Loading...
BCC Minutes 06/30/2009 B (Budget Workshop) June 30, 2009 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, June 30, 2009 BUDGET HEARINGS LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board( s) of such special district as has been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in BUDGET SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Donna Fiala Fred Coyle Jim Coletta Frank Halas Tom Henning ALSO PRESENT: Jim Mudd, County Manager Leo Ochs, Deputy County Manager Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Page 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING Notice is hereby given that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County will conduct Budget Workshops on Monday, June 29, 2009 and Tuesday, June 30, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. Workshops will be held in the Boardroom, 3rd Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building, Collier County Government Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida to hear the following: COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FY 2010 BUDGET WORKSHOP SCHEDULE Monday, June 29, 2009 - 9:00 a.m. General Overview Courts and Related Agencies (State Attorney and Public Defender) Airport Authority Community Development Transportation Services Public Services Administrative Services Public Utilities Debt Service Management Offices (Pelican Bay) County Attorney BCC Tuesday, June 30, 2009 - 9:00 a.m. Constitutional Officers: Elections Sheriff Other Constitutional Officers requesting to address the BCC 1 :00 p.m. Public Comment Page 1 June 29-30, 2009 June 30, 2009 MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats. Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike. Welcome to our second day of budget workshops. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And good morning, everyone. Thank you-all for being here this morning. Here we go on a second day. It's been very difficult to this point. It will continue to be difficult this day. But in the end, we hope that we are doing the best for all of our citizens here in Collier County, all of our employees in all of your departments, and the best that we can for our community, and we're keeping that in mind. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Mudd. Let's move on. SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS MR. MUDD: Starts at nine a.m., and we start with Constitutional Officers. First Constitutional Officer to basically talk about their budget is the Supervisor of Elections. MS. EDWARDS: Good morning. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good morning. Sounds like church. MS. EDWARDS: For the record, my name's Jennifer Edwards. I am the Collier County Supervisor of Elections, and I'd like to introduce my assistant, Melissa Blazier. MS. BLAZIER: Good morning. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good morning. MS. EDWARDS: I believe our budget begins on Page 8 behind Constitutional Officers, and I'm presenting to you this morning a budget of three million, 291 dollars -- 291 thousand dollars and 400 (sic). That is a 2.8 percent decrease from our current budget. That is $95,900. And we also turned back $61,920 as part of the current year request that you-all made to our office. The budget includes funding for four elections next year. As you Page 2 June 30, 2009 know, we have a primary and general. So we're funding the full primary, part of the general, and we also have two municipal elections. We have the City of Naples and the City of Marco. For those two elections we've budgeted $53,000, and that money will be returned to the general fund once we bill them and they reimburse. So that's a -- an overview of our current budget. Looking forward, I've talked to you-all over the last few years about the fact that, indeed, we do have an unfunded mandate in 2012. So I just want to keep that in -- in your awareness because the state mandated that we implement new equipment for -- to replace our ADA equipment, and it's going to cost approximately $800,000. MS. BLAZIER: Seven hundred. MS. EDWARDS: $700,000, thank you. And what that means is we have to have a new ADA voting piece of equipment in every early voting site and every precinct beginning in 2012 with the presidential preference primary. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Jennifer, can you tell me how much -- I don't know where to look here. How much do we still owe on all of that touch screen equipment that we bought which was ever so good but then we were forced to put aside? MS. EDWARDS: We -- it originally cost 4.2. I'd have to look over at the budget office or the finance department because it has been paid over a number of years through one of the borrowing pools. But we purchased it in 2002 for a 10-year period, and it cost $4.2 million. I'm not sure of the balance on it. MR. MUDD: And you still owe -- you still owe about half, and that's what it was last year with my memory, okay, and it's still pretty good. So I'd say you're probably about 1.8. Now, we did get some refund money, I believe, when we traded it in, and that was part of a discussion we had last year, so -- MS. EDWARDS: We got about 800,000 in reimbursement from the state to help pay for the new estimate that we had to buy in 2008, Page 3 June 30, 2009 which, total cost for that was 1.2 million. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Jennifer, I looked over -- over your budget, and I didn't see any projection for a millage-neutral budget. Do you have anything in regards to that, going to a millage neutral? MS. ED WARDS : Well, what I've presented to you -- my understanding was we were looking at as much as a possibly a 3 percent or 15 percent decrease. So what I've brought forward is 2.8. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. There was also some discussion yesterday about a millage-neutral budget. How would that affect your organization? MS. EDWARDS: I can't answer that at this time. I'd have to go back and look at the millage neutral. Okay? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I think that maybe that needs to be part of the -- as we look at the big picture here, because not only does the County Manager's side have to make these types of cuts, but also the Constitutional Officers, we're hoping, will jump on board for a millage-neutral. MS. EDWARDS: Well, if we're talking about millage neutral being the worst-case scenario, then we have run that number, and that number is approximately $500,000. And my budget is 3.3 million. And we have elections to conduct next year. So I'm constitutionally mandated to conduct elections. And we have reduced our administration budget significantly, and that is over $95,000. COMMISSIONER HALAS: So you're saying that if you went to millage neutral, you would take an additional $550,000 in budget cuts? MS. EDWARDS: I'm not going to say that number is exact. I will tell you that is approximately 500,000. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. That's close enough. Thank you. Page 4 June 30, 2009 MS. EDWARDS: Okay. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep. MS. EDWARDS: And a countywide election costs approximately -- between 5- and 600,000. So we're facing elections next year. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: What are your capital needs in 2012, or how much are they? MS. EDWARDS: In 2012 we are mandated to implement new ADA equipment. That is equipment for the visually impaired that will provide a paper trail, which will be equal to the new paper-trail equipment that we have now, or as close as possible, so that the visually impaired receive the same kind of equipment and treatment as other voters. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MS. EDWARDS: We now meet federal requirements, but our state legislature passed the law when they required us to change in 2008, to change the ADA in 2012. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And how much is that going to cost? MS. EDWARDS: That's going to be approximately 700,000 for Collier County. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we should start budgeting it in 2011, County Manager? Capital improvements? MS. EDWARDS: We'll have to -- we'll have to request that in the next budget cycle in order to have it in time for the presidential preference primary in 2012. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MS. EDWARDS: Thanks. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Jennifer, what grants do you Page 5 June 30, 2009 anticipate or expect based upon the last experience, last -- MS. EDWARDS: We receive right around $50,000 in grants. It's a federal flow-through money from the Hovell (phonetic) Bill, and it flows through the state, and they then distribute it to the counties. So we'll be looking at possibly another 50,000. We can only use that for federal election expenses, and we use that mainly for sample ballots and other printing. COMMISSIONER COYLE: The state is not providing any funding at all to counties for this additional equipment? MS. EDWARDS: We had our conference last week and we learned then that the state is looking at a formula to help us. They have indicated that their first step in that formula would be to provide one piece of equipment for each early voting site. So that means that they would be purchasing seven pieces of equipment for Collier County. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And how much would that be? MS. EDWARDS: The ADA equipment is about $7,000 per piece, so seven times seven. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. What is that? Twenty-five? MS. EDWARDS: No, I don't think so. I think that's 49. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MS. EDWARDS: But moving forward, they also told us that they planned to reimburse us over the years for our expense. But then we started having that back-and-forth conversation with representatives from the Division of Elections, and we decided it's probably going to take about 50 years for them to be able to reimburse all the counties across the state for this purchase because it's going to cost all counties across the state about $36 million to buy this equipment. We have asked, and it has been one of our legislative initiatives, to ask the legislature to extend that requirement a few years, because as of today there's only one vendor, and we'd like to encourage the Page 6 June 30, 2009 vendors to step forward and for us to have a little competition so that, perhaps, the price would be reduced. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And what is the purpose to be achieved as a result of all these changes in election equipment? MS. EDWARDS: We were required to change our equipment in 2008 because activist groups did not trust touch screen and were able to influence the legislature to change to equipment that has a paper trail. And the legislature then took that next step and said, well, not only are we going to require you to make this change in 2008, but we're also going to require you to change your ADA equipment in 2012 so that our visually impaired will be voting on the similar kind of equipment that will provide them a paper trail also, so that's the purpose. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm beginning -- MS. EDWARDS: I fought this as hard as I could. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm beginning to like the system that's used in the Middle East a lot better. Just dip your finger in ink and then vote and that's it. MS. EDWARDS: Well, as elections administrators, we sometimes talked about getting -- going back to dropping pebbles in boxes. Things to save money. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me ask if the Productivity Committee has any input on this or any Constitutional Officers. MS. VASEY: No, ma'am, on elections. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. MS. EDWARDS: I would like to add one more comment. As you know, we have been using, for early voting, our electronic poll books, and those poll books replace the ones that have been used for years where you sign in on the registrar at the polling place. Electronic poll books were also used for Golden Gate special fire district election. Electronic poll books are much more secure and they Page 7 June 30, 2009 interface with both our active voter registration system as well as state system, and that adds to the security and accuracy. And I asked -- I had come to you to ask for those for the 2008 election, and we deferred that to 2010 because we had to buy new equipment in 2008, and I didn't want to ask for the electronic poll books to be funded. We're asking to -- we're deferring that again. I'm not asking for it for 2010, but I just want to keep that as an awareness factor for you-all because I would like to see our county move to that in the future. But to implement that will be approximately a million dollars to have those for every polling site on election day. So that would be, in capital funds for the 2012 presidential election year, approximately $1.7 million for both the ADA equipment and the electronic poll books. And that concludes my comments. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any further comments from commissioners? (N 0 response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MS. EDWARDS: Thank you. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to the Sheriffs Office, if there's no other questions by the Board of County Commissioners for the Supervisor of Elections. Thank you, Jennifer. MS. EDWARDS: Thank you. SHERIFF'S OFFICE MR. MUDD: Commissioner's, the sheriff's -- the sheriff's budget starts on Page -- and you go to the tab that says Constitutional Officers. It starts on Page 23 of your books. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good morning. Page 8 June 30, 2009 SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Good morning. Ready? Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chair, Commissioners. Kevin Rambosk representing the Collier County Sheriffs Office and staff. I brought all the pertinent individuals to answer all of your questions as we go line by line through our budget today -- I know you want to get out by five clock -- or rather, in preparation for that, to inform the community with regard to some information that you're already aware of, I thought it might be appropriate to give a little background and overview on what we're doing with our existing resources that the community has provided us, where we want to go with future resources that we're asking for, and really how to maintain the quality of life in Collier County as best we can as we know it. And certainly quality of life has much to do with public safety, and particularly in our case, law enforcement; but it also has a lot to do with innovation, technology, and hard work from all of our employees. Your county staff, who many are in the back of this room, do a terrific job. They work together with us all the time, and certainly the men and women of the Collier County Sheriffs Office that move forward. In the short-term, you know that we're facing some challenges, and certainly in an annual report that you had produced about two years ago, we've recognized our community as a premier place in America to live and to work and to play. We concur with that. And how do we maintain that in this difficult time? Well, our organization is defining these challenging times as an opportunity to focus on what we can do rather than what we can't do, because that's really, I believe, the only methodology that one can use when facing the kind of challenges that not only we in this county are facing, but the state and the nation as well. So let me begin by revising an amended budget submission to you this morning. I'm reducing my request for certified operating Page 9 June 30, 2009 dollars to 143.2 million from the original amount that was submitted to you at 146. I'm also looking at finding more and better ways to implement the use of inmate labor and cover the supervision of those operations with existing dollars, which in this particular year, because we have had some selections reassignments throughout the organization, we can do that. I don't know where we'll be at the next budget year, but we'll take it one budget year at a time. But in this particular case, all our opportunities for inmates working in Collier County, we're going to absorb all those costs, which is appropriate under the circumstances. And that really brings me to what is our return on investment? And it's a question that is often asked in business. As you know, very difficult sometimes to track and measure in government, and particularly for law enforcement when we're looking at preventing events rather than accounting for them and measuring them after they've occurred. But if I could, I'd liked to give you and the public a little background on what have we done so far, whether it be in our existing budget and looking forward, and just a couple of examples of what we have done. We've reduced about a half a million dollars in capital. We have, since January -- actually probably since October -- set a goal of reducing our fleet by 100 vehicles, which we will have accomplished by the 30th of September of this year. As you know, we had actually spoken with you and the Productivity Committee, you-all recognize, as well, who in the past has given us good recommendations. Certainly one was to look at our fleet and how we could better manage that. Weare moving forward to do that. We've reduced overtime just this year by $1.2 million, 25 percent lower than the year before, and that's important. Because of a number of programs out there relative to inmates in our jail facility, and Page 10 June 30, 2009 particularly the 287(g) program, which I'll touch on in a minute, we've had the ability in January to close down the dormitory portion of the Immokalee Jail Center. That has allowed us not to have to staff or fill vacant corrections positions, reassign more staff to functions that need more attention, road patrol, community policing, investigations, and throughout, again, without increasing or making a request for positions. We've looked at the -- reducing our need to fund all of our existing positions, as you and the county staff have done through attrition and through options for early separation. But most importantly, with that -- and we're looking at approximately 100 positions to be unfilled by the end of this -- this year or the beginning of the next year. The most important question though that would be asked by the community is what type of an effect will that have on public safety? And certainly there would be effects if it weren't for the men and women that are sitting here before you and all of those that work 24 hours a day, seven days a week to provide the service. Because we have consolidated functions, we have asked our staff to do more with the resources that they've got, and they've committed to do more. So they're working more and doing more than they have ever done and doing it with less staff resource. So some very important elements of where we've gone that I want to reinforce with the community. As you're all aware, in a previous meeting, I committed to return $2.8 million in our current budget. And as the County Manager and the staff reminded me, I owe $600,000 more, and you will definitely have that as committed. But, you know, I know that you know, but sometimes it's good to talk about where would we be if we just remained on track to put together a budget for FY 1 O? Well, our costs would actually have been $156 million. So with the number that we have reduced, we can see the difference of $13 Page 11 June 30, 2009 million from where we might have been today standing before you asking. That's important. And since 2008 until today, we've been working hard at revamping our budget to reduce operating costs yet, more importantly, maintain levels of service. There is only so far that you can go with that, and we're at that line, and we'll talk a little bit about that in a minute. Back to return on investment. What are we getting in Collier County? Well, you know that we have one of the finest counties in the State of Florida, if the country, ifnothing else. Crime and safety were the lowest -- have the lowest metropolitan crime rate throughout the State of Florida. The professional status of our members and the flagship accredited status of our organization shows that we adhere to best practices. Our budget and fiscal responsibility since 2008, and particularly this year so far, shows that we're able to increase the level of service and/or maintain it while reducing operating costs. And certainly we have a new vision for the future which instills and engages community to provide for increased safety and more service from our staff. So a very positive position that we're moving forward to. We've continued the focus of a number of programs, and a continued reduction in crime. Since 1971 we're at the lowest crime rate that we have ever been, more importantly since 1996, our number or incidents of crime, which means victims in Collier County, have continued to reduce. Can we maintain that in the toughest economic times we've ever seen? I'll tell you today that the six-month mark, we are holding the line on last year's victimization numbers, which is absolutely terrific under the conditions, and we're going to continue to do that. Our traffic fatalities and our crashes are down for last year. Holding the line for this year. Very important. 287(g). You know, 287(g) was a program, started 18 to 20 Page 12 June 30, 2009 months ago, and has not just materialized. And has been of significant importance, not one that I necessarily had to carry-forward but one that I wanted -- that I committed to this community to carry-forward, because I believe our partnership and the partnership of law enforcement in the 287(g) program provides for a safer community with a potential for less crime and saves dollars. That's what my role and responsibility is to you and to the community, which is why sometimes I question why other communities don't do it. Commissioner Coyle? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Could you tell me what 289g is? COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's just what I was going to do. The criminal alien task force. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: The criminal alien task force. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Which, ultimately, over that 18 to 20 months, has detained or placed detainers on 17,096 inmates and/or identified criminals in our jail facilities and have actually removed 1,261 criminals from Collier County and from the Collier County Jail saving us millions of dollars and the need to continue to open the Immokalee Jail Center, if we didn't have that plus other preliminary or pre-trial and re-entry programs. So very, very important. The community caretaking initiative, working together. As we started to identify vacant and foreclosed homes, which your code enforcement staff has taken over and has just done an absolutely tremendous job. We continue to work together with that, and providing new avenues of communication to let the residents, yourselves, and the county staff know what's occurring in Collier County. So where does that take us? Well, there are only 11 other counties in the State of Florida that have a lesser crime rate than we do. And there's a graphic up on the board right now that shows those 11 counties. None are metropolitan counties. And if you look, none Page 13 June 30, 2009 are even south of 1-4. So we are surrounded by counties that have a much larger, in some cases, crime rate than we do. And, in fact, more and more we're finding we are becoming the target of criminals who live in those surrounding counties, and that's something that we want to continue to maintain for the future, but it's going to be very difficult to do so. You know, one of the things that I mentioned early on last year was to get more in touch with our community. Well, one of the things that we wanted to do was do a community safety assessment to find out what was important to our residents with need and with desire, because sometimes what we think in law enforcement is important to our community may not match up with what they believe is important. So we held town hall meetings throughout the entire community, we solicited what was important, we worked together with -- for the first time, the public, in creating a community safety master plan for Collier County. But, you know, the bottom line, what the community told us was, they want to maintain the current levels of safety in Collier County, but they also wanted us to do it in a very fiscally responsible way, which we agree. And there were five areas of focus that came out of that. Traffic and boating safety to keep our roadways safe; crime prevention, keep a safe community and hold the line on reduced crime; youth programming, and I'll touch on that in a second; promote a positive interaction with law enforcement; and to give kids some safe, fun avenues to pursue. Community outreach, how do we stay in touch with our residents, and communications. This year we've done a lot of things, and you might say, well, you know, we had a turn-back, we're looking at reducing the budget. We have actually reduced our request. And is that going to result in a reduced service level for what we do? And I can sit here and tell you today with all the work of our members, we're not reducing the level of service; we're increasing the level of service Page 14 June 30, 2009 and opportunities for our residents, for our kids, and we're doing that together working with your staff, because we can't do it alone. We all need to work together to get that done. A variety of things, which I'm not going to get into, but the community can feel very proud of their participation in developing a plan for the future and the programs that the men and women of the Collier County Sheriffs Office are promoting. I did want to touch on youth programs for a minute because, you know, with these tough economic times, there are not many summer jobs out there for our kids this year. And, you know, when there's nothing to do, there's always the potential to head the wrong way. So we looked at a couple of things. We looked at our teen academy to start, a youth advisory board, a hot summer nights program, and a teen driving challenge to help our kids drive more safely on the roadway, but more importantly, to give them something fun and safe to do to keep them occupied. Because we can tell you, because we know that it's much more cost effective to prevent a problem than it is to rehabilitate or incarcerate the problem down the road, and there's no question about that. But giving our kids a good, healthy avenue, an opportunity and, again, working together with your tremendous staff in recreation in doing so. So what are some of the public safety challenges? Well, it's pretty simple. You know, we looked at ratio that I've never really liked to look at through the FBI, and that's officers per 100,000 of population just to see where we are relative to other county law enforcement organizations only, because many cities are going to be much higher. But the average is 2.7 officers per 1,000 population in county law enforcement. Again, higher for cities, generally . We are at 1.7 officers per 1,000. So we're pretty efficient as we are with the services that we're providing. Page 15 June 30, 2009 We're looking at what the impacts are to the state. Is the State Department of Corrections, are they going to invigorate their re-entry program? We're seeing now generally 40,000 inmates being released into the general population per year. Might that increase because of cost reductions? We don't know. We'll have to wait. But if they do, they're on our streets, as well as streets throughout the entire State of Florida. What I can tell you is that in this current budget year, a variety of state agencies have cut their budgets. Department of Corrections, law staff, FDLE Law Staff. FHP is not fully staffed. You say, well, what effect does that have on us? Well, I can tell you that if FHP is not staffed here in Collier County, which they are not fully staffed, your Sheriffs Office responds to more accidents and takes time out of their responsibilities for proactive patrol. Same with FDLE. We don't get the support that we might need in the event of a major incident. So as other elements of the State of Florida begin to shut down this year and maybe into the future, we will result in having to provide more serv1ce. What are we focused on? Pretty simple. Continuing to reduce crime. Again, I relate that to the community working together with the members of our agency who have taken on a lot. They're willing to take on more. But I can tell you there are areas that I'd like to be going in and like to invest more in; child pornography, sexual predator identification. I've got to find ways to put more investigative functions into that area, and we will find a way to do it. We're going to continue to look at reducing our operating costs. And even though we stand with you today as one part of Collier County helping to try and keep it safe, I will make the commitment to you again that we're going to continue to look at the most effective ways to serve the community and reduce our operating expenses. In doing so, I will not relinquish my role and responsibility by state statute, and that is to provide you and this community with a Page 16 June 30, 2009 certified budget that I know is adequate to provide public safety services at the level that they need to be. So we'll continue to do that. With that, what I'd like to do is open it up for questions. We have a full staff here, and we're ready to go. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Believe it or not, I don't have one commissioner requesting to ask anything. Oh, there we go. Guess who? Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sheriff Rambosk, thank you very much. Could I ask you about -- well, rather than get into the details, maybe I'll just ask you a question. You've agreed to reduce your budget. You didn't tell us exactly where. But did you address the attrition policy? Is that an area where we can achieve some savings without impacting head count? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: No. Unfortunately, you know, in years past when we had the vacancy rate that we had, that seemed a reasonable request and direction. Unfortunately, we're not seeing a lot of attrition. I think since the first of the year we've seen very, very few members. I think the dilemma would be if we followed the existing or past practice of reducing 4 percent attrition, I would need to be back to you on October 2nd making a request for 90 percent funding of our budget because we will have so few vacancies at that point to refill. I don't believe, in the position that we're in, with the cuts we've made and with the lack of attrition that we're going to see in the coming year, that that would actually benefit the county as it has done in the past to free up dollars that haven't been spent. COMMISSIONER COYLE: How about the self-insurance reserves? If you prefer to wait until Janet Vasey comes up and makes her observations from the Productivity Committee, it will-- that's okay with me. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Yeah, no. That's good. We actually heard from the Productivity Committee. We looked at all of their Page 1 7 June 30, 2009 recommendations. That was one of them. You know, initially it seems like, without a problem, that that request would be a reasonable request. The only thing that was brought up during our discussions which I felt would be important for you to know is, you know, by next year, by November, there -- well, there is already -- there will be more of a pandemic. We don't know how serious it will be, but might that reserve be able to be used if we need it? You know, we're not losing the dollars. They're always there to be turned back over. We're just concerned that as a front-line agency who are meeting the public on a regular basis, they're interacting, they're getting sick; if we were to run into any more serious of an issue than is projected -- and there isn't a serious, a deadly pandemic that's projected -- but the pandemic is coming. Might that be an avenue of redress in our insurance? Beyond that, it was a good recommendation. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did you have a -- MR. GREENWALD: Yeah. Randy Greenwald, for the record. I work with the Office of Management and Budget. I just wanted to clarify one thing. The sheriff did put reserve for attrition in his budget of 5,087,500. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I know that. MR. GREENWALD: Which was the policy that we gave them. We told them to take their funded positions and take 4 percent on the salaries, and they did do that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think the issue was whether it was based on filled positions or unfilled position. MR. GREENWALD: Well, it was based on the policy that the county uses, based on funded positions. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Maybe we ought to talk about the county's policy then. Okay. MR. GREENWALD: That's what everybody did. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That provides us an opportunity. Page 18 June 30, 2009 So when Janet gets up here to talk, we'll pursue that a little more closely. Is there another potential source of funding that might be available either from overall county reserves or from state or federal funds that might address the issue of a pandemic? You see, my concern is for everybody to hold back reserves in the event of the worst-case situation. We're holding back reserves in the event of a hurricane. You're holding back reserves in the event of a pandemic. Well, maybe we ought to think about earthquakes and other things too. You know, it seems cumulative, and I think the chances of us being faced with all of these things in the same budgeting year are relatively slim, and to base the taxpayers' millage rate on the expectation of an event that mayor may not occur, I think, is not being fair to taxpayers. That doesn't mean I think you should eliminate the reserve. I'm just wondering if there's an opportunity to adjust it a bit. And so -- so that's all I'm asking here. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Yeah. And there absolutely is. As I said, we're -- you know, we were in the same position. We looked at all the what-ifs, and we're flexible on that. That's not something that's a significant problem. If I were to believe that it was absolutely positively necessary to ensure the public safety, I'd tell you. But I think the recommendation from Productivity Committee was a good one, and we just had these couple of questions about, if we run into that problem, will we be self-sufficient, so to speak, but I can always come and ask you for more money. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. And if we haven't had that hurricane, we might be able to give it to you. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So -- but it we get both of them, we might have a problem, okay. But at least we need to think about it and Page 19 June 30, 2009 decide what adjustment of that reserve might be prudent under the circumstances. I'm not asking that you put yourself in a bind anywhere. But if you could take a look at it and then advise us as to what we could do with it, it would be greatly appreciated. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: We'll absolutely do it. We're open to it. Let us take a look at what amount we feel comfortable with it and get that information back to you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN FIALA: We've mentioned Janet and Productivity Committee quite a few times. Let's get her up here, and then we'll hear from Commissioner Halas. MS. VASEY: Good morning. Janet Vasey, for the record. I'm speechless, in a good way. I'm just very impressed that the Sheriffs Office is offering this additional reduction. Basically, if you take the 3.3 million additional amount that they're offering and add it to what already has been reduced from their FY09 adopted, it's 5 percent. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. MS. VASEY: Now, 5 percent is better than the county staff has done. So I have to say, thank you very much. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep. MS. VASEY: I appreciate that. We did base the attrition issue on information that we received through our budget reviews on how attrition was calculated, and I feel pretty confident, based on their answers, that the attrition had been taken off of the unfilled positions, positions that they had not intended to fill, and maybe there is some adjustment to that, but the county policy is to take attrition off of funded positions. So, you know, there may be some -- some issue of how things were calculated. But quite frankly, I'm really happy with 3.3 million. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, don't stop. You're on a roll. MS. VASEY: Oh, sorry. Page 20 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ifwe can get 3.3, maybe we can get 4.3. But I would just ask you to take a look at it and tell us what you think. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Happy to. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. You've done a wonderful job. We appreciate you being so cooperative to help us out of this hole. If you could help a little more, that would be wonderful, but I'm not interested in reducing your ability to serve the people of Collier County. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you. MS. VASEY: And I would say -- well, like I said, I think we're satisfied with the 3.3 million, and if you would take a look at your reserves. We felt really pretty strongly, the level of reserves both with your organization and with the County Manager's, would allow a very modest -- and this is a very modest reduction that we didn't think would jeopardize reserves or the future or anything. So if you feel like you can do that, we'd appreciate that. And then that would be an even larger percentage. I didn't calculate that because you took me by surprise, but -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Six percent. MS. VASEY: Pardon? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Six percent. MS. VASEY: Okay. Then we're talking 6 percent. Now if we can get the County Manager's Office to match the 6 percent, then we might be talking some real money. MR. MUDD: Can I hear a number, ten, 12, 13? The other thing I will tell you is on reserves, reserves are non-reoccurring, okay, and you're trying to cut them in order to get reoccurring cuts to your millage rate. It puts you in a significant hole. And I will -- and one thing, Janet, that your organization did not look at but I will bring it to the board's attention this morning or this afternoon -- the other thing I will also tell you is the sheriff has obligations as far as retirement, as Page 21 June 30, 2009 far as healthcare, as far as sick leave payout that our auditors are very sensitive to compared to what we as the Board of County Commissioners -- or what you as the Board of County Commissioners have done over the years in the fact that you don't payout sick leave anymore, and sheriff's organization isn't completely there yet. Part of that reserve that you're talking about is there to basically cover that obligation, and you have an obligation that is audited to make sure that you have those reserves on station, and that is something that our annual audit does take a look at. So -- now, I don't blame this on Sheriff Rambosk because a lot of this happened before he was the sheriff, but we have what we have, and there is an obligation, especially when you have said and promised or whatever in policies of the past; you must have those dollars in order to payout, and that's part of the reserve that the sheriff needs. So I don't think it's as clean as we'd like it to be or Janet would like it, where we just say, okay, lop off its head, and then it's an automatic one-to-one correlation with the reduction in millage rate. I don't believe that happens at all. And I will also talk a little bit about how the different reserves were calculated and how they came up with them. There were -- it was a look at what the audit was in 2008, and then all of a sudden there was no look at what happened in 2009 nor how this board and/or your staff reduced particular reserves to come up with the mid-year budget cuts. And I did mention it yesterday with worker's comp and things like that in a reduction. I think that when you talk to Mr. Walker today, he will tell you that lopping the reserve that the Productivity Committee saw in 2008 versus whatever has been reduced by almost 20 to $25 million based on board's policy. So I don't think it's as lucrative as some folks would like to believe, but we'll talk about that a little bit more. Page 22 June 30, 2009 But again, this is a significant difference dealing with this sheriff. And I like the old sheriff well enough, but I will tell you that this sheriff's office is a whole lot easier to work with than the latter, and they are more open to new ideas and more innovation, and for that, I'm very, very grateful to Sheriff Rambosk and his staff. COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, I hadn't quite finished yet, but I'll just make one observation. I hope we're not trying to convince the sheriff not to take a look at reserves for the purpose of reducing them if it's possible. Nobody is talking about cutting into muscle and bone here. We're talking about taking a look at whether or not they are excessive. And I don't know if Jim Gibson has any observations concerning that or not. But the -- the point about -- you know, we've got this mantra that you can't cut or you can't take nonrecurring money and use it for recurring costs. I haven't seen much in this budget that is recurring at all in the county budget or this budget at all. Any time you're prepared to eliminate people and move projects, that is not a recurring cost. So what we're trying to do is to get through some tough years here, and if we can get through some tough years without laying off people, it is a smart thing to do. If we find that we don't have the money in the future to do it anymore, then we will have to take the obvious course of action, which is to layoff people. But I think we need to develop a little more flexibility with respect to how we -- we deal with these things. We cannot just say that reserves are sacred cows and whatever amount we establish is not to be questioned, because that isn't true. We must question them. Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Janet, are you finished? MS. VASEY: I am. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sheriff, I commend you for the additional cut in your budget, and I know it was probably a difficult Page 23 June 30, 2009 situation. And I also say that it's a pleasure to work with you and your staff compared to where we were a few years ago when we were at odds with your -- the other sheriff. I have some questions. Does this -- these budget cuts, do they relate to a wage freeze? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: There are no increases included in our budget for next year. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And does it also address the benefits so that maybe you're in line with what the County Manager's side of the ledger is, and that is, there's co-pays and some other areas that we've discussed in the past? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: We are actually currently working together with our healthcare review consultant to look at heading towards -- more towards where the county's position is. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. But this doesn't -- this isn't a reflection on the budget assets today? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: We're looking at that for January of'10, 2010. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I think you've answered my questions. Thank you very, very much. I appreciate all of your effort and every -- all of your staff in regards to addressing all of these Issues. And I can tell you that Lieutenant Brisco is always at the meetings up in District 2, and he has a very good rapport with the people up there, and I think that the respect for the Sheriffs Office has gone up by a 1,000 percent. Thank you. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good morning, Sheriff. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Good morning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I notice the -- your calls for Page 24 June 30, 2009 service is down over 9 percent, closer to the 2006 -- 2006 levels. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: How does that affect your agency when -- you know, when I look at it, it's kind of like, you have less business. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Well, in one sense, that's a good thing to have less business, but in effect, what it actually does is it provides more proactive patrol time for those deputies already assigned. You know, we look to ascribe for 28 percent patrol time out of your day. We've not ever successfully gotten there. So with a little fewer calls, we reinvest that time back into patrolling the streets and preventing the potential for more crime. So it actually turns out to be a positive position. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there any way that you can take a look at your 2006 budget and see where -- what levels you were then and maybe do some adjustments? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Sure, be happy to take a look at the budget to see where we were. I can tell you the crime was higher at the time. We don't want to go there. But operationally, I will look. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Sheriff, a little -- couple questions regarding your reserves. The reserves that you would have, they would be just for contingency funds in case of worst-case scenario; is that correct? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Under the present way we have set up reserves, would you have to come back to the commission before you could take those reserves and place them into the general fund to cover those eventualities? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: That's a good question. I think I would defer to your financial department. Page 25 June 30, 2009 MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, any -- our budget amendment policy states that reserves that are over $50,000, a request for a reduction in reserves over $50,000 comes to this board in the form of an executive summary; 25,000 or less it comes to this board in a report format without covered (sic) by an executive summary. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So basically if we're talking about emergencies, then you would be coming back to this board. So it's not a case of these reserves are funds that you can tap into without the oversight of this board? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: From the explanation just given, yes. But let me be even more emphatic that these are strictly for what the intention would be. It's not to move them to be used in any other fashion, because if we're not using them for health, then we just as soon should re-adjust that number and provide it back to you. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I want to share with you a little story about your predecessor, Sheriff Hunter, who we dearly love. But his method was a little different than yours. I remember one time we had a very heated session during the budget discussions. And I ran into him out in the hall. And I said, you know, it's very difficult to deal with a person that's wearing a gun when it comes to talking about money. And he said, Commissioner, you're not wearing a gun? I said, no, I'm not. And he said, you want to go outside and talk about it? Of course, in j est, and I got the humor. But once again, thank you. It's been an absolute pleasure working with you. You're the high point of the day. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I'll just chime in and say I'm really pleased about this Criminal Alien Task Force because I think -- I think your focus on that has really helped keep us all safe and safer as you continue to expand that service. I'm just so pleased. And I think that maybe that also helps us to scare away people who -- you know, criminal aliens who wanted to come here and Page 26 June 30, 2009 realize that we have such a -- such a good program that they maybe go other places instead. Oh, my goodness. Let's see. We have Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I just -- I just wanted to come to Don Hunter's defense for a moment. You know, he's been catching a lot of flack this morning. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: I'm going to as well, so go ahead. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. We had a couple of difficult budgeting years with Sheriff Hunter, but more recent years were very good. We've worked cooperatively. The Sheriffs Agency has done a wonderful job throughout that entire period of time, and it was under Sheriff Hunter's leadership that the Criminal Alien Task Force was -- was organized, and his efforts go back probably five or six years, maybe longer, to get that program going. So I think Don Hunter did a great job. I was proud to have him as our sheriff, and I'm just as proud to have Sheriff Rambosk here, too. And I think all of the men and women of the Sheriff's Agency are to be commended for what they've done for the people of Collier County. And it is absolutely true that their policies are driving the criminal element to other places. And as they will tell you, there are people they've apprehended who used to live here but have since moved to other places and come back here from time to time. But by and large, the word is, don't go to Collier County. So it is having a good effect, and I'm proud of all of the people who are serving this community. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good speech. I really appreciate that, and I chime in and second that. Thank you. Well, Sheriff Rambosk? SHERIFF RAMBOSK: One last comment on the same path. You know, the continuity of a great community over time is definitely relative to not only what you do, but the Sheriffs Office. And from Page 27 June 30, 2009 Sheriff Rogers to Sheriff Hunter and now the good fortune for me to be here with you, we want to keep providing that consistent positive level of law enforcement both now and well into the future. So thank you very much for the opportunity. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, you're all a joy to work with. You know, I get to work with a lot of you, so I really appreciate all you've done for us and for our community. Thank you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And their guns are unloaded before they come into this complex. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't think so. Thank you. SHERIFF RAMBOSK: Thank you. CLERK OF COURT MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that will let us continue with other Constitutional Officers requesting to address the Board of County Commissioners. Ms. Kinzel from the Clerk's Office has indicated that she has some remarks. MS. KINZEL: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Crystal Kinzel, Finance Director for the Clerk of Court. Just to keep the board apprised, the Clerk has been working with the County Attorney's Office and the County Manager's Office on the Interlocal Agreement that was proposed by the Productivity Committee. We've not finalized that agreement yet, but we're really confident that we will be able to do that in the near future. We weren't specifically scheduled to present at this workshop, but the Clerk asked me to please come over and let you know that we're working on the agreement. We have submitted a line item budget detail to the Budget Office and the County Manager's Office, and we are requesting an appropriation from the board for the Clerk's operations as Clerk to the Board of $6.1 million. It's 6,177,300. That's Page 28 June 30, 2009 to cover the finance operations, minutes and records, recording, and the other activities that the board -- that the Clerk performs on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners. Additionally, to let you know, we'd like to give you some idea of what the Clerk has done to reduce his costs. The 6.1 is a 10.8 percent reduction from last year's budget, and last year was an over-1 0 percent reduction from the year before that. So over the last two years we've made significant reductions in the Clerk's staff and operations. We implemented a hiring freeze in 2008 and reduced funded positions by over 33. In 2010 (sic) we've further reduced by over 14 positions, including some part time, for a total reduction of over 47 positions in two years. Our authorized strength was 295. We're down to 247 and a half FTEs requested. Our COLA, merit, and base salary adjustments have been frozen since October of 2007 . We did provide an added to -- not-added-to-base salary increase in April of '08 of 3 percent, but that 3 percent was removed from salaries this year due to the budget constraints that we've faced. Beginning April 1, each employee in the Clerk's Office has been furloughed a day a month to further reduce our budget costs. Travel and training and operating were all reduced. One satellite office was closed. Over-time was greatly reduced or eliminated. We do have some overtime on the court side in civil, but that's not a part of this budget. We would request that the board provide our level of funding to keep the finance operations moving forward. We've worked very well over the past year on technology projects with county staff. We're working to streamline, process things more efficiently and effectively, and I think you'll see that in the numbers of staff that we've reduced to date. But with that, we weren't really scheduled to present a detail to you. I don't know if you're prepared to ask questions, but we are Page 29 June 30, 2009 willing to move forward on the agreement and come back and go over detail at such a time that you would prefer. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning. MS. KINZEL: Good morning. COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's good to see your face. MS. KINZEL: Thanks. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm concerned -- I'm a little perplexed here. I was under the impression that the Clerk has decided that he's a fee officer and not a budget officer. Can you tell me where the -- what's changed here? MS. KINZEL : Nothing, Commissioner . We are still a fee officer, and the Clerk has operated under that. But being a fee officer does not preclude the funding of the Clerk's functions as Clerk to the Board. And this process is consistent with what we have done each and every year -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MS. KINZEL: -- in requests for funding. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I believe that we do have obligations by Florida State Statute, and I believe that the County Manager and the staff has looked at this and has basically said that -- being that the Clerk of the Courts is a fee officer -- and I understand that we're working on an Interlocal Agreement, but I think that what we're obligated to pay here is about $462,000 to the Clerk to take care of his operating expenses, and I don't see anything in the budget here in regards to $6.1 million. MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Halas, that 400,000, that only covers paid -- what the County Manager has included in the budget on behalf of the Clerk only includes those functions for, paid by the board on behalf, which includes your facility costs and some other miscellaneous phone costs for court-related functions. There's nothing included in the budget that you have before you to fund the entire Page 30 June 30, 2009 finance operation of the county. Currently, we are the accountant to the board and we prepare your financial statements. There is nothing included in that number to fund those services. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I believe last year the budget was about $503,000. MS. KINZEL: But, Commissioner, at that time we had income available to the Clerk to cover the other costs. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, that was the moneys that were really owed to the taxpayer here in Collier County and not to the Clerk. I mean, I don't want to get in another argument here. All I'm saying is that I'm very concerned that all of a sudden we have a budget adjustment here of $6.1 million, and I don't see the justification, and I can't approve something of this nature. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll chime in and say, I was hoping when you said that, that we were going to be a family again where everybody submitted their budgets, and Dwight was going to be a budget officer again. That was so much nicer when we all worked together. But anyway. MS. KINZEL: Well, Commissioner Fiala, let me clarify, because we have -- we have been a fee officer, but we have participated in this budget process even under that scenario. We've always submitted the budget book in a detailed manner. We've presented to you by line item the costs for the Clerk's function to the board. We got into a little thing in the last couple of years on how that money was provided, whether it would be provided by payment of invoices, whether it would be provided by other income that the Clerk had, but consistently we provided the budget book to show you what it costs to perform the functions to the board. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And then we usually voted on your Page 3 1 June 30, 2009 budget -- MS. KINZEL: Right. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- and just provided the budget. MS. KINZEL: And that is similar to what we're asking you to do this year. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning -- Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, thank you. County Manager, I -- I guess it was an assumption on my part; the interest is down significantly, so -- the interest moneys, interest? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're budgeting $52,000. I'm assuming that you're -- I guess I was assuming that you were going to pay the Clerk with those interest moneys? MR. MUDD: Commissioner, there's $52,000. I'm trying to figure out where that number came from. But that is not the case. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The summary. MR. MUDD: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Where is the interest from investments? MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner? MS. KINZEL: I believe it's 6 million. MR. ISACKSON: If you look at the general fund roll-up under your overview in the general fund, you will see interest income for FY10 in the amount of $6 million. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Which is what you're asking? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And I'm -- and I don't see it, but I'm going to assume that it is there. So are you saying that the Clerk's functions, you haven't budgeted for the Clerk's functions are -- you haven't budgeted for the Clerk's function? MR. MUDD: What I am -- I'm not going to say a budget, okay, because they're -- the Clerk has -- has definitely stated that he is a fee Page 32 June 30, 2009 officer, and fee officers might internally have a budget, but it's not a budget that you basically approve. What the board -- what the Productivity Committee asked -- and Crystal, this isn't a surprise because I have submitted this particular letter. We did meet with the Clerk on the 11th along with Mr. Grady, who's his -- who was representing the Clerk at this particular Interlocal Agreement meeting; Mr. Klatzkow and Mr. Ochs accompanied me as we went to the particular issue and we talked about it. At that particular point in time, Mr. Brock provided a document, and it was -- it was pretty topical as far as its segments, but it added up to $6.1 million. It's the first time that Mr. Ochs or lor the County Attorney had seen the particular document. It confused me a little bit because on 1 May, 2009, the Clerk provided a document to this board and to the chairman in particular and basically said that they requested funding for 1.1 mill- -- or $5.1 million. Forty-some-odd days later we're getting a request that's a million-dollar increase over what we received on 1 May. And things change. What I also asked my folks to do is go back and determine how the expenditures ended in the '08 time period as far as those core functions that I could determine and how that funding was spent, and what our records basically looked at was about $4 million was the funding that would be needed and that was spent for those particular items. So at the end of '08, so let's say, 1 September, or 1 October of this last year, we're at 4 million, on 1 May of'09 we're at 5.1, and June we're at 6.1, and everybody's trying to chop. So what I'm going to tell you is, we're not very close with an Interlocal Agreement. I'm kind of still trying to look at what things are core functions that provide a service to the Board of County Commissioners, what things are overhead in the particular Clerk's Office. And it wasn't until -- that I got a picture diagram of his staff that I find out that he Page 33 June 30, 2009 had counsel on his own staff for all this time, and I always was looking at outside counsel, but he has an attorney that's on his staff, and I never met that gentleman before. I'm not too sure what kind of service that gentleman provides to the Board of County Commissioners, and I'm still kind of stuck. What I -- what -- one of the things that the Productivity Committee looked at when they were reviewing the particular vouchers that the Clerk had provided on a monthly basis that started in October -- and I -- and during the meeting with the Clerk, he basically said that those vouchers basically did not represent, in a very logical manner, what the cost of running of his office is in providing that serv1ce. He said that same thing to the Productivity Committee when he met with them, and I believe Productivity meetings are taped, so that's probably -- that comment is probably on tape in the county archives. What I will tell you is I'm still stuck. I'm still trying to figure out how much it costs -- there is a benefit that Crystal and her shop does for this county. There is. They do payroll, they sign checks, you know, checks and payroll checks, they do your -- MS. KINZEL: CAFR. MR. MUDD: -- do your CAFR. MS. KINZEL: Debt service. MR. MUDD: They also do receivables and all of those other things that actually go out, and there -- and there is a benefit to the Board of County Commissioners for that. I just don't know how much it's worth, and that's my biggest dilemma. And I've wrestled with it a little bit to try to figure it out, and the only way I can figure it out is to go out with a request for proposal and figure out how much that service is worth on the outside. Not to say that the Clerk has to privatize, but to basically say, how much is it worth on the outside, and then sit down with the Clerk's staff and figure out what's a reasonable amount of money that the board sets aside in order to have Page 34 June 30, 2009 the Clerk perform that function. With that, you base an Interlocal Agreement that comes back to the Board of County Commissioners in which you decide how you're going to budget. I do not know what your interest money is going to come back and look like at the end of October. I will know at the end of October what that looks like. I will tell you in the budget in '09, that Mark and I -- well, John Y onkosky and I set aside $20 million for interest, okay. You have not received $20 million yet for interest this year. And I'm looking that we're going to be short anywhere from 3 to $4 million in that $20 million piece, and that's going to affect your reserves as you go to the next year. It is important that we get an Interlocal Agreement done, okay. I cannot have, nor should you expect, that sometime in the near future that all of a sudden the Clerk says, I can't pay anybody anymore, and then all of the paychecks in Collier County had ended, or I can't pay any more bills in order to get that resolved. I believe that is not good government. I believe the taxpayers expect better than that. But I will tell you if we don't come up with an Interlocal Agreement and he has no access to your interest money to spend, that sometime in December or January or February of next year, I believe the Clerk is going to be in that situation. I believe we need to come -- work very diligently to figure out what that interest money is going to be to see if it will offset what that Interlocal Agreement is going to be so that it doesn't impact your tax revenue collections, i.e., what you're setting the millage rate on. And we need to work at that, and we need to work at it hand in hand and come back to the board and have a basis and have -- and I can't say it strong enough -- have a basis for what that function is worth, because so far we do not have a basis. I know that Crystal knows what the costs are in her staff, but it -- sometimes it takes a new way of thinking and taking a look at what Page 35 June 30, 2009 you were doing before in the same old way versus which way you have to do it now based on the revenues that we have in the particular county . But that's kind of where we are. I'm still waiting. I got the details, or Leo got the details yesterday from the Clerk's Office. We have no way to try to analyze those from yesterday morning till this afternoon to give you a comprehensive and coherent, cogent Interlocal Agreement. We're going to have to work at that over the summer. I will-- I will ask the board's direction to keep going out and taking a look at RFPs. I'm not looking to privatize his organization. I'm looking at ways to figure out what the basis of what the Interlocal Agreement should be and what the board should provide to the Clerk to pay for the functions that he provides the Board of County Commissioners. MS. KINZEL: And Commissioners, if I might. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, wait a minute. MS. KINZEL: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm still looking for an answer. So you're anticipating you may get it from interest or you will include it in the budget for those court services? MR. MUDD: When we get the Interlocal Agreement, sir, I'm believing that we'll include it in the budget, and I'm -- and hope is not a method, but I believe we will -- we will have either dollars from interest that will cover it and/or we'll have to come to the board and ask for reserves in order to cover the difference. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Would you provide me the information that the Clerk gave you about those costs -- MR. MUDD: Oh, certainly, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- to this board? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. I'm done. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle? Page 36 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just want to make sure I understand this. I have not seen those detail items, but I need to understand the implications of this. And I'll preface by saying, I for one have absolutely no reluctance to pay the Clerk the cost of the services that he's performing for us. Absolutely no reluctance whatsoever. MS. KINZEL: Thank you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I'd like -- but we need to get this information very quickly because we have to set a millage rate. And I would hate to set a millage rate based upon inaccurate information because I think we do a disservice to the taxpayers of Collier County when we do that. But let me make sure I understand what we've been told, County Manager. The Clerk presented some vouchers to us that do not reflect the cost of -- to him of providing those services. Is that a fair statement? Is that a quick summary? MR. MUDD: That's a fair statement. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, if -- and we can't pay things on that basis. If a contractor submitted to us vouchers that didn't reflect the actual costs of their work, you, Crystal, and the Clerk, would not permit us to pay that, would you? MS. KINZEL: No, but can I explain the difference? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no. MS. KINZEL: If you want to know what the difference is between the vouchers and -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: I will -- I will in a minute, okay. So all I'm interested in doing is getting that part solved, okay? MS. KINZEL: Good. COMMISSIONER COYLE: If somebody will tell us what it costs to do that -- if it is not exorbitant, if you're not making profit off of us for the services you provide and if we can't get it somewhere else cheaper, then I have no problem with paying the Clerk to do that. It's Page 37 June 30, 2009 just -- that's the way it ought to be, all right? MS. KINZEL: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: As long as we get a reasonable price and it's not padded, I'm happy to proceed. So we need to do that quickly. We just can't -- and maybe the current documents will do it. Whenever the County Manager has a chance to review them, maybe it will be resolved. But my experience tells me things are not all that easy. So hopefully we can get this done quickly because we've got to set a millage rate. MS. KINZEL: Could I help you with a couple things that might work through it very quickly? The difference between the vouchers, and not being the costs, the vouchers were established on a fee schedule that was determined in the statutory fees for creating a document. Obviously what we do in finance goes far beyond that. I, for example, personally, or Derek, who does the investments, we don't produce a piece of paper or process an invoice. Ours is mostly analytical work, a schedule, putting the CAFR together one time a year, but that is an accumulated process. Those are costs that aren't identified in a fee schedule that is based on preparing a document. The budget process that we go through line item by line item is your cost. The fee mayor may not cover your costs, just as in traffic or civil fines, they may not cover the costs of those operations. The idea is that cumulatively, hopefully, it can sustain the operation. Quite frankly, we're having the same difficulties on the court side this year with what was done by the legislature. But the invoices or vouchers that were presented to you were not a reflection of the cost to do the Clerk's operations. Those costs are what you see in the budget document, are salaries, personnel services, and operating. And I've gone over some of the things we've done to reduce the costs, you know, with reduction in force, freeze in hiring Page 38 June 30, 2009 for several years, those issues. But that's the difference between charging the voucher fee and a budgeted, what's the actual cost. A couple of other things that the County Manager said that, let me clarify. In prior years -- the reason you saw a variance in the Clerk's budget was because the Clerk's budget was supplemented by additional income that he received. Effective July 1 of this year, the income of interest is no longer available to the Clerk to supplement from his income those costs of the board. Consequently, we have to prepare for the board what exactly does it cost. The costs of the Clerk, the budget in 2008 for all of the Clerk's activities was over $10 million; 10.3 million was our budget. Now, that budget was funded by transfers from the board and revenues that the Clerk received, including his recording revenues. Those all offset the costs. Recording revenues are down for this year. In 2009, our budget was 9.3 million, a reduction of over a million dollars, and in 2010 now, we're asking for a budget of 8.3 total, but we are offsetting that with the Clerk's revenues of a little over 2.1 in recording and other miscellaneous fees we earn. We never make a profit. At year end, we're a turn-back officer, and anything the Clerk has not spent for operations he returns to you, and we've always come under those budget figures. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Yesterday we talked about parks and recs charging a fee for launching boats, and everybody, commissioners, County Manager's Office, County Attorney said, any fee you're going to charge to the public must be justified, okay, and that means our staff is going back and they're going to look at the cost of providing the launching of the boats, and they're going to come back to us with a justification for the fee. If we do it with our own staff, I don't know why we shouldn't do it with the Clerk. So-- MS. KINZEL: But I guess you're missing the point of that fee. The fee on the vouchers was pre-established by the statutory rate of Page 39 June 30, 2009 preparing a document, so there is a basis for that fee. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, but you just said-- MS. KINZEL: This is the cost of the budget. COMMISSIONER COYLE: You just said that the financial functions are not really transaction driven. There are a lot of other things that go into it that reflect the cost of the staff and all the other things you do, and I know that, I agree with you. But no matter how you cut it, whether it's our people calculating an impact fee or whether it's Joe Schmitt calculating a service fee to the developers for doing permits, it has to be justified some way and -- because we want to be able to make the best possible decision we can make. MS. KINZEL: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so it should not be an imposition for us to ask the Clerk, how much does it cost us for you to manage our payroll and issue the checks to our employees. MS. KINZEL: And it is not, absolutely. That is what is in the budget detail book that you have now by line item, and that's the cost. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well-- COMMISSIONER HALAS: What budget detail book? MS. KINZEL: It went to the county staff. And, again, because we weren't scheduled for this workshop, we do need some time to go over that, and any questions we'd be glad to answer. But we have consistently provided a detailed budget book to the board and to the County Manager's Office each year, regardless of the fee-versus-budget argument, regardless of any of those other issues that have arisen over the last couple of years. We've done that again this year. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, I received a document on May the 1 st, 2009, which is not a detailed line item budget, but it says, fees requested, $5,156,000. Now, as the County Manager's pointed out, it's gone up a million dollars since May the 1 st. And so look, if you believe you are sending Page 40 June 30, 2009 the necessary information to permit a line-by-line analysis of the costs of your services to the Board of County Commissioners, why isn't a copy of that even at least given to the Board of County -- or the Chair so that we would know that? You sent a -- you sent us a letter that said, we want $5.156 million. MS. KINZEL: And Commissioner, remember, that was prior to the interest income issue coming before the legislature and taking away the interest income. If you read further in that letter, it very clearly spells out the cost of our budget, and it was going to be offset by additional income that the Clerk had. Effective July 1, the Clerk does not have that offsetting income. Consequently, the full costs need to be borne by a transfer from the board for those functions. And-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, the full cost. We need some line item detail which tells us what the full cost is. MS. KINZEL: It's there. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I think the only way we're going to get it is through an interagency agreement, okay. So we need to find out what that is. If it is in the County Manager's hands as of yesterday and he hasn't had a chance to look at it, that's fine, we'll look at it. MS. KINZEL: Okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: We have to emphasize the importance of getting this done quickly. MS. KINZEL: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER COYLE: The Clerk didn't find out yesterday that he wasn't going to get interest money. He found out many weeks ago. MS. KINZEL: Not very much, but a couple. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MS. KINZEL: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I am a little -- a little concerned Page 41 June 30, 2009 that we're here at this point and we've just received some recent data that we haven't had to analyze. MS. KINZEL: And I do apologize for the lateness of the detail of the budget book; however, I do know the Clerk has met with the County Manager and County Attorney, and he did provide an operating -- personnel services operating and capital breakdown of the request, including what revenues we anticipated supplementing. So, you know, we'll be glad to sit down with them and go over the detail and then answer any questions you might have. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm going to ask one final question and then I'm finished with this. Did either of you feel that the information provided by the Clerk at that meeting was sufficient for us to approve a budget allocation? MR. MUDD: No, sir, and that's the reason I wrote the letter. And I do have the information that was provided at that particular meeting, and I -- and I said before, it was topical. I mean, it's pretty topical. I mean, it has a topic. It says, save personnel service operating, switch to the next page, and you're basically dealing with a series of numbers that have no explanation as they sit through the process. So what I asked the Clerk after that meeting as I wrote the letter, and said, hey, we need to have some detail to back up this particular document because I cannot go to the Board of County Commissioners and say, I got all the information I need. We did the appropriate pro forma and the detailed analysis that we needed to do in order to get that done. And I guess my letter sparked the delivery of that information to the staff yesterday. There's going to be a point in time that I'm probably still going to be at a loggerhead with what was presented, okay, and I'm still going to be scratching my head. And I can't scratch too much because then the roots will come out. But what I will tell you is, we're going to have to go out and find out in some situations how much things cost. Page 42 June 30, 2009 I'm assuming that we'll have the cooperation of the Clerk's Office in order to get that done. The more complete that information is as we go out and find out in an RFP, the better we'll figure out what the cost is in order to get that resolved. But I am going to say, because you mentioned it, Commissioner Coyle, that to set -- to set the budget -- this budget does not have $6.1 million for the Clerk. This budget does not have $4 million in it for the Clerk. This budget does not have $5.1 million for the Clerk. And what I'm going to say to you is, I still don't know what the interest is going to be as it all falls out, because part of this year, okay, the Clerk has been able to use the interest money as fees for his office and has, I'm assuming, probably spent some of those. So I have no idea, plus we're in the middle of a Judge Thompson ruling that says two-thirds/one-third and, you know, we're still trying to figure out how that all works out. So the accounting at the end will have to be something that the Clerk is going to have to be very transparent with us as we try to set the millage and lay that out. Now, hopefully by the Tuesday of July, the 28th, I believe, Mr. Ochs, the -- we will have something for the board that says, okay, this is not going to affect the millage rate as far as an increase is concerned in order to get the tax dollars, but it's going to be compensated with what interest that we presume that we're going to receive from the Clerk based on what was from the '09 budget, so it basically comes out for -- as a one-to-one tradeoff so that it won't increase the millage rate that the taxpayers will have to pay in 'lOin order to offset that particular item. MS. KINZEL: And just for the record, I know that the County Manager went through this very quickly, but what we did provide was a breakdown for finance and accounting, general administration, the Clerk's accounting, board minutes and records, internal audit function, MIS recording. We went department by department in those elements that are Page 43 June 30, 2009 allocated or directly servicing the board. We provided personnel services, operating, and capital, which is usually the level of detail the board looks at. The budget book that we provided is similar to the one that we've given each and every year, and it goes in much, much greater detail. So knowing that this is a million-dollar reduction even from last year's budget, the level of detail, including work load measures and everything are included in our budget book. So I think that will help the board in resolving, perhaps, what we do for you and on behalf of you so that the appropriation will be easier to determine. The interest amount, we have provided that information, we have been providing the two-thirds payment up through June, and for the remainder of the year it will probably be between 13, 14 million in total interest by year end. That's where we are. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's it. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, thank you. Well, I'm looking at this from a distance and how everything's going and the discussion's going. From what Mr. Mudd said, this thing's going to reach some sort of climax around November; is that what you said? MS. KINZEL: It can't. MR. MUDD: No, we can't. It's got to -- we've got to have some resolution for you by your July board meeting so that you can set the maximum millage rate. And if I can't -- and if I can't come to some kind of resolution with the Clerk in order to get that done, then we're going to have to talk about this at a greater length, and it might be November that we don't get any resolution on it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. And what I've seen happening -- Page 44 June 30, 2009 MR. MUDD: We're hoping it for July. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I want you -- both of you to tell me why it's not going to happen -- is that the way everything's been going in the past, and they can almost guarantee it's going to proceed on the same path it has in the future. We're going to come to a calamity. We're going to reach a decisive moment where we're going to have a total meltdown; the Clerk won't issue any more checks; we're going to have everything sewed up; he's going to make a stand at one point in time and just say, that's it, I'm not going to issue any more checks until I get my money. We're going to have to go to court, get a judgment from the judge to be able to release the money. I mean, all this is inevitable the way it's going. Tell me why this won't happen. MS. KINZEL: I don't believe it needs to happen, Commissioner. We've reduced costs according to the guidelines if you look at the staffing we've cut, and I believe if you look at the detail, we've met every policy that the board has set forward on requesting cuts. We have frozen positions. We haven't given salary increases in two years in the Clerk's Agency. We are following the Clerk's health and benefit plan, so we're on the same plan as the board. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're here for the budget approval for us that's not a budget because you're a fee officer. MS. KINZEL: But regardless of whether he was a fee or a budget officer, this process worked from 2002 up until the year the transfer was omitted from the budget, so it is a similar process. It's not new to anyone. The details of our operation shouldn't be new to anyone. They've been outlined year after year. So I'm very confident we should be able to get through this and come to an agreement. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Mudd, that possible train wreck, can you tell me why it won't happen? MR. KLATZKOW: I can tell you why it won't happen. It's not going to happen because when you get there, there's going to be court Page 45 June 30, 2009 that gets involved, all right. Because as Mr. Mudd said, the public interest demands a resolution on this one way or the other, and you will get it. The only issue I have is whether it's going to be an involuntary resolution, which will be a court order, or a voluntary resolution, which will be the Clerk's Office and Mr. Mudd's Office comes to a resolution. But there's going to be, sooner or later, a resolution on this one. MR. MUDD: And I would add to Mr. Klatzkow's comments, not from the legal side of the house, okay, but what I will add to it is, there's been some incentive in this particular Interlocal Agreement at this particular juncture because right now -- I remember one time when I -- in Desert Storm, I'd go in and ask for what was for dinner, and the cook was named Rico. And he says, it doesn't look good but it's better than nothing. And so -- and I heard that lots of times, and that meant that you were going to eat salad because you weren't going to touch what was cooked. What you basically have right now is, the Clerk has no interest money to use to basically fund his organization so he's at zero, okay. He has no place to go but up. The issue that I've heard time and time again -- and it's one that I reported to the board on -- had to do with outside attorney costs. And I believe that where we are right now and where we've been as far as fee versus budget had everything to do with a transfer of dollars that went to attorney costs without the board's approval. And I will say to you at this juncture, we're going to come up with an Interlocal Agreement and figure out what the cost of the function of his office is, of which outside attorney fees are not one of those things that I'm going to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners. And so, I believe the Clerk has all the incentives to try to come up with a -- with a logical, detailed Interlocal Agreement that basically Page 46 June 30, 2009 covers the costs of providing services to the Board of County Commissioners. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Now, one more thing, and then I'll be done. Commissioner Fiala put it so eloquently about why we can't just work together like we have in the distant past. I mean, this has got to be so contentious it's unreal, and the Clerk does have a fairly good support group out there. And the logic that the Clerk uses when he goes there is commendable, the way he handles himself. I mean, he has the education and the background that's -- that lends himself to that. But let's get down to the facts of life. You know what would change this tremendously to be able to get everybody on the same page -- and I know it's very painful to say this again, but if the Clerk would accept that invitation to take that seat next to Commissioner Coyle and join us in the meetings and we get these discussions going and take an active part in this, I mean, we would love to work with him one on one as a person to person rather than through the courts, through the lawyers and everything else that's out there. And I can tell you right now the only thing we're heading for right now, the way this is put together, is more legal fees for the citizens of Collier County. I don't want that. I'd rather have the Clerk here and talking to him personally. Not that you're not a great representative -- MS. KINZEL: Thank you, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- but the Clerk should be here today. I'll tell you right now, and I'm telling the Clerk, he has to stop sending his representatives and show up here in person. And I invite him to come back here today before the end of this meeting and possibly start that dialogue. Let's see if he accepts that invitation. MS. KINZEL: I'll be glad to communicate that to him. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Before I call on Commissioner Halas, I Page 47 June 30, 2009 just have a question. What is the time line or the drop-dead date for this interagency agreement to be established so we can set the millage rate so we can move forward with our budget? MR. MUDD: Ma'am, he needs -- we need to have the Interlocal Agreement pretty well set in place so we can either provide it for you at that meeting in July or give you a recommendation of where we are, where it sits if the interest moneys are going to be able to cover it, the cost for next year. And if it is, then you don't have to increase the millage rate and you'll be okay. But we're going to have to give you a status report of where we are in this particular regard. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So in other words, we need this report and this agreement before the July 28th meeting, what, a week in advance? MR. MUDD: That's not exactly what I said, but, ma'am, that's close. That's close. The closer we get to the 28 July meeting, okay, where we're close to having an Interlocal Agreement set and we know if the interest dollars that are remaining on the table are going to be able to cover it, that will give you assurances of where you sit and the decision that you make as far as what your millage rates are going to be at that meeting. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, okay. MS. KINZEL: And we would aim towards that goal also, because obviously we do need to know for the security of our employees where we are on funding. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. Issues like this make everybody very uncomfortable. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm going to put it bluntly. You knew this was coming down the pike. There's no reason that you couldn't have spent the time the last two days putting together a budget to be submitted to this board so that we could have at least gotten this information yesterday so we could have studied it last Page 48 June 30, 2009 night, instead of coming here today and telling us that we have a $6.1 million budget -- increase from our budget that's got to be directed. Now, is it my understanding that the 6.1 million plus whatever costs may be incurred by this Interlocal Agreement is going to be added to it? MS. KINZEL: No, Commissioner. The 6. -- it's six million, one seventy-seven, five is our -- or three, is our total transfer request, and that is -- that will be outlined in the Interlocal Agreement. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've heard enough, okay? I think the County Manager needs to go out and find out exactly what it costs us to get this thing done on the outside. I'm tired of going through this process, and I don't think that the taxpayers are getting value received in this case. Last year your budget was $10 million. I believe about 3 million out of that dollars was in court-related costs. MS. KINZEL: No, Commissioner, that's not correct, but-- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I'm just telling you that-- because it couldn't -- you know, I don't know, but we asked for that documentation. We never got that documentation, and what we did get was so fragmented we couldn't get an idea of exactly what the costs were. And I think it's time that everybody is on a local -- level playing field so we have an understanding of exactly where the costs are. This budget that you submitted and brought before us, that doesn't tell us anything, okay? MS. KINZEL: Which budget are you referring to? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm talking about what was presented right on that overhead in regards to you saying this is our budget or the letter that was received saying, here's what we want for the money, and it wasn't any explanation in regards to what that money was going to be spent (sic) and how it was going to be spent, how many full-time employees you got or anything else or what -- any of this stuff, and I'm tired of playing this game. Page 49 June 30, 2009 MS. KINZEL: Well, Commissioner, I think once you see the detailed book, it will be resolved. COMMISSIONER HALAS: The book should have been here two days ago. MS. KINZEL: Commissioner, I agree. COMMISSIONER HALAS: The book should have been here two days ago. MS. KINZEL: Things have changed over the summer due to litigation, the letter was submitted May 1. The Clerk's budget isn't due to the Clerk until September 1. We have been working with the court side of the house and also the board side. So we appreciate it. I came over today to talk to you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Crystal. We're going to take a break. COMMISSIONER HENNING: For how long? CHAIRMAN FIALA: For an hour and a half. No, we're going to take a break for ten minutes. MR. MUDD: I was going to say, Leo, what have you done to them? We're going to take break for ten minutes, ma'am? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, my God. MR. BROCK: I'm here. I heard you, Commissioner. (A brief recess was had.) MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats. Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a hot mike. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Look who's here. Instead of what we were going to do next, which was leave for vacation, we have a new speaker. MR. BROCK: We can do that. I won't object if you take me with you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Dwight, welcome. MR. BROCK: Thank you. Page 50 June 30, 2009 Commissioner Coletta, I was watching TV and in the middle of a meeting with a citizen, and I decided I would take your invitation and I would go walk out on the person that was sitting in my office and tell them that I would be back just as soon as I got through talking to you, so here I am. I've listened to some of the things that were said here, and there are a couple of points that I would like to make. We had a meeting with Mr. Mudd, with Mr. Klatzkow, Mr. Ochs, and Mr. Grady, and presented information to them. Sometime shortly thereafter, Mr. Mudd sent me a letter. I asked my staff to pull together the information that I understood Mr. Mudd wanted and had requested in his letter. And that was on or about June the 16th. And I was of the impression that Mr. Grady was going to send that information to Mr. Mudd. I discovered yesterday morning that that had not occurred, and I sent an email to Mr. Ochs yesterday morning saying, Leo, I have discovered that what I thought had been sent to you on the 16th had not, and I'm sending it to you now. What do you want me to do? I'm sorry. Mr. Grady, I thought, was going to send it. And you know, we all make mistakes. Mr. Grady didn't realize that he was supposed to do that. I was of the impression that he was going to do that. Based upon the letter to -- from Mr. Mudd, he indicated that time was of the essence and we were trying to get it. And I will have to take responsibility for it being delayed, but I will tell you that it was purely human error in thinking that something had been done when it hadn't. Okay. The information that we provided to Mr. Ochs and Mr. Mudd yesterday, that is, in fact, an analysis of the costs of running our office as it relates to the functions associated with the county. It includes a portion of the operation of my office which is related to official records, that's the recording of real property transactions, which is funded through fees that are charged that are statutory. Page 51 June 30, 2009 The rest of that relates solely to the cost of operating my office. So if you look at that, you should be able to determine exactly by line item what the cost of operating the Clerk's Office is. The Clerk's Office is an open book. If you have any questions though, please, let me know, and we will be more than happy to try to explain and answer any questions you have with regard to that. I just spoke to Leo, and you asked a question, Commissioner Coletta, how are we going to get through this? Obviously, we're going to get through this. One way or another we're going to get through this. And I don't think anybody in this room wants to go any further down this path than we have already gone. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's see if we can resolve right now not to involved another attorney in this. Let's work it out between this Board of Collier County Commissioners and you personally. MR. BROCK: I'm certainly agreeable to that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No more attorneys. Great. And that will end all that nonsense. MR. BROCK: I certainly hope that that is what's going to happen, and I will certainly facilitate that process. You have asked me on several different occasions, you know, why don't I come over here and sit during the board meetings? Obviously I have things that I have to do other than deal with the Board of County Commissioners, because my job involves more than that. But I really and truthfully don't have a problem coming over here and sitting with you and helping you if you want me to do that as much as I possibly can. I have avoided that because I didn't want to get in a childish argument in a board meeting with the Board of County Commissioners during this litigation. I didn't think that that functioned to anyone's benefit. But I will be more than happy to try to facilitate communicating Page 52 June 30, 2009 with you. But remember, Commissioners, that line of communication goes both ways. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we can only do it when we're face to face. MR. BROCK: That's fine. And, you know, I will be more than happy to communicate with any of you anytime you want to talk to me, and I will do what I can to try to attend your board meetings for the things -- you know, it doesn't do me any good to come over here for land use issues that, you know, has absolutely no impact upon the Clerk's Office, but we'll figure out a way to try to accomplish it. And if you've got something specifically that you want me here for, that you think it's imperative for me to be here, let me know and I will certainly be here for those. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'm just going to say one thing when I see the lights are on, couple board members want to speak. In light of this new development, I hope that our comments are tempered in such a way that will bring about the resolution we're looking for. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Dwight, I'm thankful you're here. I've asked on a couple of occasions for documentation in the past in regards to expenses, and basically what I got from your office was a lot of receipts that didn't make any sense, and I think that also the present Chair has also asked for documentation, and we haven't been able to get the information that's needed to find out exactly what the total expenses are that are coming out of your office. You made a statement that you were hoping that Mr. Grady delivered this information. Is Mr. Grady a full-time employ of yours, or is he an attorney? MR. BROCK: He's an attorney. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I would have thought that maybe someone in your office, such as Crystal Kinzel, then would Page 53 June 30, 2009 have also dropped off the information that was needed to sit down and analyze what the upcoming budget here is in regards to just a letter that was dated to me at some point in time stating that I'm requesting $5.1 million, okay. And now this morning, as we opened up the dialogue, we ended up with $6.1 million with really no explanation. MR. BROCK: I mean, I can give you the explanation for that, Commissioner. The -- back in May when that was submitted, the $5 million was our anticipated billings pursuant to the statutory scheme provided in Chapter 28 of the Florida Statute. Has no relationship to the cost of operating the office. It's purely a statutory scheme. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Scheme. MR. BROCK: Even though at that point in time we fully understood that the cost of operating our office was $6.1 million or somewhere thereabouts. The additional cost of operating the office was funded through interest revenue. When the Florida legislature amended the statute, then that income stream disappeared, and that's where, the additional increase. Now, there is a slight adjustment in those two amounts in total. COMMISSIONER HALAS: What-- MR. BROCK: And one of the reasons for that adjustment is -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Excuse me. MR. BROCK: -- because of the cost of retirement that is set by the state. It went up. So it had to go up whenever we did our budget as a consequence of that. And there were some other minor adjustments that took place in there, but they were essentially the same amount. COMMISSIONER HALAS: You said two adjustments. What other adjustments? MR. BROCK: Well, I don't recall exactly what they were, but they were minor in terms of total dollar amount. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Well, obviously you realize that we're looking at everything and scrutinizing it in full detail, and Page 54 June 30, 2009 we're trying to figure out where all the dollars are going and what they need. So I'm hoping that when you bring the budget book that it's in full detail in regards to how many full-time employees you've got, what is -- and everything else that goes along with the budget, okay, just like the rest of the Constitutional Officers presented. MR. BROCK: Commissioner, you have a document that was submitted to Mr. Ochs that identifies each and every employee and the allocation mechanism by which they are applied to the board's side versus the court side. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is that the one that was received yesterday? MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am, it is. MR. BROCK: And in addition to that -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't have a copy of that. MR. BROCK: -- the in-kind expenditure structure -- anticipated expenditure structure of our office is set out in the budget detail by line item. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I'm looking forward to getting that book so I have an understanding of exactly what's going on so that we can hopefully come up with the necessary funding to fund your office. But I can tell you -- MR. BROCK: I appreciate that. COMMISSIONER HALAS: But I can tell you the $6.1 million is kind of a shocker, okay, because we were under the impression that, as we went through all the scenarios, that you were a fee officer, and now we realize that there's some obligations here that maybe we weren't privy to. And I'm hoping that we can work through this, and I hope that we can come up with a good Interlocal Agreement that will be beneficial to all the taxpayers so we don't have to go out on the outside and see if we need to privatize this, okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? Page 55 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Commissioner Henning's next. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we really need to move on and pick up the pace here a little bit. That's my opinion. But, you know, Commissioner Coletta, I think, said a lot, is, basically we need to turn over this chapter and start out on a positive note. I can tell you that from time to time I call Dwight Brock and say, you know, can you give me some information, and you always provided it to me, either through your -- with the help of your -- Crystal, or your recording has been very, very helpful. And I just think if others try that, open up that line of communications, you'll find that it's not that difficult. MR. BROCK: I mean, Commissioner, you know, I wish I had time to be able to answer any question on every issue that comes through the Clerk's Office, but I can assure you that I don't and the -- most of the information from a financial structure comes from the lady sitting right here behind me and the gentleman sitting next to her, and I have to rely upon them. It's sort of like the budget document that was given to you-all. They're the ones that actually put the information and the detail together. But as Commissioner Henning says, you know, my office is an open book, folks, anything you want to know. Commissioner Halas has indicated that he didn't get some information that he thought he wanted. I'm -- I have to apologize, and if that has occurred, I'm totally unaware of it, Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: That was in 2006. MR. BROCK: Okay. What was it in reference to? COMMISSIONER HALAS: It was in regards to the expenditures, because at that time we could see that the interest rates -- excuse me -- that the -- that the amount of interest that your officel Page 56 June 30, 2009 was spending, there was some concerns and there's concerns on my part to make sure that we were addressing the expenditures for the taxpayers. And when I asked for documentation, basically what I got was a whole box of receipts with no real explanation on it, and then I gave it to our budget manager to try to figure out what was going on. And it really wasn't a clear picture. MR. BROCK: Well, I mean, was this legal bills? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, it was. MR. BROCK: Okay. Well, I mean, obviously, Commissioner, I'm not going to give you legal bills in the throes of a lawsuit -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: It was bills of everything. MR. BROCK: -- that contains -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: It wasn't -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is going no place. This is not the direction I hoped this would go. COMMISSIONER HALAS: It was not legal bills. It was billing on all stuff, you know, in regards to where the money was going. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Just before you walked in, we were talking about an Interlocal Agreement, and I mentioned that we should have some kind of a date whereby we can finalize this Interlocal Agreement and maybe start working together again. And so Crystal was hoping that it could be accomplished a week before our next meeting, which is the 28th of July. Now that the boss is here, let me ask you, can that be done? MR. BROCK: Well, all of my resources and efforts will be spent in trying to accomplish that, I can assure you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great, great. That's what I needed to hear. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Dwight, once again, you turned the tide by showing up here today, and I'd like to keep this Page 57 June 30, 2009 effort going forward. I'd like to see what we can do to bring this thing to a resolution, like Commissioner Fiala said, at our next meeting with the Interlocal Agreement. I'll be here from now through the rest of this coming month, so I hope several times we'll get an opportunity to talk. The discussion we had earlier about putting everything behind us and doing away with all these expensive attorneys, I hope we both took that at heart and that that carries forward in this Interlocal Agreement and things get a lot simpler. And I assure you that we won't waste your time in the future bringing you here for needless subj ects, but your presence here would be most welcome. MR. BROCK: Commissioner, I can assure you that one of the most pleasant things that can happen is to bring all of this to a conclusion and move on. I have -- I've been an attorney all my life -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, you can't help that. Some people are born that way. MR. BROCK: -- all of my professional life, but I didn't realize how difficult it is dealing with attorneys as a client until I have dealt with the attorneys that we've had to deal with with all of this. And I can assure you, if I never had to deal with another one, I wouldn't be upset. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's why we have you elected to your office and we're elected to ours and we can stand across the aisle and work these things out. MR. BROCK: You got it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. MR. BROCK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you for coming. Okay. Let's move on now to who? MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I believe -- and I listened to your meeting in the afternoon. Some things you didn't get finished with in public services, i.e., property -- Page 58 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Don't we have property appraiser and tax collector yet? MR. MUDD: No, no, you won't get those, ma'am, until 1 August, okay, unless they come forward. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. MUDD: And so what you have is what you have, and their particular budgets are set by the state in the review. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. MUDD: Yesterday, I believe Dr. Colfer was up talking about public services, was the last person to speak. MR. OCHS: I think we finished. MR. MUDD: And there was some discussion, just to make sure that I was -- that you were listening. She still is the best deal in Collier County as far as moneys that she brings forward from the state and from other federal agencies to provide services to taxpayers, and you do match some of that contribution. I believe the sentinel chickens are free-range chickens at the natural food market, but I did hear that discussion yesterday, much to do about chickens. And she does run a pretty healthy thing. But you never did make a motion on her particular budget, so we'll leave it outstanding. But that pretty much covered everything in public services. So I believe you are about ready to start administrative services, followed by public utilities debt services, management offices, County Attorney, and the Board of County Commissioners. Ms. Vasey, you're standing there like you have something to say, but go after it. MS. VASEY : Yes. I just had one item of clarification. If I could draw your attention to the general fund revenues. It's under the general overview. It's about the fifth page in. It's the General Fund 001 revenues. It doesn't actually have a page number. Have you found it? It's -- I'm trying to get you to the board Page 59 June 30, 2009 interest line that you talked about a little bit earlier. Do you have that page? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Show us. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I do. This one right here. MS. VASEY: It's under general revenue, general fund, general revenue. Basically right under the middle hole punch is an item called board interest. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. There, it is. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MS. VASEY: Okay. If you go in under the FY10 budget, there's $6 million there. And I just wanted to bring to your attention that the Productivity Committee worked a little bit with that number wondering why it was so low. And it's sort of there as a placeholder. In checking -- in talking to Crystal Kinzel about it, that interest in FY 10 will actually be between 12 and $13 million based on the funding that's out there drawing interest and the fact that interest rates are reclining recently over what we could get earlier. So it's going to be 12 to $13 million. Now, there's nothing in your budget for the Clerk at this point. But I don't want you to think that there's no money available. You know, whatever it turns out to be, there is some flexibility in that interest line in how that will finally come in. So it's not like you've got your budget here, and then the Clerk's budget will come in and it's something totally in addition to this. So I just wanted to make sure you understood that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Janet. MS. VASEY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, you have your light on. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I guess we're going to wait till the end of the meeting. You mentioned the fact that Dr. Colfer's part of the budget wasn't approved. There's many things that Page 60 June 30, 2009 weren't approved. We seem to be hit and miss all the way through. And I hope before we leave here today we can resolve all those issues. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think it's that big of a deal. We just never -- we never got to that point. We moved things along so quickly. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And I tried to listen to what you basically gave direction for. You know, I heard one-day-a-month furloughs to the total -- that's what I heard. You didn't vote on it. But I heard a million dollars for the general fund, half a million in the explanation for 111, and then $4.6 million overall for the agency and different ways to go and move those particular resources around. At the same time I listened to increases for agricultural agents, EDC moneys, and some other things, making a code enforcement hole to the '09 level to the tune of another additional 385,000. So I was watching the cuts go and I was watching the things get added on. So, yes, we will go down every bit of those things that I can -- that I remember and that my staff has done, and we'll try to get that resolved by close of business and have something to you after public comment. From what I understand from the Editorial Page today, you're going to have quite a full house, so -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Okay. Oh, Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I just want to make -- get a clarification that if we try to obtain millage neutral, we're still looking at cutting out $30 million out of this budget; is that correct? That's what I see here with millage neutral. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, at this particular -- at this particular juncture, I believe that the Productivity Committee, in Ms. Vasey words yesterday, was that they were unable to find $30 million worth of cuts in order to get to millage neutral from the Productivity Committee. And everything I've seen so far hasn't got us there. We Page 61 June 30, 2009 are -- we are incrementally trying to get closer to it, but we're not even in that ballpark. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, okay. I just want to make sure that -- where we're at at the present time. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Halas. And good morning. Still morning. Should have been afternoon, right? ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES MS. PRICE: I was checking that before I made my greeting, yes. Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Len Price, administrator for Administrative Services. I did not prepare a long presentation, but I would just like to draw your attention to the fact that administrative services takes care of the business of all the departments, all the services that we provide. We do that transparently, and we've done that by design. Much like when you turn the switch on for electricity, power happens, that's the way we've always liked to operate; however, there is a lot of infrastructure and a lot of work that goes on behind the scenes of that. And the directors can share that with you just a bit. We have had some new demands for service despite the -- or even as part of the cuts to the budget. We've been working very closely with the housing department from both our purchasing side and from real estate to help them put together the Neighborhood Stabilization Program where they were given $7.5 million to buy homes. Real estate helps them buy them, purchasing helps get the contractors together to re -- rehabilitate the homes before we sell them. Our grants office has taken on a tremendous workload in trying to get our fair share and some of the federal stimulus money that's out there. We've had -- we've taken on some new buildings that are going Page 62 June 30, 2009 to need to be monitored, electricity, water, et cetera. We've got a lot of moves in the works. Most of those are being done so that we can save the county about a million dollars in rent fees. But there's a whole lot of domino effect to emptying out some places and moving them into other places. We've taken on the role of centralized disaster reimbursement. This has been very positive for the county. We've been able to standardize procedures, and we're still working to get our reimbursement from Tropical Storm Fay, but it's working much better than it has in the past where it was disbursed throughout the county. We're also taking on the role of records management. We're going to be working to scan documents and be able to reduce some costs in terms of storage so that we take care of everything electronically. There's been a lot of savings that we've created and we've helped create throughout the agency over the past few years. Storage, I mentioned, water and electricity. Our facilities department has reduced water and electric consumption by dramatic amounts through automation, through turning lights off at different times. You've seen the campaign, turn your power off, turn your lights off. Those sorts of things. Purchasing department has increased the use of purchasing cards which brings revenue into the county. Our fleet department has implemented the use of red dye diesel so we don't have to pay federal sales -- federal taxes on the diesel. We've cut our insurance rates dramatically. We've done a lot of outsourcing. These are things that you may not actually see overtly, but they have cut dramatically from the budgets throughout the county. It doesn't just impact our division, but throughout the county. Just a quick overview before I turn it over to you for questions. This year we go into the FY10 budget with 25 vacancies. That's about 13 percent. Those are frozen positions. And our total appropriation, Page 63 June 30, 2009 while it's showing 120 million under millage neutral and 124 million under tax neutral, I just want to share that about 75 percent of that is insurance funds, trust funds, Conservation Collier. So our actual operating budget is significantly less than that. About 70 million of that is actually operating budget for the departments, and of that about $14 million is pass-through, funds that come from other departments that we can provide services to other departments. And we do that through the IT department and through fleet. And with that, I will turn it over to you for any questions that you might have of us. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I am confused on some of your line items, Page 5. Miscellaneous revenues, we adopted 622,000, but the forecasted was $2 million? MS. PRICE: Commissioners, I'm having a problem following. I don't think you've got the same Page 5 that I've got. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's on your summary on the very front. MS. PRICE: I'm sorry. Call my attention to it again, and -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Miscellaneous-- MS. PRICE: Miscellaneous. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- revenues. MS. PRICE: Of$5 million? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it was -- MS. PRICE: Five million in 2008. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It says we adopted $622,000, but the forecasted was two million. MS. PRICE: I can't answer that question right now. I'm going to have to look at the detail. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I've got -- I've got more questions. You have a transfer of -- from the general fund, -01, of 600 Page 64 June 30, 2009 percent increase. Why? MS. PRICE: That's going to be offset through a number of different places. I mean, the bottom line comes to 2.7. So it's just things that come in from different places, different ways of putting the dollars together. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well-- so you're not getting-- correct me if I'm wrong. You're not getting services from Community Development or the water department because they're ramping down, so you're replacing that with ad valorem dollars? MS. PRICE: Commissioner, those are indirect charges that go into the general fund at the fund level. Those were never revenues into administrative services. So there's no change from any -- any differences from different organizations. That doesn't actually have an impact on our budget. COMMISSIONER HENNING: 111 budgeted $646,000? MS. DAVIDSON: I think I can answer that question for you. For the record, Laura Davidson with the Office of Management and Budget. What you're seeing -- if I could go back to your first question, you asked about miscellaneous revenues? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. MS. DAVIDSON: The reason that we're seeing a spike here in your forecast and then going back down again, that's actually recoveries into our insurance funds that came in this year, and I -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MS. DAVIDSON: Okay. So it's not something that we anticipated. We don't usually know when that type of thing will happen or, of course, when an event would occur that we would receive insurance reimbursement so -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: That makes sense. MS. DAVIDSON: Okay. That's the spike there. In terms of your transfers from the general fund and from 111, what Len's referring to Page 65 June 30, 2009 is in the past your information technology department has been a part of the general fund, and a lot of the services that the general fund provides, I'm sure you're aware, not only do we provide them to other departments in the general fund, we provide them countywide, and so there are other funds that, in turn, will reimburse the general fund for those costs. Now, typically, as she was saying, that comes in the form of an indirect cost reimbursement plan. And that money goes to the general fund, kind of the pot as a whole. It doesn't go back to the department. The transition that you're seeing this year is our information technology will be an internal service fund similar to your fleet department, and so that money that's coming to administrative services now is coming to the information technology fund rather than the general pot. So you're seeing an increase there. The money was always coming from other funds to the general fund. Now it's going directly to administrative services. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Where do we recognize that revenue? MS. DAVIDSON: That's sort of at the very, very highest level, in your other general administration for the county. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And my -- where do I find it in my budget book, your revenues? MS. DAVIDSON: That you might have seen in the past for these indirect services that we provide? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. MS. DAVIDSON: Okay. It would be on your -- ifyou'll-- if you're at the very front of your book -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right -- that's -- MS. DAVIDSON: -- you've got the general fund kind of overview page. That's where that shows that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And what would it be -- would it be -- named what? Page 66 June 30, 2009 MS. DAVIDSON: I believe it's called indirect cost reimbursement, and it's a particular line item on that general fund page for you. And so you'll see, it's gone down this year because some of that money's coming in here in the administrative services division for your IT services. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The -- the 111, that's 100 percent increase. MS. DAVIDSON: Right. 111 -- formerly that money would have been paid to the general fund for these IT services. Now it's being paid to your IT fund. So, of course, it wouldn't have been budgeted in the past because -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. MS. DAVIDSON: -- those IT services were in the general fund. Now it's going directly to -- it's actually Fund 505. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But the line below -01, it's 100 percent increase. There was nothing budgeted -- MS. DAVIDSON: Right. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- but it says NA. MS. DAVIDSON: Because it was showing up in that indirect cost reimbursement, and it didn't go to the administrative services division directly. It would never have shown up on your division overview here. And now we've sort of changed the route by which that money goes. So it's a new line item on this particular page; whereas before it would have shown up in the front of your book. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But it's a way to balance your budgeting. MS. DAVIDSON: It's really just a shift, because your IT expenses are occurring somewhere else, so we want the revenue that offsets it to go where that is. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have some other questions for independent departments. I don't know if you want to wait or -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Go ahead. Well, yeah. Why don't you go Page 67 June 30, 2009 ahead. There's only Commissioner Coletta waiting. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I can wait. I'm used to it. I'm District 5. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The risk management is going up, and I remember last year we had moneys coming -- huge amount of moneys coming back, anticipated insurances was -- wasn't as much. So what's up? MR. WALKER: Where are you specifically speaking of? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm looking at Page 4, and it says, risk management department, the adopted, it was 42 million, and you're going up to 44 million. MR. WALKER: Well, that is -- it's a recognition of those reinsurance moneys that came in and are part of really the carry- forward budget within the department. In other words, our expenditures have not increased. What has happened is that we have collected a good deal of money from our reinsurance carriers in '08 and also in '09 that goes back into those funds for claims that were paid, so -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It just says appropriations. MR. WALKER: We've not increased rates. MS. DAVIDSON: Some of that occurs -- if I can interrupt you, Jeff. Some of it occurs in reserves. It's not an expense that he's got on his operating side, but his total budget will increase if that money is recovered and then placed in reserves. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. WALKER: Yeah. Our allocated rates -- in other words, at the beginning of the year when we allocate rates for the various lines of coverage, those -- those rates are distributed throughout the organization. In '09 our workers' comp rates are going down about 10 percent. Our casualty, property and casualty rates, are going down about 11 Page 68 June 30, 2009 percent. And the health rate is flat. So this is a -- this -- this is -- really has to do with reinsurance recoveries, more than anything else. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I brought up yesterday about the $2.5 million dedicated to this Building F for remodeling. Is there any way that we can forego those costs to remodel this building? MR. CAMP: For the record, Skip Camp. That's the minimum amount of money it's going to take to move the off-campus departments into this building. And I will tell you, Commissioner, that's -- that is going to tax us because it's not going to replace all the things that should be replaced. Like the air-conditioning system in this building, it should be replaced. We've deferred that. It's about 35 years old, all these air-conditioners above your head, and we're looking for trouble. That's not even included in this. This is just enough to get the old state attorney stuff out of there that's been in there for 35 years and repartition it with minimal amount of offices and move the finance and the other departments back onto campus and out of leased space. If there is any money, it will be returned to you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And I just don't -- really don't want to appropriate anything unless it's absolutely necessary. MR. CAMP: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- your expenses from this working budget, is there -- like the courthouse annex, $19 million, was that all expended? MR. CAMP: The annex, as you know, was dedicated last Tuesday. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. MR. CAMP: We're going through the punch list items now. We're going through the -- as you know we did some value engineering. We're going through to see if we can make any adjustments, especially as it relates to energy. Are there opportunities to, perhaps, look at some of the light bulbs? Are there -- is there a Page 69 June 30, 2009 cheaper way to run the buildings? We're looking at those last things. They're called close-out documents also. All those things are being looked at now, probably for the next eight weeks, and at that point, if there is any money, it will all be returned obviously. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So there is money the way you answered? MR. CAMP: Well, we haven't expended the entire budget yet, but it's at the end of the project and we're looking at things. For instance, it's going to take us all summer to move all the Clerk's Offices over. If there are pieces of furniture -- as you know, we're using used furniture to move those over. If there are pieces in order to make a bridge from one work station to another, that kind of expense will have to come out of there. But at the end of the project, any money that's left over will be returned to you, yes, sir. MR. MUDD: One of the -- one of the things that Productivity Committee brought up -- and I believe when Ms. Vasey comes up she'll talk, or Jim Gibson or whomever, or Gina -- there's -- on the list it talks about a million dollars facilities repair and maintenance cut, and the admin. services folks are basically saying they'll be able to -- be able to do that and get that done. And that's part of the savings that you're trying to get at, Commissioner Henning, I believe. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And I don't understand the allocation of -- same page, Capital 3, vehicle personnel locating systems. That's so we know where our employees -- where our employees are? MR. AXELROD: For the record, Barry Axelrod, IT director. That is part of a capital project adjacent to the public safety radio system. The Sheriff's Office was the main sponsor of this where the radios themselves will be located in the system, and they'll be -- positions will be provided for anybody carrying a radio or any vehicle Page 70 June 30, 2009 with a radio, mostly for the safety of the deputies, but it will also be used by county departments. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I see. And then fleet management, we have less employees. Does that mean we have less vehicles? MR. CROFT: Commissioner, Dan Croft, Fleet Management Director. We do -- we did reduce 38 vehicles this year, and most of those had to do with in the building -- building inspector vehicles and also in road and bridge. That is out of -- we still have 767 on-road vehicles, and 790 major equipment items, along with over 1,200 pieces of small equipment items. We run a pretty lean organization as far as technicians go. The 38, the reduction, really -- we're not going to be able to reduce any personnel for that. If we continue, you know, reducing vehicles and equipment, we will relook that in the future. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But that sounds like Commissioner Coyle's idea of a -- one-day furlough a month may work very well with that. But are you anticipating purchasing any vehicles this year? MR. CROFT: I have recommended some purchases. We have-- in the past two years, we've cut way back on the replacement of vehicles, keeping our vehicles longer. The division administrators have the option, according to the budget, as to if they replace vehicles I recommend or not. In the past year, especially this year, I recommended about 60 vehicles be replaced. We actually replaced 21. You know, it's aging the fleet. I mean, it's going to cost more to maintain them, but we were in very good condition when this -- when the economy turned down, you know, as far as the vehicles go. Weare -- the vehicles we got rid of this year, like from building inspectors, those little Ford Rangers, they had up around anywhere Page 71 June 30, 2009 from 110- to 120,000 miles on them, and -- because they're run pretty hard. So I don't know exactly. Right now I've recommended about 60 vehicles for replacement. We should run somewhere between 70 and 90 vehicles replacement every year, you know, to -- in order to keep our fleet fairly dependable, and we haven't done that for the past two years. COMMISSIONER HENNING: How many vehicles are sitting -- sitting idle because of -- that position is frozen? MR. CROFT: Not a whole lot. It hasn't been recognized, because you've got a lot of folks that would not be driving the vehicles. We keep a very close eye on the mileages that are being driven and the vehicle usage. And I turn in a report of each division administrator to the County Manager every six months, take a look at vehicle usage to make sure that we are using them properly. And what we are doing -- you know, if we see a vehicle that is not being used, we go back to division administrator to say, we need to move that around someplace where it can be used properly or transfer it back to fleet so I can -- I can transfer it to another department. So we are keeping a close eye on the vehicle usage and equipment usage. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that's it for now. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Are there any plans in the near future to build any new facilities of any type for any of our County Manager's employees or Constitutional Officers? MR. CAMP: We have no plans with the exception of working on the Elks Club when you come back from your recess. That's the only facility. It's already been secured. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Could you brief us on the move that's being done with Jack Wert's department into Joe Page 72 June 30, 2009 Schmitt's? I think this is a wonderful example of how to use facilities to their finest. MR. CAMP: That's part of the County Manager's overall plan to reduce leased space, and it includes not only the general fund, but all the others. In this particular case, tourism is moving from leased space to space that is owned by the Board of County Commissioners over on Horseshoe Drive that was vacated by employees that are no longer there. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Is there -- is there many units left, spaces left in that particular building, Community Development? MR. CAMP: We are actually looking at all those options. We did a survey of those. There are some spaces there that are available. Unfortunately they're not all clumped together, but Joe Schmitt's group has done a really good job at consolidating and continuing to see where we can consolidate the sections to keep them together and open up other spaces, and we're looking at that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there a possibility that we might be able to entertain the idea of work at home for certain employees at certain times to be able to lessen the need in the future for office space? MR. CAMP: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Are we doing anything at this point in time; is there any program out there? MR. CAMP: The -- I'll let HR talk about that actually. There's a program. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There is a program. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. MS. PRICE: Commissioner, we put into place a few years ago a work-from-home program. At this point it's voluntary, but it allows for folks who don't have direct interaction with the public, don't have immediate need to have hands-on with either people or things at the Page 73 June 30, 2009 office, we do have a policy that those folks could work from home. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And how do you monitor their performance? MS. PRICE: Supervisors are charged with monitoring that performance stays either at the level that it was before or at a designated level, maybe work-from-home days have a higher productivity in one area, then they come into the office. We allow for up to three days work from home at this time without any extra or special dispensation, and we have our employee sign a contract. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, the advantages are many; one, of course, is the fact that the employee doesn't have to spend the time traveling on the road, and -- MS. PRICE: That's correct. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- at home they don't have to deal with the interoffice procedures that sometimes can hamper their productivity. I think it's a wonderful idea. And the reason I brought it up, too, is that after this -- we get through the budget process, at some point in time possibly we might be able to get a short presentation to the commission regarding our own staff. I mean, when it comes down to it, other than the days that I am going to meet with my constituents within the office or when my aide would have to work on the front desk answering the phone, there is no difference between working at home or working in the office provided they've got a broadband connection and the phone can be relayed to them to take their share of the calls and be able to get those calls. And I'd liked to be able to move forward on that with the idea that maybe we might be able to set a format for the rest of the county to be able to follow in the future. And, of course, we can't make recommendations based upon less than fact. MS. PRICE: I'll be happy to bring the procedure to you to show you how we've got it laid out. We've identity requirements that you Page 74 June 30, 2009 have to have at your home in order to do it. There's a process to evaluate each job to make sure that it's conducive to work from home. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Appreciate that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any other questions board members? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Productivity. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, thank you. Commissioner Coyle, and then we'll hear from Productivity. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't we hear from Productivity first, and then I'll ask the question. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great, okay. Thank you. Oh, she's bringing the big gun. MS. VASEY: We do have a recognized authority on reserves, so -- I'd like to address the -- we had suggested a $1 million reduction from Skip's repair and maintenance account. And basically the difference between the millage neutral and the tax neutral was $2 million, and we suggested that not all of those were acceptable, so we took $1 million -- recommend $1 million, and we mention in particular the custodial service contract. They were not interested in accepting the lowest bid, feeling that the quality of custodial service would be better accepting a higher bid level, and we felt that that was somewhat subjective, that with this economy, that they would probably be able to find services that were acceptable at a lower cost, so that was part of the basis of that. And the rest of the issue was repair and maintenance, in general, is a lower priority. It can be deferred not forever, but a little bit, and so we felt like this was a reasonable level of reduction of lower-priority items. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: With respect to some of the capital costs related to acquisitions of the land, we recently gave Page 75 June 30, 2009 Conservation Collier guidance to stop purchasing additional land. Do your -- do the figures in this budget reflect that guidance? I think I'm seeing some -- some land purchases there that we had deferred. MS. HENNIG: For the record, Melissa Hennig, Conservation Collier Manager. It does. What we requested from you and what our committee recommended was that you defer the cycle seven, which was basically us getting the nominations this year, ranking in December and bringing them to you in January, and then purchasing those in 2011, I believe. What's on the list right now for purchase next year is already on our active acquisition list from cycle six that was approved for purchase. And the reason we wanted to suspend cycle seven was because we knew we wouldn't have the money to purchase those properties, so we didn't want to take staff time to go through nominations and make a list when we couldn't purchase the property in -- until 2011. COMMISSIONER COYLE: With respect to reserves overall, the Productivity Committee has stated that they feel that the reserve position is excessive. In fact, for the county in total, we're looking at a reserve position which is greater than prior years by substantial margins. So what can you do to reduce your reserves? MS. PRICE: We're talking about insurance reserves? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. MS. PRICE: I'm going to defer the answer to that to Jeff Walker. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. WALKER: Jeff Walker, Risk Management Director, for the record. I think the Productivity Committee is correct in recommending that we need to take a look at reserves. And truthfully, I think their thinking is along the line of what we had adopted as part of actually Page 76 June 30, 2009 the FY09 budget midyear. Let me back up a little bit so that you understand kind of how this process works. When I set rates, I set rates in December of each year for the next fiscal year. So for 2010 I set rates in December of '08. That's how far ahead I work. Obviously, you know, we use actuarial work to do that, we make assumptions when we set those rates and so forth. We do not know how that is going to work itself out until we complete an actuarial study as of September 30th of each year. And so, what we did this year -- there were a couple things we did. We wanted to look at what's called lost development factors in terms of how we set what's called, IBNR, incurred but not reported claims. The liability number that gets booked in the CAFR in terms of -- if we stopped the program as of September 30th, what is the amount of money that we would need to pay all those outstanding claims that haven't yet been reported but need to be paid? That's the number in the CAFR. We wanted to see if we could reduce that number. That's one of the reasons that you've seen the reserve levels go up. We looked at what's called lost development factors. And what that assumes is that, for example, in a workers' compensation claim, it can actually take many years for that claim to develop. I have one claim, believe it or not, that goes back to 1981, that is still active, okay. We're paying bills on it. So what has to happen is the actuary will look at our losses, and then they will determine how much, as of today, that number needs to be developed to fully fund all outstanding liabilities. We asked the actuary to look at Florida factors rather than national factors. That reduced the actual IBNR number in the workers' compensation fund by almost a million dollars. That was a way to get those numbers down. The second issue that I look at is cash carry-forward, not Page 77 June 30, 2009 reserves, but cash, because on a balance sheet, I've got to measure liabilities against the amount of cash that I have. I don't get that number, the final audited number, until about March, about the time that we're doing our budget. So I'm preparing my rates in December, I get my CAFR number in March. And what we did this year is we said, okay, let's work through a formula to determine whether or not we could get the premium credit back to the various operating departments within the agency, and we did that. What ended up happening was, is that we credited back about two million, almost -- excuse me -- almost 2.2 million in the workers' compensation fund that went back, and then the casualty fund we credited back about $643,000. Those went back to those departments midyear in 2009. So when I say that we're thinking along the same lines as what the Productivity Committee is recommending, that is what we're doing, and we will commit to continue to do that process annually. And if we have what we consider to be excess cash in those funds -- and now I'm excluding health here, and I'll talk about that in just a second -- then what we will commit to do is do that premium crediting process in March or April of every year so that we avoid this accumulation of excess funds. Now, in terms of what we define as excess is somewhat of a policy decision, it is also a management-level decision. My understanding what the Productivity Committee recommended was that we look pretty much at IBNR, in other words, what is that liability number? I will be truthful with you. I think that from a management perspective, that would make us so lean that it would become very difficult for us not to dip into our required reserves. We have issues that we have to deal with. For example, I have to pre fund claims. I mean, I don't get reinsurance money immediately. I Page 78 June 30, 2009 have to prefund those, request money back, and it can take a considerable amount of time. That's the reason that we're seeing a lot of this 2008/2009 money flowing into the 2010 budget. We got -- in 2008, we got two-and-a-half million dollars back in health reinsurance money on claims that occurred in '07 and '08, so it takes a while for this cash flow to happen. So we need something in there in terms of reserve for some sort of contingency. Also, the issue remains, I'm working two years ahead in trying to determine what my costs are going to be. We may have hurricanes this summer that would affect my reinsurance renewal on April 1 of 2010. I feel it's prudent for me to put some money aside for that contingency because I don't want to be put in a position, particularly in a very lean budget year in the general fund, which is typically 45 to 50 percent of the revenue stream, of having to go with my hand out saying, would you please give me some more money. But that's a concern I have. So I would rather have some reserve moneys there to deal with that contingency, work with the rebate process on the claims side of the equation to make sure that we don't build up too much in reserves. The other issue -- and I've heard mentioned this morning -- has to do with wind deductibles and those sorts of things. Our named storm deductible is $5 million. For the Hurricane Wilma event, if it occurred under the program that we have now, it would have -- we would have paid $5 million out of our own funds for that event. Do we get a Wilma event every year? No, we do not. We had a Tropical Storm Fay event last year that is going to run us somewhere near 750- to $800,000 for that storm last year. Wasn't a big storm. It was actually a fairly minor storm. So the question remains, what is the proper level to fund for that type of an event? This is -- this is my judgment. I don't think we need to fund $5 million. I recommended as part of this analysis that we Page 79 June 30, 2009 fund 60 percent of that, which would also include not only the wind deductible, but in Wilma, we got two very large pollution losses out of that event, which we would need to fund the retention on that as well. And what I want to have happen is that if we have a storm this summer, that the likelihood is that we would be able to fund that out of my self-insurance fund without me having to go to the general fund or utilities or transportation or any other department with my hand out saying I need more money to pay claims. These are not funds that are allocated out to departments every year. These have been accumulated within the self-insurance fund for this purpose. Now, is three million right? If you have no storms, it's probably not right. If you have a storm, it may be right. I don't know. But we want to be able to fund some sort of contingency there. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now, let me interrupt you because Jim Mudd would like to say something, and then we've got Jim Gibson here. COMMISSIONER COYLE: We haven't finished. MR. MUDD: Okay. And Jim Gibson will probably like my answer, and I just want to get to the bottom line a little bit before lunch. But I've had conversations with the staff, and I believe the Productivity Committee and Jim will recognize this particular sheet. I believe we can do the $1.7 million reduction in excess self- insurance reserves, okay. Don't have an issue with that. I've told you before on this one about the million dollars from facilities, we can do that also. I will tell you, please don't tie our hands and say that that $1.7 million needs to come out of health insurance, okay, because then you get yourself into a problem. MR. WALKER: Right. MR. MUDD: Okay. Give my agency some flexibility. I can get the $1.7 million out in order to get that done, okay.h Page 80 June 30, 2009 And so there's where I am on this particular regard. And I believe -- thank you very much, Mr. Walker, for getting to the bottom line. Mr. Gibson, I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a motion for that guidance. And I want to add on to it after I get a second. Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did you give -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'll second it after I hear what he wants to add on. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. And then -- then Commissioner Coyle hasn't finished, but Commissioner Coyle, can we hear from Jim Gibson from the Productivity? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. GIBSON : Well, I just want to thank the County Manager for looking at our recommendation and taking it, I think as you heard earlier today, the county sheriff also. Our recommendation was basically looking at both self-insurance funds both from the sheriff's side and the County Manager's side. And I was going to talk about in the aggregate. And, you know, Jeff and I had long conversations about the IBNRs and some of the other facets. And again, our structure was, look at it in the aggregate. Don't necessarily dwell on the IBNRs or the postretirement healthcare portion and the liability. Look at it in the aggregate and see how that accumulation is taking place and if it could be drawn down. And we're happy to hear that it looks like it can be on the -- 1.7 on the county's side, and you've heard that the sheriff is going to take a hard look at the 1.1 on their side, and we're happy to hear that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Coyle, why don't you finish, then we'll have Commissioner Halas and Commissioner Henning. Page 81 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll try to go very quickly. With respect to contingency reserves, is the contingency reserve, if I remember correctly, about a quarter of a million dollars in the drivers education budget. What kind of contingency are we expecting in the drivers education? Some major crashes by students or what? MS. DAVIDSON: I can address that, if you'd like, Marlene. What we deal with is, there's a difference between our fiscal year and the way that runs and the school district fiscal year and when we actually give that money to whoever -- whichever program may be applying for that grant funding. And so what we do is -- MR. MUDD: It comes from the state as Doris Slosberg, and you have to basically put it to the educational fund. You can't -- you can't spend it because it's earmarked. MS. DAVIDSON: We just hold it because we disburse it to them at a different time in the year. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, okay. So it's not -- MS. DAVIDSON: We get it midyear-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's not a reserve. MS. DAVIDSON: -- and so some of those funds accumulate and roll over, and then they get it again midyear. COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right. Then let me ask you about property and casualty insurance. I asked for and you provided me a detailed breakout of all the casualty claims from Hurricane Wilma. And I went through all of them. And to me it did not indicate that there were huge sums of money that were solely the result of wind damage. There's a lot of landscape damage and trees blown down and some other kinds of things and, of course, that was wind. But as far as buildings are concerned, I saw some garage doors and hangar doors and things like that, roofs, metal buildings that were blown off and that sort of thing, I saw some of that. But the thing is, it doesn't seem to me that we incurred any really Page 82 June 30, 2009 large losses to our structures at Hurricane Wilma. So then that raises the question, is there any way to restrict the coverage on our buildings? Because my experience has been that property and casualty insurance premiums are based maybe as much as 80 to 85 percent on wind insurance factors. If you were able to eliminate that coverage or reduce it in some way, then you could save huge amounts in premiums. Is that possible for you? And if so, what action will we have to take? MR. WALKER: It is possible to do that. The downside of that would be that you -- you would be in violation of the Stafford Act, which is the FEMA act that determines the ability to recover from the federal government under FEMA for those losses. So essentially you would be bare and you would have no other source of recovery from either the carrier or a federal government standpoint -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: You couldn't -- you couldn't self-insure? MR.OCHS: Yeah. MR. WALKER: Oh, yeah. COMMISSIONER COYLE: You could do that? MR. WALKER: Oh, yeah. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you could -- you could fund that self-insurance fund by savings that you achieved on your insurance premiums over a period of years. MR. WALKER: Over a period of years, you could, yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Now, my question is, if you -- can you do that, and could you save any money by doing that? MR. WALKER: You know, if we have a crystal ball and we know there are going to be no storms, then we could answer the question affirmatively. And I can't answer that question. You know -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. WALKER: -- if we had -- if we did that and we had a storm Page 83 June 30, 2009 this year of the magnitude of Wilma, then that would be a losing proposition for us. If we went ten years and we had no storms, that would be a winning proposition for us. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I guess my point is that there's some things that I think I know. I think I know this building is not going to get blown down. I think I absolutely know that our emergency services building is not going to get blown down, okay. And we can apply that same logic to almost every government building on this facility; not all of them, but most of them. And by doing that -- I mean, if we make some reasonable judgments that we will self-insure for the damage to those buildings, do we have the flexibility to do that with our insurance coverage, or must we consider everything in its aggregate and put the value of all of these very big buildings in there and have the insurance companies calculate their premiums based upon values of buildings that are not going to be destroyed. They simply are not going to be destroyed. MR. WALKER: Well, the carrier already looks at construction type for all of the -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. MR. WALKER: -- buildings that we have on the schedule. And then they aggregate the rate. In other words, you may have a frame structure building over here, but then you've got a concrete building over here like the EOC, and they take that into account in calculating what the aggregate rate is going to be. In other words, I don't pay a certain amount for this building and a different amount for another building. It's a flat rate per 100 based upon the accumulation of all those buildings. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I understand that. But I'll be willing to bet you that they don't take your actual experience in Hurricane Wilma and factor that into your premiums. MR. WALKER: No, they don't. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Because your premiums are way Page 84 June 30, 2009 higher than the level of damage that we incurred in Hurricane Wilma. And the wind component of those premiums is way higher than anything we incurred from Hurricane Wilma. MR. WALKER: Well, I think I need to correct that statement, with all due respect, Commissioner. You know, we're paying a little over four million in property premiums now. The losses in Wilma were over eight. And if that -- if that occurred today our retention would be five. So -- I just want to make the numbers clear. You know, truthfully, in terms of commercial property insurance rates, we have a very competitive rate. Our rate is in the neighborhood of about 45 cents. And to put that into perspective, I had the Lee County risk manager work for me for a while. He renewed their program after the 04/05 season for Lee County. His rate went up to 86 cents. We avoided that because we wrote on October 1, 2005, an 18-month term to our insurance policy . We didn't renew again till April 1, 2007. And this was not necessarily smart on my part. I didn't plan this. I will take luck where I get it. We avoided all of those difficult renewals. And the market subsided a little bit by the time April 1, 2007, came around. It saved the county a tremendous amount of money because we never -- the highest rate we ever paid was about 46 cents. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Bottom line is, you feel like you've looked at this and you feel comfortable that it's the best deal we've got and there's no way to improve it? MR. WALKER: Well, I will never say that -- I will never say never. And we will continue to look at this. And what we presented to you at the April 1 renewal this year -- for example, we do -- we do a max- -- probably maximum loss study every year where we look at a 100-year event, a 250-year event, what's our potential exposure for probable maximum loss. We have Page 85 June 30, 2009 consistently reduced what we call our loss limit every year, the maximum amount of coverage that we buy, so that we can save money on premium. And we did that again this year, and we saved a couple of hundred thousand dollars by doing that study. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, let's get back to the reserves. You said that you will continue looking at the reserves. Does that mean you're going to look at the reserves before we set a millage rate, or you're going to look at the reserves as we move forward into the next year to provide some rebates to the general fund? MR. MUDD: Both, both, Commissioner. The $1.7 million, I basically said we're going to basically take that out so you can adjust your millage rate, and he's going to continue to push on this -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. MUDD: -- all through next year. MR. WALKER: Absolutely. MR. MUDD: This isn't a dead thing. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it's 1.7 plus one million? MR. MUDD: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Two -- 2.7 total? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. MR. OCHS: Correct. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Good. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, just a quick question. By statute or by law, are you forced to have a certain amount of reserves, medical, and on any of the other reserves? MR. WALKER: Well, there are various standards and statutes that govern this. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MR. WALKER: Primarily on the casualty side, we're under GASB 10, Government Accounting Standards Board rule, number ten, Page 86 June 30, 2009 which says we must fund this on an accrual basis. So we are required under that standard to set aside actual cash to fund that liability. In terms of the health fund, we fall under Florida Statute 112.08. We have to file, report annually with the Department of Insurance, which requires us to not only fund IBNR, but also some surplus as well. And if we do not do that, then we can get in trouble with the state, and they can actually take away our ability to self-fund. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Do you have more in reserves than you really need? MR. WALKER: In terms of the health fund? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Uh-huh. MR. WALKER: We do have excess reserves at this point. Our plan for that is to use those excess reserves to, number one, handle variations in claims because we can -- we ran into a problem in 2007 where we had 27 people that cost $5.7 million. Fortunately, that has fallen off. We're doing much better with that now, but that can happen, and you need -- you need funding for that. The other issue is, one of my major goals is to have rate smoothing. I don't -- I don't think it's a good idea to have major variations in rates. One of the contributing things that caused us to be able to reduce our workers' comp and our other rates this year, number one, we've had improved loss experience, but also that factor of loss development factors that we did. If the amount you have to fund goes down, you can reduce your rates, and that's what we did. But what -- for example, in the FY10 budget, we're going to burn up about $2.4 million in health reserves to hold our rate in a very, very tight budget year. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MR. WALKER: So I'm trying to think of this long-term, not just one year at a time, because I -- fortunately, because we are self- funded, I have the beauty of holding those funds; whereas, if we Page 87 June 30, 2009 were fully insured, those funds would be gone and you would have no use for those -- or ability to use those funds. So I'd rather try to plan over a two- or three-year period to try to hold rates in a very tight budget situation and take care of our employees as well, so -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: More important. MR. WALKER: -- that's what we're trying to do. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sounds great, good. COMMISSIONER HALAS: The other question I have is -- this is for Skip. There was a statement made, and I just want to get a clarification what lower priority maintenance items are. MR. CAMP: We will do our best to prioritize every work order that comes into the department. And the potential with these types of cuts will be a longer response time. A leaky faucet; maybe instead of getting there today, we'll get there tomorrow. But we are committed to make this thing work. But a famous lady once said, you're going to pay now or you're going to pay later, but you're going to pay. The -- when you defer maintenance, there's a penalty. You'll remember a number of years ago, painting was always our lowest priority. Life safety was always first, and then electrical replacements and air-conditioning and roofs, and then painting was the last of them. That usually got cut, until the front page of the Naples Daily Newspaper talked about the fact that we had all these leaks over at the courthouse. Then that year it became paint -- painting became an important thing. Since the County Manager, Jim Mudd's been here, he understands the replacement of these -- of these elements, and we -- he made us put together a long-term plan. That plan has been funded so far up to this year. We're not taking any 301 money. We're not having any air-conditioning replacements, electrical replacements, and that kind Page 88 June 30, 2009 of stuff this year. And I will tell you just a quick example of how things sometimes work against us. There's a new law out there that says when you -- in your home, you know, you have an air handler in your attic and you have a compressor outside. Well, you can often switch out one or the other. Well, now you have to switch out both because of the Freon. We have to get permits, for instance, for water heaters. All these things have a consequence. And, again, you're going to pay now or you're going to pay later, but you're going to pay. So we think we'll be able to work within this for this year. I will tell you if we have a major motor go out, let's say it's a $40,000 motor -- one of the chillers, which is a $200,000 unit, if one of those goes out, we'll just come back to you and we'll need funding. But I think it gets back to what Commissioner Coyle says. It's a way to fund it out of -- out of a reserve. We don't have the -- these unanticipated things are going to happen, we just don't have them funded in our operating budget this year. MR. MUDD: I will tell you, Commissioners -- and I did mention to you yesterday when I said, you know, the general fund is paying the debt service for the impacts fees, okay, and we're laying on, and we've got about a $46 million savings account that has no money in it right now but a lot of promises, but that's part of the -- when you take the money out of 301 and you're paying the debt service, that's that third of a mill, okay, that I normally watch that he's talking about when he talks about Fund 301, when those dollars come in, you've got the ability to go back into his long-term deferred maintenance and get at those particular issues, okay. So deferring it for a year or so -- we've been very aggressive here in the last couple of years to get the stuff that's really been bad. Remember one time when I got to be the County Manager, this guy named Mr. Skip Camp, your facilities manager, said, we got $16 Page 89 June 30, 2009 million worth of deferred backlog maintenance on major issues. Well, we've been notching that out. And that savings account with nothing in it right now until the building part of our economy kicks back in again will have some abilities in the out-years to put those dollars in to basically start where we stopped this year in order to continue that process. So he'll never have to say in front of you that you've got $16 million worth of backlog maintenance. Because I said, that is not a badge of honor. That's something that we need to get after, and he's been doing that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Well, I thank you all for being here. We are now going to break for lunch. We'll see you back here at 1: 15. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir -- ma'am -- and I finally got the sex right, I'm sorry -- ma'am, and what we'll do is, when you said 1: 15, it's really -- it's really one o'clock is public comment. It's been advertised. So I just want to make sure that you understand. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It means we can't have it before one o'clock. Doesn't mean it has to be at one o'clock. MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Have it at 1: 15. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: For an old man, he's pretty sharp. (A luncheon recess was had.) MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, Madam Chair, you have a live mike. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Welcome back, everyone. And for those of you who have just joined us, welcome to our commission meeting here. We're discussing the budget. Oh, it's a wonderful topic. We're having so much fun. And although we have not finished our budget discussions, being Page 90 June 30, 2009 that we have so many people in the audience to discuss this -- actually a couple subjects, we'll start with our public speakers. But before we get into the public speakers, we would -- do you have -- how many public speakers do you have, Jeff? MR. KLATZKOW: Oh, Lord. We've got a lot. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: I'm trying to put this in order as to the topics. Not everybody put down what they wanted to talk about, so some people may be inadvertently towards the end. But by far your biggest number here is for the DAS issue. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: If you'd like to start with that, ma'am? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you think there's more than 30? MR. KLATZKOW: No. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Now, normally, folks, for those of you who have never been in a commission meeting before, we give everybody three minutes to speak their piece and say what they feel. Before we begin on the DAS subject though, I'm going to get Amanda Townsend up here to tell you -- I don't know if you've been watching and seeing what's been taking place. The sheriff has given us a wonderful offer. And to start off, Amanda, why don't you tell us about it. MS. TOWNSEND: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Amanda Townsend with Domestic Animal Services. As we discussed yesterday when we were talking about the public services division budget, Sheriff Rambosk has offered to provide DAS, I believe the county, with inmate labor at no charge for (Applause.) MS. TOWNSEND: -- for fiscal years '09 and '10. What this -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Two years. Page 91 June 30, 2009 MS. TOWNSEND: -- means to DAS is that we were looking at a potential budget cut at 15 percent. At your millage neutral, the cut was $390,000 to DAS. This brings us a $104,000 windfall to DAS. At a tax-neutral cut, it was $78,000, so the sheriff's offer fully funds Domestic Animal Services in a tax-neutral environment. In a millage-neutral environment, there's still a long way to go, as I'm sure you can understand. I did develop what a millage-neutral budget would look like with the Sheriffs Office. It does not put DAS whole. We would be able to preserve the adoption program; however, we would not be able to preserve the volunteer program. We would lose an animal control officer, we would lose a fiscal technician, we'd still lose three FTEs, and we'd put ourselves at risk with some staffing and some other circumstances, having a little lack of bench strength, losing some enforcement capacity out in the field, et cetera. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. You know, I'm curious. How many of you voted to reduce your taxes a year and a half ago on Amendment I? Just raise your hands. How many of you voted to reduce your taxes? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Everyone raise your hands, because you know you did that. You know you did that. It passed by 70 percent. CHAIRMAN FIALA: 81 percent. COMMISSIONER COYLE: 81 percent. CHAIRMAN FIALA: 81 percent. Anyway -- and what I wanted to know is, would anybody mind, not only for DAS, but we also have other things like libraries and so forth -- would anybody mind paying a little incremental extra, not -- I mean, last year. Would you mind paying last year's taxes, which were still lower than the years before, and yet still at that same time -- just a little bit more, not much, little bit more to make sure that you keep the services in place? Raise your hands if you would want to do that. See, that's the Page 92 June 30, 2009 reaction I've been getting all over. You're just like everybody else I've been talking to. They all say, you know, we want to keep our serv1ces. COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's right. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I just wanted to hear from the audience what you had to say. And so now we will call our -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner, that was a great vote, and that's the vote that I've gotten from my constituents when I've had meetings. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Me, too. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can I pursue that just a bit? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Because it might save everybody a lot of time. I don't know of anybody here who has said they want to -- they want to cut the adoption service. We have already identified, by my calculations, $15 million that will be available to fill gaps of important services such as this and Emergency Medical Services. So I'd be happy to make a motion right now to approve your budget at the tax-neutral -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Tax neutral? COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- tax-neutral level. And if we need to make up something somewhere else, we'll do it with that $15 million we've already identified in our negotiations for the past two days. (Applause. ) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Was that minus the sheriff's -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: That includes the sheriffs deductions, but not his forthcoming. He's talking about more, so we don't have a problem with things like that now. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do I hear a second? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. Page 93 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I hear a second and a third. Commissioner Coletta and Henning, you have your buttons on. Did you want to say something? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do you want to wait till after our speakers because we've got a bunch of speakers? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, you take the liberty to ask the public about their taxation, so I want to take the opportune time. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: If the county commissioners can keep the level of service the same by doing less spending of dollars and keep your taxes the same, would you be in favor of that? All right. That's my point, and -- you know, Commissioner Fiala, I know you want to spend it. THE AUDIENCE: We want to know how you'd spend it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. One of the things Commissioner Coyle said is about the $15 million that was identified. This year's working budget, we haven't spent what -- the budget they're working on right now. And, in fact, last Tuesday we identified $1.6 million that hasn't been spent that can be used to keep the same level of service. That's my point. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. That's -- and that's an excellent point. I think that's what we're all going for. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. What I hear you say is increasing taxes. CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, no, no. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What I'm saying -- and what I'm saying is, let's do less spending and keep the same level of service. Page 94 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: I hear what you're saying. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, Commissioner Fiala, due to the fact that we have five commissioners all in agreement, you may want to offer the opportunity for people in the audience to waive if they feel that their needs have been met. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I was going to do that. I think that's an excellent suggestion. Now, what he's saying is, audience members, now that you hear the vote or you hear the way the vote is going and you know that we're voting for what you want us to vote for, and that is to retain all of the services for DAS, right? I love the guy with the one on his hat. That's cool, isn't it -- and you hear the way we want to vote -- we can't vote until we hear from you and we've got all of the speakers here. But if we're already voting the way you want us to vote, you can just say waive rather than come up, and that way we'll know that you're in agreement. If you want to speak, if you're against it or you want to say something, certainly you have the right to do that, and we always allow everybody the opportunity to say whatever they have to say. So, with that, will you call our speakers? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, Madam Chair. You have 17 registered speakers. Michele Antonia's the first. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Waive. MS. ANTONIA: No, I do want to speak. MR. KLATZKOW: Your second speaker will be-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll withdraw my motion. You're going to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. MS. ANTONIA: No. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: Your next speaker will be Gisela Rowley. CHAIRMAN FIALA: If every person speaks, that's 51 minutes. Page 95 June 30, 2009 MS. ANTONIA: I'm not even going to take three minutes. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MS. ANTONIA: I do want to thank you for voting in favor of Domestic Animal Services. That is very important. And I know that I speak for everybody here when -- while you're saving the animals, because that's very important to us. I do want to comment on something that was said yesterday. Yesterday Mr. Wright said that Domestic Animal Services didn't need a full-time veterinarian. A sick or injured animal admitted to Domestic Animal Services on Monday shouldn't have to wait till Wednesday to get treatment just because that's the day that the veterinarian happens to show up. (Applause.) MS. ANTONIA: We wouldn't wait to see a doctor, and an animal shouldn't wait to see a doctor either. So keeping the veterinarian on staff at DAS is vital. And I want to thank you because the volunteer program, the adoption program, and the veterinarian program is the heart of Domestic Animal Services, and if you would remove the heart of Domestic Animal Services, that would be the end of it, so thank you for keeping Domestic Animal Services alive. (Applause.) MR. KLA TZKOW : Your next speaker is Gisela Rowley. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Anybody who wants to waive is fine. MR. KLATZKOW: No such luck. She'll be followed by Michael -- MS. ROWLEY: One-in-a-lifetime moment. MR. KLATZKOW: She'll be followed by Michael Simonik. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Michael Simonik. You can get up and get ready to speak when -- he's going to call the next one so we can keep them going, you know. MS. ROWLEY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Page 96 June 30, 2009 Gisela Rowley. I'm a volunteer at the county animal shelter. Last night I learned on TV that each of you had stated that you would ensure the continuation of the shelter animal adoption program as it currently operates, and you have just confirmed that today. Virtually every research study into animal overpopulation lists efficient spay/neuter and adoption programs as the major requirement for limiting animal euthanasia. Your decision will not only save the lives of countless animals, but will delight county residents that you serve. To each of you, I extend my sincere thanks. (Applause.) MR. KLA TZKOW: Your next speaker is Michael Simonik. He will be followed by Janet Rossano. MR. SIMONIK: Good afternoon, Madam Chair and County Commissioner. Thank you so much for your vote supporting the adoption program at Domestic Animal Services. I wouldn't have come up here unless -- I didn't want to be accused of not showing up again. My ears were burning yesterday. So I had a lot to say yesterday. I don't have too much to say today. Thank you very much, and we look forward to working with Amanda Townsend and DAS. We've worked jointly with her for five years, and we will continue that. We will continue helping the animals at DAS and all of them in our community. Thank you very much. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: Your next speaker is Janet Rossano. She'll be followed by Sharon Walton. MS. ROSSANO: Good afternoon. My name is Janet Rossano, and I am thrilled. Thank you. However, we still have a long way to go. There are other avenues that we can save money and keep this budget going in a positive route. I did have something very prepared, Page 97 June 30, 2009 and I'm just going to probably go off the cuff here. County licensing is a big reason and a big avenue for you to collect revenue. It's not enforced, and it needs to be enforced properly. We have animal control officers who can do that enforcement. We have services as far as re-registering your car, your boat, new driver's license, at all that time and frame, they can go ahead and make sure that your animal is licensed. At $10 a pop, maybe 100,000 animals, we're talking a million bucks right there in your budget free and clear that should go to Domestic Animal Services. Spay and neutering needs to be addressed in a totally different avenue than it is addressed. There are many good clinics out there and very good business mottos that we can follow and would love, at a better time, to take this opportunity to sit down with you-all and discuss that. Again, thank you on behalf of the animals. They need -- this is their voice, and they need this. Also, I would just like to add, the heart and the soul of DAS may be the volunteers and the workers, but it really is the animals. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. KLA TZKOW : Your next speaker is Sharon Walton, who will be followed by Karen Acquard. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And would the next person please come up so that they're ready to go. MS. ACQUARD: I'm waiving. CHAIRMAN FIALA: All right. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much. MR. KLATZKOW: Elizabeth Brown would be the following person then. MS. WALTON: I want to thank you very much for what you said today. I hate to think about the three employees though that will Page 98 June 30, 2009 not be working at DAS. CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, they are now. MS. WALTON: Still now? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, we passed that budget. Everything is intact. COMMISSIONER HALAS: We haven't voted yet, but we made the motion and got a second. MS. WALTON: If you don't mind, I would like to read my thoughts before I heard what you had to say today, because it's so important to me, and I have three adopted animals myself. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You have three minutes. MS. WALTON: My name is Sharon Walton. I've been a volunteer for Collier County Domestic Animal Shelter. There were five days when I would not leave until I had walked every single dog in every single cage at the shelter. I felt each one deserved their ten minutes of freedom and exercise in the open space and human interaction. Although some of these animals would eventually be euthanized, they were given a chance at adoption. If DAS is included in the 15 percent budget reduction, it will mean certain death for all of the animals, although I know that's not true now. Every dog, cat, bunny, bird, and often other animals as well at this facility has completely depended on us for their life. It is unthinkable that human beings would ultimately kill them on purpose to save money. There has to be a better way to reduce the county budget. Could there be a special fund set up for Collier County residents who wish to contribute to DAS specifically, or could we not vote on a small increase in the budget specifically for Collier County Domestic Animal Services as we did for the Collier County firefighters? Exactly how much money is required to keep the adoption policy in place? But I think you told me it was $390,000. Page 99 June 30, 2009 Please tell us what we can do to save our animals. Please find it in your heart to help these helpless pets. Their very lives depend on it. And I thank you so very much for what you've done today. (Applause.) MR. KLA TZKOW: Your next speaker is Elizabeth Brown. MS. BROWN: Waive. MR. OCHS: Waive. MR. KLATZKOW: Pamela Rae. MS. RAE: I'm Pamela Rae. I pass because what I had to say has already been said. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you. MS. RAMSEY: I thank you so much for your decision. We all appreciate it. MR. KLATZKOW: Kelly Fox? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Next one? MR. KLATZKOW: I think it's Dallas Diaz, but I may be wrong. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Pardon me? MR. KLATZKOW: Dallas Diaz -- Pallas Diaz. MS. FOX: Thank you so much for today. We will continue to support DAS and Amanda. The current pet overpopulation crisis is a direct result of animals left unaltered in our community. We will never solve the pet overpopulation crisis as long as we continue to allocate resources to treating the symptoms instead of the cause until we put our resources into preventing unwanted animals from being born. My name is Kelly Fox. I am a board member for the nonprofit Collier Spay/Neuter Clinic. Our mission is to provide a non-lethal alternative to the unnecessary euthanasia of homeless pets by providing high-quality, high-volume, affordable sterilization services. Our clinic is one of 56 strategically placed self-sustainable models of the highly successful Humane Alliance Clinic in Ashville, North Carolina. Page 100 June 30, 2009 By performing these surgeries, we will save the lives of thousands of animals each year while saving taxpayers millions of dollars and helping to protect public health. Collier Spay/Neuter Clinic will target those who cannot typically afford sterilization services. We will also provide multi-lingual spay/neuter educational outreach programs. It's simple. We must prevent dogs and cats from entering shelters in the first place, and this can be done by implementing proactive strategies like adoption programs and spay/neuter services that will keep pets in their homes and fundamentally decrease their birth rates. Given the financial, special, and resource restrictions of animal shelters, the only way to ensure the welfare of surplus pets is to prevent them from being there in the first place. Prevention truly is the best medicine. Across the nation, many public animal control organizations are directing their funding toward spaying and neutering pets rather than sheltering and euthanasia. In this way, taxpayer money contributes to proactive measures to decrease shelter euthanasia. Remember, billions are spent finding cures. Little is spent on prevention. Again, the key and solution to solving this crisis of pet overpopulation and subsequent unnecessary euthanasia of homeless pets is to prevent the deaths by preventing the births. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. KLA TZKOW: Your next speaker is Pallas Diaz, who will be followed Cindy Harrold. MR.OCHS: Waives. MR. KLATZKOW: Ali O'Connor. MS. DIAZ: I would just like to thank you, and I commend you for your decision today. Our organization completely supports Amanda Townsend, our Director of Animal Services, and we offer any type of help that our Page 101 June 30, 2009 organization, the low-cost Spay/Neuter Clinic, can provide to help face future budgetary concerns. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: Your next speaker is Ali O'Connor, who will be followed by Cathy Ahorn. MS. O'CONNOR: Hi. I am Ali O'Connor. And I actually want to thank you so much for this. I saw this on the news last night in big hopes, and I was thrilled to see that all of you had a positive consensus. DAS is working very hard on a shoestring staff, and I'm hoping that we can still see a way to come through and make sure that the ten members of the staff that aren't there now will be replenished eventually, if not more so. Again, beneficial to the animals. I'm hoping also that eventually we can see a program where all veterinarians in our area have a mandatory requirement to where they have to give a specific amount of their time towards veterinary care to help DAS, for example, so that down the roads those funds that are allotted towards veterinary care right now might be able to be funneled into a different area. There's lots of other things, but I really hope that this is a genesis to helping these animals in a much better way for all the organizations out there trying to save their lives. And again, thank you. We really appreciate it. (Applause.) MR. KLA TZKOW: Your next speaker is Cathy Ahorn, who will be followed by Marcia Breithaupt. MS. AHORN: Hi. My name is Cathleen Ahorn, and I am the president and founder of Animal Rescue in Marmarth Valley, which is in a town, an area the size of Collier County, Haverhill area outside of Boston. I moved here a year ago, and I was stunned to read about the Page 102 June 30, 2009 statistics of what DAS is forced to euthanize each and every year. I became very involved with the local groups here. But history of my group in Haverhill beginning in 1999, the successful implement of a massive spay/neuter push over a five-year period and neutered over 8,000 feral cats, both feral and owned cats. After year three, the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty in our area, service area, was no longer forced to euthanize kittens, and every year thereafter, the euthanization of healthy cats dropped significantly. Today, for the most, only the very sick are euthanized in our area, in-- north of Boston. The animal control in our town did not even pick up a single litter. Another cost savings was the pick-up and disposal of animals hit by cars. This number dropped by over 70 percent, along with a huge reduction with animal complaint calls resulted in a lower cost to the community. As for dogs, because the MSPCA took action years ago, many years ago, accepting pit bulls, dogs are not an issue in Massachusetts. And in fact, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine import thousands of puppies annually from the south and Puerto Rico. And I hope that the commissioners and the citizens and the press will take a stance to support the new Collier County Spay/Neuter Clinic and an aggressive push on spay/neuter to end the madness of the killing of thousands of healthy cats and kittens and puppies and dogs every year in Collier County. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: The next speaker is Marcia Breithaupt. She'll be followed by Thomas Breithaupt. MS. BREITHAUPT: Hi, I'm Marcia Breithaupt. I'm owner of Liberty Home and Pet Services in Naples for over five years, board member ofDAS for two, board member of National Association of Professional Pet Sitters, I'm a Naples Chamber of Commerce member, had 30 years of animal support experience in the greater Chicago and Page 103 June 30, 2009 Naples area. My points today will focus on solutions to various DAS problems yet also benefit the county taxpayers through creative techniques used by other agencies around the country but enforced by our local commissioners -- by their local commissioners. Collier County has trapped itself in an uncontrolled cycle of unwanted animal growth recovery and an overburdened voluntary recovery system and an unreasonable number of euthanasia of animals. The cycle must be broken at the front end since this cycle is not sustainable. The simple uptick of 10 percent of animal births through normal breeding cycles of cats and dogs can result in doubling of unwanted animals in just one year. Like a nuclear reaction, Collier is teetering on this edge and may become uncontrolled in enter situations that may take Florida state control to even resolve it. Organizations in Charlotte, North Carolina, San Francisco, and Chicago have proven that using creative education, working with local vets, and strong legal enforcement, they have reduced animal euthanasia by 50 percent in five years and 100 percent in some markets. This is wonderful for these animals but humbling for our local DAS and should be humiliating for our county. The public and some DAS board members have made numerous attempts to make a change, but it is slow and politically charged, which I see no reason. There is no reason why DAS must charge our rescue groups for these adoption animals, pushing even more burden on them. DAS needs to absorb costs 100 percent. Give these animals away free so these voluntary organizations can help push these animals at a faster rate. Get them out of there. It is proven over and over that organizations around the U.S. can be heavily subsidized via simple code enforcement of existing animal Page 104 June 30, 2009 safety and rabies laws. So funding is clear, simple and unambiguous for all citizens working through local vets. But most importantly, DAS taking the lead role in defining and coordinating legal activities. There is public funding DAS uses for spray/neuter yet it rests in a fund rarely spent. It can be easily shown as small investments here can yield huge results in reducing unwanted animals. Spay/neuter and trap/neuter release must be attacked in an aggressive manner immediately. Weare now entering a dangerous period of animal population and associated control. Small attempts have been made on education, but this has been a shotgun blast when really a rifle shot is needed to pick key markets. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. MS. BREITHAUPT: I just have one last thing. As a final note, I brought a couple of stuffed animals. This is Cricket and this is Rusty. And I just want you to think about a needle sticking in these animals at a rate of 200 per month. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, we have other speakers, please. MS. BREITHAUPT: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. MR. KLATZKOW: Your next speaker, Madam Chair, is Thomas Breithaupt. Will be followed by Isabel Parodi. MR. BREITHAUPT: Yeah. My name is Tom Breithaupt. You're not going to hear me make emotional pleas for money to save animals because the DAS issues are far bigger than just this. I'm here to stress these problems and hold people responsible for past failures and future solutions. Today I focus on three points: Summarize the failures, call out the county operations, and give a plan of action. The system is broken. This meeting would not be taking place if everything was working well. I give Ms. Townsend and the DAS staff Page 105 June 30, 2009 tremendous credit for taking a messed-up facility in 18 months and stabilizing it. It is now at least comparable to other government facilities, but I do not give this a grade A but a grade C for average. Honestly, I still view 200 animals being euthanized every month as a grade F. I took heavy criticism for labeling some animal groups as failing. These folks take great pride in absorbing countless castaways from DAS, yet they're overwhelmed carrying these costs. These people should have been raising cane with the commissioners and DAS to change animal laws and enforcement, yet they spend time absorbing more and more animals, extending this horrible cycle and offsetting government failure. Finally, you commissioners have failed. You swallow the reports from your county officials with blind trust, not questioning the budget, not reviewing the rest of the market, and not asking for creative solutions. Apparently only one of you has even visited DAS. As for the county commissioners, Mr. Coyle, you're considered a loose cannon and up for 2010 election. Are you going to roll out your fire power on resolving long-term DAS solutions? Mr. Halas, you're up for election in 2010 -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Take our vote back, huh? MR. BREITHAUPT: -- a big supporter for the Audubon Society. How many of these feral cats are eating your birds? Ms. Fiala, I'm glad to read about all your vegetation you push through the county, but these green lies are great nesting areas for at least some breeding animals at an installation cost of over $152,000 a mile in some areas. Mr. Coletta is big on healthcare. Where's your push for rabies control and enforcement? What is your interest in the looming nightmare of the invasion of MRSA staff infection, now appearing in South Florida beaches and moving into animals -- from animals to humans. Page 106 June 30, 2009 Mr. Henning, I understand, is about the only person that really understands DAS. (Applause.) MR. BREITHAUPT: My five-point action plan includes the following: Number one, enforcement. Facilities like DuPage County in suburban Chicago with four times the population of Collier County takes in 500 animals a month yet has zero euthanasia of adoptables for the last 18 months. This is success. Also this facility is 100 percent self-funded via enforcement for 15 years. Not a penny of taxpayer dollars. This is success. Point two, animal kill reductions. DAS has no five-year plan. Why? I believe a reasonable target for euthanasia easily should be 50 percent in five years via enforcement, entrapment, or why not put this in print and enforcement? Point number three is safety. What would happen if there was an outbreak, a full outbreak, a full outbreak of MRSA and the beaches were shut down, the EP A or tourists -- and tourist revenues crash? Spay/neuter must achieve significant results in the next months, not years, to help prevent this. Point four is education. Involvement of teens and young adults in the general public can be done creatively or students even pay in some parts of the country to attend such learning camps. There's got to be more creativity expected from this facility. Finally, point five is some financial cost reductions. DAS may never be a self-funded facility, but I see it can comfortably operate on 50 percent of its government budget today simply through enforcing and collecting fees that other counties do. Demanding full licensing just through rabies shots that other counties do of 50,000 animals in Collier -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. MR. BREITHAUPT: -- would bring us to -- Page 107 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. MR. BREITHAUPT: -- $1 million a year. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Next speaker? MR. BREITHAUPT: Guess you didn't want to hear what I said. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER COYLE: Didn't want to hear the first part. MR. KLATZKOW: Your last speaker was James Brown. MR. BROWN: James and Susan Brown waive. MR. KLATZKOW: That's it, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Okay, Commissioners. We have a vote on the floor to approve the DAS budget at tax neutral. MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning, you have comments? COMMISSIONER HENNING: There was some creative suggestions from the public. Can we give direction to our staff to explore some of those? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Can we do that after this vote, please? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. I'm sorry. And I forgot to add that that would include the sheriffs offer in this -- in this budget, a reduction in the budget for -- because of the sheriffs offer; is that correct? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I don't care where the funds come from. We've got several sources of funds. As Commissioner Henning pointed out, we're able to reduce spending by some $15 million already. So whether it comes from that or whether it comes from the sheriffs, it doesn't make any difference to me, as long as it's funded, okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, very good, very good. I have a motion on the floor and a second. Page 108 June 30, 2009 Do you have the motion? COMMISSIONER COYLE: The motion, by the way, was made by the loose cannon. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER COYLE: You must be one of the bloggers on the Naples Daily News. MR. BREITHAUPT: Reading about all of you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. That's what I thought. MR. BREITHAUPT: I'm not a blogger, but I've read. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And who was the second? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Mr. Halas was the second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. That's a 5-0. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We're going to go to the next batch of speakers. Thanks. Thank you-all for caring so much and for being here. That was great. MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, your next large group -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm sure -- I just have to say, I'm sure they had plenty of other things to do with their day besides being here, and you came anyway, and that's great. And we appreciate hearing from you. Thank you, except for the guy that called us names. Thank you. MR. BREITHAUPT: You'll see me again. MR.OCHS: Madam Chair? Page 109 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. MR.OCHS: I'm sorry. I believe Commissioner Henning had some follow-up for staff before we close this. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I thought some of the ideas that the public suggested was worthy of exploring. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if we can give that to our staff and -- to explore some of those, take them through the advisory board and bring them back up to the Board of County Commissioners, it might further help the department become millage neutral. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll tell you, there were some great suggestions. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Really. So would you like to name them or -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nope. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- Leo, do you know if we -- did you keep track of them? MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, you kept track of them, Amanda. MR.OCHS: Between Amanda and myself, we have the list. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great. MR.OCHS: We'll work it through the DAS Advisory Board. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, great. Thank you, Commissioner Henning, that was great. MR. OCHS: Thanks, Amanda. THE AUDIENCE: Thank you, Commissioner Henning. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Jeff, who are our next batch of speakers? MR. KLA TZKOW : Your next large batch of speakers are here in support of the EDC. Page 110 June 30, 2009 Your first speaker will be Bob Mulhere. Mr. Mulhere will be followed by Mike Pavento. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you want to wait a minute? You can, Bob. MR. MULHERE: I'll just wait a few seconds, if I could. CHAIRMAN FIALA: After that, what batch? MR. KLATZKOW: David Lawrence Center, three; then you have another half dozen on miscellaneous. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'll vote for the loose cannon anytime. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I like him. MR. MULHERE: Good afternoon. Am Ion? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. MR. MULHERE: For the record, Bob Mulhere, here as a citizen of Collier County, here also as a partner in a small business, and also I do sit on the board of the Economic Development Council. Speaking really, I think, in all three of those capacities, and I guess also as a property owner and as a parent because I have children who are now growing up and getting into the workforce here in Collier County, if they can stay. I know that the last -- yesterday and today have been very difficult. I haven't been here for all of the meetings, but I've been watching them on TV. And the one thing that struck me is I'm very grateful for the involvement of the many citizens who do get involved on the Productivity Committee, the input of Janet Vasey. I mean, I think that that's exceptionally -- I don't know if you have that kind of assistance everywhere else, but it's very valuable. And I know that your choices are very tough, but I think I would like to echo what I read this morning in the Naples Daily News editorial as it relates to the economic development funding. This is a Page 111 June 30, 2009 public/private partnership. It's critically important. It has never been more important than right now with the economic downturn that we're going through. We're working very diligently to expand and diversify our economy. We've made great progress. To take any kind of steps backward would be extremely detrimental. And so I just wanted to share with you that my position would be -- and I know I represent a lot -- the thoughts of an awful lot of other people, employees, partners, clients, that we hope that you'll be able to find a way to fund the Economic Development Council as you have in the past. Thank you. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. KLA TZKOW: Your next speaker is Mike Pavento, followed by Lois Bolin. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Hold on just a minute, sir. Commissioner Halas had a question for Bob Mulhere. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, Bob. Obviously yesterday when we were going through the budget and the request was made in regards to EDC funding, at that point in time we had a very difficult situation because we were -- we were looking strongly or there was some thoughts about going to millage neutral, which would have basically taken any type of funding away from a lot of sources. And obviously, you've heard the discussion. And I think Commissioner Coyle has said that there's some -- probably some funding available for EDC. But I'd also like to put on the record that the person who spoke up -- I don't know if that person intended to make the comment that they did, and that was that they never had speakers come before in this county in regards to addressing our impact fees. In fact, I believe one individual was from Jacksonville and was Page 112 June 30, 2009 very emphatic about, they thought our impact fees were illegal and that there ought to be taxation to the people themselves to pay for growth. And I didn't think that that's the right way to go. In fact, I believe that the citizens overwhelming a few years ago passed a voter resolution saying that growth has to pay for growth. So I just want to make sure that that's on the record, okay. MR. MULHERE: Understood, yep, understood. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I believe that the funding will be there, but I take offense when somebody tells me that they have never had someone speak on behalf of -- that our impact fees were illegal and things of this nature. MR. MULHERE: Yeah, I don't know who -- I wasn't here for that, so I don't know who that was. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to get that on the record. MR. MULHERE: But I know those are two separate matters. Thank you. MR. KLA TZKOW: Mr. Pavento is your next speaker. MR. P A VENTO: Good afternoon. I wasn't -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Your name again, sir? MR. PA VENTO: My name's Mike Pavento. I work for 4What, LLC. We're a small company, and we've been involved with the EDC for a number of years. I'm here representing the owners who are kind of working with one of our major clients today so couldn't attend, but each one of you will be receiving an email, and in that email it has our interactive message to you. So, please, when you see this from Jim Cassetter (phonetic), open it and take a look at it and -- but what I'd like to say is that I've been working with the EDC in particular as it affects our company, and this is probably one of the most professional groups that I have worked with from a quasi-governmental standpoint in all my years of working. Page 113 June 30, 2009 I come from Massachusetts. I've run a CPA firm. I'm certified. I've worked for international companies. I've traveled the world, and I've worked with a number of agencies or quasi-government agencies, and these people have done a great job. They have helped us in looking at things such as workforce training and how to go about getting grants, and that's not a 100 percent grant. That's a grant that is -- we're going to have to participate in. And they've helped us with things such as employee relocation assistances, disaster preparedness. We've used them for a number of different areas and, again, they've been very professional. And we have a bunch of other programs that we're talking to them about. And why do we talk to them about that? For a small business to spend an amount of -- so much time on research and governmental programs and so forth, the red tape is just too hard and too difficult and too time consuming. They've been able to cut it down for us, and they've been able to help us as a company. I think this is what is needed in the small business. And again, I'm not an economist, but I will tell you that small business is going to lead the way. Medium-size business will lead the way for Collier County to get out of its -- out of this economic crisis that we're in. Big business is not going to do it for you. And it's -- so my opinion is, a lot of businesses don't have the resources that we have, and they, being the EDC staff, have a tremendous amount of resources, and that's why I'm here today is not to say that we need help from them. We use them, we get help from them, but there are many other businesses around. And as we all know, Collier County has had problems with the certain industries. And what this EDC is trying to do is bring in a mix to this county. And we're not going to make it unless we have a mix. I've been coming to Collier County for over 20 years, and I've lived here for over ten. I think the funding for the EDC should be looked at as an Page 114 June 30, 2009 investment by -- by this Collier County. Our company has made a significant investment in the EDC over the last year and a half, and we think these dollars are very well spent and we're hoping that it continues. Thank you for your time. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: The next speaker is Lois Bolin, who will be followed by Tom Hadit. MS. BOLIN: Hi. Thank you, Madam Chair, and County Commissioners. My name is Lois Bolin. I'm a 30-year resident. I am working in a strategic partnership with Lavern Norris Gaynor, one of our pioneering family -- families in Collier County. I'm also coming as an EDC member as well, as I had the opportunity six years ago to work with the EDC on a consultant basis on what's called New Paradigm Leadership, and it was talking about what -- what the EDC and other businesses would be facing as we move from the industrial age into the informational age and all of the impact. And our favorite quote at that time was, awareness is one thing, as transformation is another. And so we've been aware for a long time that Collier County was shifting. But like any change, the pain has to become great enough so we will make that change, and that is where we are today. As part of being an endorser for this Project Innovation, which we wholeheartedly endorse, I had the opportunity to discuss with the research triangle, Dr. Link, about how it got started in 1959 and what were some of their problems and what we could learn from it. And when I spoke with Dr. Link, who now has spent 50 years at the research triangle, transitioned its economy base from tobacco to a research development triangle. What he said was, you know, it takes patience. We started in 1959. We didn't get our first bite until five years later. He said, but it Page 115 June 30, 2009 will take patience, but it will take a driver. And I said, well, that's really good because we've been working toward biotech companies, bringing them in. He said, you've missed that peak. You need to look at other science-based models. And I said, I believe that's what we're doing. So I'm just here to support that I think more than ever the Economic Development Council plays a very vital role as an extension of the county commissioners and making our place a better place to live, and I wholeheartedly support endorsing them in their endeavors. And just as a side-note here, Tammie Nemecek is -- or will be the new incoming president for Enterprise Florida. I believe that's the right name. And she's done an excellent job and -- as well as you guys have, too, in this very difficult time. So thank you. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: Your next speaker will be Lavern Gaynor, to be followed by Catherine Fay. MS. GAYNOR: Good afternoon, Madam Chairman and Commissioners. I'm Lavern Gaynor. I live in Naples. My husband and I chose to live here because we couldn't think of any other place to call home. And place and home have become (sic) to be very important words to me in my mission that I started on two years ago. My reason for starting Backyard History, a new endeavor for me at the age of 83 at that time, was to safeguard the magic in this place we call home, and that magic is our history. I knew that history and home were synonymous and were important in giving our children and their families a sense of belonging, a sense of community, but I needed to have someone help me to bring that to the forefront so, therefore, I saw Dr. Bolin, who believed that history had an economic value way beyond its current capacity, so we joined forces. Page 116 June 30, 2009 When Lois and I met with Neighborhood America, Kim Kovezot (phonetic) made us to see that native technology was the future and it was our future. Tammie Nemecek attended one of those meetings with us encouraging us and -- all the way, and she saw that local history's value to our children and to our future. And two years ago I would not have believed that today I'd be using email and Facebook and the iPhone. I do it. I don't want to, but I do it. I have even begun to attend the EDC Project Innovation meetings, and I'm glad that I have because more than ever I see the role that science and technology will play in our future. It's a new world, one which I don't always understand or agree with, but times change, and we all must be willing to never sacrifice what is most important. What is important is sustaining our future for our children. I guess in my case I could say my grandchildren and their children, but -- and not holding on to our old ways that are not sustaining to our future. Our local economy is in a state, as Dr. Florida (sic) said, a reset. I suppose that's sort of like rebooting the computer when it's out of sync. Many people do not understand what the EDC does. I never have given -- I really hadn't given it too much thought until these past 18 months, but I now understand more than ever if we expect results, if we expect to move forward, a sustainable economy, we need someone, an organization that is dedicated to drive this goal, and that is the EDC. We all know that change is hard, but the results we expect from change don't happen without a driver, and they don't happen overnight. Just like the job you do as county commissioners, many say it's easy, but they never sat in your seats. When someone asks what does Page 11 7 June 30, 2009 the EDC do? It means they have never had to sit in that seat. They have never had to commit to the hard things that tireless leaders do. And from what I hear from around our state, Tammie Nemecek is excellent at what she does, and her team is excellent at what they do. Today more than ever we need to keep the EDC focused on this task, keep them on course to move towards a new, sustainable economy. It is our most important long-term goal. It will sustain the magic in this place we call home. So I'm asking you to grant them the highest consideration and working with them to keep them on task because our future depends upon it, and I thank you. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: Your next speaker is Catherine Fay, who will be followed by Mike Turner. MS. FAY: Commissioners, I'm Catherine Fay. I'm a small business owner here in Naples, and I'm here in support of the EDC as a partner with them, and I hope that you will consider their budget and not cut their funding. They serve a valuable place in Collier County, and we're lucky to have them, and I hope you'll continue their funding. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. KLA TZKOW : Your next speaker is Mike Turner, who will be followed by Chad Phipps. MR. TURNER: Yes. Good afternoon. My name's Mike Turner from Air Technology. And our company, we build helicopter engines, turbine engines, and transmissions that are used on those helicopters that fight fires and help the police and construction and do all sorts of things. We're a global company. Our customers are all over the world. And a large part of our business is U.S. government contracts. As you know, everywhere in Naples we see businesses closing. I've never seen this happen. I've been here 19 years. The recession has Page 118 June 30, 2009 showed us that diversification is very important. We need high-tech jobs, government contracts, export opportunities. Now, the EDC has been invaluable as an advocate, as experts in helping business identify opportunities. And it's all about opportunities, new opportunities, because this recession requires creativity . They've helped us in many areas. For example, we won a training grant valued at $45,000 for lean manufacturing. EDC helped us with that application, and now we are more efficient. We've brought -- we've trained more technicians. We've also obtained a training grant for a machinist. So all these dollars have come because of the efforts of the EDC. Now, I can't multiply the number of jobs in this community that are a direct result of the EDC, but that's a big number. It's in the hundreds and maybe thousands because of the chain reaction of all the new jobs that are created. EDC has introduced us to Florida Ready-to-Work Program, so that will help us with hiring and identifying and training additional people. They're promoting innovation. You probably went to the innovation conference. And here again, create new opportunities. So our company, I strongly endorse the funding for the EDC. I hope you can increase it, because we need to diversify to get through this recession. Thank you for your time. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: The next speaker is Chad Phipps, who will be followed by Kevin Bunnhil. MR. PHIPPS: Hi, good afternoon. My name is Chad Phipps. I'm the president and founder of the Young Professionals of Naples, helped found it six years ago. And I want to thank you for your time and ask for the reinstatement of the funding of the Economic Development Council in this budget meeting. Page 119 June 30, 2009 The EDC stands as a forum, it stands as a platform and a voice for young professionals in Naples and in Collier County. And there's been a lot of discussion about avenues and directions that businesses are going to take and what type of voice does youth and young professionals have in the community. And through programs like Proj ect Innovation, we have such a forum and such a platform. And it's been such ajoy to be able to work with Tammie and the different people that are staffed at the EDC. And understand that this actually is a place where people can sit down to discuss and work through a blueprint and an action plan to actually bring innovative companies and technologies to Collier County. When we talk about development and construction and tourism and real estate kind of faltering, you have to have a plan of action, and this is exactly what the EDC does. When you couple their efforts with the youth that's moving to the area and the want and need of younger people and younger professionals to come to the area -- and the EDC is the catalyst in all of this and having this happen. Attracting companies, attracting opportunities, employment, jobs, entrepreneurial spirit. So I ask that you keep the young professionals and the younger people in the business area in Collier County in mind when you decide to give this money to the EDC this year. Thank you very much. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: Your next speaker is Kevin Bunnhil, who will be followed by Michele Klinowski. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Kevin, how nice to see you. MS. KLINOWSKI: Good afternoon. Michele Klinowski, speaking on behalf of the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce. We recognize you have some very tough decisions. It's been difficult to listen to what you've had to go through, and we wish you Page 120 June 30, 2009 the best. We encourage you to continue the funding for the Economic Development Council. Their efforts to create innovation zones and help diversify our economy are essential to our long-term quality of life for future generations to come. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: Your next speaker is Tammie Nemecek, followed by Janet Vasey. MS. NEMECEK: Thank you, Commissioners. I appreciate, again, the opportunity to come and speak to you about economic diversification here in Collier County. The speakers that you heard today, I think what struck me as I was sitting back there listening to each one come up, was the diversity of individuals that were represented here today. I think that this goes beyond just the business community as you would normally think when we talk about diversifying our economy, but this touches legacy leaders in the community, as Ms. Gaynor, to the young professionals group, such as Chad Phipps, that came to speak to you. I can't tell you that this isn't -- and I sympathize and empathize with you as far as the decisions that you have to make, and I've sat through yesterday and your meetings today, and understanding that the challenge is ahead for not just you, but the people that you represent in this community. And I think our opportunity here though is not to look behind us but look forward at what we can create together. That was the whole genesis behind Project Innovation about five years ago. Our organization set forth in creating a new direction and be more narrowly -- being more narrowly focused on high-tech careers and jobs that we think are going to match this community. Our board of directors selected health and life science, computer software and services and clean-technology businesses. Page 121 June 30, 2009 About three years ago with our workshop with you we asked for your help in being more actively engaged in that, and each workshop we've shown a progression towards that. And I think Project Innovation this year helped to solidify not only your support but the support of the community and the citizens to understand the job that we have ahead of with us regards to diversifying the economy. It will be a marathon, not a sprint, and we have to keep that in mind to keep us looking long-term at what can be accomplished. We have very specific companies that you heard here today that have been assisted through our efforts, and there's a lot more out there. There was actually a video email that was sent to you by 4What Interactive that you can watch as far as their support for economic development here in Collier County. So I can't stress enough how important this is for us to keep our eye on the long ball and continue working together in order to create an economy by design. Thank you. (Applause. ) MR. KLATZKOW: Your final speaker on this matter is Janet Vasey. MS. VASEY: Hello. I've been before you several times in the last day and a half. I want you to understand this is my own opinion. I am not speaker for the Productivity Committee. Basically I'd like to make three points. One, the EDC has consistently taken positions against your positions. Now, they've done this by inviting the -- Governor Crist down here to sign SB360, a piece of legislation you were adamantly against. They invited Robert Poole here, one of the biggest guns in the United States for -- in favor of privatization, to speak on the issue of Alligator Alley, which you did not want to have privatized. They consistently try to -- they consistently are against impact fees, which all of you support. And I use as an example the Anderson Page 122 June 30, 2009 Group Study that was paid for by $62,000 of taxpayer money which was essentially used to emphasize the evils of impact fees. Point number two, they received over $4 million since inception, and that's a lot of money, and they take credit for $800 million in direct economic impact. And I'd like you to examine where. When I've looked at those numbers, they've been taking credit for jobs that would have come here anyway and for processing paperwork, not for actually bringing industries or jobs to the county. So I think -- and I do believe the Productivity Committee suggested last year that an analysis be performed to see just what the benefits are of the expenditure of these funds. And my third point is, $400,000 is a lot of money that you could use to retain county jobs. Thank you very much. (Applause.) MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, your next group of speakers is for the David Lawrence Center. There are three of them. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know, I've got three commissioners online here. Would you prefer to talk on this subject before we move on? Okay. Commissioner Henning is first. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think it was the loose cannon that said yesterday that if we're going to get out of the hole, we're going to need the EDC's involvement. And I'd just like to say, you know, I don't agree with liberals, but we still provide them service. Tammie -- I'm not calling anybody a liberal either. It's just a group. Tammie, the EDC is budgeted for approximately 137,000, I think it is. But your last year's allocation -- let me get to it -- was 720,000, and it's down to 173-. Did anybody contact you about the disparity? Because I'm looking ifit was 15 percent of being 615,000. Page 123 June 30, 2009 MS. NEMECEK: The -- Commissioner Henning, the 137,000 isn't for EDC. That's for the funding of incentive programs. Right now funding of EDC, which is typically at $400,000, is not included in the budget at all. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Not included, okay. MS. NEMECEK: Uh-uh. So of the funding last year, $400,000 of that would have been for EDC funding, and the remainder would have gone towards incentives. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Where would I find that in our budget book for the '09 allocation? I'm looking -- MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, Page 14 of the Community Development section gives you the detail. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But if you go to the front of the allocation of Community Development, it has the '09 comparison, shouldn't it be in that -- shouldn't it be a line item there that says '09 allocation; 2010, zero, instead of the detail page? MR. ISACKSON: Are you looking at their division roll-up; is that the question you're asking, sir? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. MR. ISACKSON: Talking about on Page 2 -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. MR. ISACKSON: -- or 3 or-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: 2, Page 2. MR. ISACKSON : You're looking at -- on Page 2 there's an analysis of the millage-neutral and tax-neutral impacts. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. MR. ISACKSON: And you see EDC. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. MR. ISACKSON: And then you see the millage-neutral and tax-neutral budgets for both of those allocations. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. It's $720,000. MR. ISACKSON: Right. Page 124 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Economic development, and it says millage neutral, 173,000, and tax neutral is 17 -- MR. OCHS: 137. COMMISSIONER HENNING: 137, thank you. Little dyslexic. I still don't understand how you come to that -- those conclusions when you had an allocation last year that is not even here. MR. ISACKSON: In this particular case, Commissioner, during our budget workshop sessions that we have at staff level, it was decided to keep that at -- only fund the incentives that were committed by this Board of County Commissioners. That's how those numbers were arrived at. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I -- I think the discussion we've had today about this is important. There has been a conflict between the Board of County Commissioners and some of the things that the EDC was doing, but we have disagreements with just about everybody, you know, and we get over that, and we go on about the county's business, and I think we need to do that here. I believe that the EDC is a very useful player here, particularly in view of recent developments. The EDC has provided the environment for us to create a new zoning category which will be beneficial to attracting high-tech business. And they've worked very hard at it, and they've been the ones who have organized the committees. I happen to chair the catalyst committee there. I'm intimately familiar with what they're doing to identify and attract high-tech businesses that will, in my professional opinion, directly affect the diversification of our economy in Collier County and protect us from future economic downturns. I think that's worth an investment. And I think I would like to continue the investment at the same level that we had last year. I mean, we can't increase it because this is tough for all of us right now. But we have identified savings in this budget that can be utilized Page 125 June 30, 2009 for things like this, and that was the objective from the very beginning. It was to identify savings from our existing budget where we could backfill into those areas that are most critical. And I think this is a very critical area. I said it yesterday and I'll say it again today. If you're a company and you're having financial difficulty, you can't recover from it if you fire your sales staff, and the EDC is our sales staff, and we really need to continue that work because I know where it's leading, and I can tell you it really looks good. So I'll make a motion that we approve funding at the same level as last year -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: What was that? COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- for EDC. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: 400,000? COMMISSIONER COYLE: $400,000. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, first, Leo, you've you got some points, question? Motion's not complete? MR.OCHS: No, it's complete, sir. I just wanted to close the loop from the discussion and direction that we received yesterday from the board on this subject. As a potential revenue source, you asked us to go back and examine our business license budgets, and so we did go back and take a quick look at that and discovered apparently those fees have not been adjusted since 1981, and if you would like us to bring that back at a later date or consider that as a supplemental revenue source with some adjustment to the fees, we went ahead, and we can do that for you, if you'd like. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you don't mind, I'll be happy to modify my motion to do that, but I -- with respect to the fees, I would ask that that be fully vetted in a public hearing. We don't want to do Page 126 June 30, 2009 anything to hurt businesses right now. I don't have any problem with updating fees that are, what, 30 years out of date? But -- I don't want to do anything that's going to damage the business community, but I will put that in my motion that you investigate the fees for business license fees and come back to the board in a public hearing, and we can make a decision as to what level of adjustment we would think is appropriate. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'll second with the understanding that the 400,000, they're vested now, and this is in addition to it, that we might be able to come up with a supplement at that point. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It might be a replacement for part of the 400,000. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Might be part of it or whole. COMMISSIONER COYLE: We can make that decision when we see it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second the motion with the corrections. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I don't know this fee, how we go about establishing it, but I would like to know what surrounding areas, what they charge for occupations, not -- business tax. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's let Norm Feder do it. He'll just triple it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Six lane it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Six times it. Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I'll just weigh in, and I have to say, if they do bring any companies in, I'll be -- I'll be delighted with that. You're right, you want to keep your salespeople. You don't want to keep your salespeople if they're going to shoot you in the back, which I felt happened a couple times here with SB360. And one of Page 127 June 30, 2009 the things we learned over at the F AC conference last week was, SB306 is going to lead to hometown democracy, which means it's going to cripple us all, the business community, the building community, the development community, all of us, and that's directly responsible from SB360, which is something that was supported by EDC. And I tell you honestly, you know, there's some great people involved. I don't know too much about who they actually brought here. I would love to see it. I know Lucy's Beauty Shop in Immokalee we lost because they couldn't get any help from the EDC, and I was sad to hear that. I know that there's some stuff going on at the airport directly related to EDC, and I'm sad to see that. So I can't in good conscience vote for it. But if you guys want to, I'm just telling you that I hope I see a turnaround so that we see them. They mentioned partnership a number of times. I don't see that partnership. So in good conscience, I can't vote for this. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is that funding available to us, or does that go to someone else that we talked to in regards to the -- where you're looking at the fees that might be charged? MR.OCHS: I believe it's general revenue to your-- COMMISSIONER HALAS: It is general revenue? MR. OCHS: -- unincorporated area general fund, 111. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I know there was some discussion about maybe we couldn't -- that we didn't -- couldn't get access to those fees, but we can; is that true? MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. Page 128 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed? Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: 3-2. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Next issue? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Next group of speakers? MR. KLATZKOW: Next group of speakers, I have three, from David Lawrence Center. David Schimmel, who will be followed by Catherine Fay. MR. SCHIMMEL: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My other two speakers will defer, if that's okay, because I need about four minutes. I want you to visualize me as your favorite pet. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Put the DAS sign on, would you, please. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can you bark? MR. SCHIMMEL: I can bark. The David Lawrence Center wants to thank the commission for a 40-year partnership. We appreciate the support that we have been able to give to you, or get from you. We could not provide community-based mental health services without the support of the county. It is a partnership. County government supports about 5 percent of our operational services, which will impact about 17,000 people. I'd like to give you a brief snapshot in the form of a PowerPoint presentation, which talks a little bit about the need and recession and why we need to continue that partnership with you. Over the last year we had about a 10 percent reduction in revenue yet we saw about a 30 percent increase in the number of people who needed help; 47 percent increase in people who walked through the door and said they were either going to hurt themselves or hurt Page 129 June 30, 2009 somebody else. That's a huge, huge number of people. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm going to interrupt you for one second and say, that's in a declining population, by the way, where many people have left town and yet your numbers are increasing. Excuse me. I just had to jump in. MR. SCHIMMEL: Anytime you want to augment my presentation, Commissioner, you're willing to do that. We had a 90 percent increase in admissions of kids. If we look at it over a three-year period, which you can see on this graph, it's been a steady increase in new cases opened, in total children's admissions, one -- well over 160 percent increase in kids. We're seeing lots of families come in who have lost their jobs, they're unemployed, they're having tough times. A lot of stress out there. And a 99 percent increase in what we call emergency admissions. By neglecting community-based mental health nationwide, we force people into other systems of care. And a good example of that is, if you look back over the last 50 years, in 1955 we had about a half a million institutional psychiatric beds. Today those are down to about 50,000. In 1955 we had about 200,000 mental health beds in jails and prisons, and today that's up over two million. So you can obviously see what's happened is, the mentally ill are now being trapped in the criminal justice system, which costs far more money and gets far poorer outcomes. Florida continues to rank 48 in its spending for mental health, and -- but we're number one in the construction of prison beds. So we don't -- we don't quite understand it in Florida yet. And some of that, unfortunately, is what's going on in our legislature, but it doesn't change the fact that locally we have these people here and we have to find a way to take care of them. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm going to jump in again and say, with the homeless population, I have been told that 92 percent are mentally Page 130 June 30, 2009 ill; is that true? MR. SCHIMMEL: It's a very high percentage that -- that are mentally ill. Over the last 40 years, we've really been committed to trying to get people into the least expensive place where we could get the best possible outcomes. We've been very committed to what I call diversion programs. These are programs where we treat people in least -- in the least restrictive manner possible, and we try to keep them out of hospitals and institutional care. Just a quick historical snapshot. In 1969, we opened the DUI program. That sees a couple thousand people a year who have been arrested for driving under the influence. In 1985, we opened our first crisis unit. When we did that, we stopped sending Collier County residents to the state hospital. The state hospital costs $140,000 a year. For one-tenth of that cost, we can stabilize people in the community, and we get a much better outcome. We created substance abuse diversion programs in the mid '80s, and I would say by late '80s we were seeing about 4,000 people a year from the court system. People who are arrested who have a chemical dependency problem and are not a danger to the community do much better off when they're diverted to treatment. 80 percent of the time we keep them from ever being rearrested again, and you can't say that about people who exit the jail. There's a very high recidivism of people who come back to the jail. We opened a detoxification unit and a children's crisis unit in 2000. We've participated in the development of the Juvenile Assessment Center which diverts about 1,000 juveniles who have been arrested a year. We've participated in mental health -- adult mental health court. We've had 20 graduates in the last year from adult mental health court. 95 percent of them have not been rearrested again. And we participate Page 131 June 30, 2009 in adult drug court, which is -- which has been phenomenally successful. We're interest in keeping the community safe. We need to provide 24-hour access for law enforcement officers for people who are in an emergency or have a crisis. You've heard me talk since 2004 about the need for Baker Act beds. Baker Act is Florida's law which allows us to hold people and evaluate them involuntarily if they're a danger to themselves or someone else. We know if we have adequate Baker Act services we can improve positive outcomes in the community. One of the things we can do in our crisis unit is we immediately link people with the services that they need. That may be housing, that may be vocational, that may be medical. It's the most effective way to deal with people who are in an acute crisis. We divert clients from the state mental hospital. As I mentioned earlier, that's about $140,000 a year, or 28 times as much as it costs us to deal with an individual in a Baker Act bed. We divert people from local hospitals and emergency rooms, which by the way, because of the lack of Baker Act beds, hospital emergency rooms sometimes have as many as 15 people a day waiting for admission to the David Lawrence Center. Since we opened the crisis unit 25 years ago, we have not been able to do a substantial expansion. We need a minimum of 14 additional Baker Act beds. Now, I realize these are tough economic times. My first plea is to not reduce the current funding that you give to us. But we have a solution for this Baker Act crisis, and ultimately we're going to need to partner with the county or the state or whoever we can to try to find a solution to this problem. We have the ability to expand our current unit. We have the ability to go from 20 to 34 beds, but we're going to need to find sources of operational revenue to be able to do that. It's critical because we have implemented crisis intervention Page 132 June 30, 2009 training in this community. 54 percent of all the Baker Acts are coming to us from law enforcement officers right now. We have a tremendous partnership with the Sheriffs Department. The sheriff and I want to see that grow. We want to see fewer people go to jail where they don't typically get better and they come back for another visit, and we want to see more of those people when their issues are mental-health related go to the Baker Act treatment facility. This last year, over 803 people were not able to get into the unit, and what that means, Commissioners, is they were either tying up an emergency room bed or they're walking around the community not being treated for a major psychiatric illness, an illness that means they could be a danger to themselves or someone else. This is an essential health and safety issue. Last year 23 -- over 2,300 people were screened for urgent and emergent crisis stabilization, and that number, unfortunately, is growing. So Baker Act has always been funded by state, county, and community partnership. We appreciate the support from the county. Our center and foundation boards are ready to build. We've submitted a permit. And this year, for the first time in the last three years, the legislature decided not to cut mental health spending. That is atypical for the Florida legislature. One of the things that the legislature's starting to realize is that's very short-sighted when you cut mental health services. So we need you to not cut our budget for this year, and ultimately we need you to help commit to a financial solution so that we can address this Baker Act problem in the community. So thanks very much, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Dave. Yes, we have Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: How much are you asking for for this year, David? No, no, no. How much do you need? Page 133 June 30, 2009 MR. SCHIMMEL: We're hoping you keep us whole this year, Commissioner. For us to move forward on the Baker Act issue, we need to find about $1.4 million to be able to go from 20 beds to 34 beds. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But to keep you whole? MR. SCHIMMEL: To keep us whole, just no cuts. I mean, no cuts is our first request to you. Whatever your current contribution is to us, we're hoping that you won't reduce it by 3 percent or 15 percent. COMMISSIONER COYLE: What is it? MR.OCHS: There is no cut. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Here comes Marla. MR. OCHS: We're maintaining the funding as it is in the current fiscal year. COMMISSIONER COYLE: We are. So that's your recommendation? MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HALAS: What is that current funding? MR. OCHS: Pardon me? COMMISSIONER HALAS: What is the current funding? MS. RAMSEY: Current funding is-- MR. OCHS: $899,300 annually. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that's in your current budget? MR.OCHS: That's correct. MS. RAMSEY: Correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve. MR. SCHIMMEL: That's another pot of money as well. MS. RAMSEY: Actually, that's with the cut. That's 3 percent cut. Isn't it? Oh, yeah. No. 899-. I thought we gave you a 3 percent cut. Never mind. MR. SCHIMMEL: No, it was not in Marcy's budget that you cut it. MS. RAMSEY: Same, 899-, I'm sorry. Page 134 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: We going to keep it the same? MR. SCHIMMEL: That's my request, that's the way it's going so far. I just wanted to -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's my motion is that we approve the budget as it stands. MS. RAMSEY: You've already approved Marcy's budget earlier COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MS. RAMSEY: -- at 3 percent. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I want to approve it again. CHAIRMAN FIALA: This one, and this isn't 3 percent, right? MS. RAMSEY: Well, it was part of Marcy's budget. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But her overall budget was a 3 percent reduction. MS. RAMSEY: 3 percent without him having-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: But it didn't reduce his 3 percent. MR.OCHS: That's correct, sir. MR. SCHIMMEL: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. SCHIMMEL: I wanted to use this, Commissioners, as an opportunity to update you on what's going on in mental health and to try to lay the groundwork for future partnerships so we can address the Baker Act issue down the road. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I would like to say that the Public Safety Coordinating Council performs a very excellent function of coordinating the needs of law enforcement and mental health and diversion programs. And if it were not for the David Lawrence Center, we wouldn't have anyplace to divert people who need treatment rather than incarceration. And by getting them into beds at David Lawrence, we're freeing up beds in the jail for people who represent a danger to society. So David Lawrence Center is performing an excellent service for Page 135 June 30, 2009 us, and it's actually saving us money from the standpoint of keeping people in the jail because we just don't have the capability to do that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: But now we've already approved his budget. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Apparently. MS. RAMSEY: That's correct. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So did you want to make a motion anyway just for the sake of making amotion? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I make a motion that David go away, and we'll make sure we don't cut your budget. MR. SCHIMMEL: I appreciate that and, unfortunately, every year you'll see me about the Baker Act issue. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's okay. MR. SCHIMMEL: And hopefully we'll be able to address that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Hopefully some day we have lots of money. COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's another opportunity as we get on later in the year, if we get turn-back money from somebody, we find some money we didn't previously have. There's always the possibility of getting some of that allocated to you, so keep us in mind. MR. SCHIMMEL: I will, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Come back and talk with us from time to time. MR. SCHIMMEL: We appreciate your support, and we want you to know that probably 95 percent of our efforts are devoted to this kind of diversion, which saves taxpayers' dollars. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. David, I appreciate you coming forward. I hope that there's a lot of people out there that are listening and realize that we rank 48th in all the states in regards to taking care of mental-health people. Page 136 June 30, 2009 And obviously, putting them into jails is not the place that they need to go to get the necessary care and to get them rehabilitated, so hopefully that some of these people can get back out and get -- carry on with their lives in society. And I go along with Commissioner Coyle. If there's some turn- back money, I think that your business needs to have additional funds to take care of this particular issue. Obviously, it costs us more to put them in jails, and a lot of times some of these people get hurt in jails because the inmates don't understand the problems that they have, they being the people that are incarcerated because of mental illness. So I commend you for the work that you're doing, and you do it in a manner that is very cost effective for the taxpayers. And obviously, this is just another unfunded mandate that's come down through the state through the years. And so it ends up in the local government's hands and it becomes our problem instead ofa problem whereby the state needs to address this. Thank you very much for everything you're doing. MR. SCHIMMEL: Appreciate your comments. Your neighboring counties have struggled with this issue, and they've made the choice to put more money into mental health. That will be difficult for them this year, but I think they've recognized that it's cost effective. It saves taxpayers' money. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just keep a couple beds for county commiSSioners. MR. SCHIMMEL: Commissioner, I don't have any beds available. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm going to need it after this budget cycle is over. MR. SCHIMMEL: I would like to help you, but there's no room at the inn. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then there's no $800,000 in the budget either. Page 137 June 30, 2009 MR. SCHIMMEL: We'll treat you on an outpatie~t basis. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think everything's been said as far as the positive attributes of the David C. Lawrence Center. I just want to thank my fellow commissioners for doing the right thing. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And David, I had a couple questions if you don't mind, please. MR. SCHIMMEL: Sure. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know, if we miraculously found $1.4 million, do you have -- MR. SCHIMMEL: Then I'd have beds for Commissioner Coyle. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you -- do you have the room on your property to expand from the 20 to the 34? MR. SCHIMMEL: Yes. We've already submitted for a building permit. As you know, it's a timely process. And even if we were able to get that building permitted, it gives us a couple of years to build. So we've -- we're working -- it's working it's way through the county now. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And then the second question is, when you do -- when the Sheriffs Office does bring someone over to you, how long can you keep that person at the DLC? MR. SCHIMMEL: We can keep them 72 hours before we have to arrange for a hearing. The Baker Act, Commissioner, is really about protecting the patient's rights and making sure they're not railroaded against their will. So at this point we've made a commitment to not ever turn law enforcement away, but what that means is everybody else in the community gets turned away. Emergency room admissions get turned away; people walking in off the street get turned away. You don't ever want to be in a situation in your community where you're turning people away who are telling you they may be a danger to themselves or someone else. Page 138 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now, if you had -- if you had people that come into your center who need a longer term of care than 72 hours, are you able to do that? MR. SCHIMMEL: Yes. We have people who sometimes stay as long as 30 days. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MR. SCHIMMEL: And then we follow them up, and we plug them into other less expensive programs. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, great, great. Thank you. Okay. Next group of speakers. MR. KLATZKOW: Miscellaneous bunch now, ma'am, on the beach parking fee a -- I hope I got this right, Mrs. Raymonde Coel. MRS. COEL: This is a wonderful day for me. I didn't expect to hear all this good news, really -- I think everything people are talking about -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Ma'am, you've got to speak into the mike. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Talk into the microphone. MRS. COEL: Everything you people talked to was more important than what I was going to say. I was also -- I'm also friends of animals, but I didn't know those people were coming today. I read the paper and I knew about the beach parking, you want to raise no more free beach parking, but I just learned that you change -- you still have the free beach parking for the residents? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Free. MRS. COEL: It's not -- is it free still? MR.OCHS: For residents. MRS. COEL: So you didn't -- oh, I just learning now. I prepare a little letter, but -- let's see, I'm going to read this, because it will be not for demanding something from you but just as a congratulations for your wisdom. So you take this as a congratulation for your wisdom. Page 139 June 30, 2009 Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as a resident of Naples for 20 years and recently a U.S. citizen, June 10th, I learned with disappointment and concern your desire to remove from us that free beach parking that we were so proud of and grateful to process in our beautiful Naples. The mayor -- the mayor in the newspaper, he say, well, I want to maintain the free parking. But you say it's the commissioners, so you are the bad guys for me. And now, I could see how wonderful you are. It is not enough that American people have to deal this year with recession, financial problem, and have to sustain another blow. I chose Naples as an ideal place to retire, but gradually I have seen some advantage disappear. Since Naples is still a very special and nice city, I admire -- admired and visited by so many tourists, American and foreigners contributing with their money to the wealth of the city, can the people here in charge and the people we vote for leave a gift as a free beach parking for the residents? In all my travels, sightseeing guides are always proud of talking about what the city or town is doing for the residents. So do not remove what your citizens are proud of. This is precious for all citizens of the world. Thank you very much. So this is not something I'm asking for. You did it, before -- before my letter. So that's why. Now I have I -- I respect for you, because I thought you were the bad guys, you know. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Give her another 20 minutes. MRS. COEL: You're good people. (Applause.) MRS. COEL: You are. And you are wonderful. You have wisdom, and you could see this before people talk. You know that already. That's wonderful. And you did so much for all the people too. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I hope you come to every meeting. MRS. COEL: Yeah, but I'm so impressed. I'm so happy I took Page 140 June 30, 2009 the citizenship. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. We're glad you're a citizen. It takes a lot of work, so we really respect you for doing that. I'm glad to have you as a fellow American. MRS. COEL: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Next speaker, please. MR. KLATZKOW: Next speaker is Jennifer Hecker. She'll be followed by Georgia Hiller. MS. HECKER: Well, that's a hard act to follow, but I'll do my best. Good afternoon. Jennifer Hecker speaking on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida and our 6,000 members. We're here to talk to you today about our support for the watershed management planning. A sufficient quality and quantity of water is necessary to supply our growing community and ensure clean beaches and rivers, the lifeblood of our tourism-based economy. Collier County Watershed Plans have been recognized as an important outstanding need to ensure Collier's long-term sustainability and the protection of its water resources. Once anticipated to be completed in the mid 1990s, they're now due at the end of 20 1 O. And in order to meet this deadline in 2006, this commission authorized a $4 million budget to create and complete these plans accordingly. The progress of the watershed planning to date has been focused on creating an accurate model which is fundamental in doing an analysis needed to accurately identify issues and potential solutions for inclusion in these plans. The next phase for which a scope of services was recently presented to -- for the board approval is to use the model to develop and select alternatives to be proposed as recommended actions in the final plans. This was part of the original scope and the $4 million budget for the project and is necessary for its completion. We commend Collier County's commitment to ensuring these Page 141 June 30, 2009 watershed plans are completed by the end of 20 1 0 and respectfully request that the remainder of the four million originally allocated be retained and expended as necessary to fulfill the remaining steps to complete these studies. Investing in watershed management planning is millions, but having plentiful clean freshwater resources is truly priceless. Thank you. MR. KLATZKOW: Your next speaker is Georgia Hiller. She'll be followed by Gina Downs, your last speaker. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And then after Gina Downs, we'll take a break. I'm sorry but I didn't -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: She's waiving, by the way. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, we love to see that waive. Thank you, Gina. So after Georgia we will take a break. Thank you. MS. HILLER: Commissioners, I'm astounded. Yesterday I was here begging to keep the branch libraries open for 600,000, begging to protect animals from being euthanized for 280,000, in full support of the EDC for 400,000 in funding, against part -- charging for parking at the beaches, and yesterday you were hemming and hawing, and everyone was bemoaning the fact that it was going to be an impossible feat to accomplish. And in 24 hours, Commissioner Coyle found $15 million in savings. That speaks for itself. This all could have been avoided and all these budgets could have been funded as requested by the public. Commissioners, I'm a fiscal conservative. I agree with Commissioner Coyle. I'm opposed to seeing the millage rate increased and the citizens continuously burdened with property taxes at levels that were determined when property values were hyper- inflated to now support a bloated government budget carried forward from prior years of wasteful spending. To suggest that last year's budget has to be preserved notwithstanding a significant decrease in the demand for governmentE Page 142 June 30, 2009 services from departments such as CDES and where nonessential projects are just that, nonessential, is politically dishonest. Quoting Naples Daily News blogger, Happy Clam. Imagine buying more office space when drastic staff reductions make the current space underutilized. How many employee jobs could you save if you hadn't made this investment? Happy Clam is referring to the county's current year multi-million-dollar-plus purchase and renovation of the Elks Lodge. To engage in scare tactics to persuade the public to buy into what, in effect, amounts to a tax hike is equally politically dishonest. Quoting another Naples Daily News blogger, BS Detector. In national politics it's called the Washington Monument ploy. Threats to close the monument over time have proven to be nearly 100 percent effective in getting citizens to agree to tax hikes. Locally it's beach parking, employee layoffs, and library closures. Let me also add, euthanizing animals. Commissioners, we, the citizens, have all had to cut our spending in these hard economic times. You need to do the same. In conclusion, Naples Daily News blogger, Blue Tongue Vole (phonetic) sums it up. Recovery will lag until the Board of County Commissioners and the District School Board recognize and then react to their own contributions to this economic disaster by radically cutting government costs and the taxes that pay them. The people have spoken, Commissioners. Cut wasteful spending and lower taxes. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think I would have rather had this lady speak last. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Georgia, thank you. MRS. COEL: Is that newfound money? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Georgia, thank you very much for kind words, but I would like to emphasize that nothing here happens Page 143 June 30, 2009 unless more than one person agrees. So I didn't do this by myself. It was a team effort thing. MS. HILLER: I appreciate that. What I find absolutely astounding is that after weeks of budget workshops and review by the Productivity Committee, that it took 24 hours for you and your team of assistants and Commissioner Henning and others to find $15 million. If you do this every 24 hours, I assure you the public will be very grateful. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'll tell you, I'm not going to do it tomorrow. MS. HILLER: You deserve a break. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you. MS. HILLER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And she's right. We do deserve a break. We're on one. See you back at three o'clock -- 3 :05 break. (A brief recess was had.) MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats. Madam Chair, you have a live mike. Ma'am, this brings us to your public utilities division. PUBLIC UTILITIES CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I just spoke with the public utilities administrator, and we just talked it over, and we thought maybe we'll start with the commissioners and just ask if you have any questions about public utilities rather than go into a presentation. Will that be all right with everybody from public utilities? I know he would like to speak, but -- okay. I do have a question from Commissioner Henning. MR. KLATZKOW: Hold on one second. Could we wait one second, ma'am? Page 144 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. I'm sorry, Terri. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I think that's a great way to proceed for all the departments. But, you know, this is pollution control, Page 41. Reserves for contingencies. Why? MR. WIDES: Commissioner, for the record, Tom Wides, operations director for public utilities. The pollution control budget is designed to have a contingency factor in their budget. They are asking for millage neutral this year, so no increase from their levels. So in fact, the contingencies fund situation such as their recently -- or their in-process laboratory work, the laboratory's is drastically outdated, and they also have very large pieces of equipment that they need to buy on an ongoing basis. That's generally the statement. If you'd like a little more detail, Mr. Smith here, our director of pollution control, is available. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you have a reserve for capitals -- capital. MR. WIDES: Yes, sir, we do. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But your answer to my question about reserve for contingencies, you said that, you know, things need to be replaced and yada, yada, yada. MR. WIDES: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the line right below it says for reserves for capital. So wouldn't you use those funds for -- MR. WIDES: We would use both funds. I believe there's a piece of equipment that was just bought two years ago in the range of about 400,000 for one spectrometer, if I remember correctly. So we will use those funds -- both of those funding levels. And if you'll also notice further, the reserve for contingencies has dropped. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, why don't we take those reserves for contingencies and put it in reserves for capital if that's what you're going to use it for? Page 145 June 30, 2009 MR. WIDES: We could do that, but it's simply by budget practice that we make sure we fund both levels. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I thought we were talking about having one contingency fund instead of everyone else having contingencies. And my last question, reserves for cash flow, it's a new line item. It's a 100 percent increase, and it shows not available. MR. WIDES: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why does -- is that like cash register cash flow? MR. WIDES: No, sir. That's not a cash register cash flow. That is simply a statute that gives us guidance to try to fund those up to 5 percent. And in prior years, we've been unable to do that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: 5 percent of what? MR. WIDES: 5 percent of the revenues. COMMISSIONER HENNING: For reserves? MR. WIDES: Yes, sir. That is not different in pollution control than other areas. MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, just as a point of information. The statutes allow you to take 10 percent of your operating expenses and put them into a contingency reserve, and they allow you to put up to 20 percent of your operations into a reserve for cash flow. COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's no cash flow in pollution control. You're not using -- you are using it. Maybe somebody can explain it to me then. MR. WIDES: Commissioner, these are -- these are -- how better to say it? But when you've got operating expenses, you have cash flowing out the door, and that needs to be reserved for. And the sad situation is that in prior periods, there was no reserves for those operating expenses for cash flow. Reserves for contingencies tend to be more towards the bigger items that you purchase; whereas, you need to have some operating reserves just for that ongoing operations Page 146 June 30, 2009 on a daily basis. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you have operations for a daily basis. You have personnel services expenses, you have operating expenses, indirect cost reimbursement, and then you have capital outlay, but then you have reserves for all those above. MR. WIDES: That is correct, sir. And that is not any different than any other financially sound environment. If I only had operating expenses budgeted at the levels they are and the unforeseen happens, I have no place to go. This -- I can't go back to the general fund in the pollution control segment. MR. DeLONY: There also -- if I may, sir. There also is a funding cycle with regard to cash for this fund. We may not get cash into this fund until November, for example, with the doors closing of the end of September. So there is a period of time in there when there is -- needs to be cash in the fund, as this is a closed fund, to carry over those expenses until the proper adjustments are made subsequent to rollover from one fiscal year to the next. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. DeLONY: And that's the kinds of things you put aside for those types of necessary operational needs. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's statutorial of -- MR. ISACKSON: I think what Mr. DeLony is referring to, Commissioner, is the bulk of your property tax receipts begin to come in around the first or the middle of December. So there is about a three-month lag between when -- and I think that's what Mr. DeLony's referring to. MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: When you end one year and before you get new moneys in for the new year, I understand that. What has the policy been for the amount of those interim operational expenses? Page 147 June 30, 2009 MR. ISACKSON: Well, in the general fund, this is -- this is an ad valorem fund. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. MR. ISACKSON: In the general fund we usually keep an $8 million cash flow reserve just in the general fund for that same reason why you have -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: What percentage would that equate to? MR. ISACKSON: Let's see. That's about 2.2 percent of our operation. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And this one is 20 percent, or is it 24 percent? Is it 24 percent? MR. WIDES: That is approximately correct, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why can't we be all the same? MR. DeLONY: Well, the policy is the policy. Weare trying to sustain a very small fund. This is -- I don't have the ability to reach out and grab other revenue sources. This is a closed-in fund. This budget that we provided to you today is a millage-neutral budget because we've seen reserves grow in this fund. We were able to, this year, sustain the level of service to the program we had in years past at a millage-neutral level. I believe we'll be utilizing effectively these reserves this year for this millage neutral, and potentially next year we may have the ability to do that as well. I believe it's a prudent investment to leave them where they're at given the uncertainty, particularly with next year's budget. We're trying to make sure that this program is stable and meets the clear intent of the ordinance which governs it. And through the stability of that funding and some excellent management by Mr. Smith and staff working with FDEP partners, we've been able to sustain that over the last few years, at least the seven years I've been here. This budget reflects that. Page 148 June 30, 2009 And I believe that these reserve levels that we have established are prudent given the uncertainties of what we're going forward in. I know there's a lot of discussions about the rolls of reserves, and I respect that truly, and I believe this certainly is within the context of the discussion I've heard the last two days. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you got a carry-forward, a 24 percent carry-forward, of $1.2 million. MR. DeLONY: And that's part of the program that we're utilizing this year to stay millage neutral despite the fact we've seen cost increases for the same level of service this year to next year, and that's how we're utilizing these moneys. And, again, that's how we're able to recommend to the board a millage-neutral budget in this program element. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm sorry. I just -- I just -- I don't want to continue the conversation. MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't agree with it. MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Because you're a $4 middle budget, you're carrying forward $1.2 million, and then you have these extra reserves. So that's all I'm going to say about it. I think it's ludicrous to do so. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: One of the -- one of the problems is that I think you're maintaining this reserve so that you can justify triple A bond rating; isn't that true? MR. DeLONY: For trip- -- no, sir. This is in the pollution control area with regard to water/sewer-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Only pollution. MR. DeLONY: -- district. Absolutely. And with regard to solid waste, similar argument, or similar situation. We're sustaining the level of service in terms of the maintenance and reserves. Page 149 June 30, 2009 In this program, this is an ad valorem program. It's the only one we have in the division. And the utilization of these reserves and the maintenance of these reserves is the reason we've had such as a great success with it. And we have not seen -- we won't see a spike or a valley in this program. We continue to be able to fund it at a stable level and utilize these earmarked funds in this manner. They're frozen in this account. They can't transfer out, for example, to another program in the county. They're set aside for this fund and this fund alone. Same thing, I don't -- no one transfers anything in. So it's a very careful balance. And Tom, I think you had a correction on a -- an input on a number? MR. WIDES : Yeah. Commissioners, just for the record, to answer your question, Commissioner, I agree with Mr. DeLony exactly. There is no bond funding here. There are no revenue bonds involved whatsoever. However, I think the one thing we have to be careful of is that you can't count reserves and add them to carry-forward. Carry- forward is on the other side of the ledger so you can't make them additive. That's just -- that's not the way this works. Reserves are expenses or a form of expense. Carry-forward is a form of revenue to offset that -- to pay for that expense or that potential expense. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any other questions from board members? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you very much. MR. DeLONY: Thank you, ma'am. DEBT SERVICE Page 150 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Move on to debt service now. MR.OCHS: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sorry you had to sit here so long, guys. MR. DeLONY: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He didn't say it was all right. He said yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I heard that. MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, your debt service fund under the debt service tab, you have continuing debt service obligations of recuring principal and interest payments on a number of different bond issues and their purposes, which are highlighted within each of the specific fund numbers that you have going forward from the -- from the tab. Just some general comments, and then I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Of particular note this year, and it's been talked about, is the Caribbean Gardens levy. The levy for 2010 right now is set at .0045 mills. That is -- was prepared before we calculated some additional information out of our office, which seems to believe that we would actually extinguish that levy this year in 2009 with the available moneys that we have. And in that particular case, .15 mills would no longer be active on the tax roll. So that's one particular point of interest and of note. That's a -- that was originally a ten-year loan. It will be paid off in four. The -- couple of other points of note in there. We've got your Pine Ridge Industrial Park, Naples Production Park bonds -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: What page are you on? MR. ISACKSON: I'm sorry, Commissioner. If you look under the debt service tab. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Got that. MR. ISACKSON: I'm just highlighting through the document. Page 151 June 30, 2009 Go to Page 13, which is your Pine Ridge/Naples Production Park debt, Fund 232. You had an executive summary before you not too long ago that talked about using the proceeds within that fund and transferring it to the transportation services division for payment of road improvements, drainage improvements within both industrial parks. That is actually online and moving forward. You have under the Conservation Collier debt, Fund 273, that's the Pepper Ranch component. Your debt service in Conservation Collier, you have a millage rate by referendum of .25 mills, and you will approach that .25 mills this year with the Pepper Ranch debt. Your commercial paper, all loans have been executed. There are 12 loans. An outstanding balance as of 9/30 of2009, based on our calculations, of $66 million. The Forest Lakes general obligation bond just continuing. You can note those in your -- in your tab on Page 14. That is an MS TU bond. That -- that bond has currently been sold, and the project is being executed. The only glitch there is, will they spend the full amount of money that has actually been sold in terms of the bond proceeds. And if not, we're working with our bond counsel to come up with a defeasance plan which may actually benefit the district and reduce that MSTU millage rate. So they're -- those are the highlights of debt service. Again, these are committed principal and interest payments on all of the particular debt service funds that you see within that particular section. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Mark. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Just a couple questions, Mark. General debt service, Page 3. MR. ISACKSON: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: When you say -- I'm seeing two entries in here for -- I see ad valorem and then I see -01 general fund. Is that a -- is general fund moneys going in a part of the first line that Page 152 June 30, 2009 says ad valorem taxes? MR. ISACKSON: Well, there are certain of the debt service funds that actually -- there is a levy, a debt service -- there's actually a property tax levy. That's what we refer to by -- in terms of ad valorem taxes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: And then there is -- you have -- and I'd have to go to a specific detail. You've got transfers in from a general fund. For example, if you go to 299 -- Page 19, our commercial paper debt. There's a transfer from the general fund to help support that particular debt service. And you would get to your number, I think, Commissioner, if you looked at each one of the individual sections to determine the transfers from the general fund. You've got, for example, in Fund 215 on Page 9 -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I think you just answered the question. When would the transfers from general fund -- are they going to continue going up? MR. ISACKSON: I think it's a product of the principal and interest every year that -- based on the amortization schedules, and we size those -- those transfers based on the individual amortization schedules when they come due, and that's something that we do every year when we evaluate the debt service payments. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The Community Development I've seen on Page 6 for general government debt -- oh, that's the '02 capital improvement bond. MR. ISACKSON: Mr. Schmitt's component of that has been defeased. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sorry? MR. ISACKSON: Mr. Schmitt's component of that has been defeased. Page 153 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HENNING: But I see on Page 9 that it says in the summary, purpose, construction of jail and development service building expansion. MR. ISACKSON: That was the parking garage for Mr. Schmitt, Commissioner, and he's still paying on that portion of it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I just don't see it on this page where it's coming from-- MR. ISACKSON: That would be -- that comes out of his Fund 113, which makes a transfer into the -- you see the -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm trying to find the transfer. MR. ISACKSON: Is that the one that's been defeased, Susan? Or the -- then 210, the Fund 210 would be the parking garage or the -- yes, Commissioner, go to Page 6, if you would. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. MR. ISACKSON: Then you have the transfer from Mr. Schmitt's Fund 113 operation. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. MR. ISACKSON: That's for the parking garage. Fund 215 is the component that had been defeased. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fund 215 what? MR. ISACKSON: On Page 9, your original question on Page 9, that is the component that has been defeased or the bonds have been paid off. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Paid off. MR. ISACKSON: For Mr. Schmitt's operation. I had them backwards. I'm sorry, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we can kind of scratch that from the summary? MR. ISACKSON: Well, I think that's-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Because I might ask that stupid question next year. MR. ISACKSON: That's been continuing, and we can look at Page 154 June 30, 2009 eliminating that, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's all I have. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Now, defeased. That means you take the fees off of them; is that what it means? MR. ISACKSON : We're actually advanced -- you advanced paid COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm just joking with you. I do have a question though, and this is another recommendation by the Productivity Committee. Is there any benefit to refunding some of the bonds in view of current interest rates? MR. ISACKSON: Mr.-- at the finance committee meeting, Commissioner, we had -- Mr. Gibbons was in attendance at that meeting, and we talked specifically about the process that we go through to regularly evaluate our debt structure and look -- always look for opportunities to refund our debt and bond issues. So we constantly look at that with our financial adviser. They make recommendations on these issues. I think we've got a -- Susan, if I'm not mistaken, we have a water and sewer revenue bond issue that may be coming before you for potential for refunding, so that might not be in the too distant future. Possibly before the end of the fiscal year. So there are -- there are opportunities there. This is the general governmental debt component portion of it, not necessarily water and sewer side of the house, and we will look for opportunities there when they are available. When the net interest cost benefits present themselves, then we would go ahead and make some recommendations to this board through the finance committee. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I think we have a policy guidance of what? Is it 5 percent net present value savings on -- for refunding? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, I believe you're correct. That is a 5 percent threshold. Page 155 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ifwe adjusted that to a 3 percent net present value savings, would that provide you some other opportunities that you might not otherwise take advantage of? MR. ISACKSON: Well, I think, Commissioner, that there may be opportunities in that area within that range that we could possibly look at for -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let me ask you for one other observation at least. I know you can't calculate this right now. But can these savings and the bonds that you think might be appropriate for refunding, are these significant savings? MR. ISACKSON: I think -- I think it would have to -- we'd have to take each of the issues on a case-by-case basis, and that's really what the finance committee does in terms of looking at the interest cost savings that would be achieved through a -- through a refunding, so -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. Well, let me ask you a different question. Would it help you if we were to give you guidance to take a look at anything with a 3 percent or below net present value potential savings -- MR. ISACKSON: I think, Commissioner-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- or above? MR. ISACKSON: I think speaking from a -- from the OMB perspective, looking at any interest savings over the long-term that we could achieve probably would be something that we should be looking at and at least making some recommendations to this board, so -- and that's what we do. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right, very well. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Jim Gibson from the Productivity Committee has a little presentation here. MR. GIBSON: Yes, just to add to the discussion. It's our understanding that the net present value savings policy has historically been 5 percent given the current low interest rate environment and the Page 156 June 30, 2009 fact that any savings are good savings in this day and age. We would certainly endorse a policy of looking at a net present value of savings of 3 percent. And I believe that the current water and sewer funding that's being reviewed would be a benchmark at 3 percent, so we would endorse that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, in that case could I make a motion, at least we get a sense of the commission, that we change the guidelines for staff so that they can evaluate refunding opportunities that present a net present value of savings of 3 percent or more? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Motion on the floor and a second. That would -- that would meet with your guidance. Any further discussion? (N 0 response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Tell your wife it was worth you sitting here for two days. MR. GIBSON: Thank you, ma'am. MR.OCHS: Anything else, Mike? MR. ISACKSON: That's all I have on this. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Then we move on to management offices. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've got a question I'd like to ask Commissioner Coyle. Where'd you find the $15 million? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I'll go through it point by point Page 157 June 30, 2009 when we get down to the bottom, if you want to. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, okay, sure. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I mean, I've got them all annotated. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, good. CHAIRMAN FIALA: While Jack Wert is sitting down, let me just tell you that tomorrow is his birthday. I'll just mention that. Would you like us to break into song, Jack? MR. WERT: The one you did for Marla was plenty. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Got your message. Okay, then. MANAGEMENT OFFICES MR. GREENWALD: Randy Greenwald, for the record. The County Manager's Office is similar to the budget office, the County Attorney's Office, and your office as well, and it -- a large majority or percentage of the total budget is made up of personnel services. So it's very difficult to get them to millage neutral. What we've had to do to make the County Manager's Office millage neutral is decrease operating expenses by a small amount and decrease the -- well, increase furlough days to 364 days per year -- I'm sorry -- 364 hours per year for every employee in that office, which is a lot of time. CHAIRMAN FIALA: 364 hours a year. How many -- what does that equate to? COMMISSIONER COYLE: 20 percent reduction. MR. GREENWALD: It's a 17 -and-a-half percent reduction to get to millage neutral. And you'll find your office is similar to that, and so is our office. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Let's play what-if. What Page 158 June 30, 2009 if that was the way that we decided to go? What would you do next year when we see another cut on the horizon? MR. GREENWALD: We'll probably have to do it again or cut positions. There's nothing -- I mean, that budget, 95 percent of it is personnel services. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the personnel services are what you provide to the public? MR. GREENWALD: That's the employee salaries and everything. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. But if the employees aren't there, then we do have a deficit of services that are available. MR. GREENWALD: We have a problem then, yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I mean, there's no free lunch here. MR. GREENWALD: No. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You give someplace, you're going to take away another. So at what point in time can we live without these people there doing the work that they're doing? I mean, that seems like an exorbitant amount to me, I mean, to be honest with you. MR. GREENWALD: It is. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I mean, I don't know what your .. . opinion is. MR. GREENWALD: Oh, I agree. I mean, we're talking about Leo. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm glad somebody agrees with me around here. MR. GREENWALD: Leo and all the staff down there. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I occasionally do. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Forgive me, Donna. CHAIRMAN FIALA: When you're right anyway. MR. GREENWALD: Like I mentioned before, there are certain Page 159 June 30, 2009 offices -- administrative offices are all like that, it seems like that, because they're weighted more heavily with the salaries and wages of people who provide services and don't -- you don't have a lot of operating expenses of these offices. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Then the other question would be, tell me a little bit about where it falls for tax neutral. MR. GREENWALD: Tax neutral, there's -- even the way it is right now, it's still at .1 percent. We'd have to cut another $28,600, so that would either be more furlough -- furlough days or half of their -- no, not all of their operating expenses. The operating expenses are only 29,300, so you can't really cut there. So it would have to be -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And what kind of cuts have you experienced over the last couple of years? MR. GREENWALD: There haven't been any cuts. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Huh? MR. GREENWALD: There haven't been any cuts over the least couple years. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I mean, we -- over the last couple of years we cut 84 million out of the budget. We never -- we never got to your department though, right? MR. ISACKSON: I think-- MR. GREENWALD: We made some minor reductions in operating expenses like this year in midyear, but-- MR. OCHS: We haven't experienced furloughs or layoffs, no, Sir. MR. GREENWALD: Not in the County Manager's Office. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, other than Joe Schmitt's office, do we have any other place where there's furloughs? MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. We have furloughs in other areas. We've had a few layoffs in transportation this year. We've had about 58 layoffs. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I know about the layoffs, Page 160 June 30, 2009 but furloughs where they take unpaid days. That's what basically a furlough is, right, or is a furlough also -- MR. GREENWALD: A furlough is an unpaid day. MR.OCHS: Unpaid day. MR. GREENWALD: Or unpaid time off. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand it. But I mean, I know Joe Schmitt's office, we had to do it there because of the fact there was absolutely nothing coming in in revenue, and we're not going to subsidize it. We haven't agreed to subsidize it. But the issue goes back that in -- within the rest of the county government, is there anyplace that we're -- before today that we've been issuing furloughs? MR. OCHS: Not that I'm aware of, sir, no. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'm just trying to get a feel for how this is all laid out and where it is and who it's going to -- it would impact. MR. OCHS: Well, again, depending on what level of reduction, either tax-neutral or millage-neutral, will dictate in FYI0 the number of potential furloughed days or layoffs that we might encounter. What Randy's telling you, is that in the County Manager's Office at the tax-neutral level for fiscal year 2010, the budget that's recommended is the same amount roughly as the current year. It is not reduced by 3 percent like most of the other budgets were at the tax-neutral level because of the fact that, frankly, 95 percent of the costs of that office are in staff. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, if you read the notations, for example, on Page 8 in -- of the County Manager's Office operations, and on Page 14, covering the OMB operations, you'll get a sense for the -- the operational degradation that would exist under both scenanos, so -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. Page 161 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is a perfect opportunity for the application of our countywide furlough program that we talked about yesterday. Rather than putting it on the shoulders of a single department, put it on the shoulders a little bit on everybody so that nobody loses a job. And I think there's ample room to do that maybe even with greater flexibility than we discussed yesterday. Maybe it's not one furlough day per month. Maybe it's one furlough day every other month. And that reduces the savings to about two million, five -- no, two million, three, five, which would be sufficient to deal with these situations so that we're not laying off people who are critical to providing services to our constituents. So, once again, this is an opportunity to take some action that will solve that problem not only for this department but for other departments. MR.OCHS: Commissioner, at the tax-neutral level for this particular office, if you adopt a budget at tax -neutral, there are no furlough days or layoff days in this budget. Same for your office budget, as well as 0 MB. You still meet your overall 3 percent reduction at your tax -neutral budget for the agency. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But that's not true of all the departments. You have some staff reductions in some of the other budgets that we've gone through already. MR.OCHS: At the millage-neutral level we do. I'm not sure-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: But you don't have any at the -- at the tax-neutral? MR. GREENWALD: Tax-neutral, Commissioner, pretty much means the personnel services side of the house. COMMISSIONER COYLE: For all departments. MR. ISACKSON: Most, if not all operations. Page 162 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Still doesn't mean you can't do it. MR.OCHS: No, sir. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I -- my biggest concern is, when you get up here to the County Manager's Office and the Board of County Commissioners, those people basically deal with the citizens here in the county, and I think most of them at this point in time are pretty well taxed with taking care of issues that are confronting us on a daily basis. And I feel that in this case, I think we need to look at this seriously and look at a tax-neutral, because I think as we move on, that we're going to find that these people are going to play more -- an even more important role in regards to addressing the concerns of the citizen and making sure that we try to appease them the best we can under the conditions that we're presently going to be under, and even in the long term. I think all of us realize that this situation that we're presently in is not going to clear up overnight. In fact, if anything, it will probably get worse. The figures are already out that throughout the whole continental United States that unemployment rates for the month of May have already increased, and those are the people that we're going to have to figure out the best way to address their needs in this county. So I think that because of the fact that we're here to serve the people, I believe that we may have to make sure that we have the necessary resources to address these issues. CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have one speaker. Who is that, please? MR. KLATZKOW: Alan Drescher. MR. DRESCHER: I waive. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Speaker has waived. Page 163 -'~ .,^,,.,., .. - 'W .'" - ,"",~ June 30, 2009 Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Clam Bay's -- Pelican Bay's/Clam Bay's budget you've got moneys allocated for capital improvements. Did the PBS&D (sic) -- I don't see anybody here from PBS&D. MANAGEMENT OFFICES (PELICAN BAY) MR. LUCAS: Kyle Lucas, the operations manager of the Pelican Bay Services Division. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Hey, how are you? MR. LUCAS: Fine. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did the board, your board approve? MR. LUCAS: Yes, they have. It was gone over in detail by the Pelican Bay Services subcommittee and was approved unanimously by our services division board at their meeting on June 3rd. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you. As far as the discussion about sharing the burden, we all need to share the burden, like Commissioner Halas said. Unemployment is the highest in many a years. These people, I don't know how they're going to pay increased taxes when you're unemployed; you don't have a job. I think the furlough system, the idea of furloughing is a great way to share that burden. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. And I think this is healthy . We've been playing with this little game for a long time now. At the beginning of the meeting Commissioner Coyle asked for a nose count, how we felt about tax-neutral versus millage-neutral. And at that point in time I told you that I was leaning both ways and I Page 164 June 30, 2009 wanted to hear everything. Well, I heard everything, and I can't tell you, but I -- enough that I agree with Commissioner Halas 100 percent. There has to be a point in time that we recognize the fact that we have to keep staff intact to the point that we can serve the public. We've already had serious cuts of over 20 percent. If we keep cutting, it's going to be to the point where the services won't be there, and let me tell you where the burden's going to fall. It's going to fall on the shoulders of the commissioners. Why am I not getting this service? Why is the person not returning my phone call? It's just not going to have any end to it. So with that, and in line with the facts that we have to deal with this situation again next year and it may even be more severe, and at that point in time we may have -- be forced into addressing furloughs to some point in time -- I'm not too sure how to frame the motion, but I'd like to make the motion that we work towards a tax-neutral budget, and just to be able to get this behind us so that we can get on to the other issues we have to deal with. I don't think I'm premature in bringing this up. And I apologize for the fact that I didn't know everything that I needed to know in the beginning and we had to drag this out so long. CHAIRMAN FIALA: None of us did. Do I hear a second on that motion? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a second on the motion. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, I really would like to ask you to hold off on that because you can do better than that. You can -- you can preserve the staff and you can save the taxpayer's money . You can achieve your goals, and you can -- you can keep it from -- you can keep the tax rate from being as high as the tax-neutral millage. So why refuse to do that? Page 165 June 30, 2009 If you could do what you want to do, keep the staff, maintain the same level of service, but not increase the millage rate as much as the tax-neutral would indicate, wouldn't you want to take advantage of those savings? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that can still be done. It doesn't mean that we can't be visiting different other things where we identify it and keep working at it. We have until the meeting we have in July to be able to address a lot of these issues. It's still an open slate, but at least at this point in time we establish the ground level of what we're working at and we can improve from there. It's like when we set the millage rate. We can't go forward. We can only go back. In this point in time we're setting something that may -- it's most likely on the high end, then we can start addressing it. Furloughs I do not believe are necessary at this point in time, and that's one of the issues I just wanted to get off the table. But I am leaving it open for other savings as we go through it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, you have your -- okay. Let's see. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've already been taken care of. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I don't know why we're-- in the beginning of this, it was -- there was a motion and second on the floor to do furloughs, and you said you weren't going to consider that until we're at the end of the budget. We're not at the end of the budget. And the motion -- let's be fair, because the motion is to stay tax neutral. That is not decreasing taxes. That's increasing taxes. So that -- consideration -- what you're saying, considerations in the future if we could find savings, you're not saying that. That's not in the motion. You're saying we're going to send out a tax increase to the residents and all the other stuff that went along with it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, Commissioner Page 166 June 30, 2009 Henning, you're right. I should clarify this motion. I thought -- I did in the end when I got through speaking the motion. I said, it's still open to go forward. I'd like to clarify my motion that at this point in time I'd like us to work with the premise of a tax-neutral budget with the idea being open that we're going to do everything we can to reduce it from that point back through other savings. Does that sound -- what you're asking about? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Saying-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm trying very hard to meet your needs, too. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it's saying a positive and a negative, or you're saying -- making one statement and then refuting it with another statement. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, if we go with a tax-neutral budget at this point in time, we have no right to consider any other cuts? I don't believe in that. I would never support that. So I hear you're -- what you're saying can't be true. COMMISSIONER HALAS: You amend your motion to say that? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I amend my second accordingly. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is there -- quite a few things we've already identified that we could reduce and yet still -- still, for the most part, use a tax-neutral position; is that correct? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. And the discussions that took place the last couple of cases, I haven't seen where there's been that many cuts. There's been increasing -- increase in spending in regards to the needs of the citizens, regards to the animals, regards to EDC, and so I'm not sure where it's at. Now, there's a couple of commissioners that are really adamant Page 167 June 30, 2009 about this, and maybe they could be the real leaders in this and show us what they're going to do in their districts in regards to getting to millage- neutral. Now, if we want to get right down to the nitty-gritty, there's things like maybe in these two districts, they'll close libraries; maybe the funding for the City of Naples, a million dollars, we can cut that out; maybe the funding for the zoo, $250,000, and et cetera; and maybe the library in Golden Gate City, we can probably close that since that -- one of the issues was close district libraries. Maybe the funding for the Golden Gate Civic Center, maybe that needs to be cut. I mean, if you really want to get down to the nitty-gritty and start cutting, instead of talking about what we're going to fund -- we're going to furlough employees, we're going to take away the -- one of the arms that we have worked so hard on this Board of County Commissioners, and that's to make sure that we respond to the people who call in and ask us to take care of concerns and services for them. And they -- in return we try to get back to them within a matter of maybe a day or hours in regards to addressing their concerns. When you furlough people, you are actually cutting the services, and these people are not going to be happy. So if you want to lead by leadership, and I'm looking for that leadership by closing areas in those two districts, I'm sure that when we come to this final budget in July, that if everything is hunky-dory, then I think that the rest of us in the other three districts will need to step up to the plate, and we'll make necessary cuts to meet budget -- or to meet millage-neutral. But when people come in here and raise their hand and state that they basically want the same services that they're getting today -- and we've seen that today -- I've seen that in my district where -- people who are responsible for large homeowner associations, such as Pelican Bay and Pelican Marsh, and I can go on with people who sit there in those meetings, and when we sit down and we talk about what is important to them, and the most important thing for them is service to Page 168 June 30, 2009 this -- that they can render, and they don't want those services cut. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Maybe we can cut through some of this by just letting me go down the list. I've been making lists for two days now about what has happened with the budgets. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We do have a motion. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know you have a motion, but I would guess this is still discussion on the motion. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep, it is. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Forgive me. I didn't mean to interrupt. CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, that's all right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: First of all, we found that board interest is way under-counted. There's been acknowledgment that there's $6 million of board interest that has not been budgeted, okay. There's a communications tax, so-called windfall, of $2.5 million. Parks and recreation has a $500,000 surplus from the Sugden Park sailing building, club building. The sheriff has trimmed $3.3 million out of his budget. Bridge maintenance -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: How much did the sheriff? COMMISSIONER COYLE: 3.3. MS. VASEY: Plus 1.1. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Plus 1.1 million, okay. Plus 1.1. That gives us 4.4 out of the sheriffs budget. Bridge maintenance said they could trim some of the bridge maintenance out. I think that the Productivity Committee said you could save maybe 1.1 million. Let's suppose we only save one quarter of that, $300,000, by moving some of that money somewhere else. Then you've got the facilities repair and maintenance. They said they could reduce that by one million. And then excess self-insurance; the County Manager said, yes, we can cut that by 1.7 million. Page 169 June 30, 2009 So what that gives you is $16.4 million of money right now, and that doesn't even take up -- take into consideration the furlough; it doesn't take into consideration taking some money out of the stormwater, which we could do. Not all of it, but some portion of it. Ifwe took one-third of the stormwater projects out and used it for the reduction of some of our expenses, we're talking about another three million on top of that. The sheriff said he was going to take a look at reserves for contingencies. I don't know if that 1.1 was -- that wasn't including reserves from the contingency. He said he'll take a look at reserves for contingencies and see what he can do. And he was also going to look at self-insurance reserves to see what he could do with that. So that's a potential for more. The thing I didn't take into consideration was the $600,000 that the sheriff still owes us that hasn't been paid, but that might be in this year's budget, so I didn't count that. So I'm not really sure how that's going to be handled. So all in all there is $23.9 million that we have identified today that could be cut from this budget without changing anything as far as level of service or staffing. And so what I'm saying to you is, for goodness sakes, please give some consideration to that, because think of how this is going to look to the taxpayers when we go to them and say, we're going to increase your millage rate because we need the money to sustain the services when I've just identified the money that says you don't need to do that. You might have to increase it a little bit. I'm not saying you can get to millage-neutral, but you're getting awfully close to it. And wouldn't it be a lot better to say to the taxpayers that we've cut this money out and we've gotten it as bare as we can while we've still maintained our staff, we've still maintained the level of service that we've promised you, and you're -- you, the taxpayers, are going to be the ones who benefit from doing that? Page 1 70 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, thank you. And you couldn't -- you're right on target, and I want to consider every one of those items after we take this vote, bring it up separate, each one we'll have a discussion and we'll vote on them. I think a lot of them have a lot of merit. You're going in the right direction. But I want to get this particular vote behind us first, and then we'll go ahead and start item by item. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to hear from the County Manager in regards to this, since he's spent so many hours on this budget. The other things I have concerns with, this is addressing it and this is one time -- taking these funds that are occurring one time and not looking at what's going to reoccur in the years coming up. And I feel that I don't want to get in the position, as I said earlier, where I'm eating my seed corn. So I understand where you're going with this, and I still -- probably I'm going to support the motion with the idea that we are still going to look at additional cuts to try to cut the millage. But I want to make sure that we are very prudent in what we go -- in the direction that we're going to go so that we don't end up in a real dire situation next year as we move forward. So I'm going to wait to see what the County Manager or his associates have in regards to the budget cuts. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We're just about ready for the vote except that we'll hear from the County Manager as requested by Commissioner Halas, and then we'll vote. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. Can I at least make one statement? I'm going to vote against the motion, but I want to make sure it's absolutely clear that the only reason I'm voting against the motion is because it does not take into consideration cost savings Page 171 June 30, 2009 which I believe we have very clearly identified in our proceedings in the last two days. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think what we're going to do -- I understand where you're coming from, Commissioner Coyle, but I think we also need to be prudent; and if we can knock the millage down from tax-neutral, I am all in favor of it, as I said earlier. I just don't want to get involved in a situation where we're eating our seed corn. And I want to make sure that we're prudent in regards to where we're going. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. County Manager? MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. What I've tried to do is tried to follow over the last two days exactly what has transpired with this board as far as things that the board wants to save or not save. Some of the things that Commissioner Coy Ie had mentioned on a list, I -- something about Clerk, Clerk interest. I don't believe you can say that and say that it's underfunded. I think we're seven million short for this year as we go in because we haven't got to the $20 million that was budgeted in '09 in that particular regard. So I guess what I'm saying to you is if that interest comes forward and the Clerk's request for $6.1 million is there, then it balances and there is no windfall one way or the other. What I'm dealing with right now is a shortage, not a surplus. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, is that the six million you were referring to as the number one item here? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. And I don't understand the County Manager's logic here. Whether the Clerk pays us for amounts due this year or not is irrelevant in my opinion to what you're budgeting for FY20 10. You have a line item there that says board interest, $6 million. Now, we know that the Clerk has asked for roughly $6 million for his operating expenses for the next fiscal year. We also know from past experience, and we can infer from our current reports of the principal Page 172 June 30, 2009 invested, that we are likely to get more than, substantially more than, $6 million in 2010. So however much more we get -- and people like the Productivity Committee are estimating 6 to $7 million more dollars than the six million that's in the budget -- whether they're right or not, I don't know. But what I do believe to be true is, any excess interest that we earn on the principal invested for next fiscal year that is above the $6 million will be excess revenues that have not been budgeted, okay? So now, if that amount is two million or three or seven million, as some people suggest, I don't know, but whatever that is, there's going to be an additional amount of money that is not included in this budget as far as a revenue circumstance. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And I don't argue that point with you one bit. But telling me that that's reoccurring where you're going to reduce the millage rate based on that one-time dollar, even Crystal -- even Crystal Kinzel will tell you that's not a prudent -- that's not a prudent issue. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I know -- I know that people get fixated on this issue of, you don't use one-time funds for recurring expenses. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, we're still -- we're still supposed to be discussing this motion. Is this -- I thought -- MR. MUDD: I believe there's a motion that's on the table, something about tax-neutral. I believe it was -- it was sent (sic) and it was -- it was seconded; there was a modification to it. I believe some commissioners asked me to go over a list of cuts that I can get to. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I think somebody misunderstood the motion itself. The motion was for a discussion afterwards. It's very difficult to concentrate on so many different things in play. If we get the motion out of the way, then we can take each one of Page 173 -<p"q -,. June 30, 2009 these things, make a motion on it, and move it forward or move it back. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Well, let me think. I'm not confused about this at all. I know exactly what happened. What happened was the County Manager was asked for an interpretation as to whether or not what I said was true, okay. The County Manager was beginning to explain, and then a commissioner said, Commissioner Coyle, do you agree with what County Manager has said, okay? And I was responding to that request by another commiSSioner. CHAIRMAN FIALA: That was me. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I'm not confused at all about what's going on. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And what we were doing, we asked Jim Mudd -- because Commissioner Halas said, I'd like to hear from the County Manager. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He did. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. And so that's when I asked the County Manager, then he referred to the $6 million. That's when I asked Commissioner Coyle, and that's what the discussion was. And I understand. Your motion is to approve tax-neutral with the understanding that after that's approved, then we would go back and make -- you know, make some adjustments; is that what the-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's absolutely correct. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. So in other words, you're just wanting to give us a general direction as to which way you want to go. You want to keep things whole and yet you want to -- want to reduce the tax rate from the tax-neutral position; is that what you're -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's absolutely correct. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- in essence saying? Page 174 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's exactly right. CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's the way I understood it as well. Okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if the motion were worded to say that we will establish a tax-neutral position or lower-- COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's exactly what -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, that's not what the motion said. The motion said that we're going to agree on tax-neutral, and then there was a remark that said, and we can go back and consider this other stuff later on. And I'm saying to you that if you really want to be accurate about what you have -- you're trying to do, you should say, I believe -- I would recommend at least -- that the motion say that we will approve a tax-neutral budget or less. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, Commissioner Halas (sic), that -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not Halas. This is Halas. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Coyle, I'm sorry. You were speaking so eloquently I got you mixed up. Forgive me. But I'll tell you what, the way you put it together, I really don't see any harm if it makes it a little clearer. That's fine by me. I'll amend my motion to what you suggested. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So you amend your motion -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. It's the words, it's just a little shorter. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- to say you'd like to approve tax-neutral budget or less? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. That's fine. CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's correct? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Does the second agree? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm hoping we're not getting Page 175 June 30, 2009 ourselves in a pickle here. I'll agree. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And that's what you had suggested, Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: That modification is what I had suggested. I don't like the tax-neutral, but that modification more accurately reflects what Commissioner Coletta had in mind. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So being the fact that we're work so close together, I'm sure I can count on your vote. COMMISSIONER COYLE: As long as everybody understands I'm going to want to get these $22.8 million or more cut out of our budget when the time comes. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think we all feel that way. You think-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HALAS: As long as it's -- as long as it's not detrimental to the point where we put this county in serious jeopardy in the years coming. And I'm counting on the Office of Budget Management to make sure that we get the right guidance level so that we don't get into this particular quagmire. As I said, and I'm making it very clear, that I'm not here to eat my seed corn. That we have to make sure that we take care of any reserves that may be needed in case of an -- any kind of event -- I don't care what it is -- and that we have some cushion to address the upcoming issues, not only in this budget, but 2011 and maybe even 2012. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I'd like to add that I don't want to see us lose another employee. So I'll just throw that in again. I know that I've said that a number of times, but I'll just say that again. So I have a motion on the floor, and a second. Everybody understands the motion? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I -- Commissioner Henning just returned. I think it might be appropriate to let him understand what -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: We were hoping to keep him in the dark. Page 176 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I had made a suggestion that we indicate our commitment to making this a budget which could be less than millage-neutral. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Tax neutral. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Tax neutral. And so Commissioner Coletta has agreed to change his motion so that it would be a motion for tax neutral or less, and so that still provides us a capability of reducing all of these expenses that we have identified. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. But at the end of the day we need to give some guidance. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: 5-0. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wow, like pulling teeth. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now we have some people sitting before us. Do we need to hear from them or-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no, no, just going to questions. CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- it's all done. Pardon me? Just questions, yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No questions. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So we have no questions. Goodjob, everybody? MR. OCHS: Thank you. Page 177 June 30, 2009 MR. SUMMERS: Thank you, Commissioners. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sorry you had to sit through all of that. Marta, it is so good to see you again. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you, Commissioner, likewise. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Marta and I used to be neighbors when her name was Reonda. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yeah, from Lakewood. CHAIRMAN FIALA: We all lived in Lakewood. Mike Smykowski lived in Lakewood. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could we come to an understanding that we're going to finish up tonight rather than -- because I'm not too sure what we do if we run out of time. I'm willing to stay as long as necessary. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. It's okay with me. How about you, Commissioner Henning? Stay tonight until we're finished? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Go ask somebody else. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, stay tonight? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't want to leave. I want to keep doing this just as long as we possibly can. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, you've having so much fun? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So the people that are here said yes. All right-yo We'll keep on going. And now -- now we'll hear from the County Attorney's Office. COUNTY ATTORNEY MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, and I'll be working offpages 11 and 12 off the Board of County Commissioners portion of your book. Like everybody else, I was asked to prepare both a millage-neutral and a tax-neutral budget. Having heard the discussion, Page 178 June 30, 2009 I will give you what I would have prepared if you'd just asked me for a budget. If you go to Page 11, you'll see that we've reduced our personnel costs from 3,021,300 down to approximately $2.6 million. Those are permanent cuts. And I've reduced actual headcount. You can see we've gone from 34 positions to 26 positions. In order to get to the tax-neutral, I had to create a litigation reserve which is actually on Page -- noted on Page 13, and that would have been a 346,700 reserve, mostly for the Hussey matter. I don't need that much. That was to get us to that number that we were directed at. What I really need is an additional $100,000 to the litigation reserve to make it $200,000, and that would get my real budget, if we're looking at the net cost to the general fund, which is $3,004,400 to $2,753,700, which is not that far from millage neutral but just a little bit above that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So say that figure one more time, would you please? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. It's $2,753,700. And what I did was, out of the $346,700 reserve, I just really need 100,000 of that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any questions from the board members? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Which page are you on, Jeff? MR. KLATZKOW: Well, Pages 10, 12, and 13 under the Board of County Commissioners. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I got 10, but I didn't see those figures on 10. MR. KLATZKOW: I'm sorry. Pages 11, 12, and 13. MR.OCHS: 13, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So your bottom-line budget is $3,415,1 OO? MR. KLATZKOW: My bottom line net cost general fund was Page 1 79 June 30, 2009 3,004,400. And what I'm saying is what I really need is 2,753,700. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you've trimmed $700,000 out just overnight, huh? That's good. MR. KLATZKOW: When I interviewed I told you we were top heavy, and we've changed that this year. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's not a bad thing. And that puts you how much -- what percent? I don't have those figuring in my summary, so I don't know what the percentages are. MR. KLATZKOW: The percentage decrease is going to be, oh, lord, approximately -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: It wasn't really 700-, was it? I mean, your budget was 3 million -- MR. KLATZKOW: My budget was-- CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- 4,400, right? MR. KLATZKOW: Net cost general fund. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And now you're saying you want 2,753-, so that's what, about, 200,000, 250,000? MR. KLATZKOW: Well, the three million was a 3 percent reduction. I'm doing an additional reduction on that of about $250,000 as well, which equates to, I don't know, about an 8 percent -- 8 percent. It's about an 11 percent reduction. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it's close to the millage-neutral? MR. KLATZKOW: My millage-neutral would have been about 2.6 million. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, yeah. So it's very close. MR. KLATZKOW: Yep. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Okay, good. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Coletta, did you have a question? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, that's from before. Thank you, Commissioner Fiala. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And then to BCC and we're done. Page 180 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HENNING: You've got CRAs, too. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the Airport Authority. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, we already did the Airport Authority. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We did? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, he is still here. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Where are the CRAs? I can see you guys, except I don't know where you are on here. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, after you get to the -- it's in between the- BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MR. MUDD: Oh, let's go to -- it's elected officials, Board of County Commissioners. If you go to Page 15 on the Board of County Commissioners -- after the Board of County Commissioners tab, you'll get -- you'll start talking about CRAs, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I was just one page away. Okay. MR. MUDD: It will be Immokalee and Bayshore. CHAIRMAN FIALA: First we have Board of County Commissioners. MR. GREENWALD: Randy Greenwald, for the record. Once again, you're in the same situation as the County Manager's Office and the budget office. Mostly your costs were in personnel services costs. Your salaries are set by the state, so we can't do anything with those. So what we had to do to get to millage-neutral was have a reduction in force of two positions in your office staff, and the remaining four people would be required to work 70-hour workweeks if we went millage-neutral, but you've already decided not to, so -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? Page 181 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. The one change that I'd like to see us do to the budget this coming year has to do with the money we have where we interact with the public and we interact with our elected officials, the travel money. Rather than have the funds segregated, I'd like it to be one pot. The reason is very simple. In order for anything to be -- to go forward, it has to receive the approval of this board. And we have assigned certain commissioners certain tasks, Commissioner Halas especially. He's not only our representative when we go to Washington, D.C.; he goes on a regular basis with the County Manager, which incurs quite an expense, but he's also taken the step to be the -- one of the directors of Florida Association of Counties. And I might mention the fact that he just got reelected to that position, and that's a very prestigious thing to be able to do. And he is very active. He has to go to many meetings that's related to that. I, myself, have many things I have to do that's outside of the purview of the immediate area of this building, and sometimes my travel budget, especially with the car and everything, is a little bit on the heavier side. Of course, that's a whole different budget. But for the travel budget part of it, right now I think we're allotted -- how much is it per person? COMMISSIONER COYLE: $4,000. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Because it's embarrassing as anything when you are willing to extend yourself out to the public and to be able to take on these jobs, but when you reach the end of your 4,000, you have to come back here, you know, and beg for money from some of the accounts of commissioners that haven't used their funds. So I'd like to see consideration for lumping that all together into one. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And if I may chime in. One of the things Page 182 June 30, 2009 you haven't mentioned is, when you or Commissioner Halas -- and I have to say mostly Commissioner Halas -- goes up to Washington or goes to Tallahassee, the dollars he brings back or the ability to bring the dollars back -- I wish I had a total of how -- how much he's been responsible for bringing back to our county, and you can't even measure that. So I think it's terribly important. I like your idea of putting it all into one pot. That's a great idea. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. MR. MITCHELL: Commissioners, Ian Mitchell, Supervisor of the BCC Office. To take the budget to tax neutral, we still have to find $30,819 for the current budget. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. How much again? MR. MITCHELL: $30,819. That's to take it to a tax-neutral budget. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Tax-neutral. Okay. That would be 3 percent below last year? MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir. MR. GREENWALD: Actually -- 42,600 actually. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And we've got to keep in mind something before we get to the point where we start getting a guilt complex for the fact that we're serving the public. We're the first front that has to deal with the public in all cases, and I'm very reluctant to ever remove that tool. I mean, right now the public gets ahold of our office or they send an email; the response is amazing. I get nothing but accolades for the tremendous service that comes from our office. We're going to be going into a very difficult year when some services are being trimmed a little bit along the line, there's going to be a bigger demand than ever. And in order to be able to meet that, we're going to have to be right up front and be able to have our workforce ready to go. Page 183 June 30, 2009 So I really think we need to be able to make sure our budget's in line with what the need is. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's --let's set the record straight. The travel to Washington, D.C., doesn't come out of the BCC's budget. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Out of the County Manager's budget. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But -- no, not -- still let's -- I mean, your proposal, I disagree 100 percent. The next thing, F AC does not come out of the Board of County Commissioners' travel funds, okay. I'm not willing to give up my travel funds unless I give all of it up to the taxpayers, not another commiSSioner. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Now, you're making it sound, Commissioner Henning, like we're going on some sort of junket. I'll tell you right now, I'd just as soon be home with my wife in my own bed with home-cooked meals than have to go all the way to Tallahassee and deal with all these situations. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I still have the floor. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. You're right, you do. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And what a message are we going to be sending to not only our constituents, but our employees if we can't even do 5 percent, the 5 or 3 percent cut? I mean, that's just -- we need to find that $42,000 out of our budget and cut it. That's my position. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I agree with Commissioner Henning. Our travel budget is just way out of control. We've done nothing to try to use travel funds efficiently. There is absolutely zero way to determine whether or not a trip to Page 184 June 30, 2009 Washington, D.C., gets us money, or is it our lobbyist in Washington, D.C., that gets us money. That's why we pay them. They lobby constantly and get us money. They do a good job. I'm happy to pay for them. I am absolutely certain after having participated in several of the trips to Tallahassee that nothing can justify the cost of three or four or five commissioners going up there at the beginning of the session. There's nothing that indicates that we have gotten anything as a result of that. It is an expense that can be avoided. We have a chairperson who should be designated to go on these trips, and that's where the money for travel should be allocated. We don't need to all go up there and walk around and hobnob with the legislators as if we're really accomplishing anything, because we're not, particularly in times of difficult financial circumstances. Now, I'll even be more direct. And I do not want to be critical of anybody. But when commissioners are spending $3,000 a year in reimbursed mileage, when we are paying $5,000 a year plus $1,000 for car repair and maintenance for a car for a commissioner -- I'm sorry, I really am, but the point is, when you're elected to a district, you assume the responsibility of doing what you need to do in that district. There shouldn't a special reimbursement for driving back and forth and long distances of that district. Now, I understand that creates a burden. And when the Florida Association of Counties comes down here and has their annual meeting in Marco, booking rooms in a Marco hotel down there for commissioners who live here in Naples is, in my opinion, absolutely unjustifiable when we're asking employees to take early retirement or we're firing them. You know, we can do better than that. And if -- I know it's not going to make a lot of differences. The money isn't that big. But if we don't at least let our employees understand that we believe they Page 185 June 30, 2009 should be frugal, then, you know, what -- we're not going to get anywhere with this. So it's not my intent to get into a big argument about this, but -- and I think I know how the vote's going to go. There are three commissioners who believe these things are okay and there are two who believe that they're not. And so the two who believe that they are not are going to lose on this, and consequently we're going to have the same expenditures in this area as we have in the past. And, you know, I know that Commissioner Fiala knows, because she has seen my car parked in the garage in Tallahassee. I've been to Tallahassee two times so far this year, okay. I paid for it myself. There's no reimbursement so -- now, that's because I can do that, all right. I don't expect anybody else to do that, but I don't expect people to spend money when it's not necessary. And I don't appreciate people trying to take what little travel budget I've got, by the way. I have a budget of $4,000. There's $4,195 in the account, at least the last time I checked, because I didn't bother to ask for reimbursement for something that was previously approved. So I haven't used any of that money. I'll be happy to use -- let it be used for commissioners who will spend it wisely, but I think the real thing to do is to reduce the amount of travel and do our part for trying to control costs in Collier County. And I hope that's all we have to discuss about that issue. I'd prefer not to get into it any deeper. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I think that -- I'll be honest with you, Commissioner Coyle. I think that some of our lobbying efforts in Tallahassee this year -- even though it didn't seem maybe beneficial, I believe that some of the people that we lobbied, and also working with our lobbyists up in Tallahassee, did produce good results, and the results were that we brought the Clerk basically undere Page 186 June 30, 2009 control. I can also tell you that when I go to the F AC Meetings, and being appointed as the director, that there are times when we have meetings or caucuses in regards to sitting down in the evening with groups that are involved in, in my case, with the Growth Management Plan, trying to figure out the best way to address those and -- those issues that are near and dear not only to us here in Collier County, but also to the other 66 counties in the State of Florida, and that we try also to eliminate as much travel as possible. If you notice that this year my travel budget has been substantially lower. And I commend you for driving all the way up to Tallahassee on your own. I, myself, am not independently wealthy. So I sometimes need to look at offsetting the expenses in travel. Now, as far as going to Washington with the County Manager, I believe that what we have done -- and correct me if I am wrong -- but I think that we have established a good rapport and communications to the fact that our first trip up to Washington, D.C., was very beneficial to the sense that when we talked to the elected officials in the State of Florida and also some other people that were involved with the transportation issues, that that helped immensely in getting the necessary funding to get 1-75 widened to where it is today. We also have been able to bring back additional funding because -- not only because of the rapport that we have with our lobbyists in Washington, but it's the idea that an elected official seems to carry some additional weight compared at the -- up in Washington compared to maybe the weight that we carry in Tallahassee. So I just want to make the record clear what takes place, and that I don't believe these are frivolous. We've been able to bring back some additional federal funding to Immokalee. We're also trying to work with our elected officials, both Diaz- Balart and also Connie Mack in getting an additional overpass that -- approved for the residents in Golden Gate Estates so that they Page 187 June 30, 2009 hopefully some day will have a better escape route in case of a wildfire, and I think that we've got the support of those transportation people. Again, as I said, that -- I think that our travel budgets are even, as far as I'm concerned, low compared to what it costs now for airline tickets. Now, as far as a particular commissioner who travels a distance that's even larger than the State of Delaware or Rhode Island, yes, he has to be a representative of the people; but to travel the distances and the mileage that he does in regards to taking care of the issues, whether it be in Everglades City or whether it be in Immokalee or in the outlying areas of the Estates, I think it's -- for him to use his own car, I would hope that the county would feel that going out there, taking care of the issues in the county, represents something that's take -- that is needed in regards to addressing issues with the citizens. So thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: County Manager, is it true that rooms were rented on Marco Island for this event? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, they were, and they were approved. COMMISSIONER HENNING: How many rooms? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can answer that. Two rooms were rented, and it was on our executive summary that we all approved under the consent agenda. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And it was also approved by the County Attorney in regards to -- and I had justification that we were having meetings late at night, and we also had a couple of meetings early in the morning, Florida Association of Counties. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you have any recommendations on how we can get to tax-neutral so we can move this on? We're not getting anywhere with this discussion. Page 188 June 30, 2009 MR. MITCHELL: Unless -- with the -- the operating expenses are less than 7 percent of the total amount. So in the operating expenses is the commissioners' travel, telephones, and then there's a little, which is miscellaneous supplies for the office. So it really limits, you know, because 94 percent of the budget is people orientated. COMMISSIONER HENNING: 64,000 is operational; 64,500? MR. MITCHELL: In the budget we've got 60,500. MR. GREENWALD: You'd have to -- you'd have to cut 42,600. So about two-thirds of what your operating expense is would have to be cut. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. MITCHELL: So we're still looking, you know, at-- because it's just -- it's so tight, other than it affecting people. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, is there any indication about salaries from the State of Florida? MR. MITCHELL: The commissioners' salaries for the budget have been maintained at the same level as they were in fiscal '09. The figures won't come out of Tallahassee until late August, but it's anticipated that there will be a slight reduction because it's based on population, and it is estimated that the population has decreased. So there should be some reduction there, but it -- how much that's going to be is probably minimal compared to what we're looking to cut. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Well, you know, Commissioner Fiala, I -- I think we just want to maybe get a consensus. There's a lot of unknowns here, but if we get consensus from individual commissioners, 1-- if you want consensus from me at tax neutral, there's guidance for Ian, and we'll find out from -- in September what our salaries are going to be. Then he can bring back something that's more reasonable. CHAIRMAN FIALA: We already voted on tax neutral though, didn't we, with adjustments? Page 189 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And do we vote on it again? COMMISSIONER HENNING: If that's your understanding, that's fine. I'm fine with it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. MR. MITCHELL: Okay. Thank you, Commissioners. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. First, I can't let this go. I mean, my integrity has been insulted. It really has been, Commissioner Coyle. I got to tell you I'm so disappointed because you haven't taken the time to research what's taken place. Example, tomorrow I'm going to go to Immokalee. I'm going to get up at six o'clock -- six o'clock in the morning -- 5:30 in the morning so I can be there for a 7:30 meeting. At that meeting I'm going to be approaching the Chamber of Commerce with a plan to be able to get the Indians to finance the road structure for Immokalee. The road's going from Naples to Immokalee and from Fort Myers to Immokalee. Remember they promised us 5 percent, and then they went back to it. The bill that's before the governor or the deal that's before the governor, it's before the Indians. Probably won't be approved. I'm trying to get together the people in that area to be able to support the initiative to reach out to our legislators. And I already talked to Matt Hudson, who is in -- basically in support of what I'm talking about -- to make sure that we include whatever deals were made in this particular bit of revenue to be able to get it there. And who's going to be the champions of that? It's going to be the people. I work very close with the people I represent. It's not because I enjoy going halfway across the country and getting up early in the morning. And it's -- and it's quite an expense traveling that type of distance. Page 190 June 30, 2009 When I came here it was an understanding that, you know, there was expenses involved with the cars and everything, and you could offset it. I spend a lot of time traveling, and my constituents greatly appreciate it. I got an area that -- 80 percent plus of the whole county to be able to cover, and I do it on a regular basis. And yes, I do need a lot of -- I eat up a lot of the mileage, no doubt about it. Some of the commissioners, with their districts being so tight because of the density, could probably cover it on a bicycle. I very much appreciate the fact that there's a county car here to be able to take the wear and the tear off the vehicle that I drive. And I very much appreciate that when I do drive my vehicle, I get a -- the federal stipulation for it for being able to help cover the cost of it. But there's other examples. When we had the recent meeting in -- over here in Fort Myers, Florida Association of Counties, I was up late in the evening talking to many of the representatives throughout the state. One of the biggest problems we've got coming up has to deal with the train wreck we're going to head into with the difference between the growth management bill, 360, that's been put upon us, and the fact that now the commissioners throughout the whole state are talking about going to a -- in favor of the -- what is it called, the -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Home-town democracy. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- home-town democracy. And believe me, both alternatives are absolutely terrible. I've been working with a number of them, and I carried that later in the day on Friday when everybody else had left to a meeting of the Regional Planning Council for the state in Marco Island at the Marriott. I presented the idea to a number of people there. They are backing it. And Ken Hennington from the Regional Planning Council is going to see what he can do about getting together a symposium Page 191 June 30, 2009 statewide to be able to see what he can do to bring the legislators together and the commissioners and all the interested citizens, including the chambers of commerce. I've been doing a lot of these things along the way. Some of them take root, some don't. But it's not a case where we're sitting idly by and letting the world go by us. I'm taking my position very seriously, and I really do want to be a productive person, and I want to see positive things come of it. We've seen a lot of positive things. It's beside me to be able to see where you're coming up with this, we've never made a difference. We've made tremendous differences, and some of the objects that came forward to this before the state legislative body would have been a lot worse if it wasn't for the commission interjecting itself. Remember what we went through with the business of the impact fees and following that from one end to the other, and we brought that down to its knees. Congratulations. Without Collier County taking the leadership in that, we would have been straddled with -- we'd have been straddled with some very, very disadvantages (sic) of legislation that would have enabled -- enabled us -- not enabled us to be able to collect the necessary funds to build the infrastructure. And I could go on and on, but I'm not going to. And I don't mean to demean you, but I mean, I really feel like I've been demeaned by your last presentation as far as how the money's being spent. I don't do these things because I truly enjoy being away from my house. I don't. I love being with my wife. I love being at home. I do it because I feel I owe something to the county, I owe something for the responsibility. For the people that elect me to the office, I owe that to them to be able to come up with meaningful ways to be able to make it work better. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we move on to the CRA? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. I have two people that have asked to Page 192 June 30, 2009 speak first. Commissioner Coyle, and then Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. There's probably not a person here who can't make the same speech, Commissioner Coletta. We all do lots of things to help our constituents and other parts of the county, as a matter of fact. The point is not what we do. The point is, we have a difficult budget situation, and our office manager is looking for a way to balance his budget, and we haven't done anything to help him. We have spent as if nothing has ever changed. That's the point. There is no substantial reduction of overall traveling expenses from this year to the previous year. We haven't -- we haven't felt the pain, and that's the point I've been trying to make all the time. We're asking our people to feel the pain. We're not feeling the pain. And I think -- the County Manager has foregone salary increases for several years, if I remember correctly, and he's done that voluntarily. And you know how hard he works. He works just as hard as you do. And so, this is not an issue of how hard you work. It is a matter of finding ways to reduce the costs to at least show the leadership to our county employees that we're willing to do things to reduce costs, too. That's all I'm interested in doing. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle, then I'm going to call on Commissioner Halas, then we're going to take a break before our staff leaves and so that our beautiful fingers can just take a little break there. So Commissioner Halas, let's wind this up with you, and then we'll come back to hear the CRA. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure. I'm going to cut my budget by $3,000, and I'm also going to turn in my cell phone. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I'll follow suit. I want mine cut $3,000, and I want the money to go to support of our aides. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't care where it goes. I'mjust Page 193 June 30, 2009 going to cut it $3,000. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I don't have a county-owned cell phone. I'm using my own without cost to the county, so -- otherwise, I'd do the same thing Commissioner Halas is doing. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Right now we're going to take a ten-minute break. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let's get this meeting back to order, and we'll move on with our CRA. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Did we finish with the county commission or did we ever start with the county commission? CHAIRMAN FIALA: I figured -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Did Ian just leave? Did he resign and leave? CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't blame him. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It was his understanding that the guidance and the vote was tax neutral. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So he's going to come back in September with a tax neutral. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, really. Did he take into consideration the $6,000 that Commissioner Halas and I just gave? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, actually it's $9,000. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it $9,000? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I did the same thing. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So 9,000. Did that get him where he needed to go? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, he needs to go a lot further. But he has some things that are coming up in August that might get us where we need to be. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Well, then-- Page 194 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are we finished with him? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Might as well finish with him. I thought you were gone, I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Tell us what some of the things are that you're talking about in August. MR. MITCHELL: No. There's just -- it will give me an opportunity to look at both the personnel services side and the operating expenses side to see, because we're -- you know, as I had said, we're still trying to reach $42,000, so -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've already given up my phone and I've given up my travel expenses -- MR. MITCHELL: Yes. COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- and I don't want my aide to go on -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Furlough. COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- furlough. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep. MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I expect to have the aide there at my beckoning call. MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you got 3,000 from me and you got 3,000 from Commissioner Henning. MR. MITCHELL: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Don't tell my wife. MR. MITCHELL: To bring you to-tax neutral, we're looking for 40,000. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Tax-neutral? MR. MITCHELL: To tax-neutral. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Was 40,000? MR. GREENWALD: 42,600-- Page 195 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, sir. MR. GREENWALD: -- would get you to tax-neutral. COMMISSIONER HALAS: So somebody's aide's going, but mine isn't. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mine isn't either, I guess, and neither is the commission -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: What suggestions do you have for August, did you say? MR. MITCHELL: Well, what it will do is give us an opportunity of looking at the budget and seeing -- making some definitive recommendations to you as to how we might, you know, accomplish those kinds of savings. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Ian, I wish you all the luck in the world with your pixy dust. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. MR. MITCHELL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: If I didn't spend 16,000 of my own dollars -- and I'm sure other commissioners have done the same thing -- to just carry through my job to go to the different things that I don't submit, I would throw some money in too, but I just -- I just don't have that, so I'm sorry. MR. GREENWALD: To keep your personnel services at the level they are, keep your aides working and everything, and yourself, you'd have to cut almost two-thirds of your operating expenses to get to that number. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't see where that's do-able, I'll be honest with you. COMMISSIONER HALAS: You can't do it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You can't do it. You're dealing with the impossible here. You want to -- you want to cut the feet from underneath the Collier County Commission so they can't interact with the public. Our obligation's to the public out there. Page 196 June 30, 2009 And, you know, I heard about setting an example and everything, and the example we're going to set is a bad example. We're not going to be able to respond in an orderly fashion. I wish that I had the kind of funds that some people have at this dais where money wasn't an object. My wife works for a living to help cover the costs. We both work very hard. And the idea that I can match dollar for dollar some of the things that another commissioner might be able to do is ludicrous, especially when I have a district that's, what, 20 times the size of that district, and the fact that I spend so much time in the field there in that district, and I don't do it for pure enjoyment. I do it because it's part of my job description. So I don't know where we're going with this, but I'm very, very concerned that we're going to get to the point where we're going to have a mechanism put together that's going to under-serve the public. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I know we should move on. Commissioner Coyle, do -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, let's make sure we understand something here. Nobody has said that you have to cut services here. I just identified $15 million. CHAIRMAN FIALA: 16.--- COMMISSIONER COYLE: 16.4. Okay, whatever it was. You have the option of using that to bolster whatever you want to do to maintain the level of service. So there is no reason to panic, and nobody is asking you or anybody else to match what somebody -- some other commissioner is doing, okay. All we're saying is, let's make an attempt to reduce our costs. There is nobody, I mean nobody, who in their own personal budget, can't find something to reduce to help out, okay. It's just not true. You either want to help out or you don't want to help out. That's okay. But the point is that we should have the services we need to serve the public, and we have the money to do it. If you don't want to help, Page 197 June 30, 2009 if you can't help, that's fine with me. I don't care. But, we should have the money for the services to be performed and we've got the money. There's no question about it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Took very much offense to the fact that trips that we make were junkets, and they're not junkets. And I take offense that you decided to use this as a bully pulpit in regards to something we're trying to do for not only the people here in the county, but also the commission itself, and I take offense to that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you can take offense at anything you like to take offense at. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let's hear from Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But the point is, we're talking about being responsible. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I am responsible, sir. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Let's hear from Commissioner Coletta, and then we're going to wind this one up, we're going to have -- we're going to ask Ian to go back and work with each one of us, see what we can do, if there's a way to get there, or maybe there will be some money to cover these costs. We'll work on that. But there's no need taking jabs at anybody. Commissioners Coletta, you want to finish this? And then we're going to go to our CRA's. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, just briefly. I didn't mean to offend anyone up here, it's just that I have a very strong allegiance to the people I represent, and I felt threatened for a moment. But I understand that there's a process we've got to work through. We did vote that we were going to go with a rev- -- a tax-neutral position. So we kind of put ourselves in the position where we are. But Commissioner Coyle brought an interesting point, and -- about the savings, and he still hasn't gone through them all, and we need to look at them. If those savings exist, we could apply them in Page 198 June 30, 2009 some other directions. That's what you just said, correct, Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's exactly right. Absolutely. That's what you're there for. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I hope I didn't offend you in any way with anything I said. COMMISSIONER COYLE: You didn't. It was never intended to be personal. It was an effort to get expenses reduced. Everybody has a high opinion of what their contribution is, and I'm not going to argue with that. We can disagree, but I'm not -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I do have a question-- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- for Commissioner Coyle, and this would be most helpful. Commissioner Coyle, we're going to be looking at all these different items out there that mayor may not be able to be cut, and hopefully we're going to find some of them that will work out to be able to work in the budget to be able to bring down some costs. Is there any way in your heart I could get about $250,000 for paved limerock roads? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Limerock roads? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll tell you what. You give up your travel budget, and maybe we can talk about it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So Ian, is that the end of your presentation? MR. MITCHELL: It is, Madam Chairman. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And let's move on then to the CRA's. Page 199 June 30, 2009 MR. JACKSON: Good evening, Commissioners. Penny and I flipped the coin, and I lost, so I get the first opportunity to receive your guidance. The Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Are those all of your notes on that little tiny piece of paper? MR. JACKSON: Yes, ma'am. It used to be very long, but as the day went along -- the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA is able to maintain its staff level. We took a 13.4 percent reduction in our tax increment financing because of the reduction in property values, and we had only one new construction proj ect in the area at the time. Of that, we have two areas in the Bayshore area, Commissioner Coy Ie, in your district. There was a reduction of 12 percent in property values. And in the triangle area, Commissioner Fiala, your area, it was a 15 percent reduction, so it averaged out to about 13.4. Since that -- this last year we've accepted more responsibility. We've gotten, received, accepted two MSTU duties for staff. We've got two major projects coming in. One on the Bayshore Drive area that we've just got a developer on and, of course, we're working on the triangle in your district, Commissioner Fiala. We have three residential proj ects that are on tap to come onboard within the next few years, and one commercial project. If you make your -- when you -- when you make your decision on what the millage rate will be, we accept that and will work within the budget. Projected off of what your numbers were and what we got from the county, I worked on three budgets, low end, medium, and high, all depending on where you set your millage, and I will adjust accordingly on those three budgets to maintain our operations. The budget that you have in your package there, there will have to be some modifications for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle area Page 200 June 30, 2009 because we've now assumed a greater debt service with the $13.5 million loan that you approved at your last meeting. And in that we will adjusted accordingly. We're going to reduce our grants and aid. We're reducing our travel and memberships. We're not going to do a CRA plan update this year. Our operational expenses would be adjusted accordingly, and our capital, we will keep some money in the capital. And the specific reason for that is that we've been offered some more land in and around the triangle pond area. And if we can acquire that, we can expand on the pond for stormwater and also get some South Florida Water Management District credits in that area to work on it. But that will be set aside in the capital part of the budget, and we will expend it only with your approval when it comes onboard. I can say that the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle area, the area has stabilized, and we can maintain the quality of life that we have now with a budget based on whatever millage that you set. The subject of furloughs, if I may bring that up, if that's okay with you, Commissioner. The CRA is not allowed to expend its tax increment funding outside of what the CRA planned and cannot spend it on anything that is a county mandated or county function. We could take a furlough as was recommended across the county and reduce us -- our staff by one workday per month, but we couldn't do anything with that money. We couldn't give it to the county to help CDS, transportation, or parks and rec. We couldn't do that. It would just sit there and just go into our reserves. The objective of the CRA is to gather this tax increment financing and to find proj ects to increase the quality of life and raise property values and make things better in the area and remove slum and blight. So I don't recommend any furloughs with us. We're a staff, we're fully loaded with 40-hour weeks, all four -- all four Page 201 June 30, 2009 members. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, David. One commissioner. Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't have a question for David. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay, fine. I'll try and remember that you're still here waiting. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll go like this. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Penny? MS. PHILLIPI: Okay. For the record, my name is Penny Phillipi. I'm the director of the Immokalee CRA. And basically, what I would like to do is run through the things that are on the expenditures. The personnel is three full-time persons. We have an admin. assistant, one project manager, and myself. Our operating expenses look kind of high. Looks like $427,200. And I want to let you know that 330,000 of that is for consultants primarily addressing our Immokalee Area Master Plan, RW A, finishing out that contract, and the other portion of that will, of course, be used to pay for our special cycle for our Compo Plan amendment. So that -- it looks like it's a lot of money, but it's all been spoken for or will be soon. On our capital outlay, as you know, that 200,000 is for Immokalee Stormwater Master Plan. We're very excited that the stormwater department has agreed to partner with us and start putting some proj ects forward so that we can get the water off the streets in Immokalee. This $200,000 will get a project shovel ready so that, perhaps, we can go after the next round of stimulus funds and some other USDA funds to help us start implementing our Immokalee Stormwater Master Plan. And then in grants and aid, as you -- as you know, we have already committed $100,000 a year to two separate developers for the Page 202 June 30, 2009 Esperanza Place. One is building 190, a multifamily apartment complex, and the other is building 60 single-family homes. CHAIRMAN FIALA: They're not low income though, right? They're middle income? MS. PHILLIPI: No. These were -- as you recall, this was two years ago that this came in -- came into effect. So they are -- 190 are farmworker rentals, and the 60 affordable rental -- or home ownership units. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. MS. PHILLIPI: But -- anyway, so we told each of those developers we would give them each $100,000 a year for three years. This also pays for infrastructure only, such as the retention pond, which are things that we, as you know, desperately need in Immokalee. So those are -- it is a very straightforward budget. It's very clean lines about the things that we want to address. What I want to say to you, because I -- as you know, I'm not as familiar with this entire budget process as I probably should be, but I would say that we are here at your pleasure, and we'll simply wait for your instructions. So if you want this reduced by 3 percent, it's easily done by our grants and aids by the travel -- same kinds of things that David was talking about, the travel of grant and aids with our facade grants, which, by the way, this was our very first year doing facade grants, a very successful program. We've done eight facade grants the first year, which is, you know, going a long way dressing up Immokalee, clean up, fix up. So those are the places that we would cut. We would cut in those grants and we would cut in travel and membership and those sorts of things. So whatever is your pleasure is something we can easily do. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. Penny, I think I misunderstood you. You said you're going to cut back in your grants. Page 203 June 30, 2009 MS. PHILLIPI: We could. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Explain that to me, please. MS. PHILLIP I : If we need to cut our budget, if you feel like this budget needs to be cut, that's the place where we would cut. We would reduce grants -- grant expenditures to local businesses, and we would cut from our travel or membership if you feel like we need to cut this budget at all. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. But the grants, that's money that comes from -- help. MS. PHILLIPI: No. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're talking about the grants internally? MS. PHILLIPI: The grants that we hand out to the-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. The grants you give out, not the grants you received. MS. PHILLIPI: I haven't got any of those we've received yet. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Forgive me. I'm saying to myself, why are they going to turn money down. I understand what you're saying. Now, we're talking about, you know, a tax-neutral budget, which is 3 percent below last year, and with that, you'd still have to make these cuts? MS. PHILLIPI: Not very much. I mean, it would be a very simple thing to do. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. There you go. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Like David just pointed out, even if they -- even if they cut their budget 40 percent, it just has to stay within their own budget. They can't give it to the county to help -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's true, that's true. So I mean, where are we with this? Is this something that should be an exception to the rule? MR. JACKSON: No, sir. If I may? Page 204 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Please. MR. JACKSON: Our budget is based on whatever you set the millage at and property values. It's a fixed number. And by state statute, the county must deliver it to the CRA's no later than 1 January of the beginning of each year. You graciously fill our budgets shortly after the 30th of September when the new budget year rolls in. We stay within that budget, so ever (sic) how much is in there, the simple math formula of property values times millage, 95 percent of that, and that is what comes to us, and then we stay within that budget. We can't go anywhere else. So we're bounded by those three numbers, and we live in that number. So with me, sir, what I would do is, like for our grants in aid that we give out to people, instead of putting $200,000 into the pot, I may reduce that 25,000 and reduce travel 25,000 or, you know, those numbers to stay so it's a zero-sum game. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: By any chance would you like Commissioner Halas's cell phone? I just thought I'd ask. MR. JACKSON: I would do my best to answer the questions that ring. CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's smart. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mark, I'm assuming on Page 8 the revenues are proj ected for in the TIF -- for in the CRA, those TIF moneys. They're not actually transfers from the general funds, but just based upon the CRA. Make sense? MR. ISACKSON: No. Commissioner, the way that works is, as David mentioned, the -- their TIF increment, they have a frozen base taxable value within the district. You take their taxable value, and that increment is applied against the taxable -- the tax rate that's actually set by this -- by this body. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. Page 205 June 30, 2009 MR. ISACKSON: And that's how they arrive at their tax increment revenue component, which is actually that transfer from 001 and 111. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: That's how that money flows to the tax increment financing area. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And what I'm seeing here is the increment? MR. ISACKSON: That's correct, based on -- based on today's taxable value and the tax-neutral millage rate. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. JACKSON: And Commissioner, just as -- where we were capped in my area, it was $288 million of property value. And whatever you set the millage at, that money goes to the general fund. This -- last year it was $1.3 million goes to the general fund for my area, and then I capture that, which is above and beyond that. So you are receiving money from our area to support general services in the general fund. And the same with Penny's, but I don't know what her base is. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. I understand that now, and I understand what you said about whatever -- wherever we set it is wherever we set it. I understand that. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would -- Penny? I would appreciate it if you could reduce your grants and transfer some of the moneys to David. MS. PHILLIPI: Really? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. MS. PHILLIPI: I was going to ask him for a loan actually. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't have any questions. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Actually if you could transfer it to the commission budget, that would be even more helpful. Page 206 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: You wouldn't have a travel budget at all then. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Anything else in this category? MR. MUDD: No, ma'am. I think you're done with CRA's and I think you're done with the staff presentations, and now I need to go to the cut list and see what we can agree to disagree with and try to come with the maximum millage rate you can get in 001 and 111 so that I've got something to put in an executive summary for the 28th of July. Okay. And without further ado, ma'am, if it's okay, I'll start. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Certainly. MR. MUDD: And let's go with 001 first, and then we can -- and I don't mean to cause anybody any eye reading problems, and I'm going to do this the best way that I can. Right on the top of the page -- on the top of the page, ma'am, and CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is this the handout that you gave us, Mr. Mudd? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no, no. We don't have that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay. MR. MUDD: Because it's been a product that's been changing, okay, as fast as -- the County Attorney's cut of 251- was the last thing that I added to this thing, so I didn't know where it was going to go yet. But on the top of the page, ma'am, what I tried to do in the 001, basically tell you what tax-neutral was, tell you what millage-neutral was, tell you what the total budget was on each, and the difference between the two and the capital, and that's that $30 million that's pretty evasive that we've been trying to chase for several months to try to make additional cuts to get closer to it. And what I tried to do on this next chart is to put down what the Productivity Committee had talked about for cuts on 001, and then I tried to verify amounts, and Janet knows that -- Page 207 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're going to have to slide that over so we can see it. MR.OCHS: Pan out. MR. MUDD: I'm sorry. I'll move it over, excuse me. And then what I tried to do is try to verify those particular dollars and try to keep it as clean as I could, because you have problems when you're moving things from different funds. And if -- you know, when you go from an enterprise fund to 001 -- and I tried to keep it as far as the millage rate is concerned so that you have -- you have an idea. Productivity Committee, for instance, recommended that it was -- on the County Manager's Office side was $6.1 million reduction, and then the sheriffs 4 percent attrition with another 1.1 in self-insurance was 6.1, so the subtotal, $12.2 million. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move it up now so we can see. MR. MUDD: I'm sorry. And so what I tried to do is to verify, eliminate matching of 457 requirement. I don't disagree with what the recommendation is. The problem is, the 450 -- -57 retirement is throughout the agency in different funds, and it doesn't just necessarily sit in 001. I mean, you've got folks over in public utilities, you've got people in community developments that basically get -- so when you eliminate the matching fund in 457, it isn't $400,000. I think it's about 128-, I'll have to go back downstairs to check. Purchase library books from the trust fund. We went that way, exactly as the Productivity Committee had recommended. I did mention in my remarks that you could get in -- you could reduce some trust as far as people's estates that they return to the library if they're looking for an additional augmentation in library services when they bequeath it to the county. And what we're doing in this particular case is we're taking those estate pieces that came to us in the trust fund, and we're using it to cover the costs for those books. I'm not going to argue. That's something that will have the effects in the future depending on who Page 208 June 30, 2009 decides to leave moneys to the county on their departure from this earth. Increased revenues for special events and beach parking. From what I heard over the -- the course of yesterday along with what I've read in the paper, I chose not to go down there at this particular time as far as an increase in revenue. So I basically said, no, we'll leave it at zero to be decided by that board, because you gave some directions to some folks to take a look at fees, and are they appropriate for boat launching and some other things, and we still have to come back to the board for that particular item. But to just say we're going to have 600- -- and you just have to understand the stuff in brackets versus the stuff not in brackets. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You can't see what it relates to, though, by the way. We can't see the -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If you could point to it when you're talking -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Maybe you can reduce it a little bit, but we can still read it, I think, Jim, and you can get the whole thing. CHAIRMAN FIALA: I can't see the subjects. Can you see the subj ects? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, sure. I can still see them. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Move them over. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, there. MR. MUDD: If you want, Commissioner, just to make -- for the ease of this, why don't I just go get you a copy. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, that would be good. MR. MUDD: It would make it so much easier for everybody, and I won't have to be up and down. I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, that would be nice. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can you give me-- CHAIRMAN FIALA: And now, you know which -- if you move it over on your thing just a little bit the other way, we'll be able to see Page 209 June 30, 2009 it -- no, a little bit more, little bit more, little bit more. Okay. That's good. We can see it. MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good. MR. MUDD: So I couldn't -- I couldn't say that that was -- that increase in revenue, so we left it at zero. Then this morning during the period that we had with admin. services, we agreed that that million-dollar cut that the Productivity Committee had recommended was do-able. We reversed the transportation transfer to Fund 111 as recommended by the Productivity Committee. That's not an issue. Reduce transportation lighting and mowing. Well, there was some discussion yesterday about lighting and mowing and safety and some other issues. And nothing against Norm, but you let Norman talk too long, okay, and I got a little lost listening to it on the speaker just a tad, but I believe you didn't decide to reduce lighting any more than you already had because of fuse issues in the control boxes. Norman, did I miss anything? MR. FEDER: (Shakes head.) MR. MUDD: I basically -- that reduction from the Productivity Committee is zeroed out. I reduced transportation capital to millage- neutral. That was also discussed yesterday, and that is also a reduction on this particular chart. Reuse capital for transportation funds of a million dollars. The discussion yesterday with Norman was -- I believe, was to do one or the other, and we took the higher of the two, okay, and cut it at 1.1. Now I'm -- I also -- , COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to talk with Norm in regards to this issue in regards to maintenance costs and any kind of concerns that we have in the upcoming year in regards to making sure that we can meet the requirements needed to repair bridges if they Page 210 June 30, 2009 need be. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And -- and I've just put it up here to kind of tally it, and then we -- there's going to need to be a discussion about -- for Norman, plus I've got some folks in OMB, particularly Ms. Susan Usher, that wants to discuss the reduction of 500,000 and 400,000, because she just wants to make sure that we're not double counting; reduce the reserves to '09 -- excuse me. Reduce the excess self- insurance reserves this morning for 1.7. So we're a little bit off between what the Productivity Committee recommended for 6.1 for the County Manager versus what I can verify at $2.8 million. This morning we had a conversation with the sheriff, and the sheriff offered up $3.2 million, and he also said that he would go take a look to reduce excess self-insurance reserves. He said he would go look. I believe it -- I believe we still need an answer from the sheriff to see how successful that's going to be as you decide to either cut that, depending on what his answer is, but he did not give you a positive -- he said he would go look. He didn't say, I could cut 1.1 or I could cut nothing. But when you add those numbers up, I get about a $6 million cut that I can verify to the general fund. What I tried to put down in the next box was that $6 million cut and what the cut value would be in order to the -- to the millage. So that's in the box, and depending on what the board tells us to do additional, we'll do that. What I also tried to capture was some of the things that were ongoing with the board over the last day and a half. First of all, you added some items. The agricultural agent is $31,400 . You decided to put $400,000 back into the budget for EDC because it wasn't in the budget. I mentioned on the first day during my introduction that you had $1.2 million worth of budget amendments that have been approved by the Board of County Commissioners, and you need to account for Page 211 June 30, 2009 them, and that's where that $1.2 million is. I also took the $600,000 that the sheriff said as far as additional turn-back from the mid-year cuts that he still owed, and that's in there. I also put in the County Manager's -- excuse me -- the County Attorney's adjustment of $251,000 that he had basically told us about. I also on this line above it basically said there was -- there was great dialogue with the board about one-day furlough -- one-day a month furlough for employees. In the 001, that equates to $1 million. And you can tally those numbers up so I haven't lost any visibility on anything that you talked about in the 001. Now, as soon as you're finished and satisfied with 001 and the conversation, then I'll be glad to go and start talking about 111. But basically between the two funds, there's about $10 million and -- that you could reduce millage in order to get to. So I'm prepared to talking about 111 whenever you'd like to talk about it. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have Commissioner Henning, Halas, and Coletta. COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, that was last time. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay, fine. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there other things that we can defer from 001 that we're expending in this present year? County Manager, I'm sure you've seen the discussion we had on those things that I pulled off the consent agenda. I think it was a healthy discussion, and I think it could come to fruition. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. If you -- on your chart -- when you -- or when we get to your chart, one of the things was to reduce the loan in 131 from the Community Development's needs to get, and the Productivity Committee's recommendation was to go find a fund in order to do it. What I had Marla do -- because she has -- excuse me -- some Page 212 June 30, 2009 funds that are very related to 111. She listed those rollover dollars and those particular proj ects, and I have a listing of that that comes close to 1.4 million, and that's where we would take that loan from, for Community Development's Environmental Services. So then -- because the board told Joe Schmitt to come back and present the rate studies, okay, and the board would consider those. Then I felt pretty assured that that $1.4 million cut could be taken off of the ad valorem as far as revenue is concerned and the board would still be safe for next year and not be -- get themselves -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: What about taking -- let me just throw that out there, and I hope I don't get anybody upset or anybody -- anyways. What about -- stormwater capital funds used to be out of the general capital improvement funds, and then we dedicated to stormwater. Can we take some of those moneys and pay down some -- our debt that we're using general fund moneys and put those -01 moneys back on this list? I guess -- you know what, can you think about it and get back to us? MR. MUDD: Sure. Commissioners that's not a problem. And what I'm trying -- what I'm trying to do is to summarize what we have -- what this board has discussed, try not to miss any of it so that we can get to whatever that millage is going to be so I can put it on the executive summary. Remember, on the 28th of July when you set that millage rate, that's the ceiling, okay. That doesn't mean you can't go down additionally as we go and answer more questions as we go through the summer and get back to you during hearings and things. Commissioner, there might be -- there might be some movement in that particular area, and I've discussed it with staff. I need to know exactly what our LASIP commitment is. I have mentioned to you before that you have about 46 million -- now, this all depends on impact fees not being legislatively removed from the face of the earth. Page 213 June 30, 2009 But you have a savings account, okay, that -- where you have used general fund moneys to pay the debt service down on impact fee debt, okay, for buildings and whatnot in the county. If the economy goes back, comes back -- and I believe it will. I just can't tell you how fast it will. Now, you have some dollars there that you could put up against stormwater projects, okay, and then you could reduce the millage rate, maybe this year if you choose to do so, or next year if you choose to do so, and you can still keep the program whole and still finish LASIP up. And so I've thought about that with staff, and -- and it will -- it will be something that the board has to discuss, and we have to talk about risk a little bit, because what -- what I don't want to sacrifice -- the board has an ordinance. This is -- this is how much millage and how it goes to a stormwater utility. But what I don't want to do in the risk is, you want to make sure that you have enough money to satisfy your LASIP requirement, okay, and if it -- and the other stuff kicks in, then you can reduce it down, and that's what I'm basically talking about. I hope I didn't confuse anyone. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. Does this -- I'm sure it does, but I just wanted to make sure. Does this reflect the money the Sheriffs Department is giving us through Development (sic) Animal Services? Because we agreed that that money was going to be to reduce the millage, not to be used to -- in addition to. Developmental (sic) Animal Services. The Sheriffs Department is offering the services at no cost where before they were charging us a dollar per hour. Is that money included in here? Because that should be, shouldn't it? MR. MUDD: No, sir. It's not -- it's included here because the -- the DAS budget had to reduce costs, and with the sheriffs addition of Page 214 June 30, 2009 some $107,000, it pretty much put Amanda Townsend's organization in the same footing as far as -- as far as their operating budget for this year, and they kept their programs whole. Now, if I missed anything, Marla, let me know. MS. RAMSEY: Yeah. That was a hundred and -- we had a $390,000 deficit there, and the sheriffs budget came in about 104-, 107-. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. MS. RAMSEY: And we took it off the top of that in order to get to our whole, and then you approved a 3 percent budget, and we're going to get there. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. MS. RAMSEY: So I think it's already been accounted for in the DAS budget. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Doesn't hurt to ask. MS. RAMSEY: Yeah. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Feder? Now, I don't need you -- I don't want you to hold anything back. I want you to tell me exactly what we're proposing here for the items that are over in the far right-hand column related to transportation and what that will mean. MR. FEDER: Basically what you've got on your bridge program -- I was asked yesterday to come back to you with some more information. You've got a program that is scheduled to use $5 million next year. If you take a million of that out, we're not going to be able to address the five that were specifically identified as having some deficiency from the state. The picture you have there -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's the first item there, the reduced -- MR. FEDER: That's the Chokoloskee Bridge. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I'm sorry. I'm talking about line item. This says reduce administrative services, repairs, and Page 215 June 30, 2009 maintenance. MR. FEDER: It's in to there. It was noted as the bridge maintenance. It's actually bridge repair and replacement. It's a capital item. It's shown as 1.1 million under bridge transportation's capital to millage neutral. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I mean, this would be insane to do that. I agree with you 100 percent. We have a serious situation out there. We had a long discussion about why we weren't going to do it, and now it's showing back up in here again. MR. FEDER: And just so you can see -- because I wasn't able to fully answer, in all due respect. Commissioner Coyle has asked some very good questions. And I told him, correctly so, that we're going after the bridges that we had some deficiency issues on. We recently got scour reports from a number of other bridges. That's what the 800,000's for. We got from you the authority to move on design. We're moving on Chokoloskee repairs right now and finding that those are becoming more significant. That was the first picture I put up there for you. We're designing the White Bridge right now, and we're designing as well the Goodland Bridge, and those are slated next year to go to construction. We also have some significant scour to work to do. That's the sub-base for the foundation of bridges based on the state's report. And so while we have those specifically, we had hoped to get into bridges in the Estates by establishing a program of five million a year, but right now that's going to be taken up, at least next year, totally by just the repairs from the five that were found deficient in the last FDOT bridge report. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't care whose district they're in, we can't allow that to go forward. Who about the other items that are on here? MR. FEDER: You did have a request by the Productivity Page 216 June 30, 2009 Committee for 400,000 in two areas. One of them was lighting, about 150-, I believe it was. And there we had noted that we couldn't turn off -- we had to either turn on or turn off. But what we do recognize is we could do what we're doing now on a reoccurring basis each year, and that is, when we have the longer light time, people have the ability out at night with more light time available to them -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I don't see that on here. MR. FEDER: -- we could turn that off. That's under the 400,000. It wasn't recommended necessarily by-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, let's not get into the ones that weren't recommended because I don't think we want to -- MR. FEDER: But I did want to clarify, because what I told you and Bob Tipton had told you is that we could not turn them off, and that's -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I remember all that. MR. FEDER: The 160- would turn it off. We've had some comments come in as to why they're turned off now. But I didn't want to mislead you. We could work with that. The other issue was resurfacing, which we're pretty-well underfunded on. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, but I don't see that on here. So, I mean -- MR. FEDER: That's in the 400-. MR. MUDD: And what I -- and what you also have to do, N orman, real quick, okay, is -- we're bouncing around again, and I feel like I'm listening to you on the microphone from yesterday. What you have on the -- in front of the Board of County Commissioners is you have two items, okay, reduce transportation capital to millage neutral, okay, and reduce contingencies for transportation of capital funds. There were two items that were sitting on the Productivity Committee recommendation, okay, and I basically went with the higher of the two in that particular regard. Page 217 June 30, 2009 Now, how does that relate to your bridge program, and how does that relate to resurfacing or whatever, as you're talking about it with the board right now? MR. FEDER: The 1.1 million as specifically slated, that would have to come out of the bridge program, which, as I pointed out to you, we've got programmed. The one million, as Jim pointed out that was recommended, was a reduction in the contingency. We agreed that our percentage was higher, but we had a number of things that made us want to go to a higher contingency, and that is, essentially our revenue stream is a lot more volatile at the moment, to say the least. We're about down 70 percent in impact fees. We've stretched those over the years now. We've assumed favorable bids on contract. We feel somewhat comfortable on that end and what we've got in the program. And then lastly, we've got a number of litigation issues out there. And, again, the thing was, okay, wait until the next year, pull some money out, but where do we feel the money will come from next year when we're in possibly another down year. So our concern was not to move that, but that's the discussion that was had. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So in other words, the 1.1 million which would be for the bridges, to reduce the contingency by a million dollars would also do harm to the program that's out there? MR. FEDER: It would put us in a position that if we had risk, we'd have to come back, and we have not come back. We didn't borrow against our impact fees. We have not come back against the general fund reserves. I was told that's an option for us, and that's what we'd have to do if we got in that position. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. MR. FEDER: But I also should point out to you, if you look on Page Capital 7 in your budget, of that contingency that we have there, only three million of that 3.7 is gas tax. The balance is all impact fees. Page 218 June 30, 2009 The impact fees I can't do anything with as far as that's concerned. Now, within that gas tax, what I get in ad valorem comes in and goes into my gas tax fund. I can't tell you what percentage of that is gas tax or ad valorem. Generally my gas tax is about three times my ad valorem money in my business program. But basically the only thing you have is the gas tax with some ad valorem, potentially, and then the impact fee is the bulk of the rest of that contingency. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. If I may continue here just a little bit more. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yep. And then I'd like to hear the Productivity Committee weigh in on this, okay? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I appreciate that. I'll just be a few minutes here. The library books from the trust fund. We don't see that as being something that somebody would challenge us from the estate? MR. MUDD: No, sir. I don't think they'll challenge us. I believe it goes against maybe the intent of what -- you're using the money -- the people gave it to go to the Library Trust Fund. I don't believe it had a special purpose in mind when it was there. I believe the person very benevolently basically put those dollars over time in that trust fund. It's there. I'm not too sure -- if you're going to use it to fund library books, purchase library books, and you're going to take it off of the tax base, I'm not too sure you're going to get a whole lot of donations to that trust fund in the future. I can't -- for certainty, I can't tell you what that's going to be. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. MR. MUDD: And I can't tell you -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm going to -- I'm going to leave it up to my fellow commissioners to try to decide. I'm not too sure what to tell you on that. Let's see which other one here. Reduce administrative service Page 219 June 30, 2009 repairs and maintenance. Is that going to do -- MR. MUDD: We're okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're okay with that. MR. MUDD: That was fine with that one. We're also okay with the reverse transportation on 111. You'll notice that here it's an add, but when you go to 111, it will be a cut, and reduce the excess self-insurance reserves, 1.7. We discussed that this morning. That's not a problem. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One more time. That doesn't put us in a bad position next year when we -- MR. MUDD: As long as -- as long as this board didn't get specific on how I can go get those self-insurance reserves and you stay away from the health side of the house, we're okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. MR. MUDD: The only part I'm still trying to wrestle with is, Norman's bridge program is 1.1, and then he talked about in his discussion the $1 million that's right underneath of that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. MR. MUDD: That says reduce contingencies. And I believe if the board agrees that if Norman gets himself in a bind that he can come to the reserves at a later time in order to get that $1 million, okay, then it cuts his risk down, and I believe that $1 million is still okay to be on the chopping block. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So what you're saying, we could take that $1 million, that if Norm does need it, he just has to come back before this commission and ask for it from reserves? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Golly, we almost got enough to reinstate Commissioner Halas's cell phone, and I really think we should. Hey, I have a problem with it, and I'll tell you what it is. I don't know about you, but there must be about 4- or 500 people that have Page 220 June 30, 2009 my cell phone number. You're going to -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't ever call. COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's your constituency. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, so how are they going to get ahold of you from now on? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't know, email. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I don't think so. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So let's hear from the Productivity Committee. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've just got a question. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HALAS: The reserves, what reserves -- because we're cutting in the reserves. Where are we getting the reserves for if Norm needs this for bridge repair or road repair to take care of the maintenance for the upkeep? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You already got the money. MR. MUDD: We've got basically 313. MS. USHER: Yeah. It would be Fund 313, the gas tax fund, because that's where the general fund money goes into. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And are we sure we're going to get the amount of gas tax money every year, the same amount? MS. USHER: No. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Because that's very -- MS. USHER: The state has -- MR. MUDD: What Norman basically said in his discussion, leveled out. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep. MR. MUDD: Okay, because of the price of gas and some other things, plus the reduced activities -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Mileage. MR. MUDD: -- as far as building is concerned has pretty much leveled. So I can't tell you it's going to be the same. But if you're Page 221 June 30, 2009 going to take risks, this is a place that you can do it. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't feel comfortable with our road system, not after we invested so much money into the road system. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why don't you make a motion. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let's hear from Productivity Committee, then you make a motion, okay? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MS. VASEY: Okay, thank you. I did have a couple of things that I wanted to make -- at least question. It's my understanding that when you approved the DAS program, Domestic Animal Services, you approved it at $390,000, the millage -- no, the tax-neutral level. MR.OCHS: Correct. MS. VASEY: That was the decision, okay. Now, when the sheriff comes in and gives you $100,000, then that's in addition. So you need -- so there is a 100,000 -- yeah, $100,000 there. Because if you approved it at millage-neutral and the sheriff then has come in and given you $100,000, then you can take $100,000 off of what you approved at the tax -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: But we didn't do millage-neutral. We approved it at tax-neutral. MS. VASEY: I'm sorry, I'm sorry. It's late. Tax-neutral. You approved it at tax-neutral, which gave them 390,000 over millage- neutral, okay. So - and then the sheriff comes in and gives them $100,000. So there's $100,000 there that can be shown as a savings. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's what I just got through asking a few minutes ago. MS. VASEY: Well, that's the way I understand it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I think our motion that we Page 222 June 30, 2009 made at the time recognized the fact that we were going to be using that separate to be able to bring down the millage. MS. VASEY: Right. But it's not listed on here is what I'm saying. You should show $100,000 for DAS. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then I was right? MS. VASEY: You were right, absolutely. I'm trying to tell you, you're right. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. MS. VASEY: I'm not doing a good job. And the other thing I wanted to bring up is, what Norman was trying to tell you on the lighting was that he is agreeing that if they turn off the lights -- you know, we talked about something that doesn't work, but they did come back and say to us that if they turned off the lights during the day, during the daylight savings period when it's not needed, that they could save $160,000. James (sic) Tipton said it, and I think Norman was saying the same thing. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Bob Tipton. MS. VASEY: So there's $160,000 there that needs to be reflected here, too. Because they're saying without harm, and the way they're doing it exactly this year would save $160,000. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, good. MS. VASEY: So could we add that? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. MS. VASEY: Okay, thank you. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Does that have a reflection on our mowing? MS. VASEY: Well, no. You didn't say anything about the mowing and I didn't say anything about it. That's your decision. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Norm, does this have any reflection on our mowing? CHAIRMAN FIALA: I still have Commissioner Coyle, Halas and Coletta. Page 223 June 30, 2009 MR. FEDER: We would -- we would request that you not attach that to the mowing and to the other work given what we have for a workload out there. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I've got a -- I've got a question, if I may, ma'am. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sure. MR. MUDD: Norm? MR. FEDER: Yes, sir. MR. MUDD: You answered it and you didn't answer it, okay? I want to make sure that I'm clear on this. If what -- if what I'm getting right now -- and Mrs. Vasey was listening to the discussion yesterday -- that the lighting for daylight savings time out of that 400K, that 160- is the number instead of the 400. Now, what you just said about mowing and whatnot -- and you didn't want it included -- so are you agreeing that the $160,000 could be the deduction instead of the 400,000 from the Productivity Committee? MR. FEDER: Yes. MR. MUDD: Okay. MS. VASEY: Yes. The 400,000 was the mowing plus the lighting. MR. MUDD: I understand. MS. VASEY: Oh, okay. MR. MUDD: I'm just trying to make sure what's on which column and how he just answered the question. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So it wasn't a hundred and -- I mean, it was 160- rather than -- MR. MUDD: Yeah, so on -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- 240-, right? MR. MUDD: Ma'am, instead of -- instead of the 400,000-- CHAIRMAN FIALA: So I'm talking about the remaining balance. I was just -- Page 224 June 30, 2009 MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. Instead of $400,000 that's there for lighting and mowing, the County Manager's verification amount would be a reduction of 160,000 there instead of zero. Okay. Now, I have to go back and add $107,000 from the sheriff for Domestic Animal Services, okay, as a -- as a revenue source and add it to that particular list. How'm I doing, Janet, okay? MS. VASEY: Perfect. MR. MUDD: All right. MS. VASEY: That's all I had to this point. I just wanted to clarify those issues. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you. But stay close. Anytime you have something, just give me a nod or something, okay, or step up to the podium. MS. VASEY: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm interested in where the communications tax increment goes. MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, that's revenue in FY2009 -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: -- that we're receiving this year. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: And the impact of that money being received this year obviously helps our carry-forward going into FYI0. And depending on what we do with the 111 slide -- maybe we can get to that when the County Manager's ready to do it. Maybe it would be more apropos to comment on that at that time. But I don't want to segregate '09 with '10. The only thing that we're doing -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're doing it with the Clerk's money. MR. ISACKSON: I understand. The only thing we're doing Page 225 June 30, 2009 with this money, that's one-time money that's helping us in '09. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. MR. ISACKSON: It's helping our carry-forward into '10. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. MR. ISACKSON: Now, that can drive some of the -- some of the issues that are being considered for budget purposes in '10. That will help certainly, especially with the maneuvering that you're doing with Mr. Schmitt's $1.4 million loan and things of that nature, but probably more apropos to talk about it at the time that we talk about the 111. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's not in the 111 right now though, is it? MR. ISACKSON: No. But recognize whatever you do in 111 in '10 obviously will be -- will reflect the amount of -- on the revenue side the amount of money that you have not only in carry-forward, but your property tax revenue. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. MR. ISACKSON: So your ability to go -- your ability to get to deeper cuts in 111, you're allowed to do that simply by the fact that you've got that windfall, and that carry-forward's helping you do that in'10. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, how about parks and rec, $500,000 excess from the Sugden Park capital project; what did we do with that? MS. RAMSEY: Commissioner, that particular fund that you've identified is an impact fee fund, so you can't do anything with that. But, Commiss- -- I did give you $1.4 million from my capital to help you with the projects. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And where is that? MS. RAMSEY: It's in the 111 fund. COMMISSIONER COYLE: The 111 fund, okay. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Page 226 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it increases the carry-forward in 111. Okay. Now, I see -- my notes include $4.4 million for the sheriff. You have five million for attrition, sheriffs attrition. We're not there yet because the sheriff hasn't adjusted the attrition rate. MR. MUDD: And what I have on the chart is, that's what the Produc- -- remember the topic. It's Productivity Committee general fund recommendation, and they got into the sheriff 4 percent attrition. What the sheriff basically said today is, they didn't agree with that, but they offered up $3.2 million. On the County Manager's verification amount, that's what I've got right there, okay. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I've got 4.4. MS. VASEY: I do have one correction. It was 3.3 -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. MS. VASEY: -- that the sheriffhad offered. MR. ISACKSON: $3,285,000. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. MS. VASEY: Yeah. I call that -- I always round up. It was 3.3. And then the other part that you're thinking about is the 1.1 that was related to the reserves, the self-insured reserves, which Jim said that that's still under discussion, that he hasn't totally given that up. He's -- MR. MUDD: I can't tell you -- if the sheriff doesn't agree to it, you've got nothing. I can't -- I can't just say it's $1.1 million and you reduce the millage, then all of a sudden the sheriff says, whoop, self-insurance reserve needed to be blankety-blank, then I've got myself -- we've got ourselves in a hole. So what I basically didn't say -- or what I didn't do is I didn't add it. I called it zero, and we're going to have to wait for the sheriff to come back to tell us yes or no, and you can reduce the millage more based on that response that I get back from him. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So you really should have Page 227 June 30, 2009 3.280 then, right, rather than 3.2, right? I mean -- MR. ISACKSON: You can round to 3.3. COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, $80,000 is -- MR. MUDD: Make it 3.3, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. MUDD: Look, and I'm going to just -- the math showed up this morning. He mentions one thing verbally, he shows you a slide, and I'm sitting there going, okay -- I'm reading and writing at the same time and I'm going, I'm not too sure my math came out the same way his did, but we're in the ballpark. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And then you've got your facilities repair and maintenance of one million and the excess self-insurance 1.7. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we've got those. All right. Now, what I -- you said you netted this out and it comes up to about 12 million. I don't see that anywhere. What -- did I misinterpret what you said? MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, you look at the Productivity Committee recommendation column versus the last column on the right, which is the County Manager's verification column. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. MR. ISACKSON: I thinks that's probably where there was a little misunderstanding. MR. MUDD: Sure. What the Productivity Committee recommended, as they looked at their General Fund 001, it came out to be $12.2 million. Right now I can only verify. MR. OCHS: Six million. MR. MUDD: Six million. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right. MR. MUDD: And so what I -- what I did is I laid it down. The Caribbean Garden piece, I mentioned to the board yesterday that that Page 228 June 30, 2009 is not really a cut. That's just going away. So I chose not to go into that particular arena. The taxpayers will notice that that is not on their tax bill and it doesn't have a millage and it won't create moneys leaving their particular household when the Caribbean Gardens is paid off. But it would be on the TRIM notice that says the Caribbean Garden millage rate is zero, and they'll see that their referendum has been paid off. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so the $6 million under your verification column then we could consider to be generally the minimum, and if some other adjustments come in from the sheriff as discussed and if we can reduce some of the stormwater charges, we can save perhaps -- if you only took a third of the stormwater costs that are budgeted, you're going to save $3 million. MR. MUDD: Yeah, it's .05 mills. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. So you're going to be up around nine or ten million fairly easily. MR. MUDD: If that's what the board directs. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, even if the sheriff doesn't come in with more. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And so what I tried to do is capture as much as I could. And, again, we can come back again and capture the lighting district -- excuse me -- the lighting day light savings time, we can capture the 107- for the sheriff for DAS, we can -- we can take a look at going to 3.3 million versus 3.2 because Janet likes to round up, and we'll take a look at all those particular issues. What I tried to do in this box, okay, on this slide is to basically say, okay, tax-neutral general funds would be 3.6009. If you take a look at the $6 million worth of county-verified cuts at this particular time, you could reduce the millage .0861, and your maximum millage for the July 28th executive summary for the general fund would be 3.5148. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas? Page 229 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I'm just going to put my two cents worth in in regards to watershed management and stormwater. We still have a number of areas in the county that are being inflicted with heavy stormwater because the drain system was not properly set up, and I believe that's probably true in the Golden Gate Estates area, and I know that there's some issues still in District 2 that are still pending. So I would hope that we would look at that very carefully before we start cutting any funding on stormwaters, and I believe there's still some issues, as you stated earlier, in the LASIP. But I think also the watershed management, that's something that we are going to be instructed to carry forward and get that taken care of hopefully by the end of this year or the end of fiscal year 2010. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. Okay. I've been going through this, and I'll tell you, I think we've got something that will work. I really do. And Commissioner Coyle, I hope you realize that I was sincere when I made that motion, that I wanted to come back and visit this. What I'd like to do is ask the County Manager -- we do have a number of cuts here. What can we do to be able to restore, at least in part, the commission budget to be able to serve the public? MR. MUDD: Okay. Commissioner, one of the -- on the bottom of this sheet, okay -- and I'm going to shift a little bit, because I tried to keep track of some of the changes and the sheriffs turn-back and, you know, what's a cut and what's an add. And I just talked to Mark over my shoulder based on, you know, lighting and the sheriffs $107,000 and what the millage rate -- and he says, look it, if that 3.5148 mill is approved by the board for the 001, we can work on the differences in here and get it resolved before the 28th of July. If they go -- if you decide to go below that, then I'm going to Page 230 June 30, 2009 have trouble with this particular piece. Now, why did I point that out? Because you -- you have $1.2 million worth of budget amendments that are out there. I'm still looking for the sheriffs turn-back for midyear at 600,000; attorney's adjustment, I heard it. We'll get that resolved; the EDC was a plus up; the ago agent is a plus up; and the furlough is a million dollars worth of cuts. So we'll get all of that worked out. Do I believe based on what I heard Commissioner Coyle -- and I don't mean to put you on the spot, sir, but I guess I am putting you on the spot just a little bit. But what I heard Commissioner Coyle's intent when he was talking build the one-day-a-month furlough is, there's ways that we can leverage that particular cut in order to make sure that we don't have detrimental service blackouts in particular -- and you didn't use those words, but I'm interpreting what you said -- that you don't have blackouts in certain offices when people are looking for critical service. And I believe if that is, indeed, the intent -- and you also told Mr. Foreman (sic) to go on out there and find out what he can do with the budget in his particular office. And if it looks like -- that there is going to be a serious blackout, so to speak, in the board office, then we can come back to the board and get that resolved based on the millage rate that's being suggested here. So if we're talking about a 30K difference, I believe the board has options in order to do that, and we can bring it up in July, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm going to make a motion at this time that we put the cuts forward as far as purchasing the library books from the trust fund, $200,000; reduce administration service, repairs and maintenance, one million; the -- reduce transfer to Fund 111, 1,200,000. MR. MUDD: That's not a reduction. That's an add, and you'll see the reduction on 111. All this is is moving money. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Then with that noted-- Page 231 June 30, 2009 I'm going to skip over reduced transportation capital, because I don't think that would be appropriate. And next one would be the -- reduce excessive self-insurance revenues, 1.7 million. And then back on down to the sheriff reduction, whatever, 3.3, I guess, is the way we decided on that. I got three different numbers down here. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, 3.3 is what I heard. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: 3.3. And the -- then recognize the add-ons of the agricultural agent, 31,400; the EDC, 400,000; budget amendment approved in financial year 2009, not including forecast, 1.2 million; sheriffs turn-back, negative 600-; and County Attorney adjustment, negative 251- -- 251,000. Did I cover it all? MR. MUDD: The one-day-a-month furlough and 001. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And direct the County Manager to come up with an equitable and fair plan for the county commission's office. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did you also include one-day furlough for COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I did not. CHAIRMAN FIALA: That wasn't included, County Manager. COMMISSIONER HALAS: In fact, I'd like to call Len Price up and -- if she's got what the impact would be on our employees in regards to this. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And there's a motion on the floor. He named all of those things. Is there a second to his motion? COMMISSIONER HALAS: In regards to everything except the -- at this point in time the one-day furlough; is that correct? CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Also, too, I eliminated the transportation -- what was it -- transportation capital millage-neutral. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. That $1.1 million, and the discussion was COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep. Page 232 June 30, 2009 MR. MUDD: -- the million -- is it a million or is it a million-one based -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, but I didn't include that in my motion. That's the money we need for the bridges, to repair the bridges? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think -- I think it would be a disservice to this community if we didn't take care of those bridges. We just seen an example of what it looked like, and we're putting the public at great danger if we don't start the program going forward. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. The discussion -- if I may add, the discussion was, Norman could come back and reduce his contingencies for transportation capital fund, then if he needs it, to come back to the county commissioners in order to get that million dollars from reserves. I'm just sorry -- I can't change the slides as far as it's moving. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I understand. That -- the transportation capital millage-neutral, I meant to include that. Which one is it, the one with the bridges? MR. MUDD: Yeah, that's the one -- that's the one you're talking about, millage-neutral. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He'd have to come back? I mean, we've already identified it as a need. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, all I'm saying to you is, this shouldn't be 1.1. It should be $1 million below it, and we'll just cross that part -- piece out and make it, Norm to reduce his contingencies for transportation of capital funds by a million dollars. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, yes, that's correct. MR. MUDD: And that's where the discussion was, and he could come back and address it if the need arises with the board to come out of reserves, and he would bring it out of 313. Page 233 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then reduce contingency for transportation capital fund, $1 million. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That changes the total to 2.7 rather than 2.8. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. If you -- if you'd like, after this is over -- okay. Because, Commissioner, we're in the ballpark. I mean, you're setting the cap and we can bring her on -- we can bring her on down in July and get it -- and get it down into the nitty-gritty, okay, and that's all I'm trying to -- that's all I'm trying to get at. And I'll make sure Janet rounds everything up. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a second. Janet? MS. VASEY: I just had one little thing I'd like to mention. The line called revenue reserve, it's based on what your actual millage rate is. There will be a reduction to that, maybe as much as 200- to $300,000 because you will be -- if you -- if you revise this millage rate, as you're about to do, there will be less of a need for revenue reserves. I don't know exactly what it would be, but I'd say ballpark 2- or 300,000. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But Janet, couldn't we address that in July when we come back to the meeting and we identify that? MS. VASEY: Right. I'm just saying that there is a little bit extra there on that line, and that's all I want to say. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I kind of hope we're not done. I sure hope that we can keep digging and find more -- MR. MUDD: And what we'll do -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- resources we can tap. MR. MUDD: Commissioner Coletta, if I may, what we'll do is we use this same form, okay, and if we cross something out and we added it and we adjusted it, so it's not like you're not going to see it Page 234 June 30, 2009 again as we're -- as we're bringing it down. MS. VASEY: Okay. MR. MUDD: Now, the board stopped at the one-day-a-month furlough so far in this motion. Without the one-day furlough, we've got increased costs, Janet, even though you're doing reductions. So there's -- you know, you've got to balance the budget, so to speak. If you have any more questions on the reserve issue -- MS. VASEY: It is what it is. MR. MUDD: Okay. That's right. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And we've got to add in the $107,000 that the sheriff is -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct, we didn't add that in, and I want to add it in at this time. MR. MUDD: We have it all in there. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Fiala. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A second on that? CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion on the floor and a second. Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Discussion. Please, it's getting late in the day, and my mental gymnastics are slowing down. But this is going to result in a 15 percent tax increase if I calculate this correctly. MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, let me -- let me just explain what happens between now and July 15th, which is, according to TRIM, I have to provide you with a tentative budget. That millage rate that we set with that tentative budget on the 15th essentially goes into the TRIM notice that goes out in August. You have two further opportunities after the TRIM notice goes out to reduce your millage rate, the July 15th and a subsequent one on the 28th. When you approve a tentative budget, you set the maximum Page 235 June 30, 2009 millage rate. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: You have two -- I'm getting to your question though, sir. I'll get to it. But you've got two other opportunities to reduce your millage rate. You set tentative millage rates on the 10th of September, and then in your final budget hearing on the 24th of September, you set your final millage rate. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: So I think what the County Manager's trying to say is, there are a lot of numbers that are being thrown around here at this point. We're trying to get our spreadsheets updated. So-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: -- we can give you that information. COMMISSIONER COYLE: All I'm saying to you is this number is going to appear in the Naples Daily News tomorrow morning, and somebody is going to sit down with a calculator and they're going to say, those commissioners are increasing my taxes by 15 percent. Now, if that's not right, let's correct it right now before it appears in print. COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're still working on this. We haven't got down to the nitty-gritty yet. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You want to say something, Janet? MS. VASEY: I -- no. 14 percent is what you've got right now. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what I said. MS. VASEY: No, but it's what you started with at tax-neutral. Now, you've made adjustments of over $6 million, so it's going to be something less than 14. I don't know what. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it's the difference between 3.1479 and 3.5148, which is very close to .45, which is very close to 15 percent, if I have not transposed -- MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, actually the percentage Page 236 June 30, 2009 increase is 11.7 percent. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, 11.7 percent. So what is going to happen here is that -- I see the headlines right now, 11.7 percent tax increase by Collier County Commissioners. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, that's because you gave them that information. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, they're going to calculate it. They know how to do that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know, Commissioner, you're talking like that, but how many years we paid 3.57 on a lot higher property values? This is going to be so much less than what they were paying for many years? And I just want to make sure we never slip back to where we were where we cut taxes to the point where we didn't fix our roads, we didn't build our roads, we had a seeping sewer system, and we had a stinking landfill. I mean, we have to make sure that we also cover our expenses. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, okay. But you have to understand that the homesteaded properties are not going to benefit from the decline in value. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Homesteaded properties for years have benefited. It's just too bad because of the economic situation that this is kind of a year that they're going to see an increase, and I don't have any control over that. That was part of the Amendment I issue. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You, yourself, said at the beginning of the meeting, if we did nothing, they're still going to see an Increase. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I remind you, I think we said that we had a 13 percent devaluation. MR. ISACKSON: In unincorporated areas. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And so if we were at about 11 percent -- I mean, it's not -- the trouble is, is that imbalance Page 237 June 30, 2009 that's built into it that we can't do anything about. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't agree with that, but nevertheless. You take whatever story you want to take. CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have a motion on the floor and we have a second. Okay. All those in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, man. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's a 3-2. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Now I'd like to have Len Price -- we want to -- now we're going to discuss this -- the Productivity Committee's recommendation of the furlough here, and if Len could -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, that wasn't the Productivity's suggestion. That was -- that was Commissioner Coyle's suggestion. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I thought the Product- also offered various personnel service options, including one-day-a-month furlough. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It was Productivity Committee -- CHAIRMAN FIALA: They didn't do that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, they did. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That went away. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It did go away. MS. VASEY: We put that in as option one that there -- we just gave you information on how much money would be saved if you had a one-day furlough or if you had a 2 percent reduction in payor you did the Drop Program, but we made no recommendation on any personnel situation. Page 238 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I just want to make sure that we have something -- it's something that was brought up. It's something that was looked at. And I want to see what the average salaries are if Len has any of this information available. MS. PRICE: Commissioners, a one-day-a-month salary decrease is about a 4.6 percent pay cut to each employee. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. MS. PRICE: Based on where a person's salary range might be, that would range from 100 to $300 maybe a month. COMMISSIONER HALAS: A pay cut? MS. PRICE: As a pay cut, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And that's, like you said, based on whatever salary range they are? MS. PRICE: Right. It's just under 5 percent pay cut. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And that includes all of the directors also? Is that what you're basing that on? MS. PRICE: Yes. It's, you know, simple math; 96 hours divided by 2,080 is 4.6 percent. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what -- and did -- was there any pay raises last year? The only raise that I think there was is cost of living; is that correct? MS. PRICE: There was a cost-of-living pay increase last year, I believe it was 4.3; is that correct, Mr. Mudd? MR. OCHS: 4.2, 4.2. MS. PRICE: 4.2. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And did the directors also get 4.2 pay raise? MS. PRICE: Everybody got a cost-of-living increase unless they were at the maximum of their pay grade. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Unless they were at the maximum of their pay grade, okay. And what would be the lower echelon, the -- let's say, the people Page 239 June 30, 2009 that are somewhere -- what's the average pay scale money-wise for the average employee? MS. PRICE: The average employee is in about the $50,000 pay range. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And what would be -- the cut then would be, what, about $200? MS. PRICE: About 2 -- just under $200 a month. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And how do you think that would affect the morale of this -- MS. PRICE: Commissioners, you're putting me on the spot here. Obviously a pay cut is never a happy day. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to -- I'd like not to go in that direction at this point in time unless we're really forced into it. MR. MUDD: I believe the motion that was passed did not have that one-day furlough in it for the 001 fund. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I just wanted to make -- to get an idea of what we were talking about as far as the monetary value that would affect the employees, so if it does come up for discussion we have an idea of where we're at in this -- in this arena, okay. And I think that morale is very, very important for the people. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are we ready to go to 111 ? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, and I've got 111 on the visualizer. The question is, do they have hard copy on III? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. MR. ISACKSON: I believe they do. MR. MUDD: Okay, thank you, sir. What we have basically is laid out the same way as 00 1. You have a tax-neutral position, which is .8070. There's a -- there's a millage-neutral position of .6912, and the difference is .1158. The total budget difference in order to go from tax-neutral to millage-neutral is $4,994,000. As in the methodology that we used prior, I took -- tried to lay Page 240 June 30, 2009 out the Productivity Committee's General Fund 00 (sic) recommendations. Their recommendations equated to $5 million worth of reductions. I went out and tried to verify those particular reductions, and I basically come up with $4,014,500 worth of cuts that I could verify in that particular -- in that particular regard. And the -- reverse the transportation transfer to 111. And as I said before in the 001, when it looked like it was a plus, I said there will be a minus on 111 because it's a transfer of dollars. Increase code enforcement to FY09 levels. That was based on the board's direction yesterday, and that would bring, not 400,000, but 385,500 -- and I'm not too sure I round up. And then the reduced parks operating or capital didn't receive guidance from the -- I'm sorry. We basically believe that that can-- that can transpire. The -- revenue-based spending cuts -- and Sue Usher's going to have to talk about those a little bit -- and reduce reserves to 2009 levels, but we did reduce reserves for cash flow $1.7 million, and we reduced the loan to 131, as I stated earlier. We were able to come together with a series of projects that Marla had that were -- that were rollover, so to speak, dollars in order to identify that $1.4 million for that loan to community development so that it would not result in a 111 liability, therefore, where you couldn't reduce the millage rate in that particular regard. And Ms. Usher, if you'd like to talk to Ms. Vasey about reducing the revenue reserve based on funding cuts and some other things, then you'll be able to do that right now. But that's basically what this chart states. I have the one-day-a-month furlough, because it was talked about in 111, that equates to half a million dollars. I also believe that the board discussed -- and I don't know if you agreed to it, but you did discuss it -- about bringing back two code enforcement officers. So you would Page 241 June 30, 2009 -- you would make the code enforcement organization whole, and that would cost another $180,000, and that's what that particular number is. So I put that on the board so that you have it. That $4 million cut that I can verify would equate to a reduction from tax-neutral of .0909 on the tax-neutral millage and gets you a lot closer to what millage-neutral would be, which is .6912. And this millage rate would be .7161. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're close. You know, I can accept that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: What do you want me to do? MR. MUDD: And as Janet talked earlier in 001 about there being a reduction in reserves because of what the rates are -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: You're it. MR. MUDD: -- that difference, that will come about-- MS. VASEY: Whatever it is. MR. MUDD: -- a bit closer as we get closer to July -- the end of July, I'm sorry. MS. VASEY: Yeah. If you -- if you collect less in property tax dollars, then the amount of revenue reserve that you have to hold will be less, and whatever it is is whatever it is. MS. USHER: If you were to turn to your overview section. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. MS. USHER: It's about the tenth page in. It's the 111 -- MS. VASEY: I'm there. MS. USHER: -- fund. And when Janet says you have $53 million, if you go to the revenue page, you see there's $52.9 million under tax neutral, and then when you have millage neutral at 47.9 million, I guess that's Janet's 48 million. If you go up on the revenue page, there is a revenue reserve reduction of $262,000 already recognized in the $4.99 million decrease. So we've already captured it. I can't capture it again. It's already in there. Page 242 June 30, 2009 MS . VASEY: We were going from -- we were going from tax- neutral and making adjustments. And so one of the adjustments from tax-neutral would be to reduce something for revenue -- for revenue reserve to bring it close to but not all the way down to the millage- neutral, because we're not going all the way to millage-neutral. MS. USHER: But what I'm saying is that $5 million reduction already includes the reduction to the revenue reserves. So if I have to reduce it again, it's double counting. That's what I'm concerned with. It's double counting. I've already captured that. MS. VASEY: You are the authority. I will defer to you. MS. USHER: I mean, I'll show you. MS. VASEY: I'm absolutely fine with it. MS. USHER: Okay. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, I'm going to make a motion to approve the County Manager's recommendations. I also want to thank the County Manager, and especially thank Mark and the Office of Budget and Management (sic) for allowing -- putting up with us pontificating up here. It was a very difficult year. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second on this motion? COMMISSIONER HALAS: What's that include? COMMISSIONER HENNING: What? It includes the County Manager's -- County Manager's verified amounts, so-- CHAIRMAN FIALA: Including the code enforcement officers? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. So what he's saying is, we're going from a .6912 to a .71 -- .7161. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now -- and also with the business tax known as the occupational license, we might be able to get to a place where we can be millage-neutral on this one. So thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second? Page 243 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HALAS: I got a problem with the -- that includes the furloughs, right? CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, I don't think so. MR. MUDD: That furlough is not part of the millage rate calculation that I have right here. I kept it separate because the board had not made a decision one way or the other, and I just want to make sure -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: But it did include the -- adding back the code enforcement officers, correct? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Doesn't it? MS. VASEY: Well, there's actually two of those. Maybe there's some confusion there. MR. MUDD: Increase code enforcement to '09 level. It's in there. What I need some clarification is, did you want to bring code enforcement to be whole up? Because when you talked about tax- neutral yesterday, I heard 385,500, but there were still two code enforcement officers that were unfilled or whatever at that particular juncture, and there was some dialogue about going full up. If you're going to go full up, then you're going to need to increase the amount of money that you need by $180,000. MS. VASEY: Okay. Let me clarify that. We were bringing it up to the FY09 level, which was $4.2 million, which is covered by the 385-. We were not recommending anything higher than that, and we were not recommending any furloughs either. I mean, the information was there, but we were not recommending it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And forgive me, but these are code officers that aren't on the payroll yet or are there and we're going to retain them? MS. VASEY: I can't answer that. CHAIRMAN FIALA: On the bottom, you mean, or the ones up it the -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Are they the same? Page 244 June 30, 2009 CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, they're not the same. MR. MUDD: No, they're not the same. And the dialogue that went on when Ms. Flagg was here, she was talking about having two unfilled positions that showed up this year. If you were going -- if you were going to fill those positions, Mr. -- Mr. Schmitt estimated burden cost per code enforcement officer was around $90,000, and that's where I came up with the $180,000 as I was listening to the particular meeting. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is it really -- I'm sorry. I don't mean to be critical, and I'm trying to recall the conversation. What was the termination, that we had to hire two new people, right, or is this we're keeping the people that are on there? MR. SCHMITT: Again, for the record, Joe Schmitt. Yeah, I currently have 52 spaces, two frozen. So I have 50 bodies in code enforcement. The budget figure that Janet was noting would only fund 48, and it's -- at its current operating and personnel budget would fund the 48. As Jim pointed out, 385 -- $385,000. If you want to retain the 50, then that would be an additional 180,000. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't want to add any new people. MR. SCHMITT: No; no, sir. It's not adding new. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then I'm all for it. MR. SCHMITT: But the two positions that are -- it's clearly spelled out in your budget the two positions that would go if we don't go up to full strength would be the two manager positions that have already been identified. CHAIRMAN FIALA: So let's hear from Commissioner Henning what was included in his motion. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I was trying to listen to Joe Schmitt when I had people talking in both ears. I spoke to Diane Flagg on her budget. MR. SCHMITT: Yes, sir. Page 245 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER HENNING: And she said she's going to take some management positions and turn them into code enforcement positions; is that -- MR. SCHMITT: Well, we would-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- above the two that's recommended here, or is that her recommendations? MR. SCHMITT: Well, it would be her recommendation. But the board -- one of the recommendations her and I were discussing, if we budgeted to the 50, we would convert those two management positions to investigator positions regardless. So we'd have more investigators. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, okay. MR. SCHMITT: But what Jim is saying is absolutely on target. It's -- there's several scenarios in your book, but you started at 42. You added the five, was 46. You added -- the additional was to 48. So that's the 48 positions. The two on the bottom are the ones that -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. MR. SCHMITT: -- were -- would be above the FY'9 -- '09 budget. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So Commissioner Coletta's comments about not hiring any more is absolutely true with the scenario that the County Manager provided. MR. SCHMITT: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So yeah, that's part of. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So do I hear a second? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a second. Commissioner Coletta, did you -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I did. I just wanted to, real quick, check a couple of things if I could. Reduce loan to Fund 131 in financial year '09, increase carry- forward -- I'm sorry. It's 1.4 million. What exactly are we doing here Page 246 June 30, 2009 again? MR. MUDD: Okay. Mr. Schmitt went through the discussion yesterday, and Ms. Vasey helped. He has -- $1.4 million was the money that he owes 111 and several other organizations in 001 because he hasn't been able to fund the benefits packages for his particular organization because the reserves did not support those particular dollars. So we've held that off this entire year. Mr. Schmitt has to make good on those particular amounts that are owed. One of the things that the Productivity Committee said, well, don't take that loan out of 111 and, therefore, increase the millage or the liability in 111. Let's see if we can find that $1.4 million someplace else in a reserve account or a carry-forward account in order to get those dollars so that it didn't impact -- excuse me -- the millage rate in 111. We were able to do that. Ms. Ramsey went out there and looked at her dollars on her capital programs that in some cases were not totally spent or weren't due to be spent for another two years and was able to come up with a list of -- that totaled around $1.4 million. So we basically went out and found a fund -- 360; is that right? MR. ISACKSON: 306. MR. MUDD: 306, sorry -- 306, where we could take that loan from. And the good news is -- and I'd be very hesitant to do that if the board had not made a decision to have Mr. Schmitt come back with his studies to reexamine his fee structure for 131 and 113, which are his two funds. And so with that we were able to find the dollars in order to do the loan, the short-term loan. It will not have an impact on Ms. Ramsey nor will it increase the millage rate, so I believe we found a successful solution and abided by the recommendation of the Productivity Committee. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Fine. No other questions. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle? Page 247 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COYLE: You told me we were going to talk about the 2.5 million. You're trying to sneak by it. MR. ISACKSON: No, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, yeah, that's right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's 2.5 million more dollars here that we can throw into this. MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Communications. MR. ISACKSON: -- if you're still at your general overview section -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: I haven't been there for at least four or five hours, and I doubt seriously if I can find it right now. MR. ISACKSON: If you could, just turn to the 111 in the general overview section, it might help us to talk about that two-and-a-half-million dollars. COMMISSIONER COYLE: What tab are we talking about? MR. MUDD: Let's get it on the visualizer, and let's see if we can't -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's the very front. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, well, I can get that far. CHAIRMAN FIALA: It doesn't have page numbers. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Very front tab? MR. ISACKSON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Under MSTD general fund. MR.OCHS: It's on the visualizer, sir. MR. MUDD: Okay. Get me where you need to go. MR. ISACKSON: Look at-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: There it is. Communications service tax. MR. ISACKSON: That's correct, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep, that's it. MR. ISACKSON: Correct, Commissioners. If you'll look at -- Page 248 June 30, 2009 there's a $7.5 million allocation that we're forecasting under that particular revenue source. And if you look at the projected revenues at year end in the Fund 111 at 61,438,000, you offset that against the forecast expense for that particular -- and for the end of the fiscal year. You come up with a -- if you slide down to the carry-forward column, the actual fund balance going into next year at tax neutral would have been $9.2 million. What I'm saying to, I guess, Commissioner Coyle, is, your -- part of that $2.5 million is helping you get to the cuts that we've just identified in 111, plus it helps you maintain some reasonable level of reserves on the budgeted side in FYI0. I don't know if that answers your question or not. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. And so that means that we -- we can reduce the millage rate more, can't we? No? MR. ISACKSON: No, sir, I would not -- I would not go that far. I would not say that. You've already -- you've already taken your millage rate down pretty close to .6912. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. What's wrong with going lower if you've got the money? MR. ISACKSON: Well, that -- you know, it's how comfortable do you want to go with your reserves in Ill? I think that's really the issue. Do you want to drop the reserves lower in III? And knowing that -- I mean, that's -- that's this board's call. I'm just -- we're very uncomfortable about taking it down probably more so than what -- if we're dropping it below the FY09 levels, which is essentially where you probably would be if you go to millage-neutral in FYI0. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Your reserves in 08/09 were, revenue reserves, were 2.3 million. MR. ISACKSON: No. I'm looking on the expense side, Commissioner, now-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: -- in 111. You look at '09, your total reserves Page 249 June 30, 2009 MR. MUDD: Let's adjust it so they can all see it. MR. ISACKSON: Okay . Your total reserves, Commissioner, in FY09 were $2,853,000 in 111. We have proposed it in '10, before we went through the exercise of the cuts, it was proposed at $4.5 million. You've now reduced those reserves as part of the cut exercise that you just went through, and by virtue of doing that, you're now at a millage rate of .71, whatever the number is. So what I'm saying is that it -- the carry-forward into FY10 from the year end that we're proj ecting in '09 is helping you get to that. 71 number and still maintaining a reasonable level of reserves that is on par with what you had in '09. If you're going to -- if you're going to go to .6912, you're going to de gradate those reserves further assuming no other changes to Fund 111. So the $7.5 million is part and parcel of the total projected at year end this year of 61 million. If you look -- and we're going to -- we're projected to spend 52 million this year in 111, so that gives you a fund balance going into next year, assuming those two numbers occur, of roughly $9.2 million in carry-forward. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't see any of those numbers on the pages in front of me. MR. ISACKSON: You see the $9.2 million number there, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: That's what I'm referring to as your fund balance going into next year, assuming we take in the $62 million number and we spend the $53 million number on the expense side. That gets at -- that's our position going into FYI0. The -- and that position going into FYI0 accounts includes this two-and-a-half-million dollar additional revenue or surplus or whatever you want to call it of communications service tax. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that line is a reserve line? I Page 250 June 30, 2009 cannot read the -- MR. ISACKSON: See the carry-forward there, Commissioner. That's your beginning of next year's fund balance -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: -- which includes your ex- -- your revenue projection in '09 and your expense projection in '09. That's what we're projecting to be your beginning fund balance in FY10. That's on the revenue side. So by the fact that we have that beginning fund balance and now we're going through making these cuts for FYI 0, what I'm saying is that that excess two-and-a-half-million dollars is included as part and parcel of how we're getting to the cuts that we just made and getting close to millage-neutral, the .6912. We're not quite there, but -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, earlier today you characterized the difference between what you traditionally had gotten and what you're getting this time as a windfall. MR. ISACKSON: It's one time -- additional one-time money, that's correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MS. VASEY: Could I make just one comment? I already got that money. If you look at the paper that was handed out, there's a line there that says, reduce reserve for cash flow of 1.7 million. That's really -- isn't that part of the $2 million that we're talking about? So I already got it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MS. VASEY: Sorry. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it's there already? Why didn't you tell me that 15 minutes ago. MS. VASEY: Is that correct? Is that another way of looking at it? MR. ISACKSON: My mind works differently obviously than either Janet's or the commissioner's. I'm sorry. I didn't explain that Page 251 June 30, 2009 properly enough. But I look at things as, okay, what do I have at the end of the year, and how do I -- how do I apply that against the budget that we're proposing to prepare and adopt for the -- for that succeeding year. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So now let's see. We have Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I don't want to talk. Commissioner Henning told me I don't want to. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: So what we're doing is we're almost -- we're in the granary right now with the seed corn, pretty much, right? MR. OCHS: No. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Say yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: His mind doesn't -- MR. ISACKSON: I didn't follow that analogy, Commissioner. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, you're at -- pretty close at millage- neutral on 111 based on what I've got on that piece of paper. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I don't want to go any lower. I think that we've done it because I want to make sure that we have some reserves for next year. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And we have a motion on the floor and a second to approve the County Manager's verification amounts plus the two extra code enforcement officers. Motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, that is not included. Page 252 June 30, 2009 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's right. Just making sure. CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's why I repeated it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion carries 4-1. CHAIRMAN FIALA: 4-1. Thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Are we finished here? MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. You've given me what I need to have as far as your July 28th executive summary. I need to come back with you during that executive summary with these charts again. And if it's been adjusted, we need to have the adjusted numbers that are there so that you've got them. But the millage rates that are recommended are your ceiling millage rates for the 28th of July, and you can -- you, as a board, as Mr. -- as Mark has basically told you, you'll have opportunities to reduce that through September through your budget hearings. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, then Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Tomorrow, 11:30 till one o'clock, Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart will be at the Golden Gate Fire Department on 13th off of Golden Gate Boulevard, and he welcomes all people. It's just a meet and greet, and we're hoping you can make it out there to meet the congressman. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to thank everyone, the Productivity Committee, the staff, the County Manager, and also the budget office for this excruciating budget that we just went through, and I want to thank you very, very much for all your patience. I know that there was many, many hours of burning the midnight candle to get where we are today. And I just want to make sure that -- the appreciation of all the time and effort, and especially the County Manager, in regards to his Page 253 June 30, 2009 particular problem that he has, and we want to thank him very much for all the time he put on this. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Janet? MS. VASEY: I would just like to thank everyone. The staffhas been amazing. We put an incredible workload on them, and they responded fairly and generously. And I would also like to thank the County Manager, because without his help, I don't think we would be where we are now. So I really appreciate his willingness to work with us and try to support our requirements to the extent that he could. So thank you very much. CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Janet, let me echo what Commissioner Halas said. You and Jim Gibson, Gina Downs sitting here two whole days and evenings and all of the -- I know you put in over 100 hours on your own before you got here. I just want to thank everybody for all you've done. We really appreciate it. County Manager, your staff has been just outstanding. They've-- they've really worked hard. And county -- and County Commissioners, this has not been easy for anyone of us, and I thank you-all for -- for working so well together even though it's been very tough. Thank you. And with that I'd like a motion. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Motion to adjourn. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion and second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nobody has a chance to say no. Page 254 June 30, 2009 ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:48 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL 4l~ d~ DONNA FIALA, Chairman ATTEst~.."". , , . ~~lELERK __... 'te '0-. , .19".t...... . oft I ..' These minutes approved by the Board on 'I~o'f , as presented -- or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS. Page 255