Loading...
BCC Minutes 09/09/2010 B (Budget) September 9,2010 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, September 9, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 5 :05 p.m. in BUDGET SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: VICE- CHAIRMAN: Frank Halas James Coletta Tom Henning Donna Fiala Fred Coyle (Telephonically) ALSO PRESENT: Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Mark Isackson, Director of Corporate Financial Planning Ian Mitchell, Executive Manager to BCC Page 1 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PELICAN BAY BUDGET AGENDA Thursday, September 9, 2010 5:05 p.m. Fred W. Coyle, BCC Chairman Commissioner, District 4 (Telephonically) Frank Halas, BCC Vice-Chairman Commissioner, District 2 Jim Coletta, BCC Commissioner, District 5 Donna Fiala, BCC Commissioner, District 1 Tom Henning, BCC Commissioner, District 3 NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING HERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE . Motion taken to allow Commissioner Coyle to participate and vote via telephone due to a scheduling conflict - Approved 4/0 (Commissioner Coyle joined the meeting via telephone) 2. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING - Pelican Bay Services Division Budget Hearing Page 1 September 9, 2010 A. Executive Summary - Fiscal Year 2011 Pelican Bay Services Division Budget Presented B. Public Comment C. Resolution Approving the Special Assessment Roll and Levying the Special Assessment against the Benefited Properties within the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit Resolution 2010-160 Adopted - 5/0 3. ADJOURN Page 2 September 9, 2010 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BUDGET AGENDA Thursday, September 9, 2010 5:05 p.m. Fred W. Coyle, BCC Chairman Commissioner, District 4 Frank Halas, BCC Vice-Chairman Commissioner, District 2 Jim Coletta, BCC Commissioner, District 5 Donna Fiala, BCC Commissioner, District 1 Tom Henning, BCC Commissioner, District 3 NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. 1. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING - BCC - Fiscal Year 2011 Tentative Budget A. Discussion of Tentative Millage Rates and Increases Over the Rolled Back Millage Rates B. Review and Discussion of Changes to the Tentative Budget C. Public Comments and Questions Page 1 September 9, 2010 D. Resolution to Adopt the Tentative Millage Rates Resolution 2010-161- Adopted 5/0 E. Resolution to Adopt the Amended Tentative Budget Resolution 2010-162 - Adopted 5/0 F. Announcement of Tentative Millage Rates and Percentage Changes in Property Tax Rates Read into Record G. Announcement of Final Public Hearing as Follows: Final Public Hearing on the FY 2010-11 Collier County Budget Thursday, September 23, 2010 5:05 p.m. Collier County Government Center W. Harmon Turner Building (F) Third Floor, Boardroom Naples, Florida 2. ADJOURN Page 2 September 9, 2010 September 9, 2010 MR. OCHS: Mr. Vice Chair, you have a hot mic. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We're here tonight -- the Board of County Commissioners is now in session. We're here tonight for the purpose of the first budget -- public budget hearing that will be held tonight. And this is one of two. And at this time I would ask that anybody that has a cell phone, if you'd please turn it off or else silence it. And at that, if you'd all rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) MOTION TO ALLOW COMMISSIONER COYLE TO PARTICIPATE AND VOTE VIA THE TELEPHONE DUE TO A SCHEDULING CONFLICT - APPROVED VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: I believe at this time it's my understanding that Commissioner Coy Ie will be phoning in. Is he on the line yet? MR. MITCHELL: Not yet, sir. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And when he gets on the line, I'll have to have a motion here so that he is allowed to join in on our discussion. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could we make that motion now? VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney, can we make it now prior to him being on line? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. MR. MITCHELL: Commissioner Coyle's on line. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Good evening, Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good evening, Commissioner Halas. How are you? Page 2 September 9, 2010 VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good. At this time we hopefully will have a motion on the floor for you so that you can join us. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, thank you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve Commissioner Coyle joining us by phone. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: And do I have a second? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: And this is due to scheduling conflicts, correct? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Due to scheduling conflicts. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, we have a motion on the floor for Commissioner Coyle to join us in our conversation tonight with the budget hearings. That was made by Commissioner Fiala and seconded by Commissioner Coletta. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Passes unanimously. Welcome aboard, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much. Item #2C (On the Pelican Bay Budget Agenda) RESOLUTION 2010-160: APPROVING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL AND LEVYING THE SPECIAL Page 3 September 9,2010 ASSESSMENT AGAINST BENEFITED PROPERTIES WITHIN THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT - ADOPTED VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, at this time I believe we're going to start off with the Pelican Bay -- MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- Municipal Service Taxing Benefit Unit. MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. Welcome back to all the board members. Good to see you here. This is, as Commissioner Halas mentioned, the first of two statutorily required public hearings to adopt your Fiscal Year 2011 Budget. We will begin this evening with a presentation of the Pelican Bay Services Division budget, followed by the adoption of a resolution approving the assessments for the Pelican Bay Services Area. Mr. Neil Dorrill, the administrator of your Pelican Bay Services Division, is here to present the budget, sir. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good evening, Neil. Good to have you aboard. MR. DORRILL: Hi, Commissioners. Thank you very much. I might add, about 22 years ago I brought my daughter to a budget hearing and she sat on this row. I presume this young man is Commissioner Henning's son, but it reminds me of Lindsay sitting with me during the budget hearings. And at that time they had coloring books, now it appears that he has expensive electronic games, and so that says something about society. F or the fourth year in a row your Pelican Bay Services Division, through their advisory board, are reducing the non-ad valorem assessment. The assessment in aggregate next year, including capital, is $370 per unit, which is a decrease. Page 4 September 9,2010 Anticipating a question concerning the carry-forward on the capital side, you may recall that earlier in the year we formed a partnership with the master homeowners association at Pelican Bay to produce a long-range master plan to replace and renovate major capital assets. And they have been accumulating cash because they are adverse to debt as a board, and so we do have a fairly significant carry-forward going forward on the capital side that will be used primarily for their top priorities, which are the replacement of pedestrian paths and crosswalk pedestrian safety enhancements across the main boulevard. In summary, their primary activities are public works oriented. As you know, they include the entrance features, median and streetscape, street lighting, drainage and water management systems, in particular, and have a very close relationship there with the Sheriffs Department but do not fund that directly as they have in years past. On a separate matter, they have a very modest street light taxing district that is ad valorem based that goes back actually to the late seventies. At that time all street lighting districts that were not part of a homeowners association were established based on a millage system and the millage has not increased for the coming year. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is there any questions from the Commission? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just a comment. I notice that your overall budget is almost 18 percent less than it was the previous year. MR. DORRILL: We've had some reductions on the operating side and a public relations campaign. In the previous years they had produced some informational videos. They've also, frankly, had decreases in the cost of their allocated fleet management fuel related charges, and have done a very good job. Page 5 September 9, 2010 There are only 16 full-time equivalents here. They utilize contract day labor very heavily to be able to do the things that they do, and I think the board there has a very fiscally conservative finance and budget committee and they've done a fine job. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, any other questions? (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are there any comments from the public on this item? MR. MITCHELL: No, sir. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, thank you. Could I have a -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to adopt the resolution for the special assessment of Pelican Bay -- VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Pelican Bay -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- Municipal Servicing Taxing and Benefit Unit. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do I hear a second? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any further discussion on this item? (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Not hearing any, I'll call the question. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye. Opposed by like sign. (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Passes unanimously. Page 6 September 9, 2010 Thank you. Commissioner Coyle, did you have any questions? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, none at all. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: A little late now, but I was hoping you'd pop up. If you've got any questions, please-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I'll make a lot of noise. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good. I can't -- you don't have a light on here. Okay, we move on to the next item, and I believe that's the Board of County Commissioners and the first advertised hearing of Collier County here. MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. And at this time I will turn the proceedings over to Mr. Isackson your Director of Corporate Financial Planning. MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, Mr. Ochs. And welcome. Good evening, Commissioners. Welcome to those in attendance this evening, as well as those watching on our Collier television. This is the first of two required statutory public hearings under the TRIM statute. Our fiscal year 2011 runs from October 1, 2010 through September 30th of 20 11. And pursuant to state statute this hearing was advertised as part of the TRIM notices which were mailed to all Collier County property owners. The final hearing is in two weeks, on September 23rd, 2010. This hearing will be noticed as part of the statutory advertising requirements contained within the Truth-in-Millage Statutes. Final tax rates and budget decisions will be made at this final hearing on September 23rd, 2010. The agenda and speaker slips are available in the hallway. Anyone interested in addressing the Board of County Commissioners regarding the county's budget must complete a speaker slip. Mr. Ian Mitchell will collect the speaker slips. Regarding -- following some introductory remarks regarding tax rates and changes in the tentative Page 7 September 9, 2010 budget released in mid July, there will be an opportunity for public comment, and speakers will be called by name. As a public service announcement: On the TRIM notices there was an indication that those who wished to request an adjustment in their market value should file a petition for such relief with the Property Appraiser by the close of business on Friday, September 10th, 2010. That's tomorrow. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Item #lA DISCUSSION OF FY2010-11 MILLAGE RATES AND INCREASES OVER THE ROLLED BACK RATES - DISCUSSED MR. ISACKSON: The first item up for discussion, Commissioners, Item 1.A, is a discussion of the tentative millage rates and increases over the rolled back millage rate. This is a required statutory discussion. And in fact this is the first substantive issue to be discussed at this hearing, percentage increase over the rolled back rate needed to fund the budget; and two, the reasons ad valorem tax revenues above the rolled back rate, as calculated on the state DR-420 forms, are being increased. In fact, none of those criteria apply to Collier County for the fiscal year 2010. The rolled back rate is defined as the tax rate necessary to raise the same amount of ad valorem tax revenue raised in the previous year. Calculation of the rolled back rate does not account for new construction. The Board adopted budget guidance in February for the 2011 fiscal year, and included within that guidance was a millage neutral position for the general fund and a millage neutral position for the unincorporated area general fund. The FY 2011 tentative general fund and unincorporated area general fund budget as presented is based Page 8 September 9, 2010 upon a millage neutral tax rate. Referring to Exhibit I-A, each Collier County taxing authority, exclusive of debt service, has currently set a millage rate which is either at rolled back rate or below the rolled back rate. Budget guidance provide that millage neutral tax rate positions would be taken in the general fund and the unincorporated area general fund and, further, that the MSTU tax rates would be set between millage neutral and tax neutral, based upon the respective advisory board recommendations. MSTU tax rates where no advisory boards exist would be set at millage neutral or below. An accumulate aggregate rolled back tax rate for all Collier County taxing authorities, exclusive of debt service, is 4.9264 per $1,000 of taxable value. The proposed aggregate tax rate for all Collier County taxing authorities, exclusive of debt service, totals 4.2596 per $1,000 of taxable value. And this represents a decrease of 13.54 percent. Item #lB DISCUSSION OF FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO THE TENTATIVE BUDGET - DISCUSSED Commissioners, Item B in your agenda is a review and discussion of the changes to the tentative budget. For tonight's hearing changes to the tentative budget submitted to the board on July 15th, 2010 and subsequently adopted on July 27th, 2010, actions of the board at their regular July 27th meeting with budgetary impacts and staff proposed budgetary actions related to routine revenue or expense adjustments are found within Exhibit 1-B, Pages 3 through 22. And a summary of those actions are described within tab 1-B, Pages 1 through 2. As is customary at this time, the most noteworthy of these adjustments is the Tax Collector's budget, which was submitted to the Page 9 September 9, 2010 Department of Revenue on August 1 st. And this is normally included as part of the first public budget hearing. According to the Tax Collector's statement of commissions and expenditures for fiscal year 2011, their budget will total $19,296,600, which is offset by commissions and charges. It's important to note that the Tax Collector is a fee based operation. Turn-back from the Tax Collector is a significant -- is significant each year and represents excess commissions over actual expenses, which is required to run their particular operations. For the past two fiscal years, 2008 and '09, turn-back has totaled 8.9 and $7.6 million respectively. Second noteworthy change occurs in Gas Tax Fund 313, where customary adjustments to the FY10 budget are normally made. And these revolve around grants that are in and whether or not those grant revenues can be used in '10 or need to be put forward in the FY11 fiscal year, as is the case to be presented, as well as increases or decreases to gas tax revenue, as has been noted in the resolution proposed. Commissioners will also note that we're forecasting in the FY 2010 impact fee revenue within the various impact fee trust funds, and those have been adjusted up or down, depending on the respective receipt patterns and corresponding increases or decreases to their beginning fiscal year 2011 fund balance. In total, changes to the budget as identified total $25,698,100. These changes do not have an impact on the maximum millage rate set by the Board on July 27th, 2010. Commissioners, that ends my remarks on Item I-B. It would be your pleasure on whether or not you would want to solicit public comment at this point, or I'd be happy to address any questions you might have. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: At this time, is there any questions from the board? If not -- Page 10 September 9, 2010 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah-- VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Go ahead, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Halas, if I could, I would just -- Mark has gone through the process of describing rolled back rates and other things as required by state law. It might be appropriate to take just a minute or two and emphasize something that might not be quite so obvious when you try to cut through all the j argon. But the bottom line is that the millage -- aggregate millage rate which the board has tentatively approved is actually 13.5 percent lower than the millage rate last year. So that should result in a substantial decrease in property taxes for many people. Of course the recapture provision of state law means that those who are homesteaded, many of those who are homesteaded will not get the benefit of that reduction. But nevertheless, the -- it's important to note that the board is recommending a decrease in tax rates of 13.54 percent. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's correct, Commissioner. Any other comments? (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think that was well presented there, Commissioner Coyle. And just to reiterate again that the millage rate this year is at 4.2596 per $1,000, so that gives you an idea of -- that we are trying to hold the line and that we've really downsized in this county. In fact, we've gotten to the point I think we're down about 23 percent in personnel from the height of 2007. At this time do we have any public speakers? Item #lC PUBLIC COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS Page 11 September 9,2010 MR. MITCHELL: Yes. Mr. Hans Meier. MR. MEIER: That's me. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, at either one of these you can go up -- MR. MEIER: Do I just speak here, or can I speak up? Can everybody hear me? VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, we like to have you speak at the podium. MR. MEIER: I worked for the county about 26 years ago for two years for John Boldt, Water Service. Then I worked for 18 years for the water management, South Florida. And now I'm retired, I fish a lot. But I feel what's going on here with the MSTU -- I can't even spell it -- what they want to do for 1.29 miles over five years, they want to spend 687,000 for bushes, okay? I argued with the board-- not argued, I told them the grass looks good, it's a waste of taxpayers' money. There's eight communities with about 3,000 people. I'm the only meat-head here. But I still feel they should consider the grass does not need spraying, the grass can be mowed every three to four weeks. Why spend about $700,000 over five years to beautify one mile? And why? I know I can afford the 52 bucks because I'm homestead exempt. But people were not informed. They were supposed to go door-to-door to find people. Why can't this be on the tax bill? If people vote for it, I'm for it. But out of about 80 to 100 people, they were there, they spoke their thing, then they said all approved, everybody lifted their hand. That was it. I don't feel its right for 3,000 people. And to get to that point to tax everybody on this where it's all set and ready to go, I'm just here, I got -- by Mr. Chapin (phonetic) I was told, hey, get politically involved. I retired. I worked my butt off from 11 years on. But to see Page 12 September 9, 2010 something like this go over and this far out in the county to spend this much money, and all we're going to have is burrows there and dug up things, like it's now from Livingston to Radio Road. And you look -- from Foxfire, I talk to different people, they're all upset. They were told five years. They've been there since 1996. I'm over speaking. And they've been paying. A lot of people are buying in; they don't even know what voters voted on taxes. And I just want you to consider either getting it through the tax board so everybody pays the same and use your conscience to plant stuff that's -- that you need. And I don't -- I think $700,000 is too dog- gone much, okay? My name is Hans Meier. Thank you very much. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hans, before you go, what MSTU are you talking about? MR. MEIER: The one from Radio Road, from Santa Barbara to Davis Boulevard. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. MR. MEIER: And I went to two meetings because I got accused of not being politically involved. And they voted. It's all done already, which I don't feel it should be. To vote .44 of a mill, which with the eight communities is $687,000 over the five years. I called Commissioner Henning. He told me I'm the minority, which upset me, because I'm white, or whatever. I know I'm German; I used to be. But dog-gone-it, I feel there should be a different approach to solve a matter like this. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think what you need to do is take that up with your MSTU board. MR. MEIER: They don't listen. They kicked me out once because I didn't have any money in it yet. And I feel an appointment like this, I ask people, how did you get on it? They applied for it, they're on it, they didn't know what was involved with it. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, thank you very much. Page 13 September 9, 2010 Any other public speakers? MR. MITCHELL: Not on this subject. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, any additional comments from our -- from the commissioners here? (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, at this time I entertain a motion for -- you want two separate motions; is that correct? MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, if I can, let's make sure. Are there other public speakers, Mr. Mitchell? MR. MITCHELL: There are other public speakers. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh, that's what I asked. MR. MITCHELL: They want to speak regarding the General Fund. And then one on general public comments, which was Item G. MR. ISACKSON: Let's get -- I think we should go ahead. Let's go ahead with the rest of the speakers, please. MR. MITCHELL: Okay. Then Georgia Hiller. MS. HILLER: Good evening, Commissioners. Georgia Hiller, candidate for County Commission, District 2, Republican. Commissioners, my question revolves around Jackson Labs and the general fund. And it's my understanding that you all approved borrowing 28 million from a separate district to the General Fund. And what I would like to get an understanding of is where in this budget you are proposing to repay that money to that separate district? VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Can you answer that -- MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- County Manager? MR.OCHS: Yes, sir. In those discussions in July, we had indicated that there were intra- fund loans that were available to be made if and when the board made a decision to move forward with the Jackson Laboratory Project. It was based on the discussion that was had during that meeting with your Productivity Committee and their analysis of the cash flow, Page 14 September 9,2010 potential cash flow requirements for the Commissioners. And $28 million was the number that was being discussed that day. So the 28 million, as I advised the board that day, would be available in 2011, but it would have to be repaid in subsequent years, 2012, 2013, and that repayment would need to be part of a larger decision to be made in 2012 about funding the balance of the local commitment, whatever that would turn out to be. So the idea was if you needed -- recall, at the time in July we didn't know whether Congress was going to approve the extension of the Medicaid funds. So we didn't know whether the state funding was even going to materialize. So the recommendation was don't get ahead of the state decision. You still have this ability to borrow internally in fiscal year' 11 if you need to move forward or decide to move forward and you need some cash in '11. That would have to be repaid, along with the rest of the funding that would need to be made at the local level, beginning in 2012. So Ms. Hiller, that decision and that funding source would need to be identified in 2012, not fiscal '11. MS. HILLER: So if I understand correctly then, the funding for this project is coming from within the general fund and is not being borrowed from reserves from a separate special district with a separate board? MR.OCHS: No, that's not correct. The available funds could be any funds, including enterprise funds, for example, that would be available in reserves for intra-fund borrowing. MS. HILLER: So it is a general fund intra-fund loan? And the reason I ask, just for clarification, is because there's potentially a Constitutional question here. Because if in fact these funds are being borrowed from a separate special district that has a separate board, in other words, in effect a separate political entity, then there would be a Constitutional question if those -- if that loan is going to be repaid with ad valorem dollars and the term of that loan. Page 15 September 9,2010 And in effect what you probably would have to do is go to referendum, as is the case when general fund dollars are obligated. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Uh, no -- MS. HILLER: And also in essence what you just described, if I understand correctly, is in essence deferred taxation that we are in effect lending money today to be repaid with future tax dollars. And since we're running budget shortfalls, there would be no way to repay this obligation other than through an increase in taxation in the future. MR.OCHS: Well, there's several different revenue options available to the board. Ad valorem taxes would be one. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle, did you speak -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Ms. Hiller's statements are simply not true and are not supported by fact. The Board did not approve any loan for funding for Jackson Labs. That was merely another source of funding that the staff brought up to consider. And no funds will be allocated to Jackson Labs until the Board makes a decision how and when and if Jackson Labs will be funded. So no decision was made at that time to provide $28 million or any other amount of money to Jackson Labs. MS. HILLER: Thank you for the clarification, Commissioner. So the bottom line is our current budget does not in any way account for any funding of Jackson Labs? VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That is correct, yes. MS. HILLER: Thank you. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any other speakers? MR. MITCHELL: Joseph Doyle. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you. Good evening, Joseph. MR. DOYLE: Hi. Good evening. Joseph Doyle, Naples, Florida. Page 16 September 9,2010 I'm here to discuss the proposed preliminary non-ad valorem assessment for Pelican Bay. Actually, the notice I got here has to do -- it's kind of long. It actually says, the preliminary assessment role, non-ad valorem assessment role allocating assessable costs, including capital reserve funds for ambient noise management and the management of conservation and preserve areas and beautification -- I'm shortening it up a little bit -- U.S. 41 from Pine Ridge to Vanderbilt Beach Road; U.S. 41 berms; street sign replacements within the median areas; landscaping improvements; improvements to the U.S. 41 entrances, et cetera. What I'm just here to say is that I would prefer that it be an ad valorem assessment. Because I do believe that rather than having the non-ad valorem where you are dividing equally among the property owners, I think it should be assessed by ad valorem, because I do believe that the property values all benefit equally with -- in accordance with the size of the property. So I would prefer -- my statements, I'd like to see this as an ad valorem assessment rather than a non-ad valorem assessment. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's something I think you're going to have to take up with the Pelican Bay MSTBU District, because that's the way it has been set up for many, many years, that they decided that they were going to assess each of the individuals, and I believe the commercial area in Pelican Bay. And-- MR. DOYLE: Well, then that should have been in this notice, because it's not in here. They told me the hearing was here tonight. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: And that's what we just passed earlier when Mr. Dorrill was up here, basically informing us exactly what was going on in Pelican Bay. And at that time we didn't have any speakers in regards to Pelican Bay . We assumed that the item that you brought forth was on the general tax rolls and not on the issue with the MSTBU of Pelican Bay. Page 1 7 September 9,2010 But I would think that what you need to do is address that committee in Pelican Bay and tell them what your feelings are, and hopefully they'll listen to what your idea is, and maybe they can carry forth on it. MR. DOYLE: Okay. So how do I proceed from here? Who do I talk to? MR.OCHS: Commissioner, let me get with this gentleman, if you don't mind, and -- VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure. MR. OCHS: -- we'll get him the proper contact information for the Pelican Bay Services Division Board. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure, great. MR.OCHS: And I think we can arrange a meeting, sir. MR. DOYLE: Okay, thank you. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much. Thanks for coming tonight. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, we have no more speakers. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just a question. The Board at the 27th of July meeting directed staff to find a funding source to fund -- potentially fund Jackson Labs. When will the board get a report on staffs findings and recommendations on that funding? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, could I answer that question? VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, go ahead, Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that was a question to staff. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, well, I'm going to respond to . k ? It, 0 ay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, can I get a response from Page 18 September 9,2010 staff first? COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you'd like. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure, thank you. MR.OCHS: I'm sorry, Commissioner, could you give me the question again? I was -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: July 27th the Board of Commissioners directed staff to find potential sources to potentially fund Jackson Labs. The question is, when will the Board get a report on those potential sources? MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we're working on perhaps bringing a status report to the Board as early as the second meeting in September or perhaps the first meeting in October, now that the -- it appears that Congress has acted on the FMAP and there's going to be a legislative budget commission hearing, as I understand it, sometime in the middle of September. We may know a little bit more definitively what the state funding commitment may be, and I think it would be appropriate after that to try to provide as much information as we have at that point to the board. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, one of the problems with defining a method of financing Jackson Labs, if we're going to go forward at all, is that the federal funding and the state funding has not been finalized. And until we get a clear statement from the state as to how much they are going to fund, we don't know how much we're going to have to fund if we move forward. So we have to take this thing in sequence. The legislation provided that once the state funding was provided and a contract was signed with OTED, between OTED and Jackson Labs, that the county then had a period of 90 days, I believe -- MR.OCHS: 120 days, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry, 120 days. Page 19 September 9,2010 -- to determine and define the county's source of funding. So we do not yet know exactly how much the state is prepared to commit for the first year, nor do we know whether the state will commit additional funding for subsequent years. So we have told Jackson Labs and the state that we are not going to get out in front of this thing and commit the county for funding without understanding what the state's match is going to be. So without really knowing the answers to those questions, it is almost impossible to select an appropriate financing mechanism from the range that has been provided by staff and the Productivity Committee. So we are in a position of waiting until the state makes their commitment, because I strongly recommend that the Board not proceed and get out in front of the state, because I think it's a precarious position to be in where we get out in front and say yeah, we've got the money and here's our funding mechanism. And so we can provide $130 million and the state then says well, okay, we'll provide $50 million and you pick up the rest. I'm not interested in being in that position and I wouldn't recommend that to the board. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any other discussion? (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, Commissioner Coyle, for that explanation about what -- the direction that we're looking at in regards to the Jackson Labs deal that mayor may not materialize. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, okay. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any other comments? (N 0 response.) MR.OCHS: Mark, next? MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, if we're concluding Item 1-C, can I move to Item 1- D? And before I go there, Commissioners, let me reiterate on a statement I made earlier regarding market value. Page 20 September 9, 2010 This is right off of the TRIM notice that was distributed on August 16th by the Property Appraiser: If you feel that the fair market value of your property is inaccurate or does not reflect fair market value, or if you are entitled to an exemption or classification (sic) is not reflected below, contact your Property Appraiser at 252-8141. If the Property Appraiser's Office is unable to resolve the matter as to market value, classification or an exemption, you may file a petition for adjustment with the Value Adjustment Board. Petition forms are available from the County Property Appraiser and must be filed on or before 5:00 p.m., September 10th, 2010. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Could you once again give that phone number? But do it slowly so if people are out there, they can write it down. MR. ISACKSON: Sir, that number is 252-8141. The area code, 239. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much. Commissioner Henning, did you have a question? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time we'll move on to Item D, which is the resolution to adopt the tentative millage rates. Do I -- I'll entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve. Item #IF ANNOUNCEMENT OF TENTATIVE MILLAGE RATES ANDPERCENTAGECHANGESINPROPERTYTAX RATES - READ IN TO RECORD MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, if you would indulge me, I have to move through my perfunctory reading of the rolled back rate, proposed millage rate and the percentage change between rolled back Page 21 September 9, 2010 rate and the proposed millage rate before you adopt. Thank you, sir. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then please remind the public that what you're about to say will make no sense to anybody. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: But it has to be put on record, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But it has to be put on record, yes. MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, if I can begin the proposed tax rates for the fiscal year 2011. Fiscal year, the General Fund, Fund 001, the rolled back millage rate, 4.0900. The proposed millage rate, 3.5645. That is a change from the rolled back rate of 12.85 percent reduction. Water Pollution Control, Fund 114. The rolled back rate, .0337. The proposed millage rate .0293. That is a change from the rolled back rate of a minus 13.06 percent. The Unincorporated General Fund, Fund 111. The rolled back millage rate, .8402. The proposed millage rate, .7161. That is a change from the rolled back rate of a minus 14.77 percent. The Golden Gate Community Center, Fund 130. The rolled back millage rate, .2354. The proposed millage rate, .1990. That is a change from the rolled back rate of a minus 15.46 percent. The Victoria Park Drainage, Fund 134. The rolled back millage rate, .0736. The proposed millage rate, .0500. That is a change in the rolled back rate of a minus 32.07 percent. The Naples Park Drainage, Fund 139. The rolled back millage rate, .0112. The proposed millage rate, .0090. It has a change from the rolled back rate of a minus 19.64 percent. The Vanderbilt Beach MSTU, Fund 143. The rolled back millage rate, .5297. The proposed millage rate, .5000. That is a change from the rolled back rate of a minus 5.61 percent. The Isle of Capri, Fund 144. Rolled back millage rate, 2.3827. The proposed millage rate, 2.0000. That is a change from the rolled back rate of a minus 16.06 percent. Page 22 September 9, 2010 Ochopee Fire Control, Fund 146. The rolled back millage rate, 5.0348. The proposed millage rate, 4.0000 is a change in the rolled back rate of a minus 20.55 percent. Collier County Fire, Fund 148, the rolled back millage rate, 3.1157. The proposed millage rate, 2.0000. That is a change from the rolled back rate of minus 35.81 percent. Goodland Fire MSTU, Fund 149, the rolled back millage rate, 1.4645. The proposed millage rate, 1.2760. It's a percent change from the rolled back rate of minus 12.87 percent. The Sable Palm Road MSTU, Fund 151. The rolled back millage rate, 3.2028. The proposed millage rate, .1000 is a percent change from the rolled back rate of a minus 96.88 percent. Golden Gate Parkway Beautification, Fund 153. The rolled back millage rate, .7221. The proposed millage rate, .5000. The change from the rolled back rate, a minus 30.76 percent. The Lely Golf Estates Beautification, Fund 152. Rolled back millage rate, 2.2937. The proposed millage rate, 2.0000. Percent change from the rolled back rate, minus 12.8 percent. The Hawksridge Stormwater Pumping MSTU, Fund 154. Rolled back millage rate, .1276. Proposed millage rate, .0500. Change from the rolled back rate of minus 60.82 percent. The Radio Road Beautification, Fund 158, the rolled back rate, .2949. The proposed rate, .2949. Zero percent change from the rolled back rate. The Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage MSTU, 159. This is their operating levy. The rolled back millage rate, 1.3974. The proposed millage rate, .2606. The percent change from the rolled back rate, minus 81.35 percent. The Immokalee Beautification MSTU, Fund 162. The rolled back millage rate, .9166. The proposed millage rate, .9166. Zero percent change from the rolled back rate. The Bayshore Beautification MSTU, 163. The rolled back Page 23 September 9, 2010 millage rate, 2.1577. Proposed millage rate, 2.1577, zero percent change from the rolled back rate. The Haldeman Creek Dredging, MSTU Fund 164. The rolled back millage rate, .6564. Proposed millage rate, .6564, zero percent change from the rolled back rate. The Rock Road MSTU, Fund 165. Proposed millage rate, 3.6355 -- rolled back millage rate, excuse me, 3.6355. Proposed millage rate, 3.0000. Percent change on rolled back rate, a minus 17.48 percent. Radio Road East MSTU, a new MSTU, the rolled back rate is zero. Proposed millage rate, .4400. Percent change from the rolled back rate is not applicable. Conservation Collier, Fund 172. The rolled back millage rate, .38.1387. The proposed millage rate, .1008. Percent change in the rolled back rate, minus 27.33 percent. Forest Lakes Debt Service, Fund 259. The rolled back millage rate, 3.4367. Proposed millage rate, 3.7394. An increase from the rolled back rate of8.81 percent. Conservation Collier Debt Service for the 2005 issue: Rolled back millage rate .0858. Proposed millage rate .0853. Change from the rolled back rate of minus .58 percent. Conservation Collier Debt Service, the 2008 issue, Fund 273. Rolled back millage rate, .0630. Proposed millage rate, .0639. Percent of change from the rolled back rate, plus 1.43 percent. Our Collier County Lighting District, Fund 760. Rolled back rate, .1356. Proposed millage rate, .1356, a zero percent change from the rolled back rate. Pelican Bay MSTBU, Fund 778. The rolled back rate .0555. Proposed millage rate, .0531. Percent change from the rolled back rate, minus 4.32 percent. Commissioners, that concludes the reading of the tax rates and rolled back rates into the record. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could you do that again? I'm not Page 24 September 9, 2010 sure I got them all. (Laughter.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, any further discussion? (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: And that leaves us with 4.2596 as the proposed millage rate; is that correct? MR. ISACKSON: That's the aggregate millage rate, sir. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, sir. Okay. At this time, if there's no other questions by the Commission, can COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- I entertain a motion to approve COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- adopt this amended tentative budget. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So made. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, do we have a second? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, I have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Coletta and -- MR. KLATZKOW: I'm sorry. Have we adopted the rates yet? VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Pardon? MR. KLATZKOW: Did we adopt -- MR. ISACKSON: The resolution on Item 1-D-- VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: This is adopt the tentative millage rate. MR. ISACKSON: -- we adopted the tentative millage rates. MR. KLATZKOW: Right, your motion was the budget. MR. ISACKSON: Right. MR. KLA TZKOW: You have to adopt the rate first. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Excuse me, I stand corrected. Page 25 September 9, 2010 MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, sir. Item #lD RESOLUTION 2010-161: RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE TENTATIVE MILLAGE RATES - ADOPTED VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Resolution to adopt the tentative millage rate. Motion? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: And a second. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: All right, motion is by Commissioner Coletta, and a second by Commissioner Fiala. Hearing no further discussion, I call the question: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye. Opposed by like sign. (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries. Item #lE RESOLUTION 2010-162: RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE AMENDED TENTATIVE BUDGET - ADOPTED VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Now we go on to entertaining a Page 26 September 9,2010 motion on the resolution to adopt the tentative -- amended tentative budget. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Questions on that. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: We have quite an increase in the gas tax, 313. Can we explain where that is coming from? MR. ISACKSON: Commissioner, move to -- if you can, go to-- go to agenda Item I-B. That would be on Page 313 -- or excuse me, on Page 9, Fund 313. Agenda Item I-B. These are adjustments, Commissioner, to the FY10 receipts for gas tax, which are actually up. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. ISACKSON: And they're being reflected in the FY10 budget and have an impact on carry forward going forward into the next fiscal year. COMMISSIONER HENNING: These are -- MR. ISACKSON: It's a combina -- I'm sorry, sir? COMMISSIONER HENNING: These are mostly carry forwards. MR. ISACKSON : Yeah, there's a combination of actions going on here. One is on the gas tax side of the house, the other one's on the grant side of the house, which' are actually being removed from' 1 0 and moved to the '11 fiscal year. The net change in that is $3.9 million, which is suggested as being moved to reserves in 313. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, good. Thank you. Then I'll make a motion that we approve the tentative budget resolution -- VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do we have a second? COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and assign the Clerk to assign a number to it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion on the floor by Page 27 September 9, 2010 Commissioner Henning, and a second by Commissioner Fiala. Any further discussion? (N 0 response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I'll call the question. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye. Opposed by like sign. (No response.) MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to announcement of your tentative millage rates and percentage changes in property tax rates. MR. ISACKSON: And Commissioners, that was entertained under Item 1- D before you approved the resolution adopting the tentative millage rates. So that item has been taken care of already. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Item #lG ANNOUNCEMENT OF FINAL PUBLIC BUDGET HEARING - WILL BE HELD SEPTEMBER 23.2010 @ 5:05 P.M. MR. OCHS: That takes us to the announcement of your final public hearing. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, the final hearing will be on September 23rd in this room, and that's at the Harmon Turner building. And it will be at 5:05. And so at this point I entertain a motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved. Page 28 September 9, 2010 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, we have a motion to adjourn. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. VICE-CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye. Thank you very much for each and every one of you being here tonight. And we'll see you on the 23rd for the final adoption of the budget. Page 29 September 9, 2010 ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:05 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL q~-2~ FRANK HALAS, Vice- aIrman These minutes approveg,by the Board on l2! O~ , as Presented v' or as corrected N I A- Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Court Reporting, Inc. by Cherie' R. Nottingham, CSR. Page 30