Loading...
BCC Minutes 06/20/2002 B (Budget Workshop) June 20, 2002 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 2002/2003 BUDGET WORKSHOP Naples, Florida, June 20, 2002 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., at County Commission Meeting Room, 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: JAMES COLETTA DONNA FIALA FREDERICK COYLE THOMAS HENNING JAMES D. CARTER ALSO PRESENT: THOMAS OLLIFF, COUNTY MANAGER JAMES MUDD, ASSISTANT COUNTY MANGER LEO OCHS, ASSISTANT COUNTY MANAGER MIKE SMYKOWSKI, BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT JANET VASEY, PRODUCTIVITY COMMITTEE JOHN DAILY, TELECOMMUNICATIONS RANDY GREENWALD, BUDGET & MANAGEMENT RAY SMITH, POLLUTION CONTROL JAMES DELONEY, PUBLIC UTILITIES Page 1 June 20, 2002 NORMAN FEDERS, TRANSPORTATION CHIEF RODRIQUEZ, FIRE CONTROL KEN PENO, EMERGENCY SERVICE BLUE WALLACE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOE SCHMITT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DENNY BAKER, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ED PERICO, BUILDING DIRECTOR WYNONA STONE, MISCELLANEOUS FUNDS SUSAN USHER, BUDGET OFFICE TOM WIDES, PUBLIC UTILITIES ROY ANDERSON, PUBLIC UTILITIES PAM LUBEY, WATER DISTRIBUTION MANAGER JOE WEISS, BOARD OF DIRECTORS JOE JAMAS, WASTE DEPARTMENT JEFF WALKER, EMPLOYEE SERVICES JOANNE BARCLAHEIMER, ADMINISTRATION MARLA RAMSEY, PARKS AND RECREATION Page 2 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS · FY 2003 BUDGET WORKSHOP SCHEDULE Thursday, June 20, 2002 - 9:00 a.m. General Overview Debt Service Funds (200's) Trust Funds (600's) Special Revenue Funds (100's) Enterprise Operations/Capital Funds (400's) Internal Service Funds (500's) Gas Tax/Impact Fees Capital Funds (300's) Friday, June 21, 2002.9:00 a.m. Ad Valorem Tax Implications MSTD General Fund (ill) General Fund (001) Overview ~General Fund O0erating Division,.: BCC County Attorney Management Offices Emergency Services Public Services Community Development/Environmental Scrvicea Transportation Administrative Services Monday, June 24, 2002 - 9:00 a.m. (Lunch 12:30 - 2:00) General Fund Budget Review (Continued) State Attorney Public Defender Courts & Related Agencies Airport Authority Operations Review of General Fund/MSTD General Fund (Ad Valorem Tax) Suppor~d Capitol Projects ~Constitution_~ Officem: Property Appraiser Supervisor of Elections Clerk of Courts Sheriff's Office Tuesday, June 25, 2002 - Immedia~iy fo/lowing BCC meeting Wrap-up (if required) June 20, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Welcome to our first meeting of the 2002/2003 Proposed Budget Workshop. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. (Whereupon, the Pledge of Allegiance was recited and the meeting commenced as follows:) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You can tell I've been here for a long time, saying, you-all. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, just before we start, rather than taking time, I do think it's worth noting and asking that people to continue to remember in prayer those people and their families and friends that went down in that plane crash yesterday at Naples Airport. And I think some of us know some of those people, and certainly their families are grieving today and we need to keep them in mind. To begin this morning, one, I need to relay to you a story that Jim tells me about a saying they have in the Army which I think is apropos for us this morning. He says in the Army they have a saying where they don't sleep often, but they sleep fast. And unfortunately for you and for us, this has been a brutal week and doesn't look like it's going to get a heck of a lot better before next Tuesday. So we appreciate the fact that you are staying with us and continue to come in here, and I get to see you more than I get to see my wife and she reminds me of that every single day. COMMISSIONER FIALA: She could come and join us. MR. OLLIFF: She would rather not. First, I need to say some thank you's. Thank you to you all again for the perseverance, but thank you in the budget process probably more for giving us some clear direction for the first time in a long, long time in terms of the Strategic Planning Process that we went through that I think helped Page 3 June 20, 2002 us to put together a budget that -- that we feel is going to meet what are your strategic needs. Secondly, I certainly need to thank the budget staff and the staff that put together the budget that you will review today. We estimate that it probably takes somewhere near 10,000 staff hours to put together the budget that you are looking at today. And before you get to your final budget adoption hearings in September, it will probably take another thousand hours of staff work before this thing gets put to bed. There is a tremendous amount of work, and I will tell you that Mike and his staff have been burning midnight oil trying to make sure that the numbers all match up, body counts are all right and the information that's in front of you today is as accurate as it can be. To begin with, I need to go back and at least refresh your memory a little bit about the process that we established that got us here. For the first time in, I believe, at least the 18 years that I have been here, we have put together what I think is an annual planning, budgeting and reporting cycle that makes some sense. At the beginning of the page that I have put up on the visualizer are the key points in time and the key work documents that we produced that I think fit into your Strategic Planning. The first is the Citizen's Survey, which is actually being conducted as we speak and -- and being put into its written form, and that's the survey that you will use in your Strategic Planning for Fiscal Year 04. Following your Citizen's Survey, then we will go into Strategic Planning which you did earlier this year, where you walked through all of the different work products and some of the information that came from the Citizen's Survey. We also took a look at old focus studies and Collier 2000 studies to try and figure out what it is the community wants from this Government. Page 4 June 20, 2002 Finally, you're in that middle process now, the budget. After reviewing what the Citizens want, putting together a Strategic Plan, we then will put together a budget which will be the frame work for actually accomplishing the work of the Strategic Plan of what the Citizen's told us to do. Following the budget process, your staff will then go back and create what we call Annual Business Plans. And for the first time, I think we want to try and have Annual Business Plans that not only start at the top, but match up from the Board's Strategic Plan to individual divisions Strategic Plans to Department Work Plans down to the individual employee work plans so that hopefully this entire organization is all aiming towards the same purpose going into Fiscal Year 03. And then finally, there is a reporting process. And I think you will see through the budget that we are taking a number of steps to improve the way that we report, not only the numbers that result from the budget, but I think that we will report significantly better the activities that go on throughout the year as part of your budget. In terms ofjust schedule and rough schedule, you have this as part of your Strategic Planning package from earlier in the Spring. But January, February is roughly the strategic planning vital signs, time frames. Citizen surveys are conducted in March at the peak season. The Budget and annual process is where we are today in June. September, you will have your final budget hearings which are required by statute. Those have to be conducted prior to October. At the same time, we want to make sure that from a business standpoint, we have business plans and action plans put in place prior to the beginning of the Fiscal year in October. Then you will again start your strategic planning for Fiscal Year 04 in January and February, and it's a recurring cycle. And this is a Page 5 June 20, 2002 cycle that we want to ingrain into your organization so that it becomes just a way of doing business for us. You'll also remember as part of that strategic planning process, we walked you through what I think at least my personal assessment of-- of a summary of the years that we were in. The year that we are currently I was unfortunately having to entitle a year of response which I think we were trying as best we could to respond to frankly a number of crisis management-type situations. And as I walk you through those, if you look at your packages, all of these, were not done at the time that we were doing Strategic Planning in the Spring. And the ones that weren't done are highlighted in blue, but as of today, as we go through the budget process, I think I can tell you that all of these are either accomplished or are underway. Obviously, the Golf Course Impact Fees have been collected. We determined how the fees didn't get collected. We have fixed that system primarily through major ordinance amendments where we collapsed and consolidated about 19 different Impact Fee Ordinances into a single ordinance that can be managed. We are in the process of updating all of the Impact Fees. Most of them have been updated. Your Parks Impact Fee is on your agenda for this coming Tuesday. Your Transportation Impact Fee is in it's final stages of being updated and will probably be ready by mid-summer. We are investigating opportunities for additional fees and those include, this year, an new Law Enforcement Impact Fee that we already have a consultant working on to bring to you for adoption. And in the Fiscal Year 03 budget, we have proposed the creation of a Government Services Building Impact Fee to help offset the cost of new capital construction for government buildings. Page 6 June 20, 2002 In the transportation side, I think we were committing in this year to -- to get some roads under construction and get them under construction quickly, and I think everyone would agree that we did a pretty good job of that. Restructuring, provide a team of people to address the problem where we restructured and created a new transportation division solely devoted to planning and construction of roads, developed a road construction plan. I think for the first time the Board has a solid non-moving five- year road plan to develop funding options, and I think we've put together a funding plan for you that the Board adopted and approved during the course of the year, establishing systems for entering progress and completions. We put together a caps track program which we have internally gone through as a staff review on a quarterly basis for the last two quarters. The next quarterly review is one where we feel comfortable enough with the system that we are going to invite the Board to participate, and it's the first chance, I think, for you to be able to see a lot of the outcome of your caps track program. A standardized capital tracking program but not only that, the GIS as well. You get to sit and see exactly where these projects are, what are the neighboring properties, what are the impacts, what's the schedule, what's the budget, and it's a great opportunity four times a year to actually sit down and ask the project managers who are responsible for these projects, how are we doing? That should occur in late July for you. Reviewing and amending land codes and comprehensive plans regarding transportation, clearly, I think you are well aware of a number of the LDC and Growth Management Plan Amendments that you have already accomplished, including removing five percent Page 7 June 20, 2002 rules, currently looking at Growth Management Plan Amendments in the Building H is the Planning Commission to establish concurrency management systems for, in particular, transportation, and looking for additional local and collector road opportunities. I think we are well on the way to doing that and, in fact, I know that there are a number of opportunities and in particular in the Pine Ridge Industrial Park to try and tye in some of those roadways to JNC and Trade Center Way. Those are the kind of opportunities that I think we need to find in order to be able to vent off some of the traffic from your arterial roadway systems. On the waste water side, we committed to get the North Plant Expansion completed, which was done, revising the planning process and schedule for plant expansions. I think you will recall the update of the master plan for both water and waste water where we crunched the schedules and brought forward a number of the capital projects. Revising the Revenue Streams to do two things. One, to lower the use and increase the cost in new development. If you will remember, you -- this Board has doubled the Impact Fees for water and waste water, and you also created an inverted rate scale for water which penalizes heavy users and-- and, in essence, provides a bonus for those people who do not use as much water. Again, establishing systems for ensuring progress and this division is part of the Caps track Program as -- as all of the divisions are so we keep up with construction projects there. Getting the South Plant under the construction, the South Plant is under construction at 951 and if you drive by there, you certainly see lots of signs of activity there. We are shooting to have that plant - - I'm sorry, that's at Lely. That plant is under construction as well as is the water plant expansion on 951. Page 8 June 20, 2002 And beginning the work of a long-term locations for future plants, I think is part of that Master Plan Update you reviewed and looked at locations for two new plants to be built in the future. And I believe even as part of last night's Growth Management Plan Amendments, you were laying some of the ground work for where those plants will be and how to get there. Internal Improvement Staffing, Mr. Jim Deloney started today, and I think for the first time you have a full set of division administrators -- or starting Monday, on board, and I will tell you I think you have got the finest top management team that this county has probably ever had. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks to you. MR. OLLIFF: Thank you. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much. MR. OLLIFF: Mission and vision have been accomplished, vertical and horizontal communications clearly I think we have made some improvements in that area. And cross-functional teams are in place and functioning not only within your agency, but across constitutional officers lines and projects is important as GIS, the SAP Financial Management System and I think you will begin to see some more cross-functional type teams as we lay out the budget for you in the PIO effort. When you went through the Strategic Planning Process, if you'll recall, we -- we ended up boiling down a lot of what we ended up putting on the Board into some manageable headers and we grouped them first into these -- these broad categories, and then ultimately, we ended up with a strategic three point plan that included these three items. Primarily, revising the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code, developing reliable public infrastructure and a Page 9 June 20, 2002 resource management process, improving the financial planning management and reporting processes. We took that as our guidance for creating the budget that you will see today. That's what we wanted to make sure that we accomplished in Fiscal Year 03. So as a result of that Strategic Plan, we are actually working on a document that looks like this that you don't have yet, because it's not finalized. But these are the work products under each of your Strategic Goals that we have built into the budget for Fiscal Year 03 that we believe will forward and help to accomplish the three items that you have listed as -- as being strategically important for you. And this is a -- probably a ten-page document that continues to go on and has department by department, division by division, work products that not only include what they're going to do to forward it but who's responsible, what the start date is and what the completion date is for that. So we -- we wanted to make sure that you understand that we are not giving your strategic plan lip service. We expect to move that strategic plan forward in Fiscal Year 03. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I assume, Tom, you are going to have this nice handout for us so that we can publicize this through the community? MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. Absolutely. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you, sir. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. MR. OLLIFF: One of the other things that's important, I think before you start reviewing the Fiscal Year 03 budget is to just take a few minutes, and I won't take much longer on my part of this presentation, but to -- to go back and at least look at where are we with the Fiscal Year 02 Budget that you are currently in. Page 10 June 20, 2002 Since we met last year in this room, I will just mn you through a series of the projects that were in that budget and what's been done with them. Since we were here a year ago, you have completed the Golden Gate Government Services Center. And you cut the ribbon on that, which is again a shared facility for a majority of your constitutional officers providing satellite government services out into the community. Again, I think that is a -- that is a trend that I would suggest that this Board continue, moving those services out into the community simply is better customer service, less taxing on your transportation system and frankly, a lot less confusing for the poor public who has to come down here to Airport and 4 ! and try and get some service here at this location. Continuing that, you also committed to do the design work for what is called the North County Government Services Building. And I'll tell you, this is probably the most ambitious satellite we have ever undertaken. And this is, as far as I know, the only facility that will be like it in the State of Florida. This is on your library property, directly to the west of the current regional library. It will include every possible government service that we know how to provide off site. You should be able to come to this one building and be able to get a library card, a beach parking sticker, an auto tag, anything that we provide, without having to figure out from the public's perspective, whether it's the library, the tax collector or the Board of County Commissioners that offers the service. That plan is completely designed and it's out for bid right now. The Construction Funds for that project are in your Fiscal Year 03 budget. While I don't have a current picture of it, hopefully you can recognize it by its location. Page 11 June 20, 2002 That is a picture of the Sheriff's Substation in Golden Gate directly adjacent to the Government Services Satellite Building. That building, it was completed in July and you all helped us cut the ribbon on that, putting Don Hunter into a new substation there. The 13th Street Bridge in the Fiscal Year 02 budget, you all helped us cut a ribbon on that just last week. A continuing effort I think similar to our -- our looks at other opportunities for arterial and neighborhood collector roads, to provide bridge opportunities, to be able to get Estates residents to have a better traffic flow of movement as opposed as having to be forced onto a limited number of arterial roadways through the Estates. Also, since we met last, the first phase of Livingston Road from Golden Gate to Radio was opened. The second phase of-- of Livingston Road is well under way in construction and should be completed late this Fall. The third phase of Livingston, which is the Pine Ridge to Vanderbilt section -- or Pine Ridge to Immokalee Section is under design in your current budget. You just, last week, broke ground on Road Phase 4 which will take it from Immokalee Road to the Lee County line and the first two lanes of that roadway are already open providing direct public access into Lee County and is one of the and, in fact, is the first new north/south connector into Lee County since the construction of 1-75. Also since you were last here in this room, Pine Ridge Road was completed between Airport Road and -- and Logan Boulevard. The Parkway was completed from Collier Boulevard to Wilson Boulevard. While it's not a recent picture, Airport Road was completed from Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road. And also since you were in this room a year ago, the new Regional Library was completed. Page 12 June 20, 2002 So I think, if anything, you ought to pat yourself on the back for having a pretty full year and -- and getting a jump on a lot of the -- the catch-up frankly that I think the community expected you as a Board and we as a staff get done. I think it was a very successful year. There are very few things that I can point to that I think were -- were outright failures at all or anything that even slipped significantly. We laid out a plan for you at the beginning of the year and I would submit to you that even though the year is not even over, that you have done a pretty doggone good job of keeping up with that plan and -- and providing the public services that I think the community wanted from us. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you think that maybe you could provide that list to the Naples Daily News and they could publish as well? I think that a lot of people need to be familiar with that list. MR. OLLIFF: I'll provide that list to whoever you -- you want me to provide that list to. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sure Denise wants to put it in her column. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I would also suggest that we take your clip that you presented this morning and run it on Channel 11 as a separate overview consolidated State of the Nation, if you please, State of Collier County, so that our citizens could see that on a regular basis. And I commend you, Tom. As I said often, as our turnaround CEO, and I'll say it a hundred million times, we -- when I came here to where we are today, this is my fourth budget session and we are now operating this place like a business. And I'm truly proud to have been a part of that process. MR. OLLIFF: Thank you. I do think we have laid good ground work and I think you have set a course in a direction that really all Page 13 June 20, 2002 that's required at this point and, again, I'll steal a phrase from Jim Mudd, is violent execution. We just need to stay on top of that plan and make sure that we keep doing what we've been doing and -- and watching over it and make sure we are doing it right. With that, I would like to walk you through real quickly some of the highlights of the Fiscal Year 03. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Tom.9 Before you go on, Commissioner Coyle has a question. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's -- it's not so much as a question, but -- but I think it's something else that needs to be said before we go much further. I -- I don't think the people who are listening to this presentation really understand how much of that is due to your leadership and your guidance. You have done a wonderful job here and it's -- it's a real loss that you will be departing for better opportunities in the future. But I don't want this moment to go by without people understanding that you are the major driving force behind a lot of this stuff, and fortunately, the Commission has provided you the support and the funds to do it. I know that many of the ideas came from you and I would like to commend you for the wonderful job you have done providing that kind of guidance for this county. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Here. Here. COMMISSIONER CARTER: And this is not even his farewell meeting. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. Don't start getting teary-eyed. MR. OLLIFF: Too late. Thank you. You've got some good people working for you. You really do, and don't let anybody tell you that you don't. Page 14 June 20, 2002 Fiscal Year 03 budget, there are a couple of things that we wanted to try and get accomplished. One, I think we want to continue to push forward some of those multi-year projects that I think are exceptionally important, and some of them are not real high profile but I think will make an enormous difference in the way you get your business done here. GIS is one that I think you have made a commitment to, grabbed the hand of the property appraiser and then working in conjunction with their agency to put together a system that will work for us and allow us to work a little smarter, better and faster. And Jim Mudd's going to walk you through exactly what's in this FY 03 budget and give you a brief overview of that because it is a multi-year project. You need to be familiar with what we've spent, where are we, where we're going with that project, because it is -- it is expensive, it is long, but I think it's important that you continue to support it. Following that, I think I have heard from the majority of you that we probably are missing an opportunity to do a little better job in two fronts. And one is in the public information front, to be able to do a better job of getting information out to the public. This morning is a good example. I think we continue to do a lot of things very, very well. One of the things we probably don't do well is tell people about it. And we need to try and -- and put together a better organizational system for doing that. And I think Leo will follow directly behind Jim and show you some ideas that we have and this budget is structured around a different organizational format for us to be able to handle public information and customer relations. With that I'll mm that it over to Jim and Leo. MR. MUDD: Good morning, Commissioners. Last year, I gave each one of you one of these books and there was a little tutorial in Page 15 June 20, 2002 the back with a CD diskette to kind of help you to let you know what the Geographic Information System was all about. I hope you still have it, because guess what? We are still following the plan in that task force and we use this as the Bible every day because it basically laid out that plan by -- by fiscal year. What I plan to do this morning is give you a brief update about what the plan said, okay? What we've done to implement that plan and where we are. Next slide, please. The steps on this -- the steps on this chart, the ones that are in green text are currently underway, and they'll continue through this year with the exception of number 7, which never really ends. Because it's data automation and application development and as people get to use it, they think of different applications that they can use, and use it for to make their jobs simpler, better and more efficient. The step in red will be undertaken during FY 02, the latter part of this year in 03 and that's basically develop survey accurate base maps, and we're implementing that grid over those base maps right now so that we can get the level of specificity that we need for locations of utility lines, road right-of-way and things like that. And then the last two in blue are eight -- eight and nine and that's to evaluate the system performance and develop public access, because it's not only an internal staff tool but it's also a tool for the tax payers of Collier County. Because there is information out there that they can use, too, to get the information that they need, and I'll show you an application of that this morning as we go along. Next slide, please. I tried to give you a systems status. It might be a little busy on the chart but it basically lays down the five areas. Page 16 June 20, 2002 The people where we sit as far as getting those -- those technical people on board, and I'll get into the specifics of that, but IT, we are around 60 percent as far as their people for that IT Corp group that we need. And I basically call them the GIS masters, the web masters that you need to have that Corp group, and kind of think of that as a hub and spoke kind of operation because it starts there, but everybody in the county and all the constitutionals will be tied to that system as we -- as we lay that and we implement that structure. Hardware, we've got it installed. We are putting some fiber optic. I think the last piece was fiber optic out on Horseshoe Drive to make sure that we had everybody tied in between community developments and transportation. It was -- we had it going on a -- on a telephone line. It was a little slow. We got the fiber optics in it and it has definitely speeded things up. And we also need to make sure that we've got a good connection with the property appraiser, because it all started there and that's who holds the base maps. We'll talk about that a little later, too. Software, we are getting that on board. We've got the platform layering. That's the RDBMS. That's an ESDI which is corporation. That's their platform tool. We are going to put 55 platforms of data out there on top of those base maps for the county, so that's important to have that there. And we are starting to lay those layered data forms on it right now. We are in the process of doing that layering creation. And the procedures, the task force is there. I'll talk about a little bit about the composition just to give you a reminder, and we're -- we're doing the public access procedures right now and we've got that in development. Page 17 June 20, 2002 Next slide. The people, the only people we've hired for GIS are on the first column and the second column. The rest of the folks are people in-house that we need to train. The slide wasn't big enough to add everybody else, but we've got Community Developments, Utilities, Transportation Users that need to be trained, along with EMS folks, Sheriff, Public Services, Department and other constitutional officers. Because there's things in GIS that you'll talk about, voting districts, what district am I in, who's my commissioner. No doubt, Jennifer Edwards will be interested in that and -- and she will use that from time to time. We are -- we've hired three GIS analysts in our IT Group, and we've got Mr. Bob Jetta on board and he's the leader of that group and making sure that we're hiring the most competent and technically proficient folks in GIS that we can get. We've got two advertised positions out there and we have two more to get in the 03 time frame. Why am I talking about this? Because the GIS budget is dispersed in different places throughout everybody's budget and you'll see that when you go to Transportation, when you go to Utilities, when you go to Community Development. We just want to make sure that you've got highlights so you know somebody is watching that entire program and we're making sure those things are there and it's part of a bigger plan. Next slide. COMMISSIONER CARTER: As you go through that, will you have a consolidated sheet to show that, here's transportation, here's this, here's this, give me one visual that shows that? I know they're dispersed, but show me where it is and -- MR. MUDD: We can get that for you. I don't have it today but I can have it for you tomorrow. Page 18 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER FIALA: We can all have one then? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir -- yes, ma'am. The GIS Task Force, here's how we run it. We have a task force where we get together on a once a month basis, more often than necessary. We have a PM that basically runs all the requisitions through and that's -- and that's done by Jim McGee in Utilities and Bob Jetta of IP. But I basically share that task force and have been doing that for at least a year and a half now. We also have GIS coordinators that go out there and -- and that's, right now is Will Walters out of WilsonMiller who's given us that technical expertise to help us and get us and guide us along the way. We have an IT Corp GIS group which is in IP, and then we have division analysts that are out there, and they're basically making sure that layer data is getting put into the system, and again, it's a hub and spoke kind of process that emanates from IT, because they are the keepers of the net, but the users are the folks that dictate what data is there, what layers and what application are put in on the machine. Next slide. Oh, and I don't want you to get all hung up on this one. This is just to let you know that we've -- we've acquired the hardware, it's out there. There's a series of servers that are in different locations in the county so that we can move the data from point to point. Next slide. This talks about a couple of those layers but there is 55 data layers that are planned. You know, there is address matchable streets. You can -- you can get the addresses, EMS or the Sheriff, if they have a call out, they can punch this up, figure out exactly where it is; is it in the back or the front, and that's envisioned in that system. Now, the Sheriffs part will be -- will have a firewall on it because he doesn't want all that data to go back out in the other Page 19 June 20, 2002 direction, so he'll keep some statistics as his -- on his side of the house, but this will be most beneficial for his operation and help him a little bit. It also helps in Community Developments. And I'll quote somebody, and Ed Kantz been around for a long time, and we have these property books. And Tom uses them all the time. The darn thing is about this big(indicating,) and weighs about 45 pounds, and when he wants to look at something, he looks at the picture. Ed says, "I don't use that anymore. I click it up on my computer. And I do it about three or four times a day and the book just sits over there gathering dust." And that's exactly what this is supposed to do. And that's -- and that's proof and I'm not saying that it is hard to learn new things, but - - I'll just leave that alone. And Natural Resources and also Surveying for accurate natural grid sections and things like that. Next slide. And I'm just going to give you some pictures. Pictures are worth a thousand words. This is existing land use data. This is at 300 level in the county. Next slide. We start to zoom down a little bit into zoning layering data. What you see before you is 41 and Pine Ridge and it basically runs Pine Ridge out to the interstate and gives you all the zone flats that are there and then you can zoom down into that in order to look at it. Next. Existing land use. This area is -- is Pine Ridge and Airport Road. It gives you all the different existing land use numbers and codes that are on there. Thanks to the property appraiser, we have rectified aerials and parcel lines that will be available for use on the map. By this, it will ensure the data created by the individual departments will overlay the data created by -- by everyone. Page 20 June 20, 2002 Next slide. It gives you an idea of what utilities does then. They put their water lines, they put in fire hydrants. On top of that -- on top of that, the particular overlay in this particular case, we have King's Lake Crown Point PUD that's in front of you and how that lays on is one of the layering tools. Next slide. Some of the applications that we can use. And just - - we just put a couple of these on the slide to give you an idea of building permit inspections, how many times they have been out there, what were the problems before. They can be specified and they can be put on a matrix so when you pluck on it you can grab that information, so you don't have to search through your files in order to get to stuff. It has all kinds of things, fixes and breaks and applications for water lines and sewer lines. Incident complaint tracking, you know, am I getting a lot from the neighborhood, do I have -- and Commissioner Henning, you helped me a lot of times with that code enforcement thing. Where are the different incidents that we see and -- and maybe where do we need to focus in order to help with neighborhood clean- up issues and sweeps and things like that. They are important to this community to make sure that we keep it a great place to live and work. Next slide. This should have some interest. We have a thing called Map City and until we got all the software in, we grabbed a web-based technology so we could export to each one of the different users. What's neat about this, you pluck on your house, you get your house and it tells you if you've got -- you're an environmental sensitive land. It can tell you what commission district that you are in. Page 21 June 20, 2002 And that's what you see on this one, or it can tell you where the elementary school is around your house, and it can give you all that information with a series of templates and menus. It's a perfect thing. Right now, we've got it intra. We soon will have it external so that we can put it on the web and people can grab that information. The next slide. Tom told me I had ten minutes so I'm trying to push it. This is what you have right now in this picture and, I think, again, this picture really shows that we've got an inordinate amount of space in this county with all kinds of maps, blue prints, all over the place rolled up. And that's a heck of a filing system that you see in the background where everything is rolled up and it's piled around the thing and it takes a while to find those things when you need to go get them. We're bringing them into the computer. We're putting them on line so that you've got an inventory and it's easy to get to once you have the -- the different PUD number or whatever you want. It brings it up so you don't have to go for a 30- minute search trying to find it. Next slide, please. I want to kind of give you -- and this is a budget meeting so we need to talk about dollars just a bit. Here's where the plan was that I briefed you last year as far as dollars were concerned. It's a total of a 4.5 million dollar effort. I will tell you it normally takes over ten million dollars to bring a system of GIS into anything. With the help of Abe Skinner, we've been able to save a couple million dollars. Abe has taken about four plus million on in his shop and we've matched it so we can bring this system on. We're bringing it on in record time, so we are doing it in about a two and a half year period of time, and that's pretty fast as far as GIS is concerned. Page 22 June 20, 2002 Next slide. Here's what we spent in 01. Pretty much on budget. As far as what we wanted and some of the things that were on our things to do are underneath data development, water distribution map books to just name a few. Next slide. In 02, we went out there at the -- at the County Manager's request to cut three percent. We went into our budget and went ten percent and that's $250,000. We basically cut that money out of the program. We are going to have to put it in 03 and that's part of your budget in order to keep to plan. But we were able to pull that out and still keep the program working and keep it pretty much on time. And we did have, and Abe mentioned earlier to you in a meeting that you were at, he had a three-month hiatus with his firm 3001 because of the 911 issue and they were called to do mapping someplace else for a national interest and couldn't get back to Collier County's needs until the January time frame. So that three-month push back, we are trying to catch up on that and keep it on schedule. So far, we've -- we've been able to do that. Next slide. And this is what's in your 03 budget as far as dollars in major categories, and I'll break those down specifically for you, Commissioner Carter, and the rest of the commissioners for the 03 budget and let you know where that exists. It's got some things on that particular slide for you. Is this coming up.9 Okay. It just takes a little bit of time. And then last but not least, what is a due force. This is faster formation, better decisions are made, better data management, operational efficiencies when we are cleaning out all those files with all those maps, we can also make space for people to -- to work and put a -- new spaces in as the county grows. Page 23 June 20, 2002 We can have new applications and sufficient storage and updating. And we don't have that right now, but GIS will give us that ability, and it will make things better for us all. So I just wanted to make sure that you had a perspective on that and where we were and how we were going on GIS. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Who is this person? MR. MUDD: Oh, this is my GIS hero. I will tell you without him and his base maps, we would-- we would-- we wouldn't be here. And a lot of this we owe to Abe Skinner and I -- and I try to make sure at every turn that I make sure that he gets his credit in this, because those base maps make it happen. He started it with his four million dollar process to get that right for his organization and it has done great things for him and it's doing great things for us. Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is GIS going to be real-time? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: When you -- MR. MUDD: The base maps will get updated every year, so the picture that you see, you still have to do fly-overs in order to get the base maps, but the information in those layers, they are updated on a continuous basis. So you'll -- when you pluck on that information, you'll get the most recent survey, the most recent GPS great coordinate where that location is. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's recent data. It's not real- time. Real-time is today, right now, at this minute, at this second. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. There's no system -- there's no system in the world that will do that. I wish it would, but -- Page 24 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I don't know if we need that much government oversite in private property. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. For instance, right now, if they want to go out and do a locate on a line, they have to go get -- they have to go get a plan of where it was. They go out there with their -- with their sizemick(phonetic) instruments to try to find that line. Sometimes they get it. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes we have a water break that a contractor does. And guess what? And you go, oh, my God, that was on the copy I had over here and I annotated that we changed it, but that wasn't the copy that he grabbed, because that was over in the Transportation Department and this over in the Water Department and Transportation made a change, they made a move and it wasn't updated because it wasn't done on everybody's paper copy. What -- this will give everybody the ability to have, is have the most current information that exists no matter which department had a change to it and it sits there and it's squared. It should save us lots of money on the Utilities side because we have got a lot of bad locates. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Your sound is going in and out so I think somebody is giving you a cue. I don't -- I just don't understand, and you can explain it to me sometime -- MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- you know, how this relates to code enforcement. MR. MUDD: MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Leo Ochs, Assistant County Manager. As Tom mentioned in his opening remarks this morning, earlier this year, the Board and the Staff engaged in a rather lengthy planning process that resulted Page 25 June 20, 2002 in the development of a three-year strategic plan for the agency. The first year of that plan, which is current fiscal year 2002 has been designated as the year of internal assessment and change. And the emphasis during the current year has primarily been on assessing our critical business processes and our service delivery systems with an eye towards identifying deficiencies in our systems, looking for improvements and developing plans that will help us transform the way that we do business in the future. With that as a backdrop, the County Manager impaneled an agency-wide task team to look at our current communications and customer relations efforts across the agency. As a result of that initial task team effort, you'll see on your first slide a current inventory of our primary strengths and -- and weaknesses in our current communications and customer relations efforts. I'll run through them just real quickly. In terms of the primary strengths, we have trained and dedicated staff in both of those operations. The agency as -- as a whole, has a strong customer service orientation as evidenced in our mission statement. We are constantly looking to exceed our customers' expectations. On balance we have adequate resources, funding, people with notable exceptions and you'll see those in your FY 03 proposed budgets at the division level, and certainly we have had historically strong support from the County Commission and Executive Management in these two areas. In terms of the weaknesses that were identified by the task team, currently our efforts both on our communications, media relations and customer relations are frankly rather disjointed and in many cases, fragmented. Page 26 June 20,2002 We lack, kind of, the consistent theme, consistent look and feel, the consistent message that -- that corporations and -- and public entities our size typically strive for. There is currently in our organizational structure a lack of what I call executive level strategic planning and policy deployment. There's also a lack of, as I mentioned, kind of consistent coordinated outputs in terms of our materials and our programs and our services, both in our communications and our customer relation initiatives. And then finally, the -- the task team concluded that we're fairly reactive to the media instead of proactive and we want to reorient the agency in that regard as well. Next slide, please. Looking at those strengths and weaknesses and opportunities to improve, the team developed a series of goals and executive management objectives that would try to move us forward in these two areas. In terms of our primary goals, we thought it was paramount to effectively promote and positively influence the public's, not only their understanding but their perception about county government operations and programs, services and our personnel. And also to consistently improve our level of customer satisfaction with county government programs and services as well as public policy decisions. In terms of executive management objectives, we seemed to establish a series of those, the first of which was to establish a dedicated executive level management and oversite function for corporate communications and customer relations. Secondly, was to improve our program coordination and the integration of our services throughout the agency at an agency-wide level. As I mentioned, we have very effective pockets of customer relations and communications programs in different areas of the Page 27 June 20, 2002 agency, but we haven't done a good enough job in coordinating the resources and developing a common approach across the agency. The team also felt that we needed to maximize existing staff resources. We have creative and very trained professional people in these areas in different pockets of the organization. We want to be able to deploy those in -- in more constructive ways. We want to do -- implement reliable systems to analyze, collect and document customer expectations. The Board does that now annually through the annual citizens telephone survey but the committee -- the team felt that we needed to do much more together, reliable, consistent, trendline data on really what our customers think about the job that we're doing for them. We need to do that on an ongoing basis so we have a benchmark and then we have over time, the ability to compare on a trend basis how we're doing in meeting our customers' expectations. And finally, implementing an agency-wide systematic approach to processing service requests and complaints. And the Board knows better than probably anyone else in this room the volume of citizen inquiries and complaints and service requests that you receive on a daily basis, the ability at an agency-wide level to intake those, track them, report back to the citizen and to the Board on the disposition of each one of those and then to use the data as a management tool for making decisions about how we deploy our resources in the future that, we, as an agency believe we need to do a better job of. Next slide, please. We looked at a couple of specific strategies that would help us meet these primary goals and objectives. I would like to run through those just briefly for you. The first one is to reposition the existing public information function in the organizational structure and also to broaden that department's duties and responsibilities. Page 28 June 20, 2002 We think in order to provide the profile that's needed and the authority to get the job done at an agency-wide level, we need to elevate the public information function into the executive management offices similar to what we do with our management and budget and send a signal, both internally and in the community that this is a priority of the County Manager. Secondly, as part of that, we would look to establish a media relations manager. An individual that would help us be much more proactive in our media relations. Examples would be setting up press conferences, having media profiles done on all of the key managers in the community, setting up a series of orientations with the media. Many times, we have members of the press or television media that are new to the community. They turn over consistently. We need to do a better job of bringing them into the agency, giving an orientation, helping them understand who does what and establishing a central point of contact so that we can meet their deadlines and be more proactive with the media. The next strategy is to establish a -- a formal reporting relationship between executive level public information and customer service function and the designated division teams. And then finally, as I mentioned, we want to improve our customer access to information and services and do that in order to better respond to citizen complaints. And I'll show you the final slide is of a proposed organizational structure there where you see the communications and customer relations function elevated to a direct report to the CEO of the company. And then the dotted lines would be shared reporting relationships between that executive management office and teams of Page 29 June 20, 2002 communications and customer relation specialists, some of which already exist in divisions. Others need additional resources, but this would be an organizational approach to make sure that we are consistently sharing information and programs and making sure that we have a consistent look, consistent theme and consistent message in all of our communications in customer-related activities. Thank you. MR. OLLIFF: I think that ought to do it. You've got the talent in your organization and it's really just a question of marshaling it better, organizing it better and -- and making some of that talent meet, I think, what are some overall county objectives as opposed to just their own specific area objectives. And I think the idea of elevating it to where it reports directly to the County Manager's Office is going to make a significant change and improvement. And I think it will address the concerns that I've heard each of you raise. A couple of other things and then -- then I promise you we won't be much longer at this. A couple of the other things that I wanted to at least highlight before you went into the budget was obviously, one of the events that -- that this budget is going to -- to reflect are the events that occurred post September, and I think we were all aware of the immediate impact that it had on the tourism industry in our area. And I think the Board had the foresight at that point to go back in and make some reductions in your current year budget to be able to carve out some money that you could put into your General Fund Reserve and also to carve back some of the allocations that had already been made on the TDC side based on our expectation the revenues would simply not come in at the projected levels. Not only did you cut down on TDC projects, but you put an extra six million dollars in your General Fund Reserve by making immediate cuts within your FY 02 Budget, and I think that helped Page 30 June 20, 2002 you significantly going into this year's budget, as we thought it would. TDC revenues, Mike, are back at about what level now? I always like stumping him. MR. SMYKOWSKI: We're going to have a shortfall of about a million five from the gross budget. Over the last three months, the projections have been very steady. We had forecast 8.2 million dollars as compared to an adopted budget of almost 9.7. The projections have been very consistent. I just provided you with the May update yesterday, provided by the tax collector and we're consistently within $10,000 on either side of that 8.2 number that we used in our forecast, so we're feeling pretty comfortable that -- and Mr. Wallace noted at the TDC meeting the other day that Collier County and Palm Beach County were the leaders in terms of recovering more quickly than other communities in terms of the resiliency of our local economy relative to others in the State of Florida, so for that, obviously we -- we are thankful. MR. OLLIFF: And while we were late, you'd hope to thing that some of that was as a result of-- of the Board's efforts along with the Alliance to be able to generate some quick advertising out there saying, "We're okay. Things are fine. Come on down and see Southwest Florida." CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Give just credit, too, to the TDC Board. MR. OLLIFF: Yeah. But as a result -- COMMISSIONER CARTER: If I could interrupt, the four million five shortfall, what year did that take us back to roughly, 2000 level, '99 level? MR. OLLIFF: Oh, you're going to stump him worse than I did. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Thank God for computers and access to the local network. Bear with me one moment, sir. The 8.2 level is FY 99. We had 8.141 million. Page 31 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thanks. MR. OLLIFF: But what you are going to see is the result of the budget that you've got in front of you is, I think, some public infrastructure security improvements. I think clearly it is an obligation on our part to make sure in particular that some of the target-type facilities have a high level of security. And that would include, in particular, some of your public utilities areas, and frankly, some of your government buildings here on campus. We have made some improvements, both at those facilities and here on this campus. Most of you are probably not even aware of the bank of security monitors that we have located in the Facilities Management Department. That's the picture on the bottom right. We would be happy to take you down there and show you, but I think we have a fairly sophisticated security system for this campus that provides most of the visiting public as well as those of us who work here every day a -- a fairly reasonable level of security given the events that have occurred. As well, I think the Sheriffs Agency clearly is going to have some security enhancement built in to this coming budget. There is a -- an increased responsibility on the part of the Sheriff and they have been working in conjunction with us to increase the patrols to your public facilities. So I think we have been working on ensuring that your water plants and your other public safety facilities are patrolled on a much more frequent basis by the Sheriffs Department. We are working with our own security department, the bailiffs and the Sheriff in a much more coordinated fashion over the course of this year and that will continue into 03. Page 32 June 20, 2002 The -- the bad news result of that is -- is clearly evident in your insurance costs. And I think your insurance costs have -- have increased significantly. I think you are seeing a premium increases on those insurances where we are not self-insured increasing by as much as 33 percent, a result of, frankly, most of it just market pricing. I think the industry is recognizing that the Government, in particular, may not be as safe an investment on the insurance side as it may have been at one day, and we are just seeing that on the premium side. For your agency alone, I think your insurance increases have been in the two million dollar range and that is a significant increase in insurance costs in any single given year. When you're going from 2.4 to 4.9 in a given year, that's an enormous leap and one that I felt we at least needed to bring to your attention as a budget highlight. Overall, county-wide, it's pretty much the same trend. I think county-wide insurance levels were at about three. We are now at about six. So I think right off the top, you don't get a lot of productivity out of making insurance payments. There's not a lot of output that comes from making an insurance payment, but it's one of those things where I'm not sure that you have a lot of choice, other than to shop the market hard. Increase in coverage is to catastrophic levels where we think it's reasonably safe, and just try and continue to ride this and find the best rates that we can. The good news, and in comparison it's relatively small good news to that, but you have what is called Indirect Service Charge Program where your internal services in particular, Human Resources County Attorney purchasing all those things that we do internally, Page 33 June 20, 2002 they provide a service that has a cost to a lot of your Enterprise Funds; Water, Sewer, Community Development. We just got done going through an update of our Internal Service Charge Program and that resulted in an increase of somewhere around $450,000 net income to the General Fund as a result of increasing our charges to those Enterprise Funds. Another key highlight obviously is the Fiscal Year 03 Budget is going to be the SAP system. And I will tell you that there is probably no single thing that I think is going to make a difference in the way you are able to manage this organization as much as this. In conjunction with the Clerk of Courts, we have been working all year long on putting this in place. We are scheduled to go live October 1 st with your new financial management system. And for the first time ever, you will actually have a financial management system that is tied in with your purchasing system, which is tied in with your budgeting system, which is tied in with your Human Resources system. So that payroll, for example, in road and bridge is not a process that takes eight different people to input information in order to get a check cut for the poor guy who is cutting the grass on the side of the road. This is a system that will actually take you into the 21 st Century and -- and allow you to add components on an as-needed basis, but I will tell you, the Clerk's Agency and ours have been working awfully hard on this and then we've been pulling resources from within your organization to make it happen. And -- and just fair warning, October, November and December are going to be ugly around here. When you convert to a new Financial Management System, I don't care how much preparatory work you do, it is not going to be flawless, and it certainly won't be seemless and -- and my expectation is you're going to be making Page 34 June 20, 2002 difficult adjustments over the course of the next full 12 months before you get the thing calmed down some. Also, in the budget are a series of capital projects and I'll run you through these real quickly. The Immokalee Jail Expansion project is already underway in Fiscal Year 02. It's an additional 197 beds, an eight million dollar project. That should be completed before your Fiscal Year 03. You've got a 951 Boat Ramp Expansion. That's an aerial view of the boat ramp. I think if any of you have either been down there on a Saturday or a Friday night or a Sunday, you've seen the cars parked up and down 951. Not only is there an opportunity to expand the boat ramp there where it is and then the parking, but we are working so see if we can secure some offsite parking on that -- the comer lot on the Isles of Capri Road and Collier Boulevard, sort of that northwest comer up there so see if there is an opportunity for some non-motorized boat access into the back waters as well as some overflow parking. The Courthouse Annex design money is in your budget in Fiscal Year 03, and while I do not believe this County can afford to build the six-story parking garage full facility, I think we are proposing that you do something smart in the interim. And that is to plan and stick with the plan that you have already adopted, and then sink some pilings and some foundations for at least two stories of that six-story building, and then future expansions that are needed for office space here can simply go up with the foundation that's in place on that building. By building two stories, you are not required from what we understand of our -- our current DRI status to do any -- anything above ongrade parking. So you don't have to build the parking garage if you only build the two stories of this building. Page 35 June 20, 2002 This building, as you will recall, is designed to accommodate courts and court-related agencies, so we ought to be able to put some of the State Attorney's Office, Public Defenders and some of those people in that building. That provides more space for your Clerk of Courts and eventually, ultimately, all your constitutional officers end up back in this building and your agency actually ends up in that building. So it's -- it's a real long, long process, but rather than lose sight of that master plan, I think we're trying to make sure that we're making investments in the right places for the long term here. Your Naples Jail Expansion and Renovation -- I'm not responsible for that clip art. The Naples Jail Renovation and Expansion is in your Fiscal Year 03 budget. The -- the design is in your Fiscal Year 02 Budget and construction is in your 03 Budget. As that shows, that is a 34 million dollar project being budgeted for and looking at both the combination of Impact Fees and Debt Service Payments out of your 301 Fund. 800 Megahurtz System, you have a multi-agency committee who is working on oversite of the 800 Megahurtz system, and John Daily inside of your IT Department does a -- a masterful job on your part of the agency of running that. But there are and continue to be growth issues and the coverage issues as the 800 Megahurtz Radio System, and I think you have some items coming up on your agenda the 25th to hopefully make some improvements to that system. We plan on funding those with a short-term borrowing, being paid for with -- in Fiscal Year 03, $428,000 worth of Debt Service payments. But from a public safety standpoint, I do believe it's important for us to get rid of those dead spots and make sure there is coverage. Page 36 June 20, 2002 We've had too many stories of public safety people being out there looking for backup and not being able to make those communicational links that are important. Roberts Ranch Restoration is in your Fiscal Year 03 Budget. We've got about $215,000 from your Fund 198. That is your Tourist Development Fund. It supports the Museum Operation to do some restoration of both the main house, a shed and a garage. We've got a visitors center that was in the Fiscal Year 02 Budget. And each step is going to bring that whole idea of a -- a real public facility in the middle of Immokalee that's a draw for the Immokalee Community to a reality. Finally, I think there is Paramutual Transfer and for those of you who are new to the Board, there is a line item in your budget where the way I understand it, certain counties are allowed to have Paramutual-type betting, whether it be Hai Lai, horse racing. And in return for allowing only a few specified counties to have those kind of activities, the state law requires them to share the wealth, if you will. So each county receives a certain amount of money from your Paramutual revenues. We have from an old 1983 agreement that held onto those funds, but according to that 1983 agreement, beginning in Fiscal Year 03, we began to transfer that money over to the school board, lock, stock and barrel. So there is a transfer in your 03 Budget of just over $440,000. And again, that's money that we have been indicating to the school board should they want to continue or expand their school nursing program, here's a good revenue source if they want to look at it. And if I would guess, I would imagine they had not anticipated this amount of revenue going into the budget year. Page 37 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER CARTER: They probably didn't anticipate that we were going to suggest they spend it either, but I think it's wonderful. MR. SMYKOWSKI: We have not budgeted for the School Nursing Program Enterprise, so that is clear. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: My intentions never were to budget for it two years in a row. It was just to be a catalyst to get it going. MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is correct. MR. OLLIFF: In your Impact Fee Capital Budget, you've got $938,000 to pay for the Golden Gate Community Center Expansion. If you'll remember, you bought just over seven acres on the north side of the existing Golden Gate Community Center. We've done some vacation of right-of-ways in there to close off some of the roadways that separated those properties, and I think you've got an opportunity to really enhance the -- the central focus of the Golden Gate Community, thereby, expanding it's community center. That's in your 03 Budget. And finally, the last slide that I've got for you. You have -- I'm trying to slow down for you a little bit. The Regional Park, and that park obviously is going to take some borrowing in order to fund it, but it is a project this Board and Staff have been working on for a number years. We are hoping to have that part built in conjunction with the construction at Livingston Road that is necessary to get access to that property. It is located almost midway between Immokalee and Vanderbilt and so you need to have that new Livingston Road segment in order to be able to get here. So those two projects need to be coordinated in their construction in order for us to have access for the public to the site. Page 38 June 20, 2002 You will be looking at construction just for that in the Fiscal Year 03, and what we're trying to do is what we call construction management at risk. And it's a system where you are provided by the contractor that's selected a guaranteed maximum price for that facility. And we thought for this particular facility at that size budget, that would be important for us. So you will look at that contract sometime probably in the first or second quarter of Fiscal Year 03. Those are the highlights that I have for you in the budget. I would be happy to answer any questions, but other than that, we're ready to jump into numbers. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one. Something I never realized before coming onto this Commission, and I would like, maybe for you to tell the audience out there is when you started this budget process in February, how far you have pared down from what you identified as your needs as stripped away continuously to bring us down to -- to this level here, whereas it's at least manageable, and I don't think people realize how much you have already stripped out of there. MR. OLLIFF: In overall numbers what was the initial budget that we looked at in the County Manager's Office, there's about 12.8 million dollars if I recall, Mike, of projects that are not in the budget that's recommended to you. So just under 13 million dollars is not included in the County Manager's recommended budget. You have access to a list of all of those things that were cut. If there is something that I have not recommended to you that you think is vital, by all means, go look at that list, but I -- I think it's our obligation to try and provide you a fiscally responsible budget. Page 39 June 20, 2002 The total budget that you have in front of you right now is about 1.5, 1.6 million dollars, out of balance from a millage neutral budget. As I recall, it's about a tenth of a percent increase in the overall total budget or about four dollars per hundred thousand dollars of taxable value today. My expectation as we go through the process, we ought to be able to find a way to get back to at least millage neutral there. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Olliff, I think this would be a great time to recognize the great contributions of the Productivity Committee in this process. What we do is we rely on Staff, of course, for us very much for the direction that we're going. But as a checks and balance measure, we have a very capable committee called the Productivity Committee that's made up of leaders in the industry, CPA's and former government employees from different areas throughout the country, who oversee this process and it's been going on for a long time. They make suggestions that are independent from what staff recommendations are. And here representing them today is Janet Vasey. Would you raise your hand, Janet, so we can all see you. As you'll notice, she has a seat pretty close to the front here, and occasionally during this process, we're going to be asking Janet to come up and make comments on different ends of it so we can get it from a different perspective as we are moving into it. And we are very appreciative of the fact that your committee has been working on this for so many months and that they're willing to come in -- of course, they do this at no charge to the County, and to be able to advise us so we can be able to see it from another perspective. MR. OLLIFF: I -- I can't begin to tell you how many hours they have spent spend. And I think we have probably worked as well with them through this budget process as well as we probably ever have. Page 40 June 20, 2002 I think I've had any number of department and division administrators in with them trying to make sure and understand and ask them questions that they have, and they've come up with a pretty thorough list of recommendations for you to consider, and we'll do that as we go through the budget. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And -- and Janet, personally has taken time to meet with each one of us if we requested that. She's written to us back and forth, coached us a lot, explained a lot of things. I know that she has really opened up a world of information for me personally, so -- and that's nothing that anybody else -- they don't have to do that. It's just that they're -- they're -- they've been there for us when we needed them. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right. And I believe Janet has been doing this now for, what, five, six years. It's been a long, long time. And Janet, when we get through this year, we are going to double your pay. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, you know, this is -- I said it last night and I would like to repeat it again this morning. This is what a community is all about. Everyone is what I call a stakeholder, has ownership. We don't sit here and try to do something to you. We try to do with our revenue streams what -- our best possible inputs from the entire community, what we can do for each other. And that's what this process is all about. And when you take a lot of diverse interests and you pull them together to assist you in anything that you are doing, you end up with a better community and that's what the Productivity Committee has done. Not working against us, working with us. And there is a spirit among staff and this Board that says we all are stakeholders. We all work together. The Board of County Page 41 June 20, 2002 Commissioners is not immune from a budget process no more than they are immune from the Transportation or any of these processes. We live in this community just like you do. We pay taxes just like you do. So this process is inclusive and I am really proud at this point as a County Commissioner to say we have come a long way in the last four years. And for new people in the community, you may not appreciate all the turmoil and things that we have gone through. But today, we're coming out on the other side. And as Mr. Olliff said, we are no longer in a reactive mode, we are moving in a progressive mode to build a better and stronger Collier County. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And in that note, I would like to take just a moment and invite Janet Vasey up to the podium there to address us on some directions that she is thinking about. MS. VASEY: Thank you very much. Janet Vasey for the record. I would like to say that the Productivity Committee is very please to have been able to participate in this process. And we do recognize that we are placing an amazing work load on additional work loads on your county staff by all the questions and meetings and things that we -- that we held with them, and we appreciate that. We recognized that we were working together to try and -- and get a very good budget for you and find extra road money for you. On behalf of our Chairman Jim Gibson, I would like to say that he's very sorry he cannot be here. He has family commitment up in Baltimore, so he wanted to express his regret. And I'm here as -- I've been deputized to speak for the committee as the vice chairman and would like to just participate as things happen. We can explain any of our rationales for our recommendations if you would like to hear them at any point in time. Page 42 June 20, 2002 If you -- if you don't want to, we'll -- we'll sit here quietly. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Mr. Olliff, would now be a good time to take a break? MR. OLLIFF: Yeah. Let's take a five-minute break. (Whereupon, a five minute break was taken and the meeting continued as follows:) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please, take your seats. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I think we are ready to turn this workshop over to Mr. Smykowski and the Budget Staff. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go for it, Mike. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Okay. Good morning. For the record, Michael Smykowski, County Budget Director. By way of introduction, first of all, I would just like to cover the schedule of-- for the benefit of those in the audience or in the viewing public. We have workshops scheduled today, tomorrow and Monday, and wrap up as needed following the Board meeting on Tuesday. Today, Tom has already provided a general overview in terms of the schedule of what we are going to cover today. We are going to cover the Debt Service Funds, Trust Funds, hear Special Revenue Funds, which include things like special taxing districts, MSTU's, Tourist Development and there is a whole host of Miscellaneous Special Revenue Funds, where we statutorily get fees and fines for things for adoption programs, ADA improvements, small activities. Frankly, the Board doesn't have a whole lot of policy-making role and we have aggregated those in a summary fashion pursuant to our Budget Policy Direction. We'll try to cover those quickly to give you -- we have given you an overview of what the, for example, the Trust Funds, what they included, the various sources of revenues, Page 43 June 20, 2002 why they may very widely from year to year. So we'll try to cover those in a summary fashion. Then we'll move into within the Special Revenue Category. Some of our major funds, such as the Community Development Fund which is supported by a building permit fee and planning and Zoning Fees. Again, for purposes of orientation, going back about five years, we used to present the budget on a divisional basis and county government is very complex. There are a multitude of funds representing the various pots of money that various programs are funded from. That tended to be very disjointed in terms of following as we have jumped from funding pot to funding pot, so we have switched our orientation to -- and our focus is now along fund lines so that today we'll be addressing things primarily that are not Ad Valorem tax related. On Friday, we will focus -- tomorrow, on the major Ad Valorem tax-supported funds. The Unincorporated Area General Fund, and we'll walk through all of the departments all across all the divisions, as well as capital projects that are funded with Unincorporated Area Taxes from A to Z, so that you'll understand any changes you make within the context of those have an immediate impact on the tax rate in that-- in that Unincorporated Area General Fund. Following that, we'll move into the General Fund. Again, kind of going from that A to Z format rather than jumping from division to division, we are going to address everything that is in the General Fund in the County Manager's Agency tomorrow. In addition, we'll be looking at the Board Agency and the County Attorney's Office as well. Then, on Monday, we'll conclude with the balance of the General Fund Operations, with the outside agencies, your-- your court functions, State Attorney, Public Defender, Airport Authority Page 44 June 20, 2002 Operations, Capital Projects that are Ad Valorem tax-supported, and then the Constitutional Office Budget, which are directly supported in one way, shape or form by the General Fund. And then on -- on Tuesday, again, given the size of the agenda, I think it would be our desire to try to avoid wrap-up given the magnitude of the agenda on Tuesday and try to use our time wisely and we'll try to keep it -- keep the discussion moving today. As we do get into the Major Operating Funds, again, by way of introduction, I will have an overview by the O&B staff. The information contained within the budget books has prior year actual revenue and expenses, the adopted FY 02 Budget, forecast information for revenues expenses for the current year, as well as the requested Current Service Items and Expanded Services for FY 03 and their summary information relative to the Expanded Service Requests as well as we go through fund by fund. We also embarked on a new program format this year. And the department directors, once upon the conclusion of the overview as provided by the O&B staff, the department directors, as we get into each of the major funding areas, such as Community Development. They'll walk you through the programs that are provided within the context of that fund so you understand the services. It also provides information relative to the number of positions, the total FY 03 costs relative to each of those programs. And the major change was identification of the offsetting revenue so you can see the -- the -- both their expense side of the -- the house as well as the offsetting revenues and ultimately, a net cost of that operation so you can see whether or not it's revenue producing. And there may be some policy implications for you as we go through that review. With that, I would like you to turn, please, to the Debt Service tab in your book. It's page G-1. Again, within Debt Service there really is little discretionary authority for the Board. This is payment Page 45 June 20, 2002 of principle and interest for outstanding bond issues that -- or debt that the county has approved. On G-1, you see a summary. The total FY 03 Budget is approximately 29.1 million dollars. There are no policy decisions here. There are a few new projects that we are funding with debt and we will talk about those on Monday when we discuss the capital projects and there, obviously, if-- if any changes were to be made to the budget, we would then adjust the debts, corresponding Debts Service Budget. The 800 Megahertz Radio System, that service is included in the budget as Mr. Olliff indicated in his opening remarks. Probably the only thing of note here, in the middle of your page on the revenue side, you see the Transfer 001. That is the General Fund Support of Debt Service, and you see the Adopted Budget had 7.4 million dollars in it. You'll note our forecast was only -- is only 3.2, and that's a function of the bond issue, primarily of the bond issue that was approved earlier this year. We had a number of projects that were initially budgeted with Commercial Paper. Due to the timing of our needs, consistent with the long-term interest rates being very favorable, we were able to secure long-term debt for those projects consistent with estimated useful life of those projects. Obviously, we don't -- do not want to finance projects beyond their maximum useful life so you are paying for something after it has -- is considered fully depreciated. So from that standpoint, you are at 3.2 million dollars. It does increase to 5.1 in FY 03. That's a function of you are just paying interest initially, in FY 02. You will have a principal payment in FY 03, increasing that. Page 46 June 20, 2002 In addition, you do have those -- there were two projects that were funded with debt, the 800 Megahurtz, and some mitigation land associated with the Lely Stormwater Improvement Project and we'll have a full opportunity when we review the Stormwater Capital Budget on Monday to address that and identify the funding sources for that project itself. One other thing of note is the relatively short remaining maturities. On a lot of the debt you look at -- just going on down the line from the top, that Race Track Debt that Mr. Olliff indicated, where we are making that full payment to the school board of $446,500. That's because the Debt Service has been paid off, or will be paid off in July, 2003. The Guaranteed Entitlement Fund, 204, that has an expiration as of October 03. The Parks General Obligation Debt, which is supported by Ad Valorem taxes that was used initially to construct the five community parks within Collier County has an expiration of July 03, so we'll be levying taxes that's about $900,000 per year. Our final payment -- final tax levy will be in Fiscal Year 03 for that so that will free up $900,000 from pre-existing tax burden because that debt will be fully repaid. The sales tax, Naples Park Drainage, Pine Ridge, those are a little longer. Those are in the 2012, 2013. Isles of Capri Fire is only reflective because there is an actual there. That debt was actually retired in April, 2000. That Special Obligation Revenue Bond, March 04. So we are actually in -- in very good shape in terms of-- we have very little debt outstanding in terms of general obligation, and that which we do have outstanding, obviously will be maturing in the -- in the relatively near term. And rates remain favorable. Obviously, we'll be embarking on some major debts associated obviously with the Transportation Page 47 June 20, 2002 Capital Funding Program. We're also looking at the jail in North Regional Park. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may interrupt you for just a moment. Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Two questions, Mike. With respect to Entitlement 204 and Parks G0206. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: You -- you made the comment that there would be a tax levy in FY 03. Would you please explain what that means? MR. SMYKOWSKI: For the General Obligation, the Parks GO debt is General Obligation Debt which is supported by Ad Valorem taxes, so the -- the tax payers that were in the boundaries of that district when that tax was -- that was voter-approved debt to create that, and the pledge was Ad Valorem taxes, so -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: So that's an MSTD essentially? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that what we are saying? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, going down the revenues from the transfers from 001, if you look at the FY 01/02 adopted budget, it's roughly 7.4 million dollars, but the actual, the forecast for FY 01/02 is 3.2 million. Can you tell me why we were -- the actual is so far less than the budget and why we are going back up to 5.1 million this year? MR. SMYKOWSKI: We had a number of projects that were budgeted with Commercial Paper initially in the adopted budget. Based on interest rates at the time, we met with our financial advisor, and based on the estimated useful life of the projects that we were financing, primarily you look at the -- the North Naples Government Center is an example. Page 48 June 20, 2002 Obviously, that facility will be existing for approximately 30 years, 40 years, however long a building lasts. Obviously, you don't want to pay that off over five or ten. We extended the payments. The interest in the near term was three percent and on the long end, probably just slightly over five, so as a result, you -- you based the debt service on the maturities of those -- of those facilities. In addition, typically in the first year of a bond issue, you are only -- you only have an interest payment as opposed to a principal and interest payment, so that's why it ratchets back up in FY 03 because you have not only the interest payment, but also the principal payment. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that a fairly level charge from that point forward? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So -- so what -- what you've done, if I understand it correctly, is you have really saved almost 2.5 million dollars as a result of this process. MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Within your General Fund Allotment you have a certain amount allocated to Capital Projects and/or Debt Service, and obviously that freed up two and a half million dollars. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Again, as I -- as I mentioned, there is little to no policy decisions here because this is previously approved debt issues, most of which were approved 17, 18 years ago. With that, that would conclude our discussion relative to Debt Service. And with that, we'll move to our-- the tab that is Grants and Trusts. It's page D-1. On page D-2 and D-3, there is a summary of your Principal Grant Funds. On D-2, there is a description provided as to the nature of them and what they are used for. Page 49 June 20, 2002 Just to highlight one, you've talked about the Summer Food Grant Program recently. Obviously that's included. The numbers in term, overall, there is an increase of 46.9 percent. That's a function obviously of the anticipated grant levels, the largest being within the Sheriffs Grants. Again, there is not a whole lot of-- there is no policy decision here. These are, you know, Grant Funds and they are going to vacillate wildly from year to year depending on the remitting agencies, either state or federal and the availability of funds within those respective -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I ask? Usually we hear of a lot of grant applications and acceptances from the airport, but that isn't in here, from the Airport Authority. MR. SMYKOWSKI: No, ma'am. And -- and there is a reason for that. Again, going back to the -- the fund structure, the Airport Authority, especially on the capital side is funded not only by grants but a corresponding match from the General Fund. As such, items that are funded by the General Fund, we will embark upon -- actually, Airport Authority is scheduled for Monday, and any grants that are associated with those Capital Projects will be addressed at that point in time because there is that General Fund Match required. We'll address that in the context of the General Fund rather than, you didn't want to discuss it here while there are major General Fund implications due to match requirements associated with those grants. These are by and large, fully grant-supported. The Sheriffs grants are matched with Confiscated Property Trust Funds, so there is no Ad Valorem requirements here. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Page 50 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are we going to get into a discussion of any General Fund Transfers into this particular section? Are we going to talk about that somewhere else? MR. SMYKOWSKI: If-- if there were a General Fund Transfer, we would discuss that as part of the General Fund, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right. MR. SMYKOWSKI: In this case, the grants here, there is no General Fund. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, there is -- MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yeah. With the exception, excuse me, of Services for Seniors -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. MR. SMYKOWSKI: We will have that opportunity when we address the General Fund. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And the other revenues are just to -- to show the effect of the grants that netted out to zero costs. Is that what you are saying? MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. MR. SMYKOWSKI: With that, Commissioners, if you would turn to pages D-12 and D-13 in the same tab. These are Trust Funds. Again, the Board has -- there is really no policy decisions for the Board within these sections, within these respective funds. The receipts vary widely from year to year due to the nature of the revenue source. As an example, the level of property confiscated by Sheriff's deputies in a given year, statutorily, obviously, you-- you don't want to budget. You see in FY 03, under Revenues For Confiscated Property, we don't anticipate how much property they are going to confiscate in any given year, but you see the actual in this case, you have $92,100. That was based on actual confiscation to date. Page 51 June 20, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Question if I may, Mike? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Sure. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The money that's confiscated or the property that's confiscated and turned into cash, what happens to that? MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is restricted in use within the confines of the -- and if you look at your description on D-12, it's for the use of funds to defray costs of School Resource Officers, Crime Prevention, Safe Neighborhoods, Drug Abuse Education and Prevention Programs, other law enforcement purposes, and also, as required, matches for Drug Control Grants and Drug Abuse Education. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The question is is if this doesn't come in, this particular revenue source, do we make it up out of the General Fund? MR. SMYKOWSKI: You would not spend -- you just wouldn't have the money to spend, so you -- it's -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So in other words, this doesn't offset some money that would be coming from Ad Valorem taxes? MR. OLLIFF: No, sir. And typically, what happens, is the Sheriff, during the course of the year, you will see a series of one or two budget amendments where the Sheriff will actually come in and request some of the Drug Abuse Trust Fund monies to be able to pay for typically small, capital-type items that he is using at some of this drug education programs. So it's really -- he tries, and I think it's a smart move not to put it toward a reoccurring operating cost and then usually uses it for small operating capital instead. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Have -- have we verified that these -- this income, so to speak, is actually occurring in the budgets Page 52 June 20, 2002 of the departments where this is to be used? I think that's where Commissioner Coletta was going. We are obviously going to be looking at the Sheriffs Budget and the Library Budget and -- and some of the other budgets. Have you verified that -- that the Trust Fund Revenue has actually been reflected in those budgets? MR. SMYKOWSKI: It's reflected in the budget here. It's actually in a separate, distinct fund separate and apart from the General Fund, Library Budget and the Sheriffs Operating Fund. There is actually a separate trust fund where this money is restricted. The Board -- here you are acting in a trustee capacity. Any funds received are for a very narrow purpose and are restricted solely to that purpose. MR. OLLIFF: Let me give you an example that might help. The DAS, for example, the Domestic Animal Services Trust Fund, the monies that are established in that trust find can only be used for Neuter/Spay Operations. So we have to keep that separate and apart so that we can keep clean the revenue and the expenditures outside of the regular operating budget of that department. Same thing in the Library Trust Fund. When people are making donations, usually they are making bequeaths for very specific-type expenses, and we have to keep those separate so that we can show a tracking, but all of that stuff does go through your County Finance Department and it shows here in a separate trust fund budget, but not in the Department Operating Budget. So you can't use these funds to offset standard operating costs, for example, in any of those departments because they are specifically isolated for very specific uses. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I -- I guess my question is that, as an example for the Neuter/Spay Program, if-- if the Animal Services Page 53 June 20, 2002 Department is asking for an increase in -- in expenses for that particular department, is this revenue reflected in that department's budget for the purpose of showing a reduction in expense? MR. SMYKOWSKI: No. MR. Olliff: No. And-- and typically the Neuter/Spay Program, for example is one hundred percent self contained within this trust fund. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So there would be no general obligation -- MR. OLLIFF: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- transfer for that particular fund? MR. OLLIFF: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that true of all of these? MR. OLLIFF: I can't say that the line is bright and white in every case, but for the most part, yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right. We'll have an opportunity to ask those questions whenever we go through this budget, I presume. MR. OLLIFF: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: With that, Commissioners, we'll turn to our Special Revenue Tab. If you will, page C-2. There are two funds here. There is an 800 Megahertz Special Revenue fund which provides funding for operational costs of the 800 Megahertz Radio System, including of maintenance of that system. And the revenue for this is a $12.50 surcharge on moving traffic violations, again, so that is a maximum surcharge authorized in statute currently and that is restricted solely in use for the 800 Megahertz Radio System. So costs of the 800 Megahertz Radio System maintenance, where they might otherwise be in the General Fund, Commissioner Page 54 June 20, 2002 Coyle, in this case are restricted in a -- in a separate pot of money in Fund 188 so that the operational costs of that system are born here and are offset by the moving traffic violation revenue that would otherwise have to be borne by the General Fund if this revenue source were unavailable. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Question if I may. Does this reflect the vote we are going to be taking on Tuesday for the tower, on the upgrade.9 MR. SMYKOWSKI: The tower, not -- not here, no. This is for maintenance of the system. The -- the actual cost of-- of that capital project is budgeted in your Capital Fund and is supported by General Fund, a short-term loan to be repaid over five years in the General Fund. And when we talk about capital projects in the General Fund on Monday, you will have an opportunity to discuss that fully and you'll have a full discussion of that obviously prior to the Board meeting. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: We have some towers out there that we lease space to the private sector. Does that money go into this fund? MR. DAILY: Yes, it does. MR. SMYKOWSKI: John, for the benefit of the court reporter, and as new members come up to speak, if you could please identify your name for the record. I'm sure that will be appreciated. MR. DAILY: John Daily, Telecommunication Manager, Information Technology. We also receive reimbursement back from the fund for the maintenance for mobile and portable radios that are in each of the individual departments. We invoice those departments and that money goes back into this fund also, so this primarily just supports the infrastructure of the radio system. Page 55 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Would that be under Concession Fees? Is that where you are reflecting that income for rental of those towers? MR. SMYKOWSKI: That would be under Interest and Miscellaneous. Actually you have -- the Concession Fees are -- are associated with the Americans with Disabilities Act Improvement Fund 190. And that's the other fund here that we are going to talk about. That accounts for handicap parking violation revenues, and Concession Fees from the snack bar are used to defray costs to improve handicap access to government facilities. And they are done typically, I think Mr. Camp works with the Steering Committee to prioritize the types of improvements necessitated to improve access to the county government facilities by handicap members of the public. MR. OLLIFF: Unless there are any other questions on that, we can keep moving, Mike. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Okay. That -- we can turn to page C-6. Mr. Greenwald? MR. GREENWALD: Randy Greenwald for the record. C-6 deals with Pollution Control. Pollution control formerly consisted of Funds 108 and 114. Fund 108 was closed beginning in FY 02 with only Residual Funds for administrative costs remaining and those have been incorporated into Fund 114 this year. The total budget for FY 03 is $2,197,200. The revenues for Fund 114 consists of Ad Valorem taxes, contracts with the State and reimbursements from other county departments. The Ad Valorem tax is a voter-approved special tax that is not to exceed one tenth of a mill and is only to be used for related efforts to protect ground water, fresh water, surface water and other non-titled water resources from all sources of pollution. Page 56 June 20, 2002 The proposed FY 03 Ad Valorem tax of .0358 per $100,000 of taxable value is a decrease of .0062 from the FY 02 rate of.0420 per $100,000 of taxable value. Ray Smith, the Pollution Control Director, will now provide some background information in the FY 03 Expanded Budget Request for Pollution Control. MR. SMITH: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Ray Smith. I'm the Director of Pollution Control for the record. My administrator Jim Deloney is sitting at my left. You're right. I'm going to provide you a brief overview of what we at the Pollution Control Department provide services to the county. We have a Pollution Control Program and a Petroleum Cleanup Program which we have state funding for. In addition to that, we have a Small Business Assistance Program that we go out to businesses and provide any assistance in proper management for their hazardous waste. This is a state mandate. We have a water resource monitoring program, an analytical services program that go hand in hand to this monitoring effort to go out and check the ground water and the surface water. As Mr. Greenwald identified, these are water resources throughout the county and we also provide services associated with pollution complaint responses. As residents call in, we respond out and provide them those services. Pertaining to -- I'm sorry about that. Regarding Special Services -- or excuse me, Expanded Services, we have no increases in our FTE's through the Department. We have 22.5 FTE's with 25 team members within our department. We are requesting to reinstate our operating budget reductions of $800 so we can attend contract meetings that are required for our Page 57 June 20, 2002 staff. We also are requesting and it's called a gas -- for the record, it's called a Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometer. I don't know who invents these terminologies, but the bottom line, it's a laboratory instrument that does pesticide analysis and petroleum product analysis on drinking water, water in general; that type of water. And again, on GTS, again, I didn't invent the technology, but it's an instrument that you can take in the field. It's -- and identify very specifically your exact coordinates within the county, which is extremely important when you start identifying municipal wells and remodeling the well-field protection zones. So this is an extremely important piece of instrumentation we request. And I would like to mm this over to Mr. Greenwald. MR. SMYKOWSKI: If there are no questions -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have a question concerning the -- the spectrometer. Does it have the capability to detect any other impurities, such as biological agents of some kind or is it limited? MR. SMITH: We have a laboratory that does microbiological work. The -- the instrument we are discussing right now does organic analyses. It has the capability of-- depending on the equipment you purchase and your add-ons to that instrument, you can expand out the organics that are being analyzed, but our focus at this particular point in time are pesticides and petroleum products in our ground water supply. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I ask how we measure that now? MR. SMITH: At this particular time -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. MR. SMITH: -- when we measure it, we would send this out to a private laboratory to have it analyzed at $595 per sample, which Page 58 June 20, 2002 you could see over a period of one year to one and a half years, we'll hit a break even on that and we'll start saving money for the county. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What is the current millage rate that's being charged? MR. SMITH: The current millage rate? MR. GREENWALD: .0420. MR. SMYKOWSKI: It's identified at the bottom, Commissioner, .0420. The proposed, based on the increase in taxable value would decrease and the millage required .0258, a decrease of sixty-two cents per $100,000. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Another question. With respect to the inspections you perform for other people, do you charge a fee for that, and if so, where is that revenue indicated in the revenue? MR. SMITH: The inspections that we conduct for individuals throughout the county -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. MR. SMITH: -- or abusing complaint inspections, where a resident would call -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Inspections of petroleum storage tank facilities to ensure compliance and protection of ground water. MR. SMYKOWSKI: That's actually under contracts, Commissioner. The petroleum site and storage -- Storage Tank Management Programs are done under contract, I believe, with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do those contracts offset the cost of the inspections themselves or-- MR. SMYKOWSKI: Commissioner, if you mm to page C-8, I think you will see the -- the programmatic breakdown and you will see the costs and the revenues for each. Page 59 June 20, 2002 The Storage Tank Managements, there is a slight cost as well as the Petroleum Cleanup and Restoration, you see $200,400, total cost revenues of $172.7. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is there any reason we can't recover that additional cost? Why should we have to do that at a loss? MR. SMITH: The petroleum storage tanks, what we are doing at this particular point in time -- well -- well, let's focus on petroleum cleanup. We are in the process of negotiating costs right now. As you may be aware, the state's fiscal year begins July 1 st, which is a little off from our year. These numbers that we are providing you are based on figures that we had from last year and we are -- feel confident that we'll receive this year. The -- I can tell you already with the cleanup -- petroleum cleanup monies, we are going to be receiving more monies and you will see that in an executive summary when the contracts -- well, you will receive that information from me when the scope of service has been signed. So we are receiving more money in petroleum cleanup. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I guess my concern is it's a 1.3 million dollar transfer from Ad Valorem property taxes here, and I'm looking for ways to reduce that -- that transfer from Ad Valorem property taxes and try to fund as many of these things as we can from fees or contracts. MR. SMYKOWSKI: I think the question the Commissioner is asking is, can we not increase the estimated contractual revenue and offset the millage slightly? MR. OLLIFF: I think the answer is, we can look at that between now and September and see what we can do. And I think that's a good point to be made and we'll -- we'll see if we can't squeeze the Page 60 June 20, 2002 DEP for some additional revenue and/or the people that we provide the inspections for. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And just to save some time and perhaps confusion, throughout these budget hearings, I'm -- I'm going to be asking for a balance of revenues versus expenses, just as if we were performing a business function here. So if you could be prepared to -- to try to maybe provide that information up front or be prepared to -- to ask it -- or answer it particularly when it comes to Ad Valorem Property Tax Transfers. I'm looking for ways to reduce the Ad Valorem Property Tax Transfers to -- to functions that should logically be paid by persons we are performing a service for. Okay? To the extent that that's possible. MR. DELONEY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand it's not-- MR. DELONEY: I understand clearly. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's it. MR. GREENWALD: And we've got it, and I think some of these are estimates that could very well be more optimistic in the final analysis, and we'll provide that, of course, through an Executive Summary Process. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much. MR. GREENWALD: Yes, sir. MR. SMYKOWSKI: You will recall as well, Commissioner, the final millage that will ultimately be levied will -- is when you bang the final gavel in September, so if that improves between now and then, obviously, we'll have latitude to make those changes and reduce the millage correspondingly at one of your public hearings in September. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you. Page 61 June 20, 2002 MR. SMYKOWSKI: With that, we'll move to page C-12 and C- 3. MR. SMYKOWSKI: There's a summary of transportation division related MSTU's, with a corresponding table at the bottom of C-12 that shows the relative millage impact and the tax dollars proposed to be levied both in FY 02 and FY 03 in the column at the very right, showing the relative impact per $100,000 of taxable value. Again, in terms of board policy making role, it's a little more limited here. There are a whole host of citizen advisory groups within the context of each of these MSTU's that works with staff in developing the budget. In most cases, specifically in the Beautification, you see Golden Gate, Radio Road, Lely Golf Estates, Immokalee Beautification. The millage impact is zero. The -- the Citizen Advisory Groups have elected to levy the maximum millage consistent with the ordinance and the staff recommendation is to abide by the citizen request. Again, these MSTU's were brought forth by citizen groups petitioning the Board who wanted -- who elected to tax themselves for a specific service and therefore, the Board has typically abided by the wishes of that citizen advisory group in terms of budgetary recommendations. Again, they work with the staff in developing those. I will also note at the very bottom, Livingston Road, Fund 161, there is a large increase in terms of tax dollars. There was no tax levy. That is a new MSTU proposed at two mills. Now, I know the Citizen Advisory Group there is still working out and is exploring some cautionary proposals. Obviously, between now and July 30th, we'll have to bring that to final resolution in terms of adopting a maximum tax rate, because once you set your proposed millage rate at the end of July, you cannot exceed that. Page 62 June 20, 2002 You can always reduce it from that point forward. The Vanderbilt Beach MSTU, that is also a new tax levy proposed in FY 03. That is a half mill tax levy which would correspond to $50 per $100,000 of taxable value. The Livingston Road at two mills is $200 per $100,000 of taxable value. And Mr. Kants and Mr. Feder and Ms. Newman are here if there are any questions relative to those or if you had any questions relative to the -- comments relative to the new MSTU's where we stand currently. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Comments. I noticed that in North Naples, we have a lot of districts dealing with drainage, neighborhood drainage and stuff like that. And just citizens have taken responsibility of what they want in their neighborhood and I commend those people for doing that. MR. OLLIFF: Unless there are any other questions here, the only other thing I would like to point out, because I think this county does a tremendous job of what I would call specialized government. And, I mean, I think we customize government as much and as I've ever been associated with for specific communities and neighborhoods who have desires and needs. And I would continue to urge you to look at MSTU, MSTBU processes as a way to -- to satisfy a lot of communities who have a request for a higher level of government service. I just think it makes a world of sense. We have actually put together a very simplified brochure on how to do that for our community, so anybody who wants the information on how to create an MSTU, by all means have them come see us and we'll provide them the way. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think that's an excellent suggestion. Is there any way we can send out to some of the Page 63 June 20, 2002 communities that are requesting us to perform special functions, like putting in traffic control devices and/or do Stormwater Management, can we initiate mailing to some of those people suggesting they pursue this alternative and in the meantime -- MR. FEDERS: Commissioner, I think your point is very well taken. We are exercising that and are working on that process of the brochures and how the process works, and as we have more of these specialized requests, we are raising those opportunities wherever an MST would make sense. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. You-- you understand that there are at least two that are requesting some traffic calming in their neighborhoods. I don't know if they have received any correspondence that indicates to them what is available. I'll be happy to do that within my district, and I'm sure the other commissioners would be too, but it would be good if it were a normal process. If we get a request from someone, we provide them that information and that way they could get started, perhaps dealing with that before it gets to the Board of County Commissioners. MR. FEDERS: We are normalizing that process. We have received some, but they are obviously welcome to get that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if you give me some of that documentation, I'll get it distributed to them. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're welcome to join us this evening, Commissioner Coyle. We are going to be going to Immokalee. Ed Cants is going to be there. We are working on a MSTU, a general one to cover a good part of Immokalee to bring those roads up to compliance and there is pretty much acceptance on the part of the community. We also got one going on Rock Road and we have one in the process, too, down on Orange Tree, so this is a wonderful process Page 64 June 20, 2002 and the government, they step in and they actually become their own government entity. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll have to decline your invitation, however. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I'm surprised with Commissioner Coyle. I thought you just needed another meeting to make your life complete. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Immokalee is absolutely beautiful this time of the year. MR. OLLIFF: Mike, where are you heading us? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Page C-32, there are three MSTU's, Fire District MSTU's, actually, four, excuse me -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: What page? MR. SMYKOWSKI: C-32. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. MR. SMYKOWSKI: It's a yellow page. We have four fire district MSTU's. Probably first and foremost, is Collier County Fire. That is to protect areas that are outside the boundaries of an existing fire district. There is a mutual adjoint agreement between the various fire districts in terms of who is providing coverage in those areas and the relative percentage shares of that -- of that money. That's a two mill tax levy. Isles of Capri, pursuant to the Board direction this year, has increased it's millage from one to 1.5. You see the corresponding impact per $ ! 00,000 taxable value of $50 and that was, I think, there was a lot of community discussion before that ever came to the Board and it was approved. Chief Rodriguez is here. Ochopee Fire obviously is --is covering the 1-75 corridor as well as the eastern segment. They have a huge area in terms of coverage. There is a four mill tax levy that's Page 65 June 20, 2002 consistent with what it has been in the past. No impact in terms of millage. The Goodland/Horr's Island Fire Control MSTU, prior to the Marco Island incorporation, Goodland and Horr's Island were provided fire coverage by the City of Marco Island. When Marco incorporated, Goodland and Horr's Island were no longer included in the boundaries of that district. Therefore, an MSTU was created to provide the means of generating funding for a contractual service agreement with the newly formed city of Marco Island, so coverage to the Goodland Horr's Island Fire Control District is provided through and inter-local agreement between the Board and the City of Marco Island. The millage within the Goodland/Horr's Island Fire Control goes from .7377 to .6181, a decrease of $11.96. Mr. Ochs has renegotiated the agreement. We had an existing agreement with the City of Marco Island, which has expired. That will be on your agenda for the 25th. Mr. Ochs is nodding in the affirmative for approval, and that's for a two-year period I believe that's $56,400 -- $56,600, so that's, actually, the Ad Valorem tax levy decreases slightly and the -- there is a $200 increase in the agreement. So we can -- within Isles of Capri, we can expand it for three full-time fire fighter positions. This will help to comply with the two in/two out rule which recommends minimum staffing to ensure firefighter safety. Due to the interrelationship, the fire districts are discussed within -- are reflected here, Commissioner, you need to be aware, there is a-- a slight-- there's $5300 that goes from the General Fund to the Isles of Capri Fire District for-- they have the only rescue boat within Collier-- within Collier County. Page 66 June 20, 2002 And they are oftentimes called outside of their district boundaries to -- to assist either stranded motorists, boat fires, whatever-- whatever the nature of the emergency is. And as such, they are provided a small stipend from the General Fund for that service that's provided obviously for the cost of making those runs outside or their district. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's $5300? MR. SMYKOWSKI: $5300. It was in 02 and 03. While Chief Rodriguez is here, given there is no increase there, I think it's -- it's worth addressing here rather than making him come back tomorrow to discuss that in a -- in a similar fashion. The Ochopee Fire, due to the increase in taxable value, that also has a major decrease in the PILT Transfer. Actually, that number is slightly incorrect. It went from 370 -- 349.6 and it's -- actually should be $190,800, not 45.2. There is a -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What page are we on? MR. SMYKOWSKI: C-32. COMMISSIONER FIALA: So instead of 45.2, it's what? MR. SMYKOWSKI: It's $190,800 going from 349.6, so there is a major decrease. That's due to available fund balance within the Ochopee Fire District due to increased value. You are actually seeing values as ports of the islands tend to grow over time and the magnitude of the housing cost there, you are seeing that reflected in the taxable value within the Ochopee Fire District. And as such, there is some money, payment in lieu of taxes that is from the General Fund, obviously they're covering a -- a wide variety of calls on the 1-75 corridor for emergencies, as well as fire responses for which they are compensated, so the balancer for the Ochopee fire District is that PILT Transfer from the General Fund, Page 67 June 20, 2002 but it is -- there is a 45-percent decrease again, going from 349.6 to $190,800. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question. The two in/two out sheet, is -- is that a mandate or is that a recommendation? MR. RODRIGUEZ: It is a recommendation. It was approved on April 1 st of this year. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It was approved by who? MR. RODRIGUEZ: By the Florida State Fire Marshall's Office in Ocala. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you give us the boundaries of your district? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. We cover a portion of Fiddler's Creek, which is the first mile into Fiddler's Creek, as well as a portion of Mainsail Drive all the way south to the top of the Marco Bridge, as well as the Isles of Capri. And we also cover a huge portion of Key Wayden Island where we provide fire and rescue services with our boat to the residents out there, the homes that are out there. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: there? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. How about the foresty lands out We also participate in District One distribution where we provide any type of assistance out in the Golden Gate Estates area or anywhere in Collier County that needs assistance with the brush fires. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What about if we do work on State land? Do we get any kind of reciprocal agreement when we help fight fires on state land? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Not unless it's been declared a State of Emergency. We just have a mutual aid agreement with all of the state agencies. Page 68 June 20, 2002 MR. OLLIFF: And that's where you get what's called PILT money, payment in lieu of taxes from the federal government, so primarily most of the land out there are federally held and we get PILT payments from the federal government. I will tell you and it's something you need to keep an eye on. I'll ask Mike to provide some subsequent reports for you. The federal government is making a move to try and reduce PILT Payments to -- to all states and local governments, and while it won't have a tremendous impact on us, it could have as much as $100,000 impact on our revenue side of the picture. I have sent a letter asking that they reconsider that, especially as it would impact us financially here, and I think other fire districts have done the same. The only other thing I wanted to say in Rod's defense here, frankly, is he runs the cheapest stinking Fire Department I have ever seen. They -- they beg, borrow and steal. They hold garage sales to raise money down there and I think he has got a tremendous amount of community support and does a great job for what I think is a fairly reasonable budget. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's true. He does a -- they do a wonderful job down there and they make a dollar go a long, long way. I was just trying to point out the -- the size of the district is so enormous, it -- it escapes most people what the responsibility is. And the only hope I would have is that whenever we do have fires in forest lands, that we try to go to the government and get it declared an emergency so we can get compensated. Mr. Peno? MR. PENO: Yes. Commissioners, for the record, my name is Ken Peno, of the Interim Services, Emergency Service Administrator. To answer your question, if we are called to another district or another jurisdiction, we do have a plan in place to reimburse or Page 69 June 20, 2002 collect from that district, just as they did from us a couple of years ago. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Any other questions? MR. OLLIFF: Mike, where are you heading us now.9 MR. SMYKOWSKI: C-38 is the Tourist Development Funds. MR. OLLIFF: Again, Rod, thank you. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Thanks. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Again, you have four major funding groups here. There is one fund for museums. That's Fund 193 and that -- there is funding in the FY 03 budget for the Collier County Museum, the Marco Island Historical Society and the Botanical Gardens. And those have already gone through the TDC and on through the Board. Again, your policy making role has primarily already taken place due to the TDC meeting and your recommendations -- approval of the recommendations that have been previously submitted through the TDC through Mr. Wallace and Mr. Havel related to beaches. In the advertising, we do have 1.2 million dollars budgeted for advertising of Collier County as a tourist destination, and the budget does include the tourism manager -- a tourism manager position and I believe we are at the point of having made an offer. We are finalizing the -- I think they were down to three and we are trying to narrow that down and get someone aboard to take on that responsibility and relieve Mr. Wallace of his duties therein. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just a question concerning the museum allocation. Has the $900 expanded service fee or amount been approved by the TDC.9 Is that coming from TDC Funds? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. That is from TDC Funds within the existing Museum Allocation. Page 70 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER COYLE: So that has already been approved? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Again, the third fund is Beaches. Mr. Havel has submitted a comprehensive list. The Board has already acted upon those. The only other point is Item 4, which is the Disaster Recovery Fund that we hope to not have to use very often, but in the event of emergency, we do like to have those funds available and ready to go with an ad campaign. We did dip into that slightly this year. The Board approved $250,000 in supplemental advertising following the 9/11 issue and the slow down in tourism. We've uped that back to a million dollars to have a million dollars available in the event of some catastrophic event. Again, hopefully never to have to use that, but in the event of hurricanes or other natural disaster, it just's prudent to have that available as needed. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Wallace has done a remarkable job of pulling this all together, even though it's something that was handed to him like a hot potato. And he has done a remarkable job of bringing all the entities and moving forward to the Director of Tourism, which, in very short order will be coming forward. A couple words on that may give reassurance to everyone where we are going, Mr. Wallace. MR. WALLACE: For the record, Bleu Wallace. For the record, I'm the Director of Community Development Operations that has been tasked with overseeing the tourism effort. Joe Schmitt, the Administrator of Community Development headed up the interview panel that was made up of five individuals, Page 71 June 20, 2002 one of them from the tourism industry, and we have involved the tourism industry in every step of the way as a group program. We had interviews with finalists last Friday and made an offer and we are waiting for acceptance. Hopefully, we can have a tourism manager on board in short order. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Once again, all these funds come from the tourist tax? MR. WALLACE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other questions? Thank you. MR. SMYKOWSKI: With that, Commissioners we'll move to page C-44 and 45, which is a summary of both the appropriations and the revenues associated with the Community Development Fund. Again, that is a self-supporting fund for the regulation of the building and construction industry in Collier County funded by -- primarily by Building Permit Fees along with planning and engineering review related fees. I would like to just provide an overview of the fund. The total Fund Revenues are actually down 10.3 percent. That's a function of the expenditure for the building expansion that they are soon to break ground on, I believe. That will be coming this July. We are looking to break ground on the building expansion. There -- there is a -- there are a host of expanded service requests that I'm sure Mr. Schmitt will walk us through as well as the programs provided. Within the context of that though, we do require a fee increase. The budget is set up -- if you look on the purple page, C-44, about midway down, it shows Total Operating Costs, and then there is a line called Net Operations, Current Services, 14.4 million on net operations with expanded services of 1774 for a total of approximately 16.6 million dollars. That is balanced against the operating revenues. Page 72 June 20, 2002 If you would look on page C-45, the subtotal for Departmental Revenues, you see 14975 and 1762, so we're -- overall to make this work, there is a highlight at the bottom of C-45 showing overall, you would need a fee increase of approximately 27 percent to balance both the current and Expanded Service Operations as proposed in the budget in keeping operating revenues and operating expenses in equilibrium. In other words, while there is a healthy reserve within this fund to absorb any fluctuations in the construction industry, which in Collier County has been particularly well-insulated from major fluctuations, but over time, the inevitable will come as we get closer to build out in Collier County. That -- the reserve is roughly equivalent to about five months of operating expenses. So while that is a seemingly a large sum of money, when you -- if you were to go into a major downturn, five months of operating capital is -- is not an exorbitant amount of money. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I presume we are going to have a chance to address each of the expanded service proposals later in -- MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. We are going to do that in short order. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: I'm just kind of giving you a general budget framework so you understand the funding sources from this in kind of a big picture perspective and then I'm going to turn it over to Joe Schmitt, who is the administrator. He is going to talk about organizational changes he's made -- he's proposing in the FY 03 budget, as well as take you through the Expanded Service Requests. The format itself also provides on one of the key things that Mr. Baker is looking at or will be looking at, Building Permit Fees have Page 73 June 20, 2002 been the driving the principal revenue source within -- within this fund. You see Building Permit Revenue in Current Service. It's the first line on C-45 of 9.9 million dollars. Total -- total inclusive of expandeds is approximately 11.1. If you look over to C-44 under the fifth or sixth line down, Building Review and Permitting, you see on the expense side, it costs five million dollars. So obviously, we're making -- a large source of the income is on the back of the building permit fee. A long-term issue within Development Services has been to make the planning and engineering side closer or to being self-supporting, relieving some of the burden on the building permit side. And just to highlight that for you, Commissioners, the planning revenue, which is the third line down, is approximately 1.8 million dollars, third line down on C-45 versus the cost of planning services of 2.6 So you upside down there to the tune of about $900,000 where expenses on the planning side are actually subsidized by building permit revenue. Engineering is in a similar vein. Engineering Revenue is approximately 1.1 million dollars. Overall, engineering expenses inclusive of expandeds is approximately 1.8 million dollars, so you are upside down there $600,000. Obviously, we would like to admit the -- while we are looking at fees, and one of the expandeds that we'll talk about shortly is a -- is a Comprehensive Rate Study is -- is looking to shift that -- redistribute that burden from the building permit side to the planning and engineering fee side. And with that, I'll turn it over to Mr. Schmitt and Mr. Baker from the Community Development Division. MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, Administrator of Community Development and Environmental Services. Just to Page 74 June 20, 2002 follow up what Mike said, the industry prefers it that way where the - - the lower cost is at the planning end, meaning the SBP reviews -- or the site -- or the -- well, the plan review piece. Then, when they come in to the building permits where the expense is really at. What I really need to do within this division is look at the cost of doing business. I need to evaluate the cost of doing business. There is no system right now that -- to capture what it costs for a plan review, what it costs for a building review, what it costs for an SDP, what it cost for each of those aspects of the building process, and I need to implement, and that's a whole other hour explanation. I don't want to get into that, but that's where we need to go so I can operate like a business and compare direct and indirect costs, billable hours, non-billable hours; those kind of things. What I handed out in front of you I'm going to highlight briefly. As far as my -- when you look at the division, I have ten funds and approximately 34 cost centers. So over the next two days we are going to be bouncing back and forth, but right now, we are concentrating specifically on Fund 113. But I'm going to highlight all of the expanded services just so you have an overview. I handed out a color version. You should have that in front of you, and for us that are both chronologically and visually impaired, I have a -- a black and white copy that has been enlarged a little bit and you can make some notes on. Current Organization, 233 and a half FTE. No, I didn't saw one person in half. That is part-time positions that roll up into the code enforcement. Highlight of the Changes. What I'm going to do -- and I'm going to go over each of these, it's the creation of a community in Page 75 June 20, 2002 planning and redevelopment organization within the Planning Services Department. I'm going to move the Immokalee Initiative from code enforcement to the planning -- community planning and redevelopment. We talked about the Public Affairs or public information piece expansion of code enforcement services and creation of an environmental and review staff. What does that mean? If you go to the next slide, you have expanded services. I go to actually 31, plus 31 and a half FTE and the numbers are so indicated on the chart. I'm going to go through each one of those so you can get an idea of what the expanded services are. You can keep that chart for reference and I'll go back to it again, but that's just a highlight. And I'm going quickly because I don't want to burn up a lot of time. This is probably the most significant. Planning Services Department, the Environmental Natural Resources. Frankly, I have a Director of Natural Resources, who really was overlooking about six folks and I said, you know, what I need to do is get the Environmental Review Fees out of the Planning Department and create an environmental and natural resource piece. And as you recall, even from last night with the rural lands, rural fringe environmental portion, an oversight in this county is going to grow significantly. In fact, we don't even know yet as we begin to assess in 04 and 05. So Bill Lorenz, I'm moving for my Environmental Specialist into an organization called Environmental Planning and Review. What that does is separate that overview process in that they don't become co-oped by the plan review process and it's a separate and distinct review, and I'm talking about one expanded position. Page 76 June 20, 2002 We'll talk about that but what I'm looking at is an environmental planner. And functionally, they will become an Environmental and Natural Resource Department. Over in the planning services, I'm recommending that we separate out of comp planning the folks who do the overlay studies, the 41 study, the Vanderbilt Beach, the East Naples, the Golden Gate Master Plan. Those kind of folks that do those kind of things that are really community planning and community redevelopment. The CRA and taking -- I'm going to move five people from comp planning into this organization, and what I'm asking for is another expanded position to go into that organization. You are going to see that. It's already been approved. You've been briefed on that as part of the CRA, one third for the Immokalee CRA, one third for the triangle and then one third for-- for comp planning, so -- so that's the one expanded. Current planning, I'm looking for four planners to go into current planning. One senior planner, one principal planner, one planner and one tech. And in comp planning, the two expanded positions that are showing here, those are the two expanded positions that we talked about last night during the rural fringe, that would be looking at third quarter of the fiscal year, looking at hiring and creating some positions to begin to manage and plan for the implementation of all the activities associated with the rural lands and rural fringe. So if you look at the net in planning, plus seven in net plus one, so that's -- that's the planning services and the natural resources, environmental natural resources. Building and Planning Review, I'm looking at eight total positions. My department director Ed Perico will talk about that and we'll discuss the expanded services there and explain why we need Page 77 June 20, 2002 those positions to support the industry. And frankly, seven positions in inspections and planning and one in contract licensing. What I have done with finance and housing and urban improvement, and I -- I neglected to explain that my economic development manager, which is part of this position I want to move into the -- the planning and redevelopment piece where I think it belongs. It does not really belong under the housing and urban improvement. It really belongs with the -- the team that is going to look at the community planning and the economic development to promote that piece of it, especially when you are talking about the CRA business, so my -- my economic development manager will move. HUI, there's really no plus ups here, but what I've done is taken my business manager, Mr. Danny Baker, made him into a Department Chief, really a Department Director, Finance and HUI Department and downgraded the HUI manager position. I want to keep that position though and put that under the CBDG functions and that person is going to focus primarily on grant applications and going out and getting the grant money that exists out there. We really don't have anybody to cast the net, to got out and get that kind of grant money. So that's kind of a capture of what I've done there. I think the most significant impact here is code enforcement, 13 and a half folks, and we'll talk about that tomorrow, so we'll save that on our plate when we talk about the General Fund. But this is frankly what we are looking at, to capture this we are looking for an afternoon and evening shift to do our code enforcement and -- and we've got some figures. We'll talk about that Page 78 June 20, 2002 more in length tomorrow at least from an aspect of where we want to go with code enforcement. And the other piece was the Public Affairs Office -- Public Information Office. This is -- we already have the community planning coordinator. What I'd like to do as -- as part of the overall plan within the county, this would be the public affairs or public information piece, to handle things, customers -- customer relations, customer complaints, relationships and the public information piece with -- with growth and all the other aspects as part of this business. And this person would report directly to me, and if you think back of several of the things where I think in my six months here -- somehow it seems longer than that, Boss. I don't know. But it -- I think we can recognize some failures in the public information piece that we need to be proactive instead of reactive, and this person would capture that. And this is also talking about the -- the part that you-all approved. Back in October, the Community Planning Coordinator -- I'm -- I'm using you-all, there you go. See that? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You picked it up from me. And before you go on though, we do-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. You got to get it right. It's ya'll. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala would like to -- MR. SCHMITT: Yeah. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Fast question. Is this -- this person that you are talking about like an Ambotsman(phonetic.) I got that impression, like Sally Barker had suggested that we bring into the county was an Ambotsman to be that liaison? Page 79 June 20, 2002 MR. SCHMITT: Yes. In -- in my position, it would be -- I'm looking for this person to do three things, and it integrates with the overall plan within the county. Of course, the -- the person at the county will be doing that at the county level, but I also get a lot of, as you well know, I get a lot of mail from each of the commissioners that are customer complaints and customer issues, and it eats up a lot of my time to try and sort it out and I think you need me to do things that need to be done to run your organization. This person, I would say, "Get this to the right department and -- and sort it out. Call the person, discuss it." Frankly, be more open and -- and focused on customer service. So they would be dealing with customers. They would be dealing with the legislative affairs. Things that you want and you need from my department through the departments or through the division. And third, with the media, a point of contact with the media. Really, from a standpoint, there is a lot of things that we do and oftentimes when I get a phone call, it's the 1 lth -- the 59th minute of the 1 lth hour and Denise may have a deadline and I'm trying to sort the pieces, and -- and certainly it would be nice for them to have someone to talk to to get the information and integrate. This person would be part of that whole piece within the county. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Just a general comment I wanted to make so that we can try to keep our department heads and everything else moving forward, whenever I send out an e-mail with a complaint, of course, I always send it to the county manager too, but then I reference it down. But I asked for a staff person to reply to that person. MR. SCHMITT: Yes. Page 80 June 20, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think I asked for yourself or Norm Feders to have to reply directly to every single request that comes through and to have the complainant think they are going to get that response back from that person is really taxing the time of that person. You know, generally, I can see when we are handling a situation of immense complexity and we need a general -- to come down and pass it on might be one thing, but I -- I find it's working very well for me. Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Schmitt, right now you have an assistant in your office; correct? Connie? MR. SCHMITT: Yes. Operations -- basically, her official title MR. MUDD: Operations analyst. MR. SCHMITT: Yes. Operations analyst. Thank you, Jim. MR. HENNING: Isn't she fielding some of these -- MR. SCHMITT: Frankly, she's handling all the business pieces, the moving of budget, those kinds of things. That's one person and my business manager. I mean, that's the depth of the organization. And -- and she is handling a lot of other things that I'm doing in trying to run the organization. Everything from managing funds to when evaluations are due, all the other things associated with that piece of-- of the operation. Very little from this standpoint. Yes. I do get her involved in that but -- but this has grown into a full-time job. It really has. And just to answer Commissioner Coletta's, no, it's not something where I -- personally, of course, I get the e-mail and I send them out as well. But I need somebody to begin to capture these kind of things, where are the systemic problems, and do those kinds of analyses. Where are -- where do we need to begin to focus our energies rather than -- than being reactive again, it's more of doing an analysis and Page 81 June 20, 2002 being proactive. And that's really what we need. We need -- the county is growing and the -- the issues have -- have increased. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Yeah. If I can continue on? MR. SCHMITT: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The way that the county manager's coordinates is structured, we are -- the questions that we get from community development are supposed to be sent on to you, being the administrator. MR. SCHMITT: Yes. That's fine. I need to keep my finger in all that and I do. I read all my e-mails. It's not a problem. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And with this person, what you are saying is they are going to be handling our questions now. MS. SCHMITT: I will be using them to -- to sort them out to the right location and -- and then making sure that they are answered. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I misunderstood then, because what I heard you say is you get a lot of e-mails from commissioners and what you are looking for this person to do is handle that. MR. SCHMITT: A piece of that. It would be some of that. But also handling -- I have a lot of folks who call and schedule appointments who want to have issues that involve whether it's code enforcement or -- or permits or other type of activities that they want -- they want to have solved and -- out at Horseshoe Drive. So this would be a person also who would help deal with those customer issues. I don't know how better to explain it. I think -- it's a person that would -- is used in that capacity to help sort out where can the problem be solved and who does it need to go to within the organization to get solved. COMMISSIONER HENNING: How do we address the layered government question so we can get a response, the Board of Page 82 June 20, 2002 Commissioners? Are we still sending e-mails to you and then you are going to direct those where they need to go? MR. SCHMITT: Yes. I would prefer that. I mean, that's, I think what you should do. I mean, I'm -- I don't have a problem with that. MR. OLLIFF: That is still my suggestion. I continue to tell you, I think this is a fairly small part of what I think we envisioned this person doing. You've got to keep in mind that your new public -- what do we call that new program for -- for planning where we are out in the community? MR. SCHMITT: Well, it's the community planning -- MR. OLLIFF: Well, the Public Information Program that we've got for all the planning functions, for rezones, the developers are required to go out and have the public meetings. One of the reasons we lost the last person who quit us recently was -- was because of the number of night meetings, and it was probably averaging four a week that that person had to go in the evenings to ensure the developer was holding the right kind of meeting out in the public and that he was saying things that were truthful in terms of rezone applications that might be in front of you. This person, part of that function is going to be to take some of that workload as well. And if there is one division that any of you know needs to have good improved public communication out there in terms of getting the truth out to the public about what's happening in terms of land use items, it's this division. And I just think it's one of those things where you can really get some good benefit and address a lot of the problem areas that your office and my office and Joe's office has been dealing with over the course of the last year. Page 83 June 20, 2002 Because to me it's -- it's more communication than it is anything, and then we have got to get better information out to the public. I think that's the primary focus of this position. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. And -- and what I see is -- is we got public information here(indicating,) over here in transportation, now in community development, it's all over and I don't see any coordinated effort to -- MR. OLLIFF: That was exactly the presentation we made through Leo on the overall, what we are calling customer service and communications function, where it is -- and you've got to understand. This is a little different for this community and this organization, and it is called a matrix type organization. It is one where you have your traditional boxes in line on the organizational chart, but you also have what we call a matrix organization that exists within it and it has worked very, very well for our GIS functions and for our FMS functions. We think it will work very well for public information, where the public information officer is going to report directly to the county manager, but then is going to have oversight responsibilities for the public information people that are located in each of the divisions as well, so that there is going to be work plans developed that are coordinated throughout our agency through a single public information officer that reports to the county manager. So I think you are going to get that coordination that I think you want through that new structure that Leo presented to you. MR. SCHMITT: Absolutely. This person, for lack of a better term, are almost going to have two bosses. One, they are going to have to work for me because they have to keep their finger on the pulse of the organization, but yet they are going to have to focus their eyeballs up to the county manager's office on what's happening across the organization as well. Page 84 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER HENNING: One more question on this position. You said that it's -- what kind of relationship is it going to have with code enforcement? MR. SCHMITT: That will be a large part of this from a standpoint of, again, you know there are a lot of customer complaints and they are not going to get involved in that. Those complaints go right into the customer service reps that answer the phone, but -- but they are also things to come to my level, again, where they begin to capture that data and evaluate where the needs are. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you elaborate on that a little bit? MR. SCHMITT: Just yesterday, I had someone come in my office and wanted to show me TV tapes out in Golden Gate about a -- I sat there for 25 minutes talking with him and looking at the tapes about what he thinks is an illegal business going on next door. I looked at the tapes and those kinds of things. I mean, I need to deal with those kinds. They are not -- we don't need them up at your level. They need to come to me if they don't get resolution, so I would ask this person to help sort that out. I'm worried about budget. I'm doing other things. I would have somebody to help sort that out and get that solved through code enforcement if, in fact, I need to get code enforcement folks out and make sure that Michelle is tasked with a tasker of some sort in order to respond back to me. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is this person going to be over the code enforcement director? MR. SCHMITT: Oh, no. No. No COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is she still going to have the power? Page 85 June 20, 2002 MR. SCHMITT: No. Code enforcement reports to me. I mean, I -- there should be no -- this person is a personal staff officer reporting directly to me. In fact, if there is any guidance, it would be me over to Michelle. That's the way it has to be. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Then don't you think that you should be reviewing those complaints about code enforcement if you are the one -- MR. SCHMITT: Yes. But I have a director that we pay to do that, but I -- yes, that's part of my responsibility. I have a pretty large organization and I need to focus on where those problems are as well. COMMISSIONER FIALA: On running the organization. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm not going to beat this upm CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's go to Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: The Productivity Committee had some recommendations with respect to some of the additions. Joe, have you had a chance to take a look at those and -- and respond to them and-- MR. SCHMITT: I have -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Before you do that, I'd like to make sure we're going to be able to get Janet up also to -- to address that so you can sort out differences. Okay? MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, can I make a request? We can sort those out as we go through each of the departments. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. SCHMITT: And I think that's the best way to do that, because we have the data that at least from a standpoint to demonstrate why we need the expanded services and then, of course, the decision is up to you whether or not those are approved. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do we do this as part of your continuing presentation or is this going to be done at a different time? Page 86 June 20, 2002 MR. SCHMITT: We are going to do that with Mike as we go through each of the budgets. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Commissioners, if you could turn to page C-46, there is the department by department list of the expandeds and I think with that, we'll begin walking through -- MR. OLLIFF: We'll move into that. I just -- I wanted to let you know why we just did what we did. There are three divisions where I think there is some major organizational changes. And I have heard from at least a couple of you that -- that you don't want to have to try and follow the "P" to find out the comparison from the FY 02 budget to the FY 03 budget. And so we tried to provide for you as clear as we could organizational chart pictures that showed what was changed and a handout so that you can keep that with you as you are going through the budget so that you will know where the "P" went to from FY 02 to 03. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Olliff, you want to find an appropriate time to break for lunch. I'll let you pick that. MR. OLLIFF: How long do you think this division is going to take, Mike? MR. SMYKOWSKI: I -- I say we try to walk our way through the expanded list on -- MR. OLLIFF: And take a break after Community Development? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yeah. That would be a logical break point. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. MR. SMYKOWSKI: C-46. Joe, you want to just take them one by one? I see the first one is the communications coordinator. MR. SCHMITT: Right. We have already gone through the communications coordinator, planning services. I talked about those. Page 87 June 20, 2002 Unfortunately, Susan Murray, the Interim Planning Services director had to leave. She had a personal emergency, so Denny and I -- Mr. Baker and I will try and -- we're going to cover that, but we have talked about the expanded services, and in that, the expanded services. Now, I need to clarify that some of the budget pages still haven't caught up with some of the re-organization and that's going to be somewhat confusing, but it's just a matter of wharp speed that I'm trying to move on trying to get the re-organization in place by the time we implement the budget. What we show here are all the planner positions, the two principal planners, the senior planner, a planner in planning tech, those are the actually plus five, and then the additional one that goes over into the -- that will go into the environmental and natural resources, so those were the planning positions, and, Denny, if you want to put those up on the visualizer and we can briefly show some of the Expanded Services. One of the things that I'll ask Denny to point out frankly is the number of hours in planning the substantial increase number of hours with the implantation of the public participation process. MR. BAKER: Good morning, Commissioners. Denny Baker, Business Manager of Community Development. The first-- you can see this on the visualizer okay, this is from Susan Murray. The first graph up top is talking about the activity for rezoning conditional uses and variances in the year 2002 and 2003. You can see there is a very, very significant increase of 120 petitions between those -- those two periods of time. A very, very significant increase. That's about-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coletta. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. Go ahead, Commissioner Henning. Page 88 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER HENNING: On this item, I think that we all know how hard the planners and how long they are working and how great they are -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And how short-staffed they also are. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And I-- if anybody has a problem with this or if anybody doesn't have a problem, can we move on? COMMISSIONER CARTER: I have no problem with this. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, yes. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I think we can move on. MR. SCHMITT: In fact, I'm anxiously looking forward to -- and so is Susan of the arrival of our new Planning Services Director and Margaret, when she comes in the first of July and certainly Susan will be relieved as well. I think the only piece that I don want to highlight, we do have the expanded two that I talked about in the briefing that -- as part of this third quarter and we're still feeling it out. We'll come back to you -- to the Board as we begin to do some analyses as the implementation of the Rural Lands and Rural Fringe. The next -- the building review, Mr. Ed Perico will talk, and I know Janet had some -- some issues here she raised about the expanded services and Ed will talk about the aid that he's requested. MR. PERICO: For the record, Ed Perico, Building Director. A quick overview of my organizational chart, which would be-- include reviews of inspections, planning review, contractor licensing, all right? I'm sorry I couldn't fit it all on one bigger page. But anyway, we're asking for eight additional building inspectors within the department. One for signs, two in each, electrical, plumbing mechanical. Our increase in our workload is just Page 89 June 20, 2002 unbelievable. We keep saying it's going to go down in the county and it just keeps going up. I'm up about 1300 permits issued, the same time this year as last year. My construction value is up by approximately up a hundred million dollars. My revenues are up. My inspections have gone up about 6,000 ahead of last year at the same time. I'm projecting about 165,000 inspections for this year. We've taken on an additional work loads with the new building code that's gone into effect. What I've done is done a comparison of inspections per employee per day with the adjoining counties, which shows you that my inspectors are going out-- we have a full staff of 27 inspectors working. They are going out with an average of 26 inspections per day. In reality, they are doing about 29. What I'm proposing, like I say, with here, to comparison with Martin County, Sarasota County, Lee, you can see that they are averaging anywhere between 12 to 17 inspections per day. I'm not trying to compete with the other counties. What I'm trying to do is go apples to apples and in reality, we are not with the homes that we are doing here in Collier County. It's getting a lot more complex, the sizes of the homes and stuff. MR. SCHMITT: IfI could point out also that the -- these are fees paid for services provided, so it's no an Ad Valorem hit. It is -- it's a fee for service and, of course, any delay in inspection raises the value of-- of the construction because that's a principal part of the whole process and I'm not telling you nothing you don't know, but this is a fee for service type of operation. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'd like to go to Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what I was going to ask. So in other words, if we have eight new positions, then we will get the Page 90 June 20, 2002 money in for those inspections to pay for those positions? It will not come out of Ad Valorem tax.'? MS. SCHMITT: Yes, ma'am. MR. PERICO: That's correct. MR. SCHMITT: Yes, ma'am. That will come out of the -- the fees that they pay when they come in and draw a permit, and -- and we are going to raise our fees accordingly, but these are services provided based on the fees that they pay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: User fee. MR. SCHMITT: User fee. Absolutely. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, oh, I see. I did not understand that. Okay. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Commissioner, all of these expanded requests on page C-46, while we are talking about the Community Development Fund 113 are fully fee supported. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may point out another-- another item, the complaint we have been getting, we have had some problems in the past with missing different things along the way, and with 29 inspections a day, just -- just try to vision this. Traveling from one end of the county to the other, covering 29. How thoroughly can you give an inspection? Are you going to be able to do that? You are doing the -- the builder a favor when you are doing those inspections. You are certifying that building or that house meets the qualifications that -- for Collier County. And if you screw up on it, then they pay the price down the road and then we look foolish. How can we expect them to perform the way they need to be when we are asking them to perform services way over and above at 29 a day. It's just unbelievable. Page 91 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER FIALA: And actually we are getting sued in a few instances because the spot survey wasn't complete -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Exactly. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because probably they were driving by and didn't -- didn't get as much as they should have. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle and then Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Carter. COMMISSIONER COYLE: He gets to go first. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We'll let -- he's the senior member of this Council. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not the oldest, just the senior. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, but the senior member as far as time. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Let me ask a question. I understand a number of positions and then I believe you told me it would take some time to train somebody to get up to speed to do this. This is not like you walk off the street and the next day you are a building inspector. So this would be a phased-in process as I would understand it. MR. PERICO: Yes, sir. What I've done now-- what I've tried to do, we have to be -- we're mandated by law that everybody has to be state certified. I can't just bring any guy off the street. He has to be able to meet a provisional license, show years of experience prior to being able to go out to anybody's home. And my guys average about 33 years of experience in each discipline and I feel very proud about that. They know their job. My concerns -- I'm very concerned to be perfectly honest with you, with the number of inspections that they are doing. You know, act on what you had said before. I'm also -- I have lived here 25 years. Page 92 June 20, 2002 I've got a lot of commitment in this community and I've been with the Building Department 16 years. And I don't want to see anything happen here, so I need all the help I can get. Like I say, it's a User Fee. I want to run it like a business and if, in fact, things start to take a dive, we'll have to take a look at it. If we have to start letting people go, then we'll look at it, if there ever is a recession. I mean, you know, like I say, all these years I haven't seen it yet, so -- COMMISSIONER CARTER: So is it realistic that we could hire and train and put six people in in a fiscal year or would this really in reality be, maybe three or four? MR. PERICO: It's going to take time because there again, with the applications and as busy as it is, we don't get all the people we would like to get in, and I'm not just going to hire somebody just for the sake of hiring them. They are going to know what they are doing before they come on board. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm-- I'm just having some difficulty with the format here. You need to help me. I'm accustomed to looking at an organization and looking at the revenues and expenses and seeing where they are. So I'm having a little difficulty here with respect to Expanded Services. I've got one sheet on page B-6 that says Community Development and it listed -- lists a number of Expanded Services, including the eight code investigators. And then I have C-46 which indicates Expanded Services and in some cases, maybe all cases, the numbers are substantially different -- MR. OLLIFF: Let me try and help you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Page 93 June 20, 2002 MR. OLLIFF: What you are looking at on B-6, we are -- again this book is broken down by not only division, but by fund. So the Funding Source is different on B-6 versus the Funding Source that you are looking at on C-44, 45 and 46. Everything that we are currently working through right now is fee-driven. These are the functions in Community Development Environmental Services that are supported by fee revenue. The things that you are looking for back on page B-6 are General Fund, Unincorporated General Fund 111. So we tried to make sure that then you are looking at funds, you know that what used to happen was Commission would make a cut in a particular program and think it affected the tax rate. In this particular case, we want you to be very clear that when you are making adjustments on page 44, 45 and 46, that those are fee- driven and supported functions. The reductions there don't affect the millage rate or the tax rate whatsoever and will be very clear when we get to those pages when you are talking about Ad Valorem taxes. These are all fee-supported. That's why they are all separate and that's why they are in separate sections of the book. MR. SMYKOWSKI: For the Commissioners, the way it's set up on page C-44, if you look in the Expanded column, the first one under Development Services Building Admin, $182,000. If you look at your first subtotal on the Expanded list on C-46, it's $182,000. So it's two expandeds that total that 182. The total Departmental Expandeds are $1,542,600, which is your subtotal grand total at the bottom of C-46. So department by department, it's going to tied back to that Expanded List. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we are going to be talking about Expanded Services for this department in -- at two different times? Page 94 June 20, 2002 MS. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that what we are saying? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes, sir. MR. OLLIFF: And the fact that I think it's just a mere coincidence, you are looking at eight expanded requests on page B-6 and you are looking at eight over here, they are eight completely separate positions in completely separate departments. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Code Enforcement, we'll -- we'll be addressing first thing tomorrow morning and that will lead on into to our General Fund discussion and we'll discuss the various funding sources. The differentiating factor here again is, these are fee-supported and then those other requests are in a separate tab because they are Ad Valorem tax-supported. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: These expanded positions, I see it as Public Health and Safety. These people are going out there and inspecting their homes, whether it be a remodel or new construction. And I can tell you from the responsible contractors out there or subcontractors there is a little concern about the time allotted for each inspector to inspect electrical and plumbing; those things that are hidden in the walls. And if-- if we could use this money for transportations, I might think a little bit harder on these Expanded Services, but I don't have a problem with them the way they are. MR. SCHMITT: This -- this money can only be used in services provided within Community Development. We can't-- we can't move this to another area. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know. Page 95 June 20, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I would like to take a minute to recognize Janet Vasey from the -- the Vice President of the Productivity Committee. Do you have some comments on this? MS. VASEY: Yes, I do. Thank you very much. Janet Vasey for the record. We are recommending that you do not approve the administrative positions of $82,000 for the Communication Coordinator. And the reason was we looked at the -- what else was going on in the administration area, and there is the Community Planning Coordinator. That position already exists in this office and has -- has not been filled and has not been planned for filling for the rest of this fiscal year. And then this new position is being added for the Communications Coordinator. So you've got a Community Planning Coordinator and a Communications Coordinator both that would be pretty much new for FY 03. And, you know, they've been doing the work load right now without either one of those positions, and so we felt that one of them would be enough, not both of them for handling this kind of function. And -- and that's kind of key to a lot of things we looked at. We looked at what the vacancies are and what have they been doing with the people that they have currently on board, and then what is -- what are they asking for now. So we felt looking at those two positions, that the one -- the new one on the Communications Coordinator was a little bit soft, and so we recommended not funding that one. And -- and I would like to address the building inspectors. We had some questions on this when we were doing the analysis and -- and we kind of performed our own analysis on the workload. And if I could direct your attention to page C-52. I would like to just take a minute to explain what we did and how we calculated the requirement. Page 96 June 20, 2002 If you'll look at the bottom of the page on C-52, there is a table that has performance measures on it. And the last two lines are the ones that I want to draw your attention to. The number of building inspections conducted each year and the number of investigations per employee. And we looked at that as the workload as the number of inspections and then the workload per person is the bottom line. We went back -- we heard the analysis about the comparison between other counties and we felt that a more representative analysis would be to look at what has this department done in prior years. So we went all the way back to 1997 to see what the workload was and what the number of inspections per person has been, and you -- you can see on the table right there for FY 01, 02 and 03, that it has gone up, the number of inspections per person. If you go back and look at 1997, the inspections per person were 5440; '98, 5359; 1999, 5469 and there was a grouping of the -- in the mid 5,500 per year, per employee. It was historically what they were doing and then it has recently creeped up. So we said, what would it look like if we go back to that level of workload that you had historically performed, and -- and when you do that calculation and when you divide 164,000 by 5469, you come up with three new people is what you need. And so that was our recommendation just looking at the historical performance. And saying that was a better base line in comparison perhaps then with other-- yes? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt you but did you in your, and I appreciate how you figured it out. I would base it on that also. But did you factor in the new building code that's out there and, you know, the drive time might be a little bit more then it was before? Page 97 June 20, 2002 And the lack of performance that we were getting due to the large number of people that were out there in the field and past complaints we've had. This is a problem I got a concern on. We've had a failure in the fact that we had a number of different places where the inspection was less than completed. It was rushed through. Was this all factored in in your recommendation? MS. VASEY: No. Not in specific quantitative terms. What we were looking at was how, you know, how it was done in the past, what was the representative workload in the past and going back to that level. So it has not looked at complaints in either time period. You know, maybe back three years ago there weren't very many complaints. I don't really know that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We -- we get quite a few and they are based on what happened in the past, people coming in here that have their variances, because some -- they weren't caught, people that -- well, we get calls on everything from electrical, plumbing and they are mad as anything because the inspection wasn't complete enough to be able to catch that. And I know of cases, I've heard of it before from even people in the department where quite often. It's a matter of a drive-up and then move onto the next place, just a quick courtesy look and then move on. You know, there was no time for it. They're doing the job but they are doing it with the resources at hand. I, frankly, am not happy with everything that we are getting at this point in time and I'm not faulting them. I'm faulting the fact that they don't have the tools to be able to do it with. That's -- that's my concern. I appreciate where you are coming from and it's a lot of logic behind what you say but there is some factors into this that I want to be able to weigh also. Page 98 June 20, 2002 MS. VASEY: Well, one of the things that you are getting out of this is if you look at the workload in 02, it's 164,000 that they are planning to do, or I think I heard you say 165, maybe as an updated figure. And they are planning about the same level of workload in FY 03. It is the expectation. And -- and three people gives them a ten percent-increase -- over a ten-percent increase in staff, and we felt like that was a pretty, you know, fairly significant increase for no -- I mean, that gives you the quantitative -- the quantitative increase -- I mean, the qualitative increase. Because if your work load is staying the same between the two years and you're increasing the number of people by over ten percent, then -- then you're getting the qualitative increase right there, they are going to have more time to spend at each one of these places that they go through. And we -- I kind of-- I used a figure of about 248 days a year and came out with -- with three new people, they would have maybe 21 -- 21 sites to visit in a day. Now, maybe there is something else --CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Can we go back to that one slide there that showed the comparison? I think it was 29 we were doing. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, do you-- when you finish this discussion, do you have three nods on the Board that wants to move at this item, because at the end of the day, that's where it is. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I understand that and -- and please, what I'm trying to do is justify what I'm doing in my -- my own case. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I'm not quarreling that. I just -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand and I'll be brief. I understand what you are saying about three nods, but I -- what I -- Page 99 June 20, 2002 and I don't want to make comparisons across here. If we had 29 before and we are going to go down to 21, that still puts us way above the average going across. For the lack of performance, and I don't know, I'm not to sure how these people are doing on performance but I do know that what we are getting is less then desired based on that. I mean -- I mean, it's an improvement, grant you, but where would it -- it would only take us down to 21 total if we put on the inspectors? Is that what you are saying? MS. VASEY: That was the calculation we did. There may be something else in it involved. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And -- and that's going to be able to take care of it? MR. PERICO: Janet was right on the number when she said -- excuse me, every year, we added three inspectors over the last few years and what's happening is we are just staying at that same level of service. That's exactly what's happening and -- and she hit it right on the mark. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So in other words, we're not improving anything? MR. PERICO: If we don't do more, we're going to stay at the same level of service. MR. SCHMITT: All we are doing is just staying at the same level of service. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Gentlemen, we -- we've got to improve this thing somehow. I don't know what the answer is. MR. PERICO: What we've also got with -- with the new building code going into effect, as it did in March, it's a lot more cumbersome then a lot of people realize. Page 100 June 20, 2002 We've got three new schools getting ready to start which we are going to be doing the inspections on each one of those schools, which are going to be very time consuming. MR. SCHMITT: I do want you to know that we picked up the mission of the schools as well, which we did not have before. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now I hear you. Now I hear you and I'm getting a little mad. I'll be honest with you. What you are telling me is that you are going to maintain the status quo before, even though we couldn't meet the status quo and perform, we are going to take on additional jobs and try to still be able to produce something. MR. SCHMITT: Well, I don't want to leave the impression that we are not meeting the demand. We're -- we're getting a 24-hour turnaround. We've also increased productivity because -- and we're going to come back to you in September with a demonstration. We funded for the -- not the handheld but they are going to be all the wireless computerized system where the inspectors will not now even have to even come in in the morning. They are going to download from home and leave right from their home to go out to the job site. The CBIA or -- has and BESAK have pretty much fully supported this from the industry prospective, so we are going to have an increase in productivity from that regard, but the -- the increase here is basically the sustained level of pro -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I didn't mean the outburst, but I've been getting some feedback on what's taking place, and I understand what the numbers are. Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just -- just a couple of quick comments. With respect to the Public Affairs position and the Community Planning Coordinator, I -- I know what you have in mind with respect to public affairs. I -- I support that concept. Page 101 June 20, 2002 Janet has raised, I think, a good point. You don't have anybody in that position now. Why go from zero to two? Can you go from zero to one and then evaluate how you are dealing with that and then proceed? MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, yes. I'll -- let me explain. I -- I had somebody in the Community Coordinator position. She resigned. Last week was her last day. And frankly she resigned because the workload was just overwhelming. As Mr. Olliffhad mentioned, she was out two and three nights a week and -- and frankly, that piece of it was when she's -- in the evening, she's got time in the morning. Developers are trying to get a hold of her. She is the principal -- she has acted as the principal point of contact at these public meetings and when the public wants information, they come back to her. And -- and I'm desperately recruiting to fill that position. I'm moving someone in there next week. I'm pulling them out of my Current Planning, so this -- I respectfully, Ms. Vasey, when she said the position wasn't filled, the position has been filled and it has been filled since October. And I'm going to put someone in there temporarily into the Community Coordinator position. This is just to help prop up that -- that organization, to meet all the demands placed upon this person from all aspects of it, so -- and - - and you all know who was in that position and she quit. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. My second question has to do with the -- the six building inspector positions. I think I understand what -- what the Members of the Board are saying about this and where we are likely to go with it, but let -- let me ask you to - - to take a look at the -- the situation where you are adding six building inspectors. Page 102 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER FIALA: COMMISSIONER COYLE: MR. SCHMITT: Well, eight. inspectors. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Eight. Eight? One for signs and seven for Okay. MR. PERICO: And one contractor's license. MR. SCHMITT: I'm sorry. One, and seven contactor licenses. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And -- and you're also asking for a reinstatement of overtime reductions from the last year. Now, it seems to me if you've got more people, never mind the quality issue. If you've got more people, why do we need to pay more overtime? MR. PERICO: The overtime, like I say, we have to turn the stuff around in 24 hours, the jobs have to be turned around in 24 hours. Some of my gentlemen are coming in at 5:30, 6:00 at night and back out again at 8:00 in the morning. We will see a down turn, but there again, my goal is to do a -- a better and more thorough inspection than just, there again, for the sake of time. And I've always said it right from day one that I'm not going to compromise a review or inspection for the sake of time. To me, that's very critical. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would agree, but-- but I would also say that you didn't have this money the last fiscal year for -- for the current fiscal year, you didn't have the overtime money this past fiscal year. You are going to get six or more additional inspectors if you -- if you go with your proposal. I think that having a substantial increase in staff and still requesting the overtime, I think is excessive. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, let me help you with that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Page 103 June 20, 2002 MR. MUDD: The plan reviewers that review the plans that come in are in this area, previously, up until about three months ago, those gentlemen and ladies were exempt employees. They were not receiving overtime pay. To increase the amount of-- to increase the turnaround plan of plan review, that group of individuals, that group went from an exempt position catergoried to a non-exempt which means they are entitled to overtime. So increased productivity, and to more properly place them in the HR slotting, they should be, or should have been exempt individuals, meaning, I mean, non-exempt so they would get paid overtime. So, I mean, that's one reason this overtime is going to be effective in FY 03 and has not been in FY 02. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I -- I don't understand that logic at all. I -- I don't know why you would convert somebody from exempt to non-exempt merely for the purpose of awarding them overtime. MR. OLLIFF: It's not because of that. Because legally, you can't have certain positions -- you have to meet certain criteria in order to be exempt from overtime and for us legally not to be required to pay them overtime. These people were incorrectly categorized. We have to put them in this new category. And everytime you tweak And impact fee, I'm working these people day and night trying to keep up with the workload, and so that's where your overtime budget is going to come from because I promise, you are going to have some impact fee increases coming and you're going to see some of those rushes to the door just like we have over the past year. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I think as far as the eight building inspectors go, I -- I -- as long -- I didn't understand that they weren't coming out of Ad Valorem taxes, that the builders were Page 104 June 20, 2002 paying for them themselves, and as long as -- I know our complaints here on the Commission have been, number one, poor building inspections I'm sorry to say, and secondly, not timely at all. Obviously, these eight positions would correct, or I shouldn't say obviously, we would hope that they would correct those complaints and we wouldn't have them anymore. And if the building, I mean, if the builders want to pay for those inspectors in order to improve this performance and we don't have to pay for it, the taxpayers don't have to pay for it, I would consider it. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, rather than get bogged down here, I think-- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand. MR. OLLIFF: If we can, maybe we can as we go through, if there are some Productivity Committee recommendations that we want to roll up and consider, you know, at wrap up and at the end of the entire budget, we ought to keep a list of those, but we ought to just keep moving and decide those -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I agree with you but before we make that rule, I would like to give Commissioner Carter a chance to speak. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Very quickly. I respect a great deal the analysis that was done by productivity and Janet Vasey. Number crunchers are wonderful. I really believe in it, however, I'm going to go to the human side of the enterprise. I'm going to say, how do you measure bum out, because you keep those people out there too long and you push them too hard, they become ineffective. I can't put a number on it, but the toll is excruciating and it causes turnover. Number two, this is really you get into the first position, you got some soft costs. I can't tell you what GAF costs you when you do a lousy job in public relations. How many hours are spent trying to repair damage because somebody didn't interact in an appropriate Page 105 June 20, 2002 manner with the media. I can't measure it but I can tell you it's expensive. And thirdly, the one issue about overtime really is driven by Federal Wage and Law Administration and that's why the reclassification triggered that particular request for overtime. So that's where I am, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's go ahead and move on. We are going to be touching back on this at a later time; isn't that correct? MR. OLLIFF: The only other point I really wanted to make is just to -- to highlight for you and this is something you need to keep in mind. When the Board implemented a much tougher sign ordinance a couple of years ago, you gave those people who have existing signs that are out of compliance until fiscal year 2003 in order to come into compliance. Fiscal year 2003 is right around the comer and that's what this budget reflects and you are going to see a great deal of public heightened interest, if you will. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's very politely put. MR. OLLIFF: In -- in the new sign code, because most of these people have not done anything with the time that we have given them and code enforcers are just going to have to go out and start bringing these signs into compliance. They are going to be low profile ground-level signs throughout the community and that's going to be something you are going to deal with over the course of 2003. MR. SCHMITT: And the building review has to do the site analysis and follow up an evaluation. It was once a part-time position. Now it is a full-time. You need him more. MR. OLLIFF: Right. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I understand. Let's move on. Page 106 June 20, 2002 MR. SCHMITT: Okay. The next one is addressing the switchboard records. Mr. Bleu Wallace, Operations Director will cover that. MR. WALLACE: For the record, Bleu Wallace. The Operations Department is a diverse organization. We've got some nine different functions. And I know that -- and I appreciate the Productivity Committee taking note that we do need a position. They have recommended that we hire a technician, not a supervisor. However, right now, I have, out of 24 bodies, I have ten direct reports. They report directly to me. And that's for -- for nine functions. What I want is a -- is a supervisor. We need help in addressing. The Productivity Committee recognizes that, but I need a supervisor to take -- there will be four or less people reporting directly to me, and if no one knows what the Operation Department of Community Development does, right now we have the records room, the filing, the digital conversion of all vertical plans to the computer system, the switchboard, they handle all the calls addressing functions, street name changes, graphics, utility of regulation cable administration. We do all the HR coordination for the division, and most recently, the TDC function. I only have two supervisors in-house. I need a third. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Wallace, just a question. Are you allowing for the fact that you are going to be hiring a director for the TDC? MR. WALLACE: This has nothing to do with the Tourist Development or the Tourism Manager. That's a completely separate function. This has to do with addressing. They have a back log. Page 107 June 20, 2002 MR. SCHMITT: This is street number, they assign these street numbers, street names, all the other activities in coordinating the emergency services and they all are associated with the addressing. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Just a quick question. I need to ask Bleu this question. Could you establish a lead person in your group, a group leader where you may bring in a technician but a group leader functions in that -- in that area for a differential? MR. WALLACE: Sir, I'm doing that now. I've given one of the individuals a five-percent bump just to keep the boat afloat, but we need the additional body, and I need an additional supervisor over-- that will give me three supervisors over 24 people. COMMISSIONER CARTER: And that controls five for seven? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I would like to go to Janet Vasey there. MS. VASEY: Just one -- one quick comment on that. We felt the position was justified based on the workload and that 48 of the -- if you look at the table on page C-53, the performance measure. The middle one there says number of on-site checks for addressing, and it's 76 this year and going up to 95. And this year, 48 of 76 site visits will not be made due to personnel shortages. And they said with the implementation of GIS, they'll be falling farther behind. So when we talked about this position in the Productivity Committee, we said, we don't need a supervisor, you know, sitting back at the office. We need more people out in the field doing the addressing. And that was the rationale behind our recommendation. COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's a good -- MR. WALLACE: May I respond? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Of course. Page 108 June 20, 2002 MR. WALLACE: Once we get a supervisor in place, that, we hope will come from someone within and move up, that will free up another position and that lower position, the newest one that is filled, that will end up being the field person to do the -- the necessary field checks. And by the way, that's up to 60 now that we are behind. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I -- I concur. Any questions or-- well, we are going to hear about it again later on on this. What do we have next here? MR. OLLIFF: Michael. MR. SMYKOWSKI: That concludes the Community Development that is fee-supported and I think we had agreed previous to that that it might be an appropriate break point. We have some small Special Revenue Funds that we can get through quickly. Then this afternoon, we still have a fairly large agenda ahead of us. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why don't we break now and then -- and then we'll come back and finish that at the end. One hour for lunch. We'll be back here at 1:30. (Whereupon, a one-hour lunch was taken and the meeting continued as follows:) MR. SCHMITT: Mr. Smykowski? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. We are on page C-59. There are a few miscellaneous Special Revenue Funds, such as the Museum, Guardianship, et cetera that Ms. Stone will walk through quickly and then we'll shift gears and head into our Utility and Solid Waste Funds. MS. STONE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Wynona Stone for the record. You'll see the Miscellaneous Revenue Funds we have listed on the page, prior page, they are mostly for specified purposes. There are some Ad Valorem consequences that I'll walk through when we go through these. Page 109 June 20, 2002 The Museum Fund, you already addressed under TDC with the $900 expanded transfer from the Tourist Development Council. That's 19 percent of the two-percent tourist tax. The Golden Gate Community Center has a transfer from Fund 111, the unincorporated area, so we are going to discuss that tomorrow. The Adoption Awareness Vehicle Tags are -- are our county's share of the Choose Life License Plate Funds for the sales of those license plates, and those are used for assisting counseling for women who intend to give their children up for adoption. The Public Guardianship Fund provides indigent incapacitated adults with Guardianship Services, and this is primarily funded with filing fees and a transfer from the General Fund. The transfer from the General Fund for FY 03 has decreased drastically to $12,700 from $83,000. The Teen Court Program was previously funded and this year is funded under the General Fund. For next year we have set up its own fund. It will be having court cost fees coming in to fund that program. And I believe you are all familiar. You have attended some of those teen court sessions. The Records Modernization Program is to keep the clerks information official records system maintained and updated as needed. MS. USHER: Hi. My name is Susan Usher from the Budget Office. The Wireless 911 Program and the E911 Program are two programs that are fee-supported. The -- you pay fifty cents for your wireless cellular phones and fifty cents per month on your regular land line phone lines and these fees support the operation, education and capital improvements to maintain the 911 Communications Center. Page 110 June 20, 2002 MR. SMYKOWSKI: We had previously adopted the fee approximately in the last two months relative to the fee for the upcoming fiscal year. MS. STONE: Any questions on any of those Special Funds? MR. SMYKOWSKI: With that, we'll move to your Enterprise Fund Tab. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Hold on. Before you go too far, is there anything that's going to show me where this Ad Valorem Property Tax Allocation of $329,600 is going to go? MS. STONE: Yes, sir. I have some sheets that I can distribute that shows you the -- the break-down on that. I don't have them all with me right now. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. That would -- that would be very helpful. Thank you. MS. STONE: I can basically tell you, the Personal Services are split. There is an agreement about the split but did you want to discuss that tomorrow? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. We'll address the Golden Gate Community Center. Ms. Ramsey will be there talking about parks and since that is funded by a transfer from 111, I think it's probably more appropriate to address it on a comprehensive basis with Ms. Ramsey tomorrow morning and we'll be sure to do that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I know that the Productivity Committee had some comments or questions. Did you want to do that now or did you wait until tomorrow morning? What would be appropriate2 You tell me, Janet. MS. VASEY: The main one we had on that, on Golden Gate had to do with the point of sale, automated systems in public services so -- and it was related to our recommendation in that area so I can deal with it tomorrow if you would like. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. Page 111 June 20, 2002 MR. SMYKOWSKI: With that, we are moving into Pubic Utilities, the water and sewer and Mr. Greenwald, we'll turn it over to you and the utilities staff. E-2, there is a -- there is a Macro Summary of both the Utilities and Solid Waste Funds combined. But on E-2-2 and 3, there is a Fund Summary for the Water and Sewer Districts so you see both the revenues and expenses for water waste water and the entire county water, sewer and water district operation. That's probably a better basis to work from. MR. GREENWALD: Good afternoon. Randy Greenwald for the record. As Mike stated, the County Water Sewer Operating Fund 408 is on page E-2-2 and E-2-3. The total request for 03 is $66,978,900. It's for Public Utilities Administration, Financial Operations, Public Utilities Engineering, Water Administration and Waste Water Administration. All of the these departments are all funded from User Fees. There are no Ad Valorem Funds that support these programs. With that, I'll turn it over to Jim Deloney, the Public Utilities Administrator and his staff. MR. DELONEY: Thank you, Randy. For the record, I'm Jim Deloney. I'm your Public Utilities Administrator. Good morning -- or good afternoon. It's a great time to begin my services as administrator with today's budget workshop and I thank you very much for the opportunity to be here and this great job. The FY 03 division budget is consistent with sustaining reliable public utilities infrastructure and services. In particular, it supports across functional efforts that were briefed earlier by the Deputy County Manager and Assistant County Managers. The Board's direction on Water Reliability Plans, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection consent orders and the water and waste water master plans that this Board adopted in November/December of last year. Page 112 June 20, 2002 The budget provides for a total staffing level of 345 full-time team members. The total FY 03 Public Utilities Division Budget is approximately $248 million dollars, consisting of an operating budget of approximately $118 million dollars and a capital budget of $130 million dollars. Through the management of thirteen fund types and consisting of 49 cost centers, all funded solely from Enterprise Funds that is user and Impact Fees. I have with me today all the Public Utilities Division Department Directors, who in turn will present an overview of their independent -- or their individual department budgets. Other than your questions to me, I would now like to ask Tom Wides, Public Utilities Operations Director to present the overall division of organizational structure with our proposed transfers followed by an overview of the Public Utilities Administration and Operations Department Budgets. He would then be followed in turn by other division department directors. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. What is it that you are going to represent to us? Are we just going to go through their part of the budget? MR. DELONEY: Yes, sir. Each of them will come-- would provide you a snapshot of their part of the total utilities budget generally by fund site, so it works to organize that way and appears to the best way to proceed with the presentation this morning -- or this afternoon. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. MR. DELONEY: Is that okay? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It sounds fine. Is there is nothing from the Commission, please proceed. MR. DELONEY: All right. Tom? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, good afternoon. Again, for the record, Tom Wides, Operations Director for Public Utilities. If I Page 113 June 20, 2002 may, I would like to take you initially to the page E-6 which is the Public Utilities Administration page, and I would like to speak to you just for a few minutes here about the mission and the Expanded Services related to this department. This -- the mission of this department is basically to policy -- to set policy and implement -- to ensure implementation of the policy along with the overall leadership and support of the water, waste water, solid waste, pollution control, engineering and beachery nourishment activities. It has four full-time equivalents in the position, including the administrator of the division. There are no Expanded Services in this -- in this department referred here. Any -- may I ask -- answer any questions for you? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can I go back to E-2, Funding Sources Utility User Fees. We -- we dramatically increased the fees this past year. I -- I don't see a substantial increase in revenue from last year to the new fiscal year. Can you explain that to me? MR. WIDES: Yes, Commissioner. We did, in fact, increase User Fees from last year to this year. They became effective in April, on April 1st of this year. I would like to characterize that and remind everyone that, in fact, what we did with the User Fees was, in fact, put a series of block -- or a block structure series in place where we tried to keep the lower blocks very close to a zero increase in cost to the customer. We ramped that up as we got into the higher usage levels. And, in fact, what we're -- we're early in the process here. We haven't seen much of the revenue impact. We looked back in our estimate here, looked back at what we had seen so far to date. We also looked back at our rate studies to see what they anticipated and we're very -- being very careful at this Page 114 June 20, 2002 point in time in terms of the planning year, trying to be very conservative as to where this revenue will end up. So, yes, in answer to your question, the revenues are not showing a dramatic increase. We're being conservative. As we move out of the planning cycle and see the actual activities, we'll be able to adjust our plans in terms of reducing any anticipated debt and, in fact, relying on the user fee site. COMMISSIONER COYLE: How about the-- MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if I can interject. Jim Mudd, for the record for just a second, one piece that he missed. The whole intent of the inverted scale was to reduce consumption, so we're hoping to get decreased amounts on -- on the user side, therefore, there won't -- their bills have pretty much come in the same, but they are using less water, okay? In particular, the stuff that's outside the home use, and that's what the inverted scale was to do is watering outside for landscaping and -- and pool use and things to get people to be a little bit more prudent with that valuable resource. In -- in his increase, and yes, there is an increase that's there in that -- those particular figures for growth for new hookups, because that would be an additional revenue that would come on. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I saw some information in here concerning water production. Can you review that for me? What I'm trying to determine is -- is what is the change in water produced versus the change in revenue? MR. WIDES: I believe -- and let me check, if I can, with our water department folks, Commissioner. MR. OLLIFF: Look on page E-15 of your budget. You will see in your performance measure the total water produced in billions of gallons. Page 115 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we are having a nine percent increase in water produced and we had a relatively large increase in the rate structure, but we're showing four and a half percent increase in revenues. MR. WIDES: Commissioner, again, we don't necessarily anticipate, although we are going to be using more water, we don't anticipate a large increase at that upper end where you'll really have the rate increases start to kick in. In those upper blocks, which is where the rate increases really are kicking in, we don't expect that to be our area of increase. As you bring more building on, we're going to expect more conservation, okay, and you are going to be having more water use at the lower end of those blocks. That's what we are anticipating at this point. MR. OLLIFF: Bottom line here is it's a very conservative revenue projection. MR. DELONEY: I've got your concern though that we don't undershoot these revenues and with the changes that came about in April which you have heard discussed by the Deputy County Manager. Mr. Wides, I've got the facts if you want to take a look at those revenues to see if there is an adjustment that is appropriate for the final budget. I've got it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, just -- just -- just for clarification. MR. DELONEY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand the expenses in this department are paid for with User Fees. They're not coming out of Ad Valorem property taxes, okay? So I do understand that. I'm -- I'm just concerned about how we are going about the budgeting process and I'd like to make sure it's as accurate as Page 116 June 20, 2002 possible, whether it's completely paid with User Fees or whether it is coming out of Ad Valorem property taxes. MR. OLLIFF: And I think the time to really ask that question again is Fiscal Year 03, is each and every time these guys are in front of you with something where they want to borrow money in order to build something. Because the amount that you borrow will be less based on the amount of revenue that you are collecting during the year, and that's something that we'll need to keep on top of and if-- if the revenue projections start to creep up higher, then you ought to be borrowing less, and paying less interest. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we talk about Landfill Fees? Is this an appropriate time? MR. DELONEY: We are going to have George up here in a minute who is going to talk about Solid Waste Funds. Can we defer to him, Mr. Henning? Is that okay with you? We'll get him up here and we'll do it. MR. SCHMITT: Okay. What page, Tom? MR. WIDES: Commissioners, if I can move you page E-7. I would like to also at the same time, early this morning, I had passed to you a copy of the Public Utilities Organization chart. I believe it's in a plastic fold-in. And if I could take you momentarily to page four of that chart. It will also be portrayed up here on the visualizer. It's a little bit difficult to see and I apologize for that, but the intent here is along the lines of where we basically had some, what I'll call some redeployment of staff or re-alignment of staff within the division. And what we have done is we have added eight individuals into the utility billing area, and when I say add, they have been likewise subtracted from the sub -- Solid Waste Department. Page 117 June 20, 2002 These are customer service -- generally, customer service folks and what we are trying to do here is really to optimize and centralize the customer service focus so that we can minimize additional staff additions, and that's all contained basically on page four of that organization chart. It revolves around the red highlighted areas. Those are -- those are the team members that, in fact, have moved into this department from another department within the division. This is really the only substantial change that we've made in the division. And, you know, I've included the other pages here for you, however, the others we won't address today unless you have questions. Let me, just for a few moments here, take you back to page E-7 on the budget books. The mission of this operation's department is -- is very strongly fiscal or financially oriented. It's basically the fiscal assessment and guidance to the public utilities operations expenditure projects It includes the management of the state-revolving fund loans that we can use in some cases for our capital projects, financial analysis of various special projects and the ongoing assessment and need for external debt financing. There are other very important activities going on here also. One I would like to note in particular is the -- on the page E-8, you will see that one of our significant responsibilities within the department is the utility building and customer service function that I just referenced to you from the organization chart. That is primarily contained on that page. And it's basically, again, billing for water and waste water customers and also the maintenance of the mandatory assessments for the solid waste customers and, of course, we have approximately today, 47,000 water and waste water customers. Finally, in terms of expanded services, we have one FTE in fiscal support for customer service in the amount of $43,800. You'll Page 118 June 20, 2002 see that at the bottom of page E-9. And we have $13,900 for the information technology network infrastructure on South Horseshoe Drive where our utility billing offices are located. And that's primarily to improve the phone switching in that area to enhance our customer service capabilities. And those are the major activities of that department today. If you have any questions, please. At that point, Commissioners, we'll move into the Public Utilities Engineering Department and Roy Anderson, our Engineering Director will join us to comment on their mission and activities. MR. ANDERSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Roy Anderson, Director of Public Utilities Engineering. I would refer you to pages E- 10 and E- 11 of the budget package wherein our Public Utilities Engineering Department Budget is described. The mission of our department is to implement and manage the utilities infrastructure projects for Collier County in a timely, cost effective and quality manner. Secondarily, we participate proactively in county planning and ensure that infrastructure requirements are in place in advance of the development projects that come along. Also, we provide a technical support to the Utilities Operations Division, namely water and waste water. The department is involved-- is divided into six program areas, administration, project management, planning, geographic information systems, supervisory control and data acquisition functions and construction and engineering and inspection functions. In FY 02, we were authorized to add seven new positions to our group, however, due to the 90-day hiring hold and the time needed, the lag time needed to advertise in national publications to -- to get Page 119 June 20, 2002 well-qualified people, there was a lag and therefore, these essential positions are now being filled as we speak. For example, the -- the supervisory control and data acquisition manager is now in place. He started this week and we're close to hiring the GIS analyst. We have completed interviews and he'll be starting most likely in the next month. And the remaining five will be interviewed over the next -- next month. The justification for our new positions are that the two engineers that we're requesting are needed to build more master planning and strategic planning capability in-house and to identify the infrastructure requirements which should be placed on developers before their projects are approved by the county. The GIS analyst will prepare the utility data layers for the county-wide GIS system and he will oversee document imaging for our records drawings. The three, construction, engineering and inspection positions will build our in-house capability to ensure that our considerable volume of construction projects are being built and inspected in a quality and timely fashion. That completes my statement. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The CIE's or CEI's? MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Three people, $200,00. Is that uniforms or something extra? MR. DELONEY: Sir, actually those positions were approved last year. We are moving out on those hirings right now, and when you think in terms of new, it's to ensure that you understood that the positions that were vacant within the division are vacant only because of the hiring lag with the requirements with regard to that. That cost, it appears to be reasonable on it's face with the data I have available today. Page 120 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'm not really questioning the positions. I'm questioning the dollar amount. MR. DELONEY: Sir, I can come back to you with the specifics, but on their face, they would be scheduled positions and that would be fully burden labor consistent with county policy, in that budget. If we've missed it, I'll get back to you and -- MR. OLLIFF: That should include total cost, which when you calculate the benefits package on top of the standard salary puts those salaried positions somewhere around the low 40's for all three of those positions. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, if we're talking about five positions it works out to be $150,000 a piece if I'm looking at the same thing, Mr. Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Exactly. Does that include vehicles? MR. WIDES: Commissioners, if I may? Tom Wides for the record again. That includes, when we say fully loaded in this case, this includes PC's, this includes equipment, such as vehicles, if appropriate for the individual. It is -- It is everything related to the position, not just the salary and benefits. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What I'm looking for, specifics is are we talking three vehicles, three laptops, sets of uniforms; those types of things. MR. DELONEY: Yes, sir. MR. WIDES: We can provide you with that information, Commissioner. MR. OLLIFF: And only because that's in your current year budget is that detail not available to you. MR. WIDES: That was, in fact, discussed in last year's budget and we actually laid that out, but we can provide that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. Sorry. I forgot. Page 121 June 20, 2002 MR. WIDES: No. I don't mean to say it that way. It was brought forward-- COMMISSIONER FIALA: You didn't remember. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just wanted to clarify for my own understanding. These positions that were from last year, they are paid out of User Fees; correct? MR. DELONEY: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the Operating Funds that you asked us to restore, those are also paid out of User Fees? MR. DELONEY: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: straight in my head. Thank you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I just wanted to get that I do have one question. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Of course. Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I -- I can't make sense out of most of what we are doing here today, but the -- the way we are going through it is very, very confusing, but I'm not going to try to change that. All right? I am concerned about Ad Valorem property tax of $1,407,500 into public utilities. Now, what I'm trying to figure out is where does that go and how do we spend it? MR. OLLIFF: Where are you? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Green sheet, E-2. MR. WIDES: Yes. I believe the Commissioner is back on E-2. That is related to the Pollution Control Department. That is the funding for the Pollution Control Department costs. And, again, you did hear pollution control this morning, only because it was part of the 100 Series Funds, but, in fact, that Pollution Control Department is part of the Public Utilities Division. Page 122 June 20, 2002 So when you see this wrap-up, you are seeing all the -- all of the divisional-related costs. That segment is related to Pollution Control. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are we going to be talking about that in more detail? MR. DELONEY: Ray Smith was here earlier. In fact, he was the lead off batter here on today's session. That is -- but we would be more than happy to answer any questions you have. MR. OLLIFF: That is that special voter-approved Pollution Control Fund monies that -- that's being levied at about .04 mills, I believe. They've got a tenth of a mill cap on there and you reviewed that with Ray Smith this morning. COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is an MSTD of some kind? MR. OLLIFF: Yeah. Yes. That was a voter-approved tax. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. All right. MR. MUDD: And, Commissioners, the reason Pollution Control is in utilities besides the location where there lab was and-- and supervisory control of the unit, there is a lot of similarities in their lab with the water lab and the waste water lab and we -- we have 'been able to grab some efficiencies. Instead of having some samples that went from water and waste water, they have been able to get pollution control to do them and pay them for them, so it's more fee per service kind of things that you were talking to Mr. Deloney about this morning. As far as the direction is concerned with pollution control, so it made a lot of sense to put them there, and that's the only Ad Valorem piece in public utilities. COMMISSIONER COYLE: MR. WIDES: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: as MSTD on these reports. MR. DELONEY: And that is an MSTD? It might be helpful if we label that All right, sir. We'll do that. Page 123 June 20, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please, continue. MR. DELONEY: Okay. If you have any other questions for Roy? Pam? MS. LUBEY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Pam Lubey, Water Distribution Manager and I'm pinch hitting today for Paul, our water director who is out of town. The expanded requests we have before you today have been reviewed in light of the Water Department's mission statement, which is to provide effective management and operation of the county's water-owned district facilities and provide a safe a reliable drinking water supply in a cost effective manner for our customers. There are a total of 94 team members currently working to accomplish this mission. The department is broken down into four functional areas that Included administration, water production, water distribution and laboratory services. There are 15 expanded requests being presented for your approval today. Four of the requests come from the water and administration area and are all related to providing our customers with the tools to promote water conservation. We feel that this especially timely given the recent passing on the Irrigation Ordinance in March and the addition of the rate increase that took effect in April. The total cost for this request was $50,000 for all four items. The first request in the distribution section is for one additional team member to assist with the GIS effort. This position will begin to take the resources that we have collected over the last two years in the field and take that data and begin to use it in a real live fashion. The second request is to provide equipment to establish a safer and more efficient maintenance and traffic plan, as distribution employees frequently must work on congested roadways. This will help provide a more safer driving environment for the public as well Page 124 June 20, 2002 as more safety for your employees. We did consult with the Risk Management staff in developing this program. The water production area has several requests also on the table today. The first of those requests is for updated security systems at both your north and south regional water treatment plants. The request will provide for motion detectors, sirens, cameras and enhanced front gate access control. Recently, we have been informed by the federal government that all water facilities must perform a security assessment and these are items which they will be looking for. The total of that request is for $275,000. The other share of our expanded request today -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Hold on just a minute, please. What -- what page are we on? MR. DELONEY: E-4. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. MS. LUBEY: The line share today, $766,000 is for the operation of the new South Plant, which is coming on line in January of 03. That will provide for the addition of employees to staff this facility, as well as for the electrical and chemicals to operate it for the nine months that it will be in operation next year. The staffing level will be minimal and will provide for one person per shift, per day. In addition, the North Plant is requesting funds to complete the testing of Injection Well Number One. This is a test that must be performed once every five years to ensure the integrity of the ASR well. Failure to complete this test will -- will make the well unusable according to the state. The water laboratory has one expanded request for testing of the new wells that will come on line in the South Regional Water Treatment Plant at Hawthorne Well Field. The testing is a series of chemical and biological analyses that are a regulatory requirement prior to placing a public drinking water well into service. Page 125 June 20, 2002 The final group of expanded services is to restore funds that were removed during the budget reductions that were imposed in January of this year, and the total amount of this request is for $22,700, and these will restore funds for other contractual services and training. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I was wondering, by the operating budget that was reduced, I notice you have requested to add that back in, but if you have been able to get a long without that all year, why would you need it restored? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, if I may. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- instead of going into next year's? MR. DELONEY: Yes, ma'am. I understand your question. Tom. MR. WIDES: Commissioner, there is two things happening here. First off, the -- the costs that are being requested to be restored is -- is not the full amount that was, in fact, reduced earlier in the year. And, secondly, to directly answer your question, in fact, there will be an executive summary in front of you for this next board meeting on Tuesday that will, in fact, ask-- request additional funding to get the Water Department through the balance of the year. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, because of these reductions? MR. WIDES: Part, yes. Partially, in direct, partially due to the budget reductions that we took and partially due to some of the operational difficulties we experienced earlier in this -- in the year. But these are relatively a very small portion of what we're requesting. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Ms. Libby, on top of E-4 you have, for the new water treatment plant, five positions; correct? Page 126 June 20, 2002 MS. LUBEY: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And in your requested $766,000 for five positions -- MS. LUBEY: That also includes all the chemical and electrical costs to run that facility for the nine months it will be in operation. It will come on line in January of 03 and that will provide all costs to run that facility for the next nine months, not just the employment side. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Is there a reason why we lumped together supplies and-- and employees? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Commissioner, that is one decision package. You have to operate that facility -- obviously, it's more than merely the staffing. It's the total cost, so it's -- it's grouped together because that frankly, is -- is one decision. You don't have the option of hiring the people and not having the chemicals and electricity as -- as a separate component. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me take it a point further. We already built the plant, so it's a no brainer that we have to hire them. The only question I have is, what is the employee costs versus the -- the supply costs? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, we can provide you with that information. That is -- we have that break down. We just summarized it here for-- MR. GREENWALD: Randy Greenwald. It's $233,600 for the employees for the five positions. That includes salaries and the benefits packages. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. OLLIFF: We tried to show you what is the phase-in cost for that new plant, and the plant will start on a given date that's midway through the year and so we wanted to let you know when you flip the switch on the plant what our estimation is, what your Page 127 June 20, 2002 total operating costs are going to be for that plant expansion from that point for the rest of the year, recognizing that the full year's cost will be slightly higher than it is in the Fiscal Year 04 Budget. COMMISSIONER HENNING: One more question. And this came up just recently. We wanted redundancy in our plants with the wells and the motors and things like that. Has that been implemented? MS. LUBEY: Yes, Commissioner. We have started to implement those items, and you will also be seeing some funding in the capital program side because a lot of those are one-time costs, so you will be seeing them in the facility rehab capital project. That will be coming before you, I think in the next item up. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Once we finish with the waste water budget, we will immediately go to the water and Sewer Capital Projects that are funded either by User Fees or Impact Fees and you'll see the whole comprehensive list of projects that are planned for the upcoming budget year. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. MR. WEISS: Joe Weiss, Board of Director. I wanted to briefly go over the waste Water Department's mission statement and tell you about our programs. I'll be speaking from page E-5 in here in your handout. The mission of the Collier County Waste Water Department is to sustain public trust and protect human health in our environment by providing a waste water collection and treatment service to our customers in a safe, effective and efficient manner that exceeds our customer's expectations. We strive to provide a beneficial reused product back to our community that meets and exceeds all federal and state regulations. We are divided into five different sections of the department. The biggest program we have is operation and maintenance at two Page 128 June 20, 2002 regional waste water treatment facilities that provide a capacity of 26 million gallons per day, maximum month. We provide analytical laboratory support for process control and State FDEP compliance. We provide industrial pretreatment program to protect our infrastructure and to make sure there are no pollutants in our sewer system that might be harmful to the waste water treatment system. We operate and maintain a waste water collections system of over 750 miles of force main and gravity mains, over 650 waste water pumping stations with over 47,000 connections. That covers an area of 75 square miles. Our programs in waste water collections include rehabilitation of sewer lines and -- and wet wells and manholes, TV monitoring and sealing cleaning and flushing the sewer lines, pump maintenance repair, preventive maintenance and the odor control program. We also operate and maintain a reclaimed water system that averages over 4.2 billion gallons distribution to 26 bulk and pressurized customers. We have a locate department now that has over 30,000 locates per year and also they maintain our GIS Mapping Department. Under the Administration Department, we have a program of safety and training that meets all federal and state regulations, revised an upper mobility program for our employees to enhance job performance and job satisfaction. On page E-5, a budget handout we right now presently have 124 full-time team members. We are requesting two additional employees in this next fiscal year budget, two maintenance specialists. They will be in the Waste Water Collection Department and they will be on a program to enhance our cleaning and flushing of sewer lines, and this is a new program that we are working on. Page 129 June 20, 2002 It's not really new to us, but the federal -- there is federal legislation that's going to require a flushing system in the future to be permitted just like a waste water plant, and anytime you have a waste water spill, you are subject to fines. And the Waste Water Department, right now, cleans approximately thirty miles per year of-- of mains and to maintain industry standards, we need to flush and maintain about 125 miles per year of sewer mains. This will be two employees who do nothing but full-time cleaning and flushing of sewer lines, and to do that they need a truck, the truck is $162,500. This truck is a large piece of equipment. It has a water tank and jet cleaning equipment along with a vacuum system to clean out sewers. This is needed to maintain a level of service that will be required by the federal government. In our -- we also request in the Collections Department to reinstate $314,800 from the Fiscal Operating Budget from last year. We project that we will have a shortfall. We tried our best to have a reduction, but in the area that we are looking at, we are going to have a shortfall and have to come back before the budget revision this summer. And this money will come in the area of other contractual services, utility parts, utility repairs and electricity. In the Stake and Locate Department we are asking for a vehicle. This vehicle will be used by our GIS technician to use to go out and verify GIS mapping coordinates. The North County Water Recreation Facility, we are asking for a utility van to be used by our Instrumentation Department. In the past, we have contracted out our instrumentational electrical repair and we have now this fiscal year hired our own instrumentation technicians and this vehicle would be used to transport equipment and parts throughout the facility in our reclaimed water water system for these employees. Page 130 June 20, 2002 We are asking for a $15,000 forklift. This will be used piece of equipment to be used for loading chemicals for our belt filter presses. We are also asking to reinstate in the north county facility $108,000 and this is an area also in contracted services and utility repairs. The North County Plant as you know has been expanded by a five millions gallons and we have really never the opportunity to take down the old facility and do repairs. The South County Facility, we are asking for a $25,000 analyzer. That's called a nutrient analyzer. This is kind of a system that's used to analyze for nitrates, nitride and ammonia. It's kind of an indicator of how well you are doing as far as supplying oxygen to the facility to save energy costs. And the last expanded item we have is $25,000 for the South County facility to enhance the entrance road and parking area at the front of the Warrant Street area. This will help in the safety around the areas. There is a baseball park there and they are parked along the street. We need to enhance that area to get those cars in a parking area and get them off-- off of Warren Street. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I'm sure you did a cost analysis to find out whether it was cheaper to hire out for the employee or hire an employee and then outfit him with the truck and all of the desks and computers and everything he needs, but I -- I would love to know what the cost savings was to bring an in-house rather than to -- rather than to -- MR. WEISS: We can get that information for you. The out of house contracted charges is $75 per hour, plus parts and materials, so we think there is a significant'savings. We've done that at the south plant as well as the north plant as well. Page 131 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh. I would like to be able to see it I think. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Where would we find information like this in that budget? Where would we find the contract costs that you have spent in prior years? MR. WEISS: It would be under Other Contracted Services. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And where would I find that? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, in this presentation, we-- we've really summed that all up as part of the operating expenses in the individual areas. We have detailed accounts within our financial management systems that we are able to track budget versus actual on the individual types of expenditures. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it -- Commissioner Fiala has asked a good question. You -- you are bringing something in-house. Is there a corresponding reduction in the external contract costs, and if so, where would I see that? MR. WIDES: Basic -- you would see it in a shift from expenses related -- operating expenses in -- out of there and shift into personnel related costs, and you would see some offsetting costs within operating expenses. Bottom line, if you come from outside, and you have costs that you are incurring from the outside, it's going to tend to be in the operating expense area. As you bring that cost inside, some of it may be to purchase a vehicle which would be capital costs, some may be other supply costs that would -- that would be offsetting to some degree in the operating expenses, and then some would shift to the personnel costs. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But we have nothing that will tell us where that is? MR. WIDES: Not -- not in front of you today. Page 132 June 20, 2002 MR. DELONEY: In the details, we can provide you that in the formulated budget. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are we going to get to that level at any point in time in this process? MR. OLLIFF: No, sir. And, Commissioner, just to help you on it, on an 800 million dollar budget, if I were to get you that level of information, it would be in stacks of computer printouts that big(indicating,) and you would spend all year going through the budget. And so we've got to roll the budget up to some level that's manageable for you, and the policy level board and -- and yet at a detail enough that we think we're trying to provide you the level of information that you need. I understand that there are probably some public information oppommities that are here, because we are providing you some things that are saving us some money on some hands, and are less costly on contracted services, and a lot of what we're doing makes good sense and it's hard to squeeze the good sense out of the format that we have provided you. We'll try and go back through and scrub and provide the Board a list of cost savings and reduction things that this budget provides for. COMMISSIONER COYLE: If-- if it's easier for you, it would be good just to take the Expanded Services that you are requesting and have an offsetting benefit, cost benefit of some kind. I don't know if you can do that. Some of them, I suspect, would be very hard to identify, but certainly when you are no longer contracting out a service, you should be able to show a cost benefit. MR. OLLIFF: We can show the comparable cost of-- of what we would pay using other options and we can do that on a number of these expanded service requests. Page 133 June 20, 2002 I would ask that you give the budget staff and your operating staff probably the balance of the summer to try and put that together for you so that by September and you come back and you wrap up the budget, we can show you all of that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. MUDD: Jim Mudd for the record, just because it seems to be a -- just a point of confusion of what was said. Commissioner Fiala asked, have you done a cost benefit analysis versus going in- house versus contracting out. And Joe basically gave the going rate that would cost to get J.C. Drainfields or whatever to come in here with a factor truck in order to do that in that process. The reason that this factor truck and the two crew members are in here is because Joe has a federal mandate now that he has to flush a certain number of miles of lines now, the total number that he's got, and we -- with this new requirement, we haven't been able to do 30 miles in a year and the new requirement is to do about 125. And so this is for a new requirement that's brought to the county in order to satisfy some regulations that are coming to the county in this next year as far as number of lines in our sewer system that need to be flushed. Did I miss anything, Joe.'? MR. DELONEY: Any other questions for Joe.9 Thank you, Joe. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Carter. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I can understand Commissioner Coyle's concerns. ! think probably what you are suggesting by showing the comparisons, looking for the cost benefit analysis is if you could find some of those block areas, pull that together and incorporate it. It gives the comparison. It makes it easier to make the assessment. I've asked for those many times. When they get through with it, they prove that what they did was most cost effective. But for public Page 134 June 20, 2002 information, I think it's just a good opportunity to show certain areas to demonstrate that we have done due diligence. MR. DELONEY: Yes, sir. I understand your intent. Susan is now -- we're going to take you -- we are now going to shift into cap projects real quick here. MS. USHER: If you wouldn't mind turning to page E-22. This page addresses the debt services requirements for the utilities. This fund was established to administer an account for the debt that the Utilities Department has acquired. All the debt that's being reviewed on this page has been previously approved by the Board at various times. There are basically four main revenue sources in this fund. There are User Fees to help pay off debt. That's Water and Sewer User Fees. Impact fees. You have assessments and then you also have interest earnings that help pay off these debts. If I can focus your attention near the bottom of the page, I list out the bonds that we will be making principal and interest payments on as well as the loans. And the anticipated -- well, commercial paper that we'll be drawing on shortly. And we're anticipating paying 17.3 million dollars in principal and interest payments next year from those four revenue sources. If you don't have any questions, I'll move on from that. If you would please turn to page E-23, this is a summary of all the water capital projects, the Utilities Department is looking for. On the extreme righthand side of the page, you have three columns. The first column is Impact Fees. All these capital projects under the heading Fiscal Year 03 Budget, Impact Fees, Fund 111, these projects will be funded out of Water Impact Fees. And right next -- the middle column is -- those capital projects would be funded out of User fees. There is a total of 45 million dollars worth of capital projects. To go -- just to give you a brief Page 135 June 20, 2002 overview on the impact fee projects, Utility Department plans on buying basically three pieces of land. Two pieces of land are going to go to the two new water plants that the master plan had laid out that we needed to start looking at building. And there is also some well field expansions. Along with that, we have some new water mains that will be laid, about 12 million dollars worth. And then we are completing the South County Water Plant. We're also going to start on the next expansion on the South County Water Plant in the amount of two million dollars. Impact Fees pay for growth related items and that's what you are seeing in that first column. In User Fees in Fund 412 these capital projects are being paid out of Water User Fees. This is for the repair, replacement, maintenance, capital type items of the existing facilities. We have quite a few relocates as our Transportation Department widens the roads. We are going to be moving our water pipes over so that they don't go underneath pavement and that will be paid out of User Fees. Also, we have some modifications over in the North County Water Plant. And then we have other miscellaneous-type projects, one of them being the automated meter reader system install where instead of picking up the lid and reading the meter, there is a way -- there is new technology that we have not that will -- you can read the meters in the vehicle while driving down the street. If you have any questions? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Questions? MR. OLLIFF: One of the things I wanted to point out-- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry. If we could, please, we -- we do have a question. Ms. Vasey, could I ask you to go to this microphone over here(indicating.) Page 136 June 20, 2002 MS. VASEY: Janet Vasey for the record. I just wanted to bring to your attention, in the capital project, you are borrowing about 70 million dollars this year and right now, on page E-22, it shows, under loans, Commercial Paper, the 5 million -- there's a total of $5,300,000 and it shows User Fees. In our conversations between Productivity and the Utilities, we asked about how that was going to be split because if-- if the user -- if User Fee Construction is borrowing the money, then they should be paying the debt -- the debt payment. And if Impact Fees are -- are using the money, then they should be paying. And the response on that was that in FY 03, they were going to be charging all the debt service to User Fees and then making an adjustment in Fiscal Year 04 because they don't know exactly yet how they are going to split, you know, how much money each one of these funds is going to be borrowing from the 70 million. And it was our recommendation that -- that whatever amount is borrowed in FY 03, that -- that fund be charged in FY 03 for -- for the amount of the debt service rather than, perhaps having a situation where the User Fee pays the Debt Service for things that should be paid for by the Impact Fee. And that was our recommendation. COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: It makes a lot of sense. MR. DELONEY: We'll do that. The challenge is -- is collateral for debt. The Impact Fees, User Fees, you go to the bank on this one to borrow and get the best rate. Okay? Because the bank is stable. And say I'm going to go to the bank and I'm going to get this much in User Fees. I know it. I know who my connections are. I know what the rates going to be. Impact Fees, terrible. You can make some good projections but the bank likes that steady income, and in order for us to borrow the capital and to get the most favorable interest rate, therefore that's our technique. So she's right. In the instate, we've got to make sure we Page 137 June 20, 2002 make the right account pay for borrowing those funds or reimbursing those funds. And just when we make that adjustment is going to be the timing with regard to what we know. But when we have a recommendation, we endorse it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Simply said, can you pay back that fund from the Impact Fees? MR. WIDES: Yes. We will, in the end, Commissioner, we will use Impact Fees to pay off the debt. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Does that satisfy the -- MS. VASEY: Yes. We just wanted to be that in the Fiscal Year 03 you will ultimately know what amount of charges are made to each on of these accounts, and so you can accurately project that -- that amount of debt service in FY 03 rather then waiting until FY 04, and that's what we wanted. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much, Janet. MS. VASEY: Thank you. MR. DELONEY: This is good stuff to hear this from them because, you know, it just keeps us on our toes with regard to good business. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: There is no way on God's earth I would have caught that myself. I could have read this over a thousand times. Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a fast question. I noticed Land Acquisition for the new North Treatment Plant, you've put four million dollars aside for Land Acquisition? That's pretty expensive land, hey? MR. SCHMITT: Yes. That is out in the Orange Tree area and that is a 200 acre parcel and that's the estimate from Real Properties. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Page 13 8 June 20, 2002 MR. OLLIFF: The only other thing I really wanted to point out on this particular page, Mr. Chairman, was there was a question that had come up before from Commissioner Henning about redundancies and issues and -- and two things I wanted to make a point about, there is a two million dollar line item here for an expansion to the South County Water Treatment Plant. And I did not want you to think that as soon as we got done expanding it, we were going to turn around and expand it again for -- for two million dollars. What we are doing there is providing two additional raw water wells to the well field for the South County Plant and that is one of those redundancy measures that the Board was looking for, and that protects you from well failure and also allows you to take certain wells off line and be able to service them in the interim, especially during the summer months when you may not have to draw as much. So it's just better planning and that's what that two million dollars is for. MR. OLLIFF: Susan, was there anything else on this page? MS. USHER: Okay. If you want to flip to page E-26, actually, E-26, E-27. These are the waste water capital projects. Again, in the far righthand side of the page, in the first column is the Impact Fees. These are the projects that we are looking for funding out of Impact Fees. And the middle column is for User Fees, for a total of 78 million dollars worth of capital projects. Out of Impact Fees, again, we have to pay for growth related type items. We are looking at buying land for a new waste water treatment facility. As for a biosolid facility, we're constructing new sewer lines, constructing new affluent lines and some other miscellaneous type projects. And then in the other column is Fund 414. That's out of Sewer User Fees. Page 139 June 20, 2002 Again, there are quite a few relocates, relocating sewer lines and affluent lines is the major portion of this budget. And that's all I have. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Let's stop and take a short break. MR. MUDD: The one thing we need to do just to make sure the Board knows, is -- is -- and I want to talk about this a little bit, Roy, about the reclaimed water ASR, because we know we -- it's been a controversial issue with the city in a prior joint meeting and some -- we -- we have got our boring samples back. Everything looks okay. There is an item in the waste water budget for next year that we are going to continue to proceed with permitting and to go for that well, because we've since seen everything and you'll get a report on that process, but I wanted to make sure that you know it's in this budget. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All right. We'll take a short break and let the stenographer rest her weary fingers. (Whereupon, a short break was taken and the meeting continued as follows:) MR. GREENWALD: Okay. Randy Greenwald for the record. Next is the Goodland Water District for Fund 441. It's on page E-31. The Goodland Water District is to ensure cost effective management of the Goodland Water District's 29 and to provide the residents of the Goodland Water District with safe and reliable service. COMMISSIONER FIALA: What page is it? MR. GREENWALD: It's page E-31. I'm sorry. It's funded from water revenue interests and assessments. There are no Ad Valorem Funds to support this program. The FY 03 budget has no expanded services and merely continues the current services that are already in place right now. If there are any questions, I'll try to answer them. Page 140 June 20, 2002 Okay. If not, we'll go on to solid waste. Solid Waste starts on page E-31-1. Solid waste Funds are comprised of Solid Waste Disposal Fund 470. The Solid Waste Landfill Closure Fund 471, Solid Waste Disposal Grants Fund 472 and Mandatory Trash Collection Fund 473. The Solid Waste FY 03 budget of $7,971,900 is funded primarily from Landfill Fees, Mandatory Collection Fees, Franchise Fees and Transfer Stations Fees. As -- as the other Public Utilities Funds are, there are no Ad Valorem Funds to support these programs at all. It's all strictly the CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I thought you had a question. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I do of a -- of an increase in the fees, it that due to growth and CPI? Is there anything else in there? MR. JAMAS: The increase and the fees as far as tipping go due to CPI adjustments annually based on the contractual arrangements we do have. COMMISSIONER HENNING: There is nothing else in there then; correct? MR. JAMAS: There is nothing else for the next year. We are thinking about for the Tipping Fees for residential garbage. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. MR. SMYKOWSKI: And there are no expanded services here. The mandatory rates as reflected at the bottom of E-31-1 that reflect that. They will remain at $127.27 both in the Immokalee Disposal Area, District One and the -- and the Naples Service Area, District Two. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no further questions. Page 141 June 20, 2002 MR. MUDD: Now, Commissioners, the reason that there is no mandatory fee increase -- this is Jim Mudd for the record, there is no mandatory increase is because the residential folks have really been doing a lot better in the recycling, so what's going in recycling isn't going across the scales when those trucks go across, so the CPI has been offset basically by the efforts of the citizens in the recycling side of the house as far as George is concerned, and that's the reason why there isn't that -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So what you are saying, Mr. Mudd, is that there is a reward for being a good citizen and recycling? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, there is. I just wanted to make sure that we got that on the record, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Page E-31-1, FY 01/02 Forecast is 29.9. We're going to a total budget for 02/03 of 47.9. What is that large increase due to? MR. SMYKOWSKI: The difference between the budget and forecast is the large Reserve in the Solid Waste Fund 470 for the eventual-- for long-term disposal issues, as well as in the landfill closure, there is 5.6 million dollars. That is all budgeted in Reserve so it's -- it's not anticipated to actually be expended. MR. OLLIFF: So in other words, what -- you budget the reserve because it's a reserve that you carry from year to year to year, because you are required to set aside monies according to DEP in order to be able to close that landfill. They need to know you've got enough money in reserve to be able to close the landfill in an environmentally safe way. So we carry that reserve money. So while it's budgeted this year, the forecast, if you'll look at the forecast column for Fiscal Year 02, you'll see the budget is 45, the forecast is 29. We again budget the reserve again next year so that the budget again is 47. ! will promise you that the reserve -- or the Page 142 June 20, 2002 actual forecast will be back in that 29 to 30 million dollar range again. COMMISSIONER COYLE: You lost me. I'm sorry. What page are you on? MR. OLLIFF: I'm sorry. I'm on page E-31-1, at the top. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Will you go over that one more time? MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. If you look at the second column of the adopted budget for 01/02, you'll see at the bottom there is a total of 45 million dollars. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. MR. OLLIFF: The next column is a forecast of what we actually forecast we are going to spend in Fiscal Year 01/02 and it's only 29.9. And that's because we don't spend the reserve. We carry the reserve. And so next year you'll see the budget go up again at 47.9 because we are again going to budget the reserve, but you're not going to spend it in Fiscal Year 03 either, so your actuals in Fiscal Year 02 will be back around that 29 to 30 million range. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now show me where the reserve is accumulated. What page is that on? E-337 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: This reserve has to be big enough to cover about what, 30 years of monitoring maintenance of the gas resource from the landfill; is that correct? MR. JAMAS: For the record, Joe Jamas of Waste. Reserves have combination of future projects, such as landfill closures, such as Reserves for our landfill gas energy, Reserves for Contingency Contract have to do as well as General Reserves for the general operations which is about five or six percent as required by the law. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. Page 143 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've been wanting to talk to you about reserves, not just you, but everybody about reserves. Why don't we put reserves into one pot? MR. OLLIFF: No, ma'am. You do not want to combine your funds. You have statutory reasons why you have to have your funds separated so that you can track them and make sure that for the rate payers in this case, you can show them exactly where their monies went, that they are accumulating their interest and we are keeping their interest in their funds. Financially, you need to keep these funds all separated. In fact -- MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yeah. You're required to in the case of MSTU's. It's mandated that, you know, if people tax themselves for a specific reason, they are paying Ad Valorem taxes in a very narrow segment -- in a small concentrated area and that money by ordinance is restricted to the use for which it was initially created, same thing with the Community Development Fund, which is exclusively funded by Building Permit Fees and Planning Fees. You cannot spend that money generically in other parts of the county, so each separate pot, there is either restrictions due to law or accounting requirements, Impact Fees, for instance, have to be spent solely for Road Impact Fees for roadway and growth related roadway improvements. You can't use it for utilities or-- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I would understand you couldn't use it, but I -- I didn't realize there were statutes and ordinances, so my question is answered. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Tell me where the total reserve is shown in these budgets. A total, not the annual allocation reserve, but the total existing reserve. What is that? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Across all funds? Page 144 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. No. No. I'm sorry. Just take solid waste. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Page E-33, the last line before total appropriations, it says Reserves. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So that's $11,594,2007 MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Was the reserves for the adopted budget of FY 01/02, and we are contributing another $104,449,800 to that in our budgeted Fiscal Year for 02/03; is that what you are saying? MR. SMYKOWSKI: No. In 02/03, you only have $1,449,800 due to a clean cover contract for 9.1 million dollars, which is the large increase in the operating expense side within this fund. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So -- so you are telling me then that the difference between the amount of money we actually spent in FY 01 or expect to spend, is 19 million dollars, will go to 30 million this next fiscal year but that the difference of 11 million dollars will go into reserves; is that correct? MR. OLLIFF: What we are telling you is you have carded a reserve last year to this year. You are going to spend that reserve money in Fiscal Year 03. That reserve money of $11,594,000 in the 01/02 budget is in essence moving up to the operating expense line that jumps from 13 million to 21 million. If you're following me, the operating expense line in 01/02 is $13,791,000. If you follow that over to the 02/03 budget, it becomes a 21 million dollar number, so you are spending a significant portion of your reserves there. You are also spending a significant portion of your reserves in your capital projects outlay one which goes in Fiscal Year 01/02 from $615,000. In 02/03 it goes to $5,736,000, so you are actually spending money in 03 and a lot of that is for ourselves, one and two restoration Page 145 June 20, 2002 in order to create that additional capacity at the landfill, it was our intermediate plant that you approved on top of the hill, and restoration of the -- the gun range, pulling the lead out of that old gun range there as well. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, does that include the reserve for eventual closure of the landfill? MR. SMYKOWSKI: No, sir. That's a separate fund. That's on page E-34. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we'll get to that later, right? MR. OLLIFF: We'll get to that right now. That's the fund where I believe Janet and the Productivity Committee had a recommendation and we can probably cover that right now if you would like to. Janet can maybe explain the rationale behind the Committee's recommendation and then we can respond. MS. VASEY: Janet Vasey for the record. If you'll look at page E-34, under the reserve line, this is what you have for ultimate landfill closure, and it's $5,680,000. Our analysis is based pretty much on what was in the comprehensive financial plan for 2001 and on the page that deals with the solid waste disposal, it shows a landfill long-term liability of three million, about $3,600,000 just to round it for you. And so it's our analysis that there is an excess two million dollars in this fund. You are required by law to -- to identify your total liability in the comprehensive annual financial plan-- or financial report. And yet you've got in the landfill now $5,680,000, so basically what we are saying is this is excess. It cannot be used for roads. It would have to, if you -- if you decided that you decided that you didn't want to leave it in this fund, you would transfer it back to one of the other Landfills Funds and you could either have the Trash Page 146 June 20, 2002 Collection Fees reduced or use it to absorb some of your costs in -- in landfill operations. MR. WIDES: Commissioners, for the record again, Mr. Tom Wides. I -- I agree with Ms. Vasey. It is -- we will continue to look at this landfill closure cost. This does move every year. It's readjusted every year, partially based on the expected life of the landfill. We are as you know, right in the middle of the studies of how to remediate the landfill, how to look for alternatives for our -- our solid waste. So we will continue to look at that but again, from a conservative position, I would be hesitant to draw monies out of there right now and then end up pulling them right back in a year or two later based on the expected life of the landfill. So she, Ms. Vasey, has a very good point. It's something we have to continue to monitor. MS. VASEY: There is one other aspect to this and that is it could very well be that the landfill closure cost could be in the five million dollar range, but we are looking at what our liability is as a county versus what the landfill operators liability is and we are only responsible for about 60 some percent of the total liability. And perhaps that's where we have some of the difference, but we would be happy to work with them and see what we've got and bring it back with a binded joint agreement, if we can, by September or whenever you would like us to do that for the budget. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We can always adjust this budget even in September; correct? MR. WIDES: Yes. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We can go down. We just can't go up. Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I would love the idea of taking that two million right now, when the prices for the land that we need Page 147 June 20, 2002 for roads are at this level than then in a couple more years. Can't -- you can't use that to switch it over to -- MR. WIDES: No. I'm sorry, Commissioner. MS. VASEY: I wish we could, but no. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, wishful thinking. Thank you. MR. DELONEY: We will work with Janet before budget time and see if we've got the right number with regard to our obligations and what's prescribed within the consolidated annual financial report that we have to provide and see if we've got that number right closer to right then what we -- and we have a pretty big margin there. We'll sort it out. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But when that -- when that does come through, you will furnish all of us copies, right? MR. DELONEY: Yes, sir, we will. MR. SMYKOWSKI: I'm making a comprehensive list as we go through for wrap-up items that we will either address in the process quickly, if we can, or certainly the balance would be addressed by certainly by the public hearing time and we would expect staff response for each of the individual items outlined. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. So we are talking this particular item would be coming before September. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just for my information, what is the possible use of the money if you can pull it out of reserves? MR. DELONEY: You could roll it into Operating Funds with some -- some relief or to your other Reserve Funds that you have within the -- what would be the 470 series accounts. That's the only place we can put this money. Again, though -- excuse me, Tom, again, bottom line, I'm not sure we want to do that. And when we -- when we do come back, Page 148 June 20, 2002 we'll make sure that we give you the right recommendation with regard to Reserve Fund Balances and then talk to you in terms of where we might place these funds within the context of Solid Waste Funds. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Carter. COMMISSIONER CARTER: If we could reduce it, could it go to a fund for Capital Expenditures for the future? I don't like putting money into operating areas. You get that false sense of security and then you turn around and Whammo, some other board is going to end up with a huge increase and you are going to have them dancing out there 15 miles deep. So I would rather put it to capital. That way it's good utilization for whatever we end up doing in an expanded project. MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is correct. This is a one-time revenue source, so if you had a one-time project that would be an appropriate use, that would be my preference to lowering the rates with a one-time revenue because once that revenue source dries up, you do the roller coaster with the rates and I wouldn't like to see that. It never makes the customer happy. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's for sure. MR. SMYKOWSKI: No. went down, but they -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: here. MR. SMYKOWSKI: level and-- They forget about the years when it Set the rates high and keep them We want to set the rates at an appropriate MR. DELONEY: I understand your intent, sir. I've got it. MR. GREENWALD: One thing that has changed over the last few years though, is we no longer will be collecting interest due to Dwight Brock taking the interest, so that is one of the things that have driven it up to that height right now. Page 149 June 20, 2002 I looked back, I think it was '94 or '95 and it was only in the three to three and a half million dollar range, I believe and the interest has driven it up to the five millions dollars, so -- so that will not go up anymore. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: To move this along, just one question. The commercial recycling, from my experience and George and I have talked about this, there is certain areas in the county that we have a high turnover of residents and the recycling days on a street that is five blocks long, I might see two recycle bins out there. We can use some of this campaign money for recycling to the residential side of it, I think. You know, even though that we are doing a good job over there in the residential, I think we can do a better job in the residential recycling. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, unless there are any other questions on solid waste, I think we are ready to go on into Internal Service Funds. Gentleman, thank you. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Commissioners, on page F-2 is a summary of the Internal Service Funds that are in operation in Collier County. Internal Service Funds are used to provide services from one county department to another. In this case, we have five currently active funds, three of which are Self Insurance Funds, the property and casualty, which is obviously for property claims. Mr. Olliff indicated we were experiencing large increases post September 1 lth and also due to, frankly, he also showed a number of new buildings that are being, either were constructed or are being constructed obviously as the county continues to grow. And as you open new facilities, you have to insure those facilities as well, so you're -- you have compounding effects of rate Page 150 June 20, 2002 increase as well as continued growth in new facilities coming on line compounding that problem. The second fund is a Group Health and Life Insurance Fund to pay for Employee Health Insurance claims, and that includes all constitutional officers with the exception of the Sheriff, who has his own self-insurance program for health insurance. We have a Worker's Compensation Self-insurance Fund, obviously, to pay claims relative to injuries on the job, worker's compensation. Again, these Self-insurance Funds are funded through billings to user departments to pay for those claims as well as -- through the actuarial studies, we are required to have as a Self-insurance Fund an appropriate level of reserves to pay for those future claim liability that we may have. There is also two fleet-related operations. One is Fleet Management, which is for the repair of the county vehicles, and there is a Motor Pool Capital Recovery Fund that is used for motor pool cars, for the eventual replacement of the motor pool cars. It's a sinking fund so that at the appropriate time, you have sufficient cash. You buy a car today. You make equal installments over the next seven years to pay for the eventual replacement of that vehicle thereby allowing sufficient cash accumulated over time so that you avoid, A, any spikes in the -- in the budget due to any given year where you may have an extra-ordinary number of-- of vehicles to be replaced, and it's just a good sound business practice. This year, talking about the spikes in that regard and you are replacing, I think, six ambulances and refurbishing seven ambulances. As a component of that, obviously that's an extraordinary expense, and with ambulances, the replacement ambulances are not allowed to be funded from Impact Fees. Page 151 June 20, 2002 So you would not want to have a million and a half to two million dollars spike in the General Fund in the given year, so that's why that program was established. Mr. Walker is here. He is the risk manager for the county. The director of employee services. I'm sure he would be happy to entertain any questions you may have. In addition, there is one expanded service request that's outlined on page F-3 for an additional customer service representative. MR. WALKER: Good afternoon. My name is Jeff Walker, Employee Services Director. I would be glad to answer any questions you might have or go into more detail on these programs if you would like. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: This customer service representative, what are they going to be doing in a day? MR. WALKER: The customer service representative will be working in the employee services center at the customer service counter. They will be supporting a couple of different functions. One of those functions will be the front end human resources operations functions for applicants and folks who walk in the door needing customer service, telephone work, that sort of thing. They will also be supporting the occupational health program. We have an occupational health nurse who works in the medical clinic down there who does many functions for us, including handling worker compensation claims, doing pre-employment physicals and drug testing and things of that nature. For example, in the month of May, he did approximately 100 physicals. That saves the county quite a lot of money, but he does not have any clerical support whatsoever. Page 152 June 20, 2002 So what we are going to try to do is bring this position in to provide clerical support to the occupational health program as well as provide clerical support, customer service support to the front. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Are we reimbursed from our insurance? MR. WALKER: No. Actually this is a direct offset of costs. In other words, when we treat employees in-house, there is no bill that goes to insurance. The difference is really, it would have been billed to an insurance carrier and what it costs us to do that service in- house. And typically, that's going to save you in the neighborhood of 50 to 60 percent. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would like to continue on. The occupational therapist who does these hundred physicals, is there any paperwork involved in it? MR. WALKER: Yeah. There is a tremendous amount of paperwork. There are initial visits that have to be documented and have to be -- those transactions have to be kept there for a follow-up visit. For example, if you have a worker's compensation claim that comes through the door, usually there will be more than one visit, so they are doing initial work with that person in terms of scheduling, in terms of filing and paperwork, as well as follow-up visits. But-- and -- and the same thing with pre-employment physicals and things of that nature. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So this assistant is going to be doing paperwork for the occupational therapist? MR. WALKER: That, as well as customer service work for the customer service operation section as well. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. I'm just trying to get a handle on it of what this person's duties are and what are they going Page 153 June 20, 2002 to be doing during the day. If we -- you are doing 100 physicals a month -- MR. WALKER: Well, it's not every month, but May was especially heavy. COMMISSIONER HENNING: How much work is detailed in doing the paperwork for one person having a physical? MR. WALKER: Well, what typically happens is when an individual is hired, a request is made to -- to bring that person on board and the physical has to be scheduled with that person. They have to come into the office and complete a series of paperwork in order to actually bring them on board and then they actually go down the hall and get their physical. It's sort of the end process of the hiring. COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: So at the end of the physical, is there any paperwork that needs to be done? MR. WALKER: At the end of the physical, there are records that have to be maintained on that person because we have records that are set aside for that individual that establish base lines for us for workers' compensation purposes, as well as hiring purposes, because we may find things in the physical that are -- that might cause us to say they are not fit for that position. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So about 15 minutes out of the day, this person is going to do the filing for the physicals? MR. WALKER: Well, I wouldn't say that but that's not their only duty. They will also, in addition to supporting the occupational health program, be supporting the customers that come through the door into the human resources department and -- and those are quite numerous. We have lots of walk-ins. We have lots of telephone calls, lots of customer service work that needs support and so it's a dual function. Page 154 June 20, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: How do you handle that now? MR. WALKER: It's -- it's very difficult. We've actually been bringing job bankers in to help us support that program. We have job bankers in there to help us get the filing done, that sort of thing. We will bring them in and take them off from time to time, but what we find is that the volumes that xve are seeing are increasing dramatically. MS. BARCLAHEIMER: I'd like to also add, Joanne Barclaheimer(phonetic) Administrator for Admin Services. This person will also help with the quality of the applications that we're receiving right now. Many applicants come in. They are not sure what they are qualified to apply for. We get incomplete applications. This causes us a lot of follow- up work that can be avoided if we have a customer service person in the front area assisting people with -- with their applications. In addition to the clinic, the occupational nurse is not only doing the pre-employment physicals, drug testing, the workmen comp triage. Just to give you an idea of the numbers, we have one person, who since October has handled 33 personal medical claims in the clinic that would have otherwise been done by a private physician, 181 pre-employment physicals and 33 worker's comp claims, which can be very expensive if they go out to an outside physician. And right now, the nurse is doing the filing, doing their notes, taking care of the paperwork instead of performing functions that they are trained to do. MR. WALKER: And what this will do is allow that health care professional to be able to hand off a lot of clerical functions that they are having to take on now. What we would like to do is begin to exploit that clinic even more by doing other health care activities. Page 155 June 20, 2002 For example, we would like at some point to be able to offer physicals to our employees through that clinic which is savings for the county, things of that nature, where those health care professionals are being utilized more effectively then they are in a clerical capacity. MS. BARCLAHEIMER: We are also seeing an increase in the clerical side of the occupational nurse's job with baseline testing that we have started and Jeff can talk about those details? But we have been bringing in a lot of the employees to establish baselines as far as hearing, sight and other wellness issues so that we can monitor what the effects of their jobs are. That is pretty extensive paperwork and follow-up to establish the baseline and then test them annually. Jeff, do you want to add to that? MR. WALKER: That's correct. I mean, the occupational health nurse, in addition to doing workman's compensation and pre- employment physicals, is also doing audiometric testing, sparametry testing, hearing testing, vision testing. These are recurrent testings that have to be done on employees in the field. For example, in your water and your Waste Water Department. Those folks who wear protective masks, SEBA equipment, that sort of thing, have to be fitted and tested on an annual basis, and that's what this occupational health nurse is doing. That saves us a tremendous amount of money as opposed to sending them out. And -- and we feel like that we can better utilize the program and exploit it more effectively be taking some of the clerical functions of his shoulders. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Just --just so that I understand this correctly. Right now this nurse handles all of her clerical, you want a position to handle the clerical. That's what it's Page 156 June 20, 2002 for, right? .And she is so busy that she can't handle the clerical herself right now? MS. BARCLAHEIMER: That's correct. MR. WALKER: He. MS. BARCALHEIMER: Yeah, he, Gary Troy. Okay. He is handling his paperwork as well as his duties as a registered nurse. What that means is that the amount of paperwork effects the number of employees that he can treat in the clinic. He has to do the paperwork. That's mandated. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And he treats them just for employee -- employee, like, evaluations and drug testing and so forth; is that-- MS. BARCLAHEIMER: There are several things. There are pre-employment physicals so when somebody is being hired -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: But he doesn't do the physical, does he? MS. BARCLAHEIMER: Yes. He does the pre-employment physical and a preliminary drug screen. And then for existing employees, he does workman's comp triage. So if we have a workman's comp issue out in the field, they come to him first, he assesses them and a number of other things. COMMISSIONER FIALA: The reason I have been pursuing this is, you know, I -- I -- I don't work in the department, obviously, so I -- I just think you do a fine job and then I didn't know. If you had this extra position for, like, answering -- I get-- gee, I hate to say this on the record, but I get calls here and there from people who have submitted an application and never hear a response, never have a return letter and -- and they never know what -- what their position is or if they are going to -- if they are even being considered. Page 157 June 20, 2002 If it was a help to that area, because it seems you are overstressed there, I could understand it, and that was the point of my questioning. MR. WALKER: Well, those areas are interrelated, because particularly in the hiring process, the scheduling, for example, physicals goes through the operations section of the HR Department. And so one of tl,.e duties of this position is while they will work at the customer service area, they are providing customer service to our employees and our potential employees in that they will help our new hires in terms of getting us physicals scheduled. It will help our employees in terms of scheduling the worker's compensation visits. They will schedule our employees in terms of all those other types of tests that we talked about and handle the clerical support as well as providing clerical support to the operations section. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I don't have any questions here. I think we spent $35,000 on this discussion. I think they are all great questions. I'm satisfied. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Should we move on? MR. OLLIFF: I think we probably need to deal with the one Productivity Committee recommendation on the fleet services reserve. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes. That's on page F-8. In your handout is the motor-pool Capital Recovery Fund. Previously in my opening remarks we talked about the established case, a Sinking Fund where if you had a vehicle that was lasting seven years, you would pay for the up front cost and over seven years, put -- put that money into a Sinking Fund, so that at the end of the seven-year period, you had enough cash to replace that vehicle on hand without having to have budgetary spikes due to a number of vehicles coming on line. Page 158 June 20, 2002 The Productivity Committee had actually, previously raised this issue a couple of years ago. We changed the system from a pure cash base to a modified cash base funding system. With the annual contribution for replacement vehicles being equal to either the total amount of the vehicles, the cost of the vehicles that were planned to be replaced within the subsequent fiscal year or the average of planned expenditures over the next five years, whichever were greater. That was the compromised position. The Productivity Committee, there is a-- a large reserve in the Motor Pool Capital Recovery Fund of which staff recently had a preliminary or a feasibility study done by Disney and Associates. We've talked for a number of years about moving the County Barn Operation to the landfill. Obviously the landfill is tied up in Rural Fringe and Growth Management Issues, so we looked at stop get measures, what we are going to do in the interim. And the feasibility study identified that once Roden Bridge moves out of the County Barn facility, that would provide enough space for both the current Fleet Management Operation as well as ultimately the Sherit~t~s Fleet Operation, which is currently in a leased facility. I believe it's on Arnold Avenue in the Industrial Park, so that would free them up fi'om their existing lease which, long-term, we need to be doing anyway to -- based on the costs of those facilities so, and so we have $700,000 in design money taking some of those accumulated reserve funds that we had obligated for a new -- or we had identified as being set aside for a new fleet facility to do that design now that we have that feasibility study, they've evaluated whether or not the Sheriff's Operation could fit into that facility now that Roden Bridge is gone. Page 159 June 20, 2002 Joanne, I don't know if there is anything else to add relative to the feasibility study or-- MS. BARCLAHEIMER: Just that the first thing the feasibility study looked at was -- is the existing building worth investing in. And the answer was no, that putting any additional funds into the existing structure was not effective or efficient because the building is too old and too dilapidated. It needs to be raised. And then based on that assumption, the architects and engineers looked at the ability to fit both the Sheriff and the Board's Fleet Management Operations at that facility. They can. They will allow us to co-share many -- many aspects of the operation, like the fuel center, the wash rack. And just to give you an idea of what the Sheriff is paying in lease payments, it's around $80,000 a year. There is a three percent escalation clause, so if you were to look at them being in a facility for 20 years, you would be looking at 2.4 million in lease payments, in expense versus something we own. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why don't we call Ms. Vasey and ask her for what the Productivity Committee recommends. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Can you identify the estimated costs though from the feasibility so the -- of planned joined facility? MS. BARCLAHEMIER: The estimated probably costs are 8.3 million. That is for design, construction, site work, permitting; everything needed to locate both -- both operations in a new facility that would last at least 20 years expected -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, what would be the break even point? You can wait on that. MS. BARCLAHEIMER: I have to -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. Go ahead and figure that out while we wait on Janet. Page 160 June 20, 2002 MS. BARCLAHEIMER: I had every other number calculated, but-- MS. VASEY: Janet Vasey for the record. Our analysis for the motor pool capital recovery account is that there is three million dollars there that we could withdraw and use -- and put the money back to the customers that paid it in. Originally, this money was collected for the purchase of vehicles, not for the building or the facility. And-- and through some changes in the process, the money was -- has been accumulated and is there and is available. It has recently been identified to be used for a facility but that was not its original intent. I just wanted you to understand that it was really to purchase vehicles. We looked at where that money came from and got a lot of information from Dan, and -- and it was -- it's our recommendation that you put that money back to the accounts that it came from. If you do that, you'll get a million eight that either go into the -- the General Fund which is nearly a million dollars or transportation related funds. So you could get a million eight out of it, $600,000 would go into the Unincorporated General Fund and about $500,000 would go back into Community Development. And those numbers were really good until the interest from the clerk got removed, so I -- I have to tell you that those would have to be invested. We couldn't keep up with all the changes. Our -- our reasoning here is it's better use for the money to go ahead and -- and put it into the roads now because we need it now for road construction and it has benefit to those other accounts. The way to finance this, we think, would be to get a loan for the construction of the building and then this is a what we call an Internal Service Fund and one of the things that an Internal Service Fund does Page 161 June 20, 2002 best is accumulate costs and then bill out on an hourly rate, so along with the -- the costs of labor and materials and working on the cars, you would have a cost of debt service on the loan. And it could go out as an hourly rate and then everybody pays their share, the utilities, the vehicles, they pay theirs out of the Utility Fund. The Sheriff and -- and a good part of the County Managers vehicles would be paid out of 001. You know, Community Development would pay out of 113. So it -- it allocates the total cost of not only the work that's being performed, but the cost of the building that is done with the loan. COMMISSIONER HENNING: True cost of doing business. MS. VASEY: Exactly. COMMISSIONER HENNING: True cost accounting. MS. VASEY: Exactly. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why isn't it a good idea? You can speak candidly. MS. BARCLAHEIMER: One of the issues when you have a -- a one-time revenue source, we are always hesitant to offset operating costs because it artificially lowers your operating costs and then you will see spikes in the following year. We are looking at about $591,000 of that money is in billings that would be avoided next year that could stay back in the variety of funds. $700,000 of it, though, we have allocated for the design of the facility. We would have to come up with some financing mechanism for that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I guess the next question would be what -- did you figure the break even point on that, by the way? MS. BARCLAHEIMER: Yeah. I'll tell you how we figured it. We looked at the cost of the facility being 8.3 million. We backed out what was available in the Capital Recovery Fund Reserve and Page 162 June 20, 2002 said we would finance that over 20 years. Including the cost of the financing, it would add approximately ten dollars to our labor rate. We would go from a $53 an hour labor rate to a $63 labor rate, so we spread it out over the 20 year useful life of the building. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. I didn't get an answer to the question I was looking for, but, Commissioner Henning, maybe you can ask it differently. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Here's how you can get the user to pay for it. This is just part of how you do business is what Ms. Vasey is bringing up. I -- a person going out from Community Development doing inspections. Those fees are paid by -- by the permit; correct? MS. VASEY: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So all those costs related to it should be passed on to that use, and that's all I think that Ms. Vasey is saying is true cost accounting for each -- each department. MS. BARCLAHEIMER: And that will still take place under the scenario that we presented to you. The building is 8.3 million expected cost. What's available in reserve will not offset the cost totally, so we will still be financing over a 20-year period and passing that cost onto the user through the labor rate. So those people who use the facility over the 20 years will pay a labor rate that is carrying that -- the burden of the facility. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Then if they are going to do that, why do you need so much money up front to pay for the building? Of course, some of it is for the design. I understand that, but wouldn't that -- MR. OLLIFF: The-- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- money also be dedicated? I'm sorry, Tom. Page 163 June 20, 2002 MR. OLLIFF: The only thing we -- we are almost arguing about the same thing, because the monies were collected from the user department to begin with. We all agree that the building ought to be paid for my the user departments. The only thing that we are arguing about is it doesn't make a lot of sense for us to return the money all back this year and then rum around and bill them for it again down the road. Why not borrow less by taking the three millions dollars I've got. And putting it towards the capital project, and if the project is 50 million dollars, whatever it is, then I only have to borrow 47 and charge that back to the departments, because it's the same departments who contributed to this reserve that I'm going to tum around and bill for the reserve. So I just -- I don't understand the exercise in retuming the money and then turning around and billing them back for it again in the future. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Can we make our decision on this when -- this is coming back to us when, tomorrow or the next day? MR. OLLIFF: We can certainly put this on a wrap-up list and then have a discussion about it at the end. MS. VASEY: I do have one issue on that. It isn't exactly equitable the things were collected. It was collected as I said from -- it was for vehicle purchase through the Motor Pool Fund. And the fleet management account actually services all of your vehicles, but the motor pool capital recovery was not buying all of your vehicles. It was not buying utility vehicles. It wasn't buying about half of your vehicles, so there is money in there from some of the people and no money from utilities. It's not an equitable kind of thing, and the reason that we were trying to give the money back was so that you would have a million Page 164 June 20, 2002 eight for roads, and one other thing, you are often hearing that this offsetting revenue is a problem because you kept it in the accounts where it was originally. You know, you put this money back and reduce a tax rate or something like that and that creates problems in future years, but you've always got things happening in a given year, and -- and there shouldn't always be a resistance to lowering the tax rate. I mean, you just -- there will be other reasons next year that you could lower it, too. It doesn't always have to be that you would have spikes and things like that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're talking about using this money in the roads that we save from what I understand. MS. VASEY: Right. And that's the million eight but I think what thcy were referring to on the -- the offsetting revenues and having spikes and things was like in the Unincorporated General Fund and perhaps Community Development. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand that. Let me make one suggestion and then we can continue this or else bring it up at the wrap-up after we've though about it. You need $700,000 for the design study. MS. BARCALHEIMER: Correct. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How about if we dedicated that to it and returned the rest of it back in such a way they could be used towards roads? MR. OLLIFF: Why don't you let us work with Janet on splitting the baby and bring you back a recommendation at wrap-up. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Does that sound good so we can move on? MR. SMYKOWSKI: The other concern long term is what it's going to do to you fleet rate adding a $10.00 an hour charge to your Page 165 June 20, 2002 fleet rate, the next recommendation will be, your fleet rate is too high, you should outsource fleet management because -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. Let's get it all down on paper so we can actually see it what it looks like. MS. VASEY: Okay. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think that for a wrap-up; do you agree? Thank you. MR. OLLIFF: Mike, where to? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Susan is going to lead us through capital. We are going to talk about impact fees-supported capital such as parks, libraries, and we are also going to talk about road funding. MS. USHER: If you can turn to your capital section in your book on page H-2. The first Impact Fee Fund that we'll be reviewing is the EMS Impact Fee Fund. On H-2 is the Impact Fee Fund on H-3 is EMS Capital. You have two funds in front of you because the first project we are going to talk about in the Impact Fee Fund is the Grey Oaks Station. That station is being shared with not just only EMS, but will be shared with two fire districts. The money that the fire districts have given to us is in a separate fund and that's on page H-3 in Fund Number 351. That money is segregated so that we can track interest earnings on that n~oney. The contract we have with the Fire Department, state that we need an interest earnings rate on their money while in our possession need to be returned back to the Fire Departments. The two Fire Departments that are participating in this constru,:tion project is East Naples Fire Department and North Naples Fire Department. This project in total, the Grey Oaks Station is just ever a 3.3 million dollar project. If you look on page H-2 under Grey Oaks, the EMS portion, the Impact Fee is $1,115,900 and the balance will paid by the two fire Page 166 June 20, 2002 stations. And you can see their total on H-3 under capital projects. That's the $2,231,800. The next project in EMS is the East Naples Substation -- EMS Station. That -- that facility is being funded one hundred percent out of Impact Fee Funds, and that's a 1.5 million dollar project. The next project is the EMS Service -- excuse me, the Emergency Service Complex. Tl:e $500,000 is for some preliminary design of that complex. That complex will be located on the corner of Davis and Santa Barbara, actually, right next door to the East Naples Substation. And finally, $50,000 is needed for some equipment for Hazmat. If you have -- do you have any questions? COMMISSIONER HENNING: None from me. MS. USHER: Okay. CIIAIRMAN COLETTA: Please, proceed. MS. USHER: If you would please turn to page H-5. This is the Ochop~e Fire Control District Impact Fee Fund. They do not have any projects -- MX. OLLIFF: Unless there are any questions on this one -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Let's skip that. MS. USHER: Okay. H-6 is the Isles of Capri Impact Fee Fund. C:tAIRMAN COLETTA: Keep moving. MS. USHER: They -- okay. On H-7, is the Library Impact Fee Fund. They are requesting $60,000 in addition to what was funded this year for the hnmokalee Branch Library Expansion. The project this year xvas budgeted at $680,000. Half of that was paid from a state grant we received. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Questions? No questions? MS. USHER: Okay. If you would like to turn to page H-8, this is the total page of all the Impact Fee Funds within the Parks and Recreation Department. Page 167 June 20, 2002 There is one active Impact Fee Fund and the other three that are noted are Impact Fee Funds that are in the process of collapsing. The biggest project here is the North Regional Park. That's a 41 million dollar project. You can see that on the top of the page and if you look near the bottom of the page, there is a 35 million dollar bond that we are looking at securing so that we can construct the North Regional Park. Other projects are -- and Tom had noted, the Golden Gate Community Center Improvement for $900,000. We also have some - - an elementary school out on Everglades Boulevard. We're just upgrading the -- the sports area for $800,000. We also have the 951 Boat Ramp Expansion for $250,000. Part of that is being paid out of Impact Fees. On Monday, you'll see another portion being paid out of Florida Boater Improvement Monies, so this is only partially funded by Impact Fee Funds. And then the rest of the items are various field upgrades and park improvements. hnpact Fee Funds can only be paid for growth-related items, not for repair, replacement, maintenance-type items. MR. OLLIi~F: And for some reason, because they are wildly popular, I'm going to point out that we are building a second dog park in your system out on a property we own on Manatee Road. We have one at Veteran's Community Park off of Immokalee Road and I, for the life of me, can't understand why it's so popular. But it -- it was just oven'un by people just bringing their dogs there so we are going to try and duplicate that at the south end. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do you think you can negotiate with the City of Naples to use Lowdermilk Park for a doggie beach? MR. OLLIFF: I think maybe you could send the commissioner from that district back to City Council to see if he wanted to -- Page 168 June 20, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: SOMETHING, Commissioner Coyle. MR. OLLIFF: The other thing I would point out is you do see a couple of school projects in here and that is just a continuation of our effort to try and -- and quit duplicating efforts in areas where there are schools located that we can partnership with the school and provide lights and maintenance on some of their facilities and upgrade their facilities slightly, then we get access and the public gets access to those athletic fields, basketball and all of their sports facilities after school hours, so it's a good partnership in a lot of these areas. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is this restricted just to certain schools or are all schools supposed to be open for this? MR. OLLIFF: We have that agreement with the Collier County School Board, so it goes to all schools, but we are selecting schools in certain areas where we don't have parks or the neighborhoods have a long, long way to go to get to some of our parks. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. For years now I've been going down to Oakridge? Is that the one on 951 down at the -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I was told years ago by the principal that I could use that along with anybody that wanted to, the tennis court. Quite often the gate is closed and I just open it and drive in. I've been doing it now for like eight years. No one has ever challenged me. I mean, the trooper lives right there I've drove in and used it, but I have never seen another person using this. In other words, here is a resource that if you know about it -- and now I'm sharing my secret with the whole world. That was smart. Now I'm going to get hell from my wife tonight when I get home. That's for sure. Page 169 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't you take a picture of yourself playing tennis and we'll put it on the website and put a little caption where it says, Please join me. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. Make it a video clip. You ought to see me in motion. MR. OLLIFF: If you'll remember that picture of President Clinton jogging, I think you will refrain from any of that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a fast question. While Marla is here, have they finished that bathroom on Marco Island yet? MS. RAMSEY: We're anticipating July 15th to have the total punchout done on it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: What does total punchout mean? MS. RAMSEY: Oh, everything from making sure that there is no dents and the painted over areas that's been scratched and -- MR. OLLIFF: And it will be done. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you. MS. RAMSEY: Marla Ramsey, Parks and Recreation Director. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Seriously, all joking aside, I -- I don't like these services that are available only to the select few that are aware of them. I mean, it's -- if it's there -- I'm sorry. MR. OLLIFF: Unless we have a specific agreement for that school -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. When I asked, I thought you were saying -- MR. OLLIFF: We can have access to all of them if we want to partnership with any of these particular schools, but in that particular case, we've not gone in and made the agreement with -- for that school where we have lighted the place and we're taking in the maintenance and taking on the responsibility after hours. Page 170 June 20, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I see. In other words, you would actually have to have a person on site? MR. OLLIFF: No. But we do execute a separate agreement and then the responsibility for the after hours public use then shifts to Collier County, and in a lot of these cases, they do have the fences and they do secure their sites in what they call remote areas where they don't have presence and we don't have an agreement with them. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I talk to you more about it later. MR. OLLIFF: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And -- and while you are talking about schools, you have the East Naples Middle. Is that in response to my -- my concerns about the lighting and -- and the people playing the soccer out there, but no lights? MS. RAMSEY: That's a request from a number of different areas. There was -- a number of years ago, we looked at that facility but there wasn't enough parking to allow us to utilize it in the evening. They have recently made an agreement with the church that's alongside to attain some additional land and put in some additional parking. When they do that, that would then allow us to be able to come in and light the soccer and the softball field there. COMMISSIONER FIALA: So that's what this money is for? MS. RAMSEY: That's correct. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't think there are any other questions. Thank you. A wonderful presensation. MS. USHER: We can start going over transportation. That's on H- 15. This is the Transportation Engineering Department. Fund 313 is the Gas Tax Fund. And there, we do fund some operational expenditures for the engineers in real property personnel that are there to help acquire Page 171 June 20, 2002 land easements and land purchases. And then we also fund road projects from this fund. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Could we take about a five-minute break? (Whereupon, a five-minute break was taken and the meeting continued as follows:) MS. USHER: Okay. If you would turn to page H-15. This is the Transportation Gas Tax Fund, Fund 313. In the Gas Tax Fund we finance the engineers in real property specialists that help us with our road projects. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did we -- did we skip H-147 I think we did. MS. USHER: I don't have 14 on mine. Oh, okay. Fourteen is -- I wanted to go over what -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You want to go through the supporting document and come back? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see. Okay. I'm sorry. Okay. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I got confused, too. MS. USHER: Gas Taxes, they pay for the engineers and real property specialists. They -- that are used to help acquire the land that we need when we expand our roads. We also fund our Capital Projects out of Gas Taxes, which you can see on page H-15, the $101,459,900. We also pay some money to the General Fund for indirect service charge. We also transfer money over to make debt service payments. We are also contributing money to the GIS project. This is the second and final year that we are paying for the implementation of GIS. And we're also transferring money over to Fund 101, which is the Road and Bridge Maintenance Fund. Then we also have reserves. Page 172 June 20, 2002 On page H-14 is their expanded requests. It's a total of $383,100 and this is for the concurrency management program. The Transportation Department is requesting two positions for this, and also $200,000 for Planning Consultant Fees. Since this is a new program that they are taking in-house, they need time to get it up and running, so that's why we have some outside consultant fees helping us facilitate to get to our goals. They also need a new vehicle to accomplish this. MR. MUDD: Let me help on this just a little bit, Commissioners, to help you on the concurrency thing and explain it just -- you did a good job, so I'm just going to give you a little more detail because Norm is not here right now. The senior planner, he's going to need somebody that's in-house that's basically going to make sure that what's being submitted from the Development Community and the road system that he's got has got real-time concurrency. It's okay to do it once a year because you're just looking at it once a year, but we're talking about looking at it every day in that process. Plus, the concurrency system, if it's different or it's demenymous we're asking -- we're asking the Development Community or that commercial person that wants to build a building to come in with a pretty detailed traffic plan in order to show where that traffic would be -- that they could move it someplace else to avoid a certain stretch of road that was -- was having a problem as far as its capacity versus -- it's -- it's basically car total against the voluminous capacity. The data base administrator -- right now, we have six -- we have six permanent traffic count stations of which two -- two are being actively used and -- and the data is being looked at. It wasn't until three or four months ago that Norman, and maybe because he was new and didn't have the -- the institutional knowledge, knew that we Page 173 June 20, 2002 had four additional permanent stations out there. And guess what? We haven't been reading that data. And so we are going at it one station at a time to -- to get those back online and in this budget request, there is another four permanent, and it's not necessarily here. It's in 111 and we'll talk about that tomorrow, I think. We -- we have an additional request for four permanent count stations. That will bring the county's total to ten. Right now we are only actively using two. And so we are doing spot surveys. We have a requirement to go in there for 24-hour periods of time, four times a year during different quarters, and we do that at 200 different locations, so we've got some good sampling techniques that are out there but we need to increase our permanent stations. And I'll give you a comparison. Lee County has got 37 permanent count stations and it's a smaller county, and I'm not saying that's right and neither is Norman. But I will tell you, two isn't right, and I think at ten, we're getting closer to where we need to be if we are going to have a real- time concurrency system that's got some good hard numbers being -- being looked at 365 days a year, 366 on leap year. And we need that data person to be on-line. The $200,000 for consultant fee, Norm is worried, and rightfully so, that -- that he is going to get rushes by -- by the Development Community when -- just like we saw when we had a new building code, we got rushed with certain permits and certain developments. Just like we talked about at our last board meeting when we talked about the three roads that were in moratorium, do we give them a 20-day grace period or not. Ten, it would automatically happen as the Board discussed it, because that's administrative time to get it up to DCA and to Tallahassee to get an approval. We -- we Page 174 June 20, 2002 talked about that the last Board meeting, but during that period of time, you get input. And that input comes to you in a mad rush versus at a slow steady pace and -- and what this consultant fee is for, those peak periods so he could -- could get over those and bring a consultant on instead of bringing on a full-time employee during those particular times. And again, it's a new system and that's his best guess. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: is a position just like Don Scott? MR. MUDD: Except-- yes, sir. Planning-- senior planner, this Except Don Scott is the Director of Planning. This person's only job would be to manage the full-time concurrency system for-- for transportation. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The data administrator? Can't we have a -- can't that be a supervisor's position instead of an administrator? MR. MUDD: No. It's not an administrator position. Let's call it a -- a data base technician if you would like. It's not like an administrator like Norm or Public Utilities Administrator. This is somebody that is just going to administer -- maybe this is just a bad choice of words as far as the position. It's not that way. This person is running the data, gathering the data base. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The salary looks like it's an administrative position. MR. MUDD: Again, that's a fully burdened salary that sits there, so you are talking about not only the salary, but you are also talking about the benefits, life insurance and all those other things that go along with it. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Data base Administrator, I read as $17,400. That's what I see down here under-- on page H-17. I guess, years ago we would have called it a clerical position. Page 175 June 20, 2002 COMMISSIONER FIALA: COMMISSIONER CARTER: 89.9? wrong page. MR. SMYKOWSKI: No, that's right. They wrote it here for 89.9. Well, maybe I'm on the 75.7 is the personal service expense and then you have operating rolled into that which comes to a total expanded request associated with that position, computers and all for 89.9. COMMISSIONER CARTER: So it's a fully-funded position with equipment-- MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yeah. COMMISSIONER CARTER: -- everything, regardless who was there? MR. SMYKOWSKI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why don't we hear from Ms. Vasey and then go from there, because I personally thought this was an excellent idea when it was explained to me before, and I would like to find out why it isn't. MS. VASEY: Actually, we think it's an excellent idea too. We are not at all opposed to it. What it is is the checkbook accounting, but it's a lot more expensive than a checkbook. But, you know, that's what the cost of doing business is because it's a complicated program to handle all the different capacities on the roads and everything. But our issue is the funding source. If you'll look at page H-16, we have gas taxes are being used as the funding source on this, which is basically, you know, road money. And we're saying that this should not be funded by gas taxes, it should be funded by Community Development Services, Permits and Fees. And the rationale here is, currently, when somebody from Community Development brings a PUD in or something to be reviewed by transportation, there is a reimbursement for that. And Page 176 June 20, 2002 that's -- and this system is now going to be the automated system that will do that in a lot more detail and a lot more, you know, a lot better, but it's still the same function. The reason we have this data base system is to support new development, and since it supports new development, we think that Community Development Permits and Fees should pay for it and that's growth paying for growth, so it's not an issue with the -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: It sounds good to me. MR. OLLIFF: I don't want to interrupt but I think we would wholeheartedly agree and we'll go take a look and see if we can't squeeze that out of the CDES budget. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Olliff, didn't we -- we made a transfer of positions out of-- out of the Planning Services over to Transportation and you're right, we lost the funding source through fees to go to the other side -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Good work. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good point, yeah. MS. VASEY: All right. Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just have one question on page 20. Part of the way down Logan Boulevard, Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt. I believe that should be Vanderbilt to Immokalee. COMMISSIONER FIALA: What page are you on, please? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Page 20. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: About what line? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm down to number, project number 60166. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: COMMISSIONER FIALA: These don't fall in numerical order. Right about in here(indicating.) COMMISSIONER HENNING: A third of the way down. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Logan Boulevard. Page 177 June 20, 2002 MR. OLLIFF: Okay. We'll double check that. You are saying it needs to be from Pine Ridge to Immokalee? Immokalee, yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: MR. OLLIFF: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: going -- It needs to be from Vanderbilt MR. OLLIFF: Vanderbilt to Immokalee, right? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Good catch. Anything else? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, this CR-29 for the city of Choco. Just kidding. MS. USHER: We would like to go to page H-18 through H-19. This is the recap of the Transportation Road Projects. This includes gas tax along with impact fee funds. A lot of our road projects are being funded by one -- more than one source. It's not unusual to have a road project in gas tax and then maybe one or two Impact Fee Funds, so it was easier to review these road projects as a total instead of by pieces. But if you want to see it by pieces, then on H-20, H-21, you can see the different pieces to come up to this total that's on H-18 through H-19. The spread sheet is in the order, in descending order of what budget needs for 03, the top projects being Immokalee Road for 27.5 million, six-laning it from US 41 to 1-75. Right now there is design work on it and I believe this is construction costs. Oh, and then inspection. I'm sorry. The next project is Immokalee Road. It's County Road 951 through 43rd Avenue Northeast. Again, that project is under -- in design right now and the 25.3 million being requested for next year is construction and inspection. And then we have the four-laning of the Vanderbilt Beach Road. It -- from Airport Road to 951. Again, we are currently in design Page 178 June 20, 2002 with that and wetre anticipating construction costs and Inspection Fees in the amount of 24.4 million. And then the last large project would be the Goodlette Road four-laning from Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt. Again, we're in the design phase and the Construction and Inspection Fees are somewhere in the neighborhood of 14.6 million. We do -- we are funding this -- helping us to fund this with a bond issue. We estimate if you go to page H-19 near the bottom, you'll see bond proceeds of $147,618,000. We are expecting that we'll need to issue a bond in that dollar amount to fund the projects that are being listed. We also have some grants coming in. About 12.2 million dollars, the two largest ones being reimbursement for the Livingston Road and a TOPS Grant from the State for the overpass Golden Gate Parkway overpassing Airport Road at that intersection. We anticipate that -- transportation is in an Impact Fee Review right now. It will be coming to you before the year end is out with their new Impact Fee rates. We don't -- at the time preparing this budget, we didn't know exactly how much those rates would go up, but you can see that this year we anticipate collecting 17.3 million dollars of Impact Fees and next year we are anticipating 25.5 million dollars. But we'll have to wait until the study comes forward and -- and you review that before we determine how much the rate will go up, and then, gas taxes we have estimated about 16.8 million dollars. And that is your Transportation Fund. Do you have any questions? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. Please, proceed. MS. USHER: Okay. And our last fund is the Correction Facility Impact Fee. MR. OLLIFF: Susan, before we do that, I want to talk a little bit from a big picture prospective about Transportation Construction Page 179 June 20, 2002 Funding. And I think the Board has seen the five-year plan graph that shows the need for Ad Valorem subsidy in your transportation construction budget in order to balance your Transportation Fund over the next five years. And I just -- I want to spend just a moment so that the Board is clear in terms of what we are proposing. What we have done this year and what our proposal is for the five-year plan, to try and make sure that there is not a feeling that we need to -- to really jump in and create some -- some huge reserves or anything in order to be able to fund the transportation needs. Now, I will tell you in fairness, this is based on the current adopted five-year road plan, and as long as the Board or the MPO is not throwing in a bunch of additional projects to this, it is fairly manageable given the proposal that we've got for you here. MR. SMYKOWSKI: Quick-- for the record, Michael Smykowski. This shows the five-year road funding plan as it currently exists. In the FY 03 year, you see there is 8.9 million dollars of General Fund support to the road program. That includes three million dollars in transportation maintenance that was previously funded by gas taxes based on the adopted Road Transportation Plan. We are using one hundred percent of the gas taxes for road construction effort. In addition, the estimated Debt Service on the bonds was 5.9, so the 5.9 plus the three represents the -- the first year commitment in terms of General Fund support of the Road Program. The key note here, it jumps from 8.9 to 12.5 in 04 but then the quantum leapage, you would have to make is actually between Fiscal Years 04 and 05. You go from 12.5 to 23.1 in a single year, so you're looking at almost an 11 million dollar jump and obviously, that would eat up a substantial amount of the available new revenue Page 180 June 20,2002 assuming you're on a continued upward growth trend in terms of assessed evaluation. Therefore, the opportunity exists if you were to try to smooth that by taking a little bigger bite of the apple in Fiscal Year 04 to soften the magnitude of the leap between years 04 and 05, and I did some quick calculations yesterday in an attempt to smooth that. Essentially, you would be moving what this shows is if you took a slightly bigger bite in Fiscal Year 04, instead of 12.5 million, if you up that to, like, 16.8, obviously the leap then from 16.8 to 24 is only eight million dollars as opposed to almost eleven, So by taking a bigger chunk up front, it softens the need for borrowing more later, and also in those years when you ran out of bonding capacity, we were using Commercial Paper under the existing program to soften the out years and you see that was fairly consistent at about 30 million dollars a year. If you put more money into the Road Program in the early years, you would have less of a need for that smoothing in the out years and you would actually lessen your burden over Fiscal Years seven through nine. So there is an opportunity that exists obviously, and then I think it's not inconsistent with what the Productivity Committee was looking at in terms of finding additional dollars early on in the process for roads. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: May I make a suggestion that we might want to keep our minds open on this. When we get through, and we set the value of what we want to spend in each part of the budget, that's it. We can only go down in September; is that correct? MR. OLLIFF: That's absolutely correct, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Then I suggest we set something right now of about 25 million dollars instead of 16, with the idea that we may find that money and if we have to adjust in September -- and then that -- this place could be the catch all for anything that we save Page 181 June 20, 2002 or any additional monies we come up with. In other words, 16 is what you've got down here; is that correct? Am I looking at this right? MS. SMYKOWSKI: That's in Fiscal Year 04 that you would have a larger bite in Fiscal Year 04. You are going from 12.5 to 16.8. COMMISSIONER CARTER: That will be next year's discussion, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Well, I -- I realize that, but what I'm saying is if we -- if we are all conservative in setting the -- the number for roads, I think that's contrary to what this commission is all about. We made a commitment and that commitment is that our roads are top priority, so if we --if we get the number up there in the roads we can always adjust it back down or move the numbers around to be able to move money into that if there is a possibility we find more, rather than locking ourselves in at a low number. MR. OLLIFF: You don't lock yourself into anything during this process except for the millage rate, and the millage rate will generate the full amount of revenue that you've got in your budget so that if you want to make some adjustments and put more in roads down the road, you can do that. All we were trying to show you with this is if the Board unofficially were to at least think about and establish a policy where this year we were carving off somewhere about 30 percent or so, maybe up to 40 percent of the growth money that comes from your Ad Valorem taxes and put it towards Road Construction. You've got to remember that this amount of money is built in next year. So the amount of new money that you have to raise is only the difference between this bar and this bar, so the amount of new money that you are going to need in Fiscal Year 04 is only going to be about seven to eight million dollars as opposed to the full 16.8, and the next Page 182 June 20, 2002 year then you need again only to raise the difference which would be about another eight million dollars. And if the property tax increases continue as they have over the last two decades at a fairly reasonable rate, what we are showing you is that you can manage to offset and -- and balance your five-year transportation capital need by simply carving off a dedicated percentage of you Ad Valorem Tax Growth. Now, recognize that of your total Ad Valorem budget, then you are going to be dedicating nine million dollars of it in Fiscal Year 03, you'll be spending 16.8 million General Fund dollars. In 04, you'll be spending 24.4, so in a pure dollar sense, you are going to be spending a significant amount of Ad Valorem tax money for the first time ever to build roadways in this community. But we are telling you there is a way to get there without crippling yourself too badly if you sort of set that policy up front. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: We remain at millage neutral? I mean, I'm speaking for myself. That's where I'm headed, millage neutral. By just moving things around, maybe taking out of other pockets that we can dedicate the money to this road situation, we can still remain at millage neutral? MR. OLLIFF: What it means is you will have less money to be able to spend on your Ad Valorem Departments growth because you will be spending it for road construction, and that's sort of what we said all along. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. MR. OLLIFF: But you can do it. What it means is, for instance, this year, you had a 17 percent property value increase that netted you 22 million dollars Ad Valorem money. You took nine million dollars off the top for road construction. Page 183 June 20, 2002 That means that in another year, under a millage neutral budget, you would have had 22 million dollars for Expanded Services this year. This year you have 13 million dollars for Expanded Services. So you will have less to be able to spend on Expanded Services in the future, but, yes, you can stay within millage neutral and have a fairly regular growth rate within your departments. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The-- this doesn't include the 44 million dollar shortfall that we have identified the needs; correct, in the five-year? MR. OLLIFF: That is the shortfall. We are -- oh, the four additional roads the MPO just added in? MS. USHER: No, the landscaping. MR. SMYKOWSKI: You're talking about the landscaping. MR. OLLIFF: No. MS. SMYKOWSKI: That was not part of the Board Policy Direction relative to the Road Funding Plan. It excluded those. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. And then the four road projects that we're going to improve --or approve for a five-year transportation, that's not included in that; correct? MR. SMYKOWSKI: That is not included in there either, but we -- we -- in the five-year road program, we were fairly conservative on the Impact Fee estimates. We assume 14 million in the current year and then we actually dropped it down to eleven, and obviously, if you are looking at a major road impact fee increase as a result of the study that's currently under way, obviously, that will take a bite out of those new projects that are -- are entering the fray as well. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Please continue. MR. OLLIFF: Okay. Susan? Sorry for that little side trip but I thought it was important. Page 184 June 20, 2002 MS. USHER: Okay. If you would like to turn to page H-22. This is a correctional facility Impact Fee Fund. Major project that we will be building next year, we are in design right now and we'll be building next year is the Naples Jail Space Expansion. Right now, we have designs. We have hired an architect to design the project, and the construction is estimated to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 34.2 million dollars. Because we are building the facility right next to the existing facility, part of that cost -- let me back up. We're funding this project with a bond issue and the bond issue will be paid back with primarily from Impact Fee Funds, but because part of this project is to renovate the old jail, where the new jail is going to meet, 83 percent of the bond proceeds -- bond debt service cost will be paid out of Impact Fee Funds and the balance will be paid out of Ad Valorem. MR. OLLIFF: Any questions there? MS. USHER: That's it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're done for today. MR. OLLIFF: That concludes the today's agenda. Mr. Chairman, we appreciate your indulgence and your patience. We will see you here bright and early tomorrow morning. MR. SMYKOWSKI: And tomorrow we will be talking exclusively Ad Valorem tax-supported either in the Unincorporated Area or on a County-wide basis through the General Fund. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Great. Looking forward to it. (Whereupon, the meeting was concluded.) Page 185 June 20, 2002 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair- Time: 4:40 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL JAMES COLETTA, CHAIRMAN .:':~' DW,:IGH~ E. BROCK, CLERK Attest as to Chairman'S sf~ature o~15. These minutes approved by the Board on .,~aw./o.a,,,~, as presented :/' or as corrected Page 186