CAPTIONING AUGUST 13, 2009 BOCC WORKSHOP BUDGET ***This is not an official, verbatim transcript of the ***following meeting. It should be used for informational ***purposes only. This document has not been edited; ***therefore, there may be additions, deletions, or words ***that did not translate. >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO OUR AUGUST 13th, 2009, BUDGETS WORKSHOP. THIS IS ONE IN A SERIES OF WORKSHOPS THAT WE'RE HAVING AS WE WORK ON BALANCING OUR FISCAL YEAR '10 BUDGET. BEFORE WE GO INTO THE RECONCILIATION PART OF OUR WORKSHOP, WE'VE GOT SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS THAT WE HAVE TO -- THAT WE HAVE TO DISCUSS, AND I WANT TO LET EVERYONE KNOW THAT OUR NEXT WORKSHOP WILL BE A WEEK FROM TODAY ON AUGUST 20th, AT 1:30, WHEN WE WILL HOPEFULLY COMPLETE THE WORKSHOP PROCESS OF OUR BUDGET. SO AT THIS TIME I'LL PASS THINGS OVER TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO INTRODUCE TODAY'S AGENDA. >>PAT BEAN: YES. THE FIRST DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY THAT WE WILL TALK ABOUT IS THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR. ERIC, ARE YOU PREPARED TO REVIEW THAT? >>ERIC JOHNSON: [INAUDIBLE] >>PAT BEAN: OH, JIM. JIM. >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR. >>JAMES BARNES: GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. JIM BARNES, COUNTY INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR. I FIRST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND PRESENT OUR BUDGET TO YOU. I THINK THAT IF WE'D HAD THIS OPPORTUNITY IN THE PAST, SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT MY OFFICE HAS FACED, WE WOULDN'T BE HAVING THEM, SO THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO PRESENT WHAT OUR WORK PLAN IS FOR FY 2010 AND TO DISCUSS IT WITH YOU AND WHAT YOU'D HAVE US DO. ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE PERFORMANCE POLICY THAT YOU HAVE, PERFORMANCE AUDIT POLICY, IS THAT WE'LL PREPARE A WORK PLAN, AND BASED ON THAT WORK PLAN, OUR BUDGET WOULD BE APPROVED. IN THE PAST I'VE SUBMITTED WORK PLANS TO YOU ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND NOT MUCH DISCUSSION WAS MADE OF THOSE. SOME OF THE THINGS IN THE WORK PLAN WE PUT INTO OUR BUDGET, BUT OUR BUDGETS WEREN'T APPROVED AT THAT LEVEL, SO WE WEREN'T ABLE TO PERFORM NECESSARILY AT THE LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE THAT OUR MEASURES SHOWED. OUR RELATIONSHIP IS KIND OF UNIQUE. YOU'VE BEEN LISTENING TO PRESENTATIONS FROM COUNTY ADMINISTRATION AND HER DEPARTMENTS. I WORK FOR YOU-ALL, AND I'M PART OF THE LEGISLATIVE SIDE, THE BRANCH, AND AS SUCH, YOU ARE MY CUSTOMER AND I REPORT TO YOU AND I SERVE YOU IN THE NEEDS THAT YOU IDENTIFY AND PRESENT TO ME. SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THIS OFFICE, IT'S BEEN PRETTY MUCH A SHAKY MARRIAGE AND A ROCKY ROAD FOR MANY DIFFERENT REASONS, AND WE'VE HAD A LOT OF GROWING PAINS IN TRYING TO RESOLVE THAT. TOO, I WISH THAT I COULD SAY ALL THESE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE WERE HERE TO SUPPORT THE IPA, BUT I KNOW BETTER THAN THAT. NOBODY LIKES TO SEE AN AUDITOR COME INTO THEIR OFFICE, SO JUST BY THE NATURE OF WHAT WE DO, WE OFFER CHALLENGES TO THE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE AUDITING IN TRYING TO DO THE QUALITY JOB THAT WE SEE THAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. I THINK YOU ALL KNOW WHAT OUR MISSION WAS, EXPLAINED IN THE CHARTER, SO I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO ALL OF THAT WITH YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT OUR STAFF, AS SMALL AS IT IS -- WE'RE ONE OF THE SMALLEST ORGANIZATIONS THAT THE COUNTY HAS, BUT I WANT TO SAY THAT WE PROBABLY HAVE SOME OF THE BEST STAFF AS FAR AS QUALIFICATIONS, COMPETENCE, AND EXPERIENCE THAT ANY ORGANIZATION CAN HAVE. WE'RE ALL QUALIFIED AUDITORS, EITHER CIA, CPA, AND NUMEROUS OTHER CERTIFICATIONS THAT -- THAT WE DO HAVE, AND TWO OF MY STAFF HAVE MASTER'S DEGREES ALSO, SO I THINK YOU'VE GOT A VERY COMPETENT AUDIT STAFF WORKING FOR YOU. THERE NEVER HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE TO THE QUALITY OF THE PRODUCTS THAT WE'VE TURNED OUT FOR YOU-ALL. A LOT OF WHAT WE DO IS OF A NONAUDIT NATURE. SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THIS OFFICE, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE THAT REALLY WEREN'T PERFORMANCE AUDITS, BUT THEY WERE ASSISTING YOU IN MAKING YOUR OWN DECISION-MAKING AND THAT SORT OF THING, SO I THINK OUR VALUE IS WHAT'S SO IMPORTANT HERE BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T SEE VALUE IN OUR OFFICE, THEN ANYTHING THAT I'M GOING TO PRESENT TODAY IS KIND OF MEANINGLESS, SO I THINK THAT YOU- ALL -- FROM THE EXPERIENCES THAT YOU'VE HAD WITH MY OFFICE, HOPEFULLY YOU'VE SEEN VALUE IN THE PRODUCTS THAT WE'VE TURNED OUT FOR YOU, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT FOR YOU. BOARD DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE EARLIER IN THIS YEAR PRETTY MUCH HAVE AFFECTED THE CURRENT BUDGET THAT'S BEING PROPOSED. YOU-ALL BY MOTION ELIMINATED TWO OF THE POSITIONS IN MY OFFICE TO WHERE NOW BASED ON THAT MOTION FROM FY 10 ONWARD, THERE'S JUST MYSELF AND AN EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT. AND WITH THAT, YOU ALSO ENTERED INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE TO DO PERFORMANCE AUDITS, SO WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT THE FUNCTIONS OF THIS OFFICE ARE AS IT REMAINS ACCORDING TO THE CHARTER, WE STILL HAVE MANY THINGS THAT WE CAN DO AND STILL THINGS THAT YOU'VE BY MOTION DECLARED FOR US TO DO. THAT INCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA AND OTHER INQUIRIES FOR YOU-ALL AS YOU MAKE THOSE WISHES KNOWN TO US. I DID PROVIDE FOR COMMISSIONER FERLITA -- SHE HAD ASKED, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAS THIS OFFICE BEEN DOING OVER THE PAST SIX MONTHS AND ESPECIALLY SINCE THE OTHER -- I WANT TO SAY THAT MY STAFF, WORKING UNDER THE PRESSURES THAT THEY HAVE AND WITH THE -- I GUESS THE MORALE, YOU COULD SAY, OF BEING KNOWN THAT YOUR JOB IS TERMINATED, THEY'VE ACTED IN A VERY PROFESSIONAL MANNER AND CONTINUED TO PRODUCE FOR YOU-ALL IN A QUALITY MANNER. I THINK YOU-ALL SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN COPIES OF WHAT I PROVIDED TO COMMISSIONER FERLITA IN THE WORK THAT'S ONGOING RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE TWO AUDITS, ONE BASICALLY A STUDY, IT'S NOT REALLY AN AUDIT, THAT WE WILL BE RELEASING. THEY'RE IN THE DRAFT FORMS RIGHT NOW, BUT WE WON'T BE RELEASING THEM. WE'RE WAITING FOR COMMENTS AND OTHER THINGS TO COME BACK FROM THE AUDITEE, SO YOU WILL BE GETTING THEM PROBABLY AFTER THE BUDGET CYCLE HAS BEEN COMPLETED. MY PROPOSED BUDGET IS BASICALLY FOR TWO STAFF, AND IT'S EXCLUSIVE OF ANY OUTSOURCE COST. THE NONDEPARTMENTAL ALLOTMENT INCLUDES $150,000 FOR OUTSOURCING AUDITS AS WELL AS $10,000 FOR A PEER REVIEW. THE IMPACT OF THIS ON THE CLERK BY THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING -- AND THEY MAY HAVE SPOKEN TO YOU ABOUT -- AT LEAST IN THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING IT INDICATES THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF AUDITS THEY DO IF THEY ARE TO RESPOND TO YOU-ALL BY THREE AUDITS A -- A YEAR, SO THAT'S ONE OF THE IMPACTS OF REDUCING THE SIZE OF MY OFFICE, AND ALSO BY SHIFTING THAT RESPONSIBILITY OVER TO THE CLERK, I STILL BY POLICY AND BY CHARTER AM REQUIRED TO CONDUCT OR HAVE CONDUCTED PERFORMANCE AUDITS, AND WE CONTINUE TO MAKE OURSELVES AVAILABLE TO YOU TO DO THAT IF THAT'S YOUR WISHES. I'VE ALSO PROVIDED IN A PACKET -- AND HOPEFULLY YOU-ALL GOT THAT PACKET. I WAS SCHEDULED TO SPEAK AT THE LAST BUDGET WORKSHOP, AND I DID PROVIDE YOU-ALL SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION. I HAD A LETTER THAT WE HAD FOUND FROM AT THAT TIME THE CHAIR, COMMISSIONER PAT FRANK, AND WHAT SHE SAW THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES AND THE NEED FOR THIS OFFICE, AND MAYBE YOU'VE ALL HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THAT. ALSO THE IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE WHEN THIS OFFICE WAS CREATED ALSO HAD ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, SO I'VE KIND OF TAKEN THOSE TWO DOCUMENTS AS THE LEAD IN WHAT I SEE THE RESPONSIBILITIES AND FOR ME TO CARRY FORWARD ON IN THE FUTURE. AGAIN, YOU HAVE MY PROPOSED WORK PLAN. IF YOU'LL LOOK AT THAT. THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PACKET ALSO. I'VE LABELED THEM BY PRIORITIES THERE, ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR. THERE'S SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS. I CAN GO INTO THOSE, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE UP YOUR TIME. YOU'VE GOT A LOT ON YOUR AGENDA TODAY. BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT WORK PLAN, I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU, AND IT ALSO DEFINES WHAT OUR DELIVERABLES WILL BE FOR '10. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO DO AS YOU LOOK OVER THAT -- AND I'M SURE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS -- IS THAT I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU-ALL TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION THAT YOU MADE IN TERMINATING THE TWO POSITIONS THAT I HAVE AND REINSTATING THOSE, BUT THAT IS UP TO YOU. I KNOW WHAT I CAN WORK WITH WITH MYSELF AND ONE EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT, BUT TO BE EFFECTIVE, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO RECONSIDER THAT SO THAT WE CAN -- WE CAN MOVE ON AND BE THE EFFECTIVE ORGANIZATION THAT YOU WANT US TO BE. WE'RE PREPARED TO SERVE YOU IN ANY MANNER THAT YOU FEEL IS NECESSARY BECAUSE I WORK FOR YOU, YOU ARE MY CUSTOMER AS WELL AS MY EMPLOYER, AND IT'S MY DESIRE TO MEET THE WISHES OF YOU, THE COMMISSION. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME THIS TIME, AND I'M OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE AT THIS TIME. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MR. BARNES, FOR THAT PRESENTATION. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR THE IPA? COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: JUST BRIEFLY. THE WORK PLAN THAT -- THAT'S BEEN MASSAGED HERE AND LOOKED AT, HAVE YOU INTERFACED WITH THE CLERK ON THESE THINGS? >>JAMES BARNES: NO, SIR, I HAVE NOT. I HAVE NOT MET WITH THEM AT ALL SINCE THEN. >>JIM NORMAN: THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MR. BARNES, THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTRO PRESENTATION. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. FIRST OF ALL, LET ME ANSWER ONE THING AND GET IT OFF THE TABLE FOR ME. I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD GOVERNMENT AND EFFICIENCY TO RECONSIDER WHAT OUR DECISION WAS IN TERM OF -- IN TERMS OF DOWNSIZING THE IPA'S DEPARTMENT, SO I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT -- THAT REQUEST. ONE THING THAT -- LET'S JUST GET SOME EFFICIENCIES OUT OF THE WAY, MR. BARNES, FIRST OF ALL. YOU, AS THE IPA, ARE ALSO OUR BUDGET ANALYST; IS THAT RIGHT? >>JAMES BARNES: YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. THIS IS CERTAINLY NOT SPECIFICALLY TO YOU BUT CERTAINLY PARTICULARLY TO YOU. I THINK MR. NORMAN HAS RAISED THIS ISSUE SEVERAL TIMES, AND I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE WITH HIM, THAT IF WE HAVE POLICIES TO FOLLOW, THEN WE SHOULD ALL FOLLOW THEM. I THINK HE HAS POINTED THAT OUT WHEN TO MY RECOLLECTION EPC WAS UP HERE, PLANNING COMMISSION WAS HERE, AND EVEN RENEE LEE, WHO HAS GOTTEN RAVING REVIEWS FROM THIS COMMISSION IN TERMS OF DEADLINES ABOUT SUBMITTING YOUR BUDGET. I BELIEVE THAT WHAT I SAW IN MARCH WAS A VERY SHORT VERSION OF A BUDGET, AND EVEN WITH THE THREE OR FOUR ELECTIVE COURSES I TOOK IN ACCOUNTING, I KNEW THAT THOSE DOLLARS AND THOSE FIGURES DID NOT MATCH UP. I UNDERSTAND THAT ULTIMATELY, PERHAPS AT THE END OF MAY, YOU SUBMITTED YOUR BUDGET, AND I BELIEVE BASED ON THE POLICY OF THIS BOARD -- AND MS. BEAN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG -- WE CONTINUE TO POUND ON THE FACT THAT IN ORDER FOR YOU AND ERIC AND THE REST OF YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF TO DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO, PEOPLE HAVE TO SUBMIT THOSE FIGURES TO YOU BY, WHAT, SOMETIME IN MARCH? >>PAT BEAN: WE ACTUALLY START REVIEWING THE MATERIALS IN MARCH. THAT'S WHEN WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE THE INFORMATION. >>ROSE FERLITA: RIGHT. OKAY. SO I THINK YOU PARTICULARLY, MR. BARNES, OUGHT TO -- OUGHT TO SET THAT EXAMPLE BY GETTING IT IN ON TIME AND IN A MANNER THAT REALLY, REALLY RESEMBLES A BUDGET BECAUSE THAT FIRST DOCUMENT WAS I HAVE TO TELL YOU QUITE PITIFUL, AND MR. JOHNSON, I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO ASK YOU TO -- TO COMMENT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT YOU ARE OUR -- OUR ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR IN CHARGE OF BUDGET, SO I THINK YOU WILL AGREE WITH ME THAT THOSE DOLLARS ON THE FIRST PAGE AND THE SECOND PAGE DIDN'T AGREE, AND I'M PARTICULARLY CONCERNED BECAUSE THAT COMES FROM OUR IPA AND OUR BUDGET ANALYST. I MEAN, DO YOU CONCUR WITH WHAT I SAW? >>ERIC JOHNSON: YES, MA'AM. ACTUALLY, THE FIRST TWO VERSIONS DIDN'T ADD UP CORRECTLY. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. SO I THINK WE NEED TO DO BETTER NEXT YEAR, OKAY? >>JAMES BARNES: YES, MA'AM. >>ROSE FERLITA: IN A TIMELY MANNER AND EFFICIENT MANNER WITH SOME CORRECT FIGURES. >>JAMES BARNES: IF I COULD JUST COMMENT BRIEFLY ON THAT. WHEN WE PREPARED THE DOCUMENT, I DID CONTACT THE BUDGET STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE PUTTING IT IN THE RIGHT FORMAT, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR ANY MATHEMATICAL ERRORS THAT WE MAY HAVE HAD IN THAT REPORT, BUT WE WERE -- THAT WAS REALLY THE FIRST YEAR, IF YOU WILL, THAT WE WERE PREPARING THIS DOCUMENT IN THE FORMAT IN WHICH THEY WERE, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE EXCUSES, COMMISSIONER. I TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR OUR NUMBERS NOT ADDING UP LIKE THAT. WE SHOULD HAVE HAD A CHECK AND BALANCE IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, AND I PROMISE YOU IN THE FUTURE - - >>ROSE FERLITA: WHETHER IT WAS THE FIRST YEAR OR NOT, JUST LIKE SOMEBODY WRITING A DOCUMENT, IF THEY'RE NOT SURE OF THE SPELLING, THEY DO SPELL CHECK. >>JAMES BARNES: YES. >>ROSE FERLITA: WHEN SOMEBODY IN THE ARENA OF IPA AND BUDGET SAYS THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE DID THIS, SORRY, WE'LL DO BETTER NEXT TIME, YOU OUGHT TO BE CHECKING THOSE FIGURES JUST LIKE I CHECKED IT. >>JAMES BARNES: OH, ABSOLUTELY. I AGREE WITH YOU. >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT WAS PROBABLY BETTER NOT SAID. BUT IN ANY CASE, YOU KNOW, I, JUST LIKE I'M SURE THE REST OF MY COLLEAGUES, HAVE SPENT AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME LOOKING THROUGH THE BUDGET, TRYING TO RECONCILE PROBLEMS IN DOLLARS AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO AND HOW WE NEED TO COMPENSATE FOR SOME OF THE FLAGS THAT WE HAVE SUBMITTED TO THE ADMINISTRATION, AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE, I -- YOU, AGAIN, BUDGET ANALYST BY YOUR OWN -- YOUR OWN ADMISSION, I REALLY HAVEN'T SEEN TOO MANY BUDGET CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND THINGS TO THAT -- TO THAT END THAT PERHAPS WOULD HELP ME IN THE TASK OF -- OF REVIEWING THE BUDGET, AND I'M JUST A LITTLE BIT SURPRISED, AND AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING PROBABLY YOU NEED TO IMPROVE ON AS WE GO FORWARD. I LOOK TO THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT HEADS BASED ON THEIR AREA OF EXPERTISE. YOURS HAPPENS TO BE BUDGET, YOURS HAPPENS TO BE IPA, SO I THINK BECAUSE OF YOU BEING THE BUDGET ANALYST, IT WOULD BE -- IT WOULD BE APPRECIATED IF YOU WERE MUCH MORE FORTHCOMING IN TERMS OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCERNS WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT, AND THAT WOULD SUPPLEMENT WHAT WE EACH DO INDIVIDUALLY. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. PEER REVIEW, WHERE ARE YOU WITH THAT? >>JAMES BARNES: WITH THE PEER REVIEW, WITH THE MOTION AS IT NOW STANDS WITH ME AND JUST THE EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT, THERE IS NO NEED FOR A PEER REVIEW. WE WON'T BE CONDUCTING ANY PERFORMANCE AUDITS IN THIS OFFICE. BECAUSE WE'RE NOT CONDUCTING THEM, THERE WON'T BE A NEED FOR DOING THAT SORT OF THING, SO THAT'S A $10,000 SAVINGS FOR THE COUNTY. >>ROSE FERLITA: MR. JOHNSON, EXCUSE ME. I'M NOT SURE, BUT I BELIEVE THE ADMINISTRATOR, PAT BEAN, TASKED YOU WITH WORKING WITH JIM BARNES. I THOUGHT WE HAD PUT AWAY -- PUT ASIDE SOME ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO HELP HIM WITH THIS, AND NOW WHAT HE'S SAYING IS WE DON'T NEED A PEER REVIEW. JUST DEFINE THIS FOR ME, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO BE CONFRONTATIONAL, I JUST WOULD APPRECIATE CLARITY AS WE GO THROUGH THIS BUDGET. IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATION, THEN, PLEASE TELL ME WHAT HE'S DOING. >>ERIC JOHNSON: LET ME BE CAUTIOUS WITH THAT ONE. WELL, COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS -- AS YOU MAY RECALL, THE BOARD AUTHORIZED THE MONEY THAT WAS SAVED FROM A POSITION, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO LEFT THE IPA'S OFFICE EARLY THIS CALENDAR YEAR -- AUTHORIZED THAT MONEY TO BE SPLIT INTO TWO POSITIONS FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF SPENDING FIVE MONTHS PREPARING FOR THE PEER REVIEW, SO IF THE DECISION WAS MADE AT SOME POINT THAT A PEER REVIEW WASN'T REQUIRED, I DON'T KNOW WHY THOSE POSITIONS ARE STILL ENGAGED PURPORTEDLY IN THAT PRACTICE, AND WE CERTAINLY HAVEN'T BEEN ADVISED THAT WE DON'T NEED TO SET ASIDE MONEY FOR THE PEER REVIEW. >>ROSE FERLITA: I CERTAINLY -- THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING. SO WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THAT? >>ERIC JOHNSON: I DON'T KNOW. >>ROSE FERLITA: IF I GIVE YOU SOME -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: WE DIDN'T NEED THE RESOURCES. >>ROSE FERLITA: MS. BEAN, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THAT? >>PAT BEAN: WELL, IF WE DON'T NEED THEM, WE SHOULD REMOVE THEM. >>ROSE FERLITA: WE WERE GIVING HIM TO SUPPORT HIM IN TERMS OF THE REVENUE OR THE RESOURCES THAT HE NEEDED TO DO A PEER REVIEW, NOW HE'S SAYING HE DOESN'T NEED A PEER REVIEW. WHAT HAVE THOSE PEOPLE BEEN DOING? WHAT HAVE THE DOLLARS GONE TO THAT GIVE US A RETURN ON GIVING HIM THOSE RESOURCES? SOMEBODY NEEDS TO ANSWER THAT, AND I -- >>JAMES BARNES: I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLAIN WHAT THEY'VE DONE. WE WORKED TOWARD THAT END UNTIL WE LOST THE TWO POSITIONS. WHEN THE STAFF CAME ON, WE WORKED TOWARD THAT. THE ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST THAT I HAD HIRED IN THE TEMPORARY SLOT AS I EXPLAINED IN THE RESOLUTION WAS TO HELP US TAKE CARE OF SOME ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES. THE OTHERS WERE TO DO RESEARCH AND PULL EVERYTHING TOGETHER SO WE COULD QUALIFY. WE DEVELOPED OUR PROCEDURES, WE'RE READY TO GO FORWARD WITH THE REVIEW. WE HAVE EVERYTHING IN PLACE FOR A FULL OFFICE, BUT I DON'T SEE A NEED FOR US TO GO FORWARD WITH THAT IN 2010 SINCE WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE DOING PERFORMANCE AUDITS OUT OF THIS OFFICE. SO THAT WAS -- THAT'S WHERE WE'VE BEEN. >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT DIDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME. I'M LOOKING AT YOU AGAIN, MR. JOHNSON, BUT THAT SEEMS VERY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. I DON'T MEAN TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT THIS IS IMPORTANT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BUDGET, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET ANALYST, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IPA. WE DON'T NEED A PEER THING ANYMORE, BUT WE'VE GIVEN HIM THE RESOURCES AND NOW WE DON'T NEED IT. OKAY. NEXT. WHAT IS THAT? >>ERIC JOHNSON: I GUESS, COMMISSIONERS, THE QUESTION IS IF AS JIM HAS INDICATED UNDER THE CHARTER HE HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PERFORMANCE AUDITS, EVEN IF THEY'RE CONTRACTED OUT, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THERE STILL WOULDN'T BE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES INVOLVED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THOSE AUDITS. AS I SAID, IT WASN'T -- I WASN'T AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO LONGER AN EXPECTATION THAT WE WOULD HAVE A PEER REVIEW. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT IS A FAIRLY -- FOR MOST AUDIT OFFICES IT TAKES VERY LITTLE PREPARATION FOR THAT. I HAVE TALKED OVER THE SUMMER WITH A FIRM THAT IS INTERESTED IN PERFORMING AUDITS UNDER YOUR ARRANGEMENT. I ASKED THEM HOW LONG IT TOOK THEM TO PREPARE FOR A PEER REVIEW, AND THEY SAID AN AFTERNOON. I'VE TALKED TO THE CITY OF TAMPA, AND I HAD A FAIRLY SIMILAR ANSWER THERE THAT IN EFFECT, YOU PREPARE THE APPLICATION, YOU SHOULD HAVE MATERIALS IN YOUR FILES, SO I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND FIVE MONTHS OF RESOURCES BEING ALLOCATED TO THIS. WE DID SET ASIDE MONEY TO PAY FOR THE COST BECAUSE AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YOU HAVE TO HAVE MONEY TO COVER THE TRAVEL COSTS OF THE PEER GROUP THAT COMES IN IF THAT'S HOW YOU HANDLE THE PEER REVIEW, BUT -- >>KEN HAGAN: ALL RIGHT. IF NECESSARY, LET'S FLAG THIS ITEM AND TAKE IT UP DURING NEXT WEEK'S WORKSHOP. >>ROSE FERLITA: WE DEFINITELY NEED TO DO THAT, BECAUSE MR. JOHNSON, I THINK THOSE WERE WASTED DOLLARS. AND MY LAST COMMENT IS THIS. I KNOW THAT IN THE PAST WEEK OR SO I'VE ASKED MR. BARNES TO GIVE ME INFORMATION ON DIFFERENT AUDITS OR REPORTS AND THERE WAS SOME REFERENCE TO -- AND I DON'T -- WE'LL CUT DOWN BY NOT HAVING THIS BACK AND FORTH, SO I DON'T HAVE ANYMORE QUESTIONS OF YOU, MR. BARNES, THANK YOU, BUT I'D ASKED ABOUT GIVING ME INFORMATION, AND UNTIL IT WAS COMPLETED, HE SAID HE DIDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE GIVING IT, SO I HAD TO RECHANGE THE LANGUAGE OF MY E-MAIL TO SAY THAT IF YOU HAVE DONE ANYTHING, EVEN IN PART OF WHOLE THAT HAS BEEN SHARED WITH ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER, I WANT IT TO BE GIVEN TO ME AS WELL. FINALLY WE GOT THAT, AND FINALLY I ASKED HIM WHAT ARE YOU DOING, WHERE ARE YOU WITH DIFFERENT PROJECTS, COMPLETION DATES, STATUS. I FINALLY DID GET THAT, BUT I HAVE TO JUST CONTINUE TO DISSECT IT OUT OF HIM. SO TO MAKE THIS SIMPLER AND TO MAKE THIS MORE EFFICIENT AS WE GO FORWARD AND NOT HAVE TO PLAY COMMISSIONER INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER, I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT SOMETHING THAT WAS IN PLACE IN 2003 BY RESOLUTION, AND I ASKED MS. LEE TO PULL THIS FOR ME AT MY REQUEST IN TERMS OF THE AUDITOR, INTERNAL AUDITOR SERVICES, AND IT TELLS WHAT THE POLICY IS OF THE BOARD, AND INSTEAD OF -- IN HIS LANGUAGE HERE, ANYTHING YOU WANT, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY ASK ME. WELL, EVERY WEEK I CAN'T TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HE'S GOT AND WHAT HE HAS SHARED WITH ME OR SOMEBODY ELSE AND NOT TO ALL, SO MS. LEE, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TODAY OR WHEN WE TAKE THIS UP, AND I WILL REFER THIS DOCUMENT BACK TO YOU, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE, BUT IN TERMS OF NUMBER THREE, IN TERMS OF RESPONSIBILITY, IT SAYS, THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR MAY EXERCISE PROFESSIONAL [INCOMPREHENSIBLE] IN DETERMINING SUCH REQUESTS WILL BE REFERRED TO THE BOARD. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO IS ADD TO NUMBER THREE, THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE AUDITOR SHALL PUBLISH ON A WEEKLY BASIS ALL REQUESTS FROM COMMISSIONERS REGARDLESS OF THE TIME REQUIRED FOR COMPLETION. THAT MEANS I DON'T NEED TO HAVE AN ANTENNA UP THAT SAYS FOUR HOURS OR OVER, THAT'S THE THRESHOLD, SEND IT TO ME. IF I'M WORKING ON SOMETHING THAT'S AN IDEA OR MR. HAGAN OR MR. HIGGINBOTHAM OR ANYBODY, WE ARE ALL HERE TO WORK ON INITIATIVES BUT TOGETHER, AND SO IF HE WILL MAKE US ALL BENEFICIARIES OF THE WORK HE'S DOING, THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HE'S DOING. THAT'S ONE CONCERN, AND THEN MAYBE WE COULD AGAIN MEET, MS. LEE. IF THAT'S REASONABLE LANGUAGE, I WOULD COME BACK WITH SOME ASSISTANCE FROM YOU AND MAKE THAT MOTION, OR HE COULD PROBABLY PUT EVERY SINGLE THING THAT HE'S DOING ON THE AGENDA AS A CONSENT ITEM, AND THAT ALSO WOULD YIELD SOME TRANSPARENCY, AND IF I WANT TO KNOW WHAT HE'S DOING WITH THOSE TWO AND A HALF HOURS AND THIS IS A SUBJECT MATTER OR ANYBODY ELSE DOES, THEN HE CERTAINLY COULD RESPOND TO THAT INQUIRY BY PULLING THAT AGENDA ITEM, SO I THINK THAT THAT WOULD MAKE IT A LOT EASIER FOR US TO GET A BETTER ANSWER THAN I DID TODAY WHEN I ASKED WHAT IS MR. BARNES DOING, SO CAN WE DO THAT AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME AND BRING IT TO THIS BOARD? THANK YOU. >>RENEE LEE: I'LL BE HAPPY TO HELP YOU. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THIS IS FLAGGED TO COME UP LATER. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM. THANK YOU, MR. BARNES. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM IS THE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT. EDITH STEWART IS COMING FORWARD TO PRESENT THIS. >>EDITH STEWART: HELLO, COMMISSIONERS. EDITH STEWART, PUBLIC AFFAIRS ADMINISTRATOR AND I'M BRINGING TO YOU TODAY THE COMMUNICATIONS BUDGET. WE'RE HAPPY TO REPORT TO YOU THAT WE ARE COMPLETING OUR EVOLUTION INTO BROADCAST OF GOVERNMENT MEETINGS BY FURTHER STREAMLINING HTV, AND YOU WILL SEE THAT WE HAVE ELIMINATED A TOTAL OF EIGHT POSITIONS, TWO OF WHICH ARE UNCLASSIFIED MANAGERS, AND IN ADDITION TO THE $849,024 IN SAVINGS, OUR DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS HAS IDENTIFIED ANOTHER $37,753 THAT HAVE BEEN REDUCED FROM THE COMMUNICATIONS BUDGET. IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THE COVERAGE OF THESE NON-BOCC GOVERNMENT MEETINGS, WHICH IS THE DU-4 THAT YOU SEE THAT ELIMINATES THREE POSITIONS, STAFF HAS PREPARED BID PROPOSALS WHICH WILL BE COMING TO THE BOARD AT A LATER DATE TO CONTINUE THE PROVISION OF LIVE AND TAPED COVERAGE, VIDEO ON DEMAND, CLOSED CAPTIONING, AND WEB SITE MAINTENANCE FOR THESE NON-BOCC MEETINGS. IT IS A REAL SERVICE THAT WE PROVIDE TO THESE OUTSIDE AGENCIES, AND THEY WILL DO THAT IN RETURN, COMMISSIONER NORMAN, FOR A CONTRACTED PAYMENT FOR SERVICES AS YOU HAVE ASKED US TO DO. THERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR $135,000 IN REVENUE FROM 12 OUTSIDE AGENCIES. WE'RE ALSO NEGOTIATING FOR THE LEASE OF OUR LICENSE FOR BROADBAND, WHICH HAS A POTENTIAL 30-YEAR REVENUE STREAM, BUT SO THAT YOU WILL BE SURE THAT YOU KNOW THAT YOU WILL COMPLETE -- HAVE COMPLETE COVERAGE FROM YOUR PIOs FOR MEDIA RELATIONS, BOARD SUPPORT, PUBLIC INFORMATION, AND CITIZENS BOARD SUPPORT, AND WE WILL CONTINUE WITH THE HTV INTERNET - - INTRANET PRINTING SERVICE, VIDEO ON DEMAND, SPANISH TRANSLATION, CLOSED CAPTIONING, GROUND BREAKINGS AND DEDICATIONS, AND WE'RE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: MS. STEWART, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR THAT EFFICIENCY ABOUT -- CERTAINLY WE WANT TO BROADCAST AS MANY OF THESE DIFFERENT MEETINGS AS WE CAN, BUT THE ACTUALITY IS WHERE WE ARE IN TERMS OF DOLLARS, WE CAN'T. SO I'M GLAD THAT YOU-ALL ARE LOOKING AT SOME OF THESE DIFFERENT AGENCIES TO HELP KICK IN WITH SOME OF THE COSTS BECAUSE IN GOOD TIMES WE COULD DO IT AND IT WAS GOOD FOR OUR CITIZENS, AND THAT'S FINE, BUT THIS IS ALL ABOUT PARTNERING AND PARTNERSHIPS AND TRYING TO CONTAIN THE COSTS BY EVERYBODY KICKING IN. ONE THING I DO WANT TO ASK ABOUT IS ON PAGE 233 UNDER COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT, AND AGAIN, I AGREE WITH YOU, THE ONES THAT ARE ON-SITE, THE ONES THAT WE CAN DO, THAT'S FINE, AND YOU'VE MADE YOUR BUDGET PLAN VERY CLEAR HERE AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE -- APPRECIATE THE EFFICIENCIES. THE ONLY ONE I WOULD LIKE YOU TO MAYBE GET BACK WITH US ON -- AND I DON'T KNOW IF -- I GUESS THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT IS FLAG IT, PERHAPS, BUT PEOPLE BECOME VERY -- VERY, VERY CONCERNED AND VERY, VERY INVOLVED IN CHARTER REVIEW STUFF BECAUSE THAT REALLY GOVERNS WHERE WE GO AND WHAT WE CHANGE AND WHAT IS STALE AND WHAT WE NEED TO UPDATE, AND I'M WONDERING IF YOU COULD SHARE WITH US -- AND I'LL FLAG IT AND THEN WE CAN DO IT WHENEVER IT COMES UP AGAIN, BUT I WONDER IF YOU COULD GIVE US SOME AVERAGE IDEA OF WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST TO KEEP THAT TELEVISED, AND IT'S ONLY, OF COURSE, WHEN THEY'RE IN SESSION. >>EDITH STEWART: RIGHT. THERE IS AN ALLOCATION ON A SEPARATE PAGE FOR $9500 THAT GOES TOTALLY TO CHARTER REVIEW TO STAFF IT, DO THE LEGAL NOTICES THAT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO DO, TO DO THE TELEVISING, TO MAIN ATTAIN THE PUBLIC RECORDS. -- MAINTAIN THE PUBLIC RECORDS. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. HAS THAT BEEN EXCLUDED THEN BECAUSE IT SAYS -- STUART IT'S NOT UNDER THE HTV BUDGET. I BELIEVE IT'S UNDER INTERGOVERNMENTAL, BUT THERE IS A DIRECT ALLOCATION, AND IT HAS -- >>ROSE FERLITA: THEN I'M MISREADING THIS. LOOK, WAIT A MINUTE, EDITH. IT SAYS, THE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT BUDGET ELIMINATES ALL HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TELEVISION COVERAGE OF NON-BOCC MEETINGS TO INCLUDE METROPOLITAN PLANNING, PLANNING COMMISSION, PTC, TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED, PUBLIC SAFETY, PORT AUTHORITY, ZONING, JUVENILE JUSTICE, TOURIST DEVELOPMENT, AND THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD, SO THIS LOOKS LIKE IT -- IT ELIMINATES THAT TOO. >>EDITH STEWART: WELL, IT EXCLUDES IT FROM THIS EXCEPT THE CHARTER REVIEW BOARD HAS A FUNDING STREAM THAT WOULD FUND THE COVERAGE. >>ROSE FERLITA: SO THAT WOULDN'T GO AWAY IN TERMS OF OUR CITIZENS -- >>EDITH STEWART: THAT'S CORRECT. IT WILL BE TOTALLY COVERED AND CAPTURED AS IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN ON THE WEB SITE AND WITH LIVE COVERAGE. >>ROSE FERLITA: PERFECT. THE OTHER COMMENT I HAD IS CERTAINLY THIS. I KNOW YOU TALKED VERY BRIEFLY AND YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO PROBABLY TALK ABOUT THIS AT SOME OTHER TIME AT SOME OTHER MEETING AT SOME OTHER VENUE ABOUT THE REVENUE STREAM YOU'RE GOING TO CREATE, AND -- THAT YOU JUST REFERRED TO. >>EDITH STEWART: YES. WE HOPE TO BRING THAT TO THE BOARD IN ITS FINAL FORM. >>ROSE FERLITA: RIGHT. AND WHEN IT DOES, THAT WILL BE VERY GOOD, BUT WHAT I REALLY LIKE IS BECAUSE RIGHT NOW EVERYBODY'S NEGOTIATING, YOU-ALL ARE GOING TO DO THIS FOR -- FOR US OR FOR THE BUDGET OR FOR OUR CITIZENS, BUT IT'S JUST SO PLEASANT TO NOT HEAR WE'RE DOING THIS FOR YOU-ALL, SO CAN YOU DO THIS BACK FOR OUR BUDGET. THERE'S NOT A TIT FOR TAT, AND THAT'S GREAT. I AGAIN APPRECIATE THE EFFICIENCIES THAT YOU DO, AND LORI, I CAN'T PRAISE YOU ENOUGH FOR YOUR STAFF'S EFFICIENCY AND YOUR EFFICIENCY, AND THOSE ARE ALL THE COMMENTS I HAVE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. >>KEN HAGAN: EDITH, DO WE NEED TO OFFICIALLY FLAG THIS DU- 4? >>EDITH STEWART: WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU WANT TO DO THIS IN THE BUDGET PROCESS, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, OR WHETHER YOU WOULD PREFER US TO BRING IT IN BOARD ACTION. >>PAT BEAN: I THINK BOARD ACTION. >>EDITH STEWART: WHAT WE'RE SEEKING IS YOUR APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT AND TRY TO RECAPTURE THE DU-4. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU LIKE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT THEN? >>ROSE FERLITA: SO MOVED IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'D -- >>MARK SHARPE: I'LL SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FERLITA, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>EDITH STEWART: THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: COMMISSIONER WHITE. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT AGENCY, WE'RE GOING TO POSTPONE THE DISCUSSION ON THE MEDICAL EXAMINER'S OFFICE FOR TODAY. WE'LL BRING THAT BACK AT NEXT WEEK'S MEETING. THE NEXT ITEM WE WOULD MOVE TO IS NONDEPARTMENTAL ALLOTMENTS. ERIC, ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE THAT PRESENTATION? >>ERIC JOHNSON: YES. COMMISSIONERS, WE'LL HAND OUT AN EXTRA COPY OF MATERIAL. FOR PEOPLE WHO MAY BE VIEWING THIS, IT'S AVAILABLE ON-LINE IN THE COUNTY'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET DOCUMENT BEGINNING ON PAGE 339. THESE ARE THE -- A VARIETY OF EXPENDITURES THAT DON'T GET ASSOCIATED WITH ANY SPECIFIC COUNTY DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY, AND WHAT I WANT TO DO IS MOSTLY HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT ARE REFLECTED IN THESE EXPENDITURES. THIS IS AN AREA OF THE BUDGET BECAUSE OF SOMETIMES THE UNIQUENESS OR SENSITIVITY THAT IN EFFECT WE SHOW A HIGHER LEVEL OF DETAIL THAN WHEN WE TALK ABOUT AN ENTIRE AGENCY OR PROGRAM BUDGET. THE FIRST THING ON THE FIRST PAGE IS A SUMMARY BY FUND, AND IF YOU'LL LOOK AT THE SECOND SET OF NUMBERS, WHAT YOU'LL SEE IS THAT OVERWHELMINGLY OF $108 MILLION THAT DON'T FLOW THROUGH ORGANIZATIONAL BUDGETS, MOST OF THAT 95 OF THE $108 MILLION FLOWS THROUGH OUR COUNTY'S SELF-INSURANCE FUND, AND THAT INVOLVES PROGRAMS THAT WE ADMINISTER, WHETHER IT'S EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE OR RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS OR CATASTROPHIC RESERVE, WHICH ALSO SHOWS UP IN THAT COUNTY SELF-INSURANCE FUND. IN OUR COUNTYWIDE GENERAL FUND, THERE'S $7 MILLION FOR NEXT YEAR VERSUS EIGHT POINT ALMOST THREE MILLION THIS YEAR, AND IF YOU'LL TURN TO THE PAGE TO WHAT ON-LINE WOULD BE PAGE 340, IN OUR COUNTYWIDE GENERAL FUND, AS MIKE MERRILL INDICATED WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE DEBT MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, WE'VE FINE-TUNED OUR BUDGET FOR DEBT ISSUANCE AND OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR, AND THOSE ARE GOING TO BE MORE TRANSACTIONALLY BASED AS OPPOSED TO CHARGING -- HAVING THEM CHARGE US BACK ON AN HOURLY BASIS FOR WORK THAT THEY DO FOR US. UNDER THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, THERE'S A PROGRAM THAT WAS INITIATED -- I DON'T RECALL HOW MANY YEARS AGO -- FOR AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION, AND IN THAT PROGRAM WE SUSPENDED SIGNING UP ADDITIONAL PARTICIPANTS AND GOING FORWARD. THAT'S A PROGRAM THAT IS ELIMINATED IN THE BUDGET BEGINNING IN FY 10, AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT PAST PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROGRAM HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED. I'LL POINT OUT AS A CLARIFICATION, STILL UNDER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS, YOU'LL SEE THERE'S A LINE ABOUT HALFWAY DOWN THE PAGE ENTITLED TAMPA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. I SHOULD CLARIFY, THAT'S OUR FUNDING OF THE COMMITTEE OF 100, AND WE'RE INVOLVED IN A PROJECT, THE CITY OF TAMPA AND HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE SEGREGATING OUT GOING FORWARD THE FINANCES OF THE COMMITTEE OF 100 FROM THE FINANCES OF THE TAMPA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THAT FUNDING THAT SHOWS UP HERE IS IN SUPPORT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE OF 100 AND NOT THE UNDERLYING TYPICAL WORK THAT ONE WOULD EXPECT OF A CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. AND YOU CAN SEE WE'VE CONTINUED THAT LEVEL OF FUNDING -- FUNDING FOR THAT LEVEL OF -- FOR THAT PROGRAM AS WELL AS FOR THE USF HIGH-TECH INCUBATOR AND THE USF OFFICE FOR TECHNOLOGY ENTREPRENEURSHIP. ESSENTIALLY WE'VE TRIED TO LEAVE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE UNTOUCHED AS WE PREPARED THIS BUDGET. I DO WANT TO POINT OUT, THE SECOND LINE FROM THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE, IN OUR REAL ESTATE DEPARTMENT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY FACING IS THE FACT THAT WE ARE TRYING TO ELIMINATE LEASES WHERE POSSIBLE. WITH OUR DOWNSIZING OF VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS INTO COUNTY-OWNED BUILDINGS AND OUT OF LEASED SPACE. WHAT WE RECOGNIZED, AS WE DEAL WITH LANDLORDS ON LEASE TERMINATIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME EXPENDITURES PARTWAY INTO FISCAL '10 THAT WILL NOT NECESSARILY BE REFLECTED IN PROGRAM BUDGETS, AND SO THERE ARE $500,000 OF ONE-TIME MONEY HERE FOR REAL ESTATE TO ARRANGE FOR TERMINATION OF LEASES, AND THAT'S AN EXPENSE WE HAVEN'T PREVIOUSLY HAD. THE FOLLOWING PAGE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE HAD IN PLACE FOR QUITE A WHILE -- I DATE IT TO SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE ED RADICE LEFT THE COUNTY. WE'VE BEEN CHALLENGED WITH THE FACT THAT SOMETIMES WE HAVE UNEXPECTED REPLACEMENT OF EQUIPMENT THAT REQUIRES US MIDYEAR TO FIND A FUNDING SOURCE, AND HISTORICALLY WE'VE BUDGETED ABOUT $2 MILLION IN OUR COUNTYWIDE FUND. YOU CAN SEE IN THE LEFT-HAND COLUMN IN FISCAL '8 WE SPENT JUST UNDER $600,000. WE'VE TIGHTENED UP ON THAT AND CUT IT BACK TO A MILLION DOLLARS, AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THAT AND SEE IF THAT'S AN AREA THAT WE CAN GOING FORWARD CONTINUE TO TIGHTEN UP, BUT THE CHALLENGE FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT IS YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT MIGHT REQUIRE REPLACEMENT UNEXPECTEDLY. A COUPLE LINES DOWN, AS WE'VE JUST HEARD IN THE DISCUSSION OF THE IPA, WE HAVE SET ASIDE SPECIFIC FUNDING FOR PERFORMANCE AUDITS IN THE AMOUNT OF 150,000 AS WELL AS $10,000 FOR A PEER REVIEW, AND I WOULD EXPECT -- ACTUALLY WE SHOW THAT BOTH UNDER FISCAL '10 AND FISCAL '11. THAT'S A ONE-TIME EXPENDITURE EVERY THREE YEARS, SO IF THE IPA DOES GO FORWARD WITH THAT, WE WON'T NEED TO REPEAT THAT EXPENDITURE IN FISCAL '11. FURTHER DOWN, ABOUT HALFWAY DOWN THE PAGE, WE START OUR UNINCORPORATED AREA GENERAL FUND. WE HAVE LOOKED AT HISTORICAL SPENDING UNDER AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM, AND AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE FIRST COLUMN THERE, WE SPENT $432,000 LAST YEAR. WE'VE TALKED TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ABOUT EXPECTATIONS GOING FORWARD, AND WE'VE TIGHTENED UP THE BUDGET THERE FROM THE $800,000 THAT WE'VE PROBABLY BUDGETED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS FOR THE PAST DECADE TO $500,000 FOR EACH OF THE NEXT TWO YEARS. SIMILARLY, THE NEXT LINE DOWN WE HAVE AN IMPACT FEE WAIVER PROGRAM AND NO-FEE ZONES. WE SPENT $350,000 LAST YEAR. WE HAVE BEEN BUDGETING BETWEEN ONE AND TWO MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. THAT PROGRAM DOES CONTINUE, BUT WE'VE LOOKED AT THE PHASING DOWN OF EXPECTED COSTS, AND SO WE'VE BUDGETED HALF A MILLION DOLLARS FOR NEXT YEAR AND $250,000 FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR. AND AGAIN, THAT'S A PROGRAM THAT WILL REQUIRE SOME REVIEW MIDYEAR TO ENSURE THAT AS WE CONTINUE THIS PROGRAM THAT WE ASSESS HOW MUCH MIGHT BE NEEDED GIVEN THE POTENTIAL IN THE GEOGRAPHIC AREAS COVERED. AND THEN AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PANEL, AGAIN, FOR THE FIRST TIME WE'VE BUDGETED IN OUR UNINCORPORATED FUND MONEY THAT REAL ESTATE MAY NEED AS THEY NEGOTIATE LEASE TERMINATIONS AND RELOCATIONS OF COUNTY DEPARTMENTS. THE FOLLOWING PAGE, AGAIN, WE HAVE EMERGENCY ACQUISITION OF EQUIPMENT, AND WE ACTUALLY HAD A FAIRLY LARGE BUDGET THIS YEAR IN THIS UNINCORPORATED FUND BECAUSE AS WE TRANSFERRED RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF FIRE APPARATUS FROM THE FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT TO FLEET MANAGEMENT, WE FOUND A NEED TO DO SOME SIGNIFICANT REFURBISHMENT OF VEHICLES TO EXTEND THEIR USEFUL LIFE, AND SO WE'VE HAD SOME FAIRLY HEAVY EXPENDITURES THIS YEAR, BUT WE'VE TIGHTENED THAT UP GOING FORWARD TO A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. AND THEN THE LAST THING THAT I WOULD POINT OUT THAT'S MAY BE SIGNIFICANT IS THAT FROM TIME TO TIME WE TALK ABOUT THE OBLIGATION WE HAVE TO TAMPA GENERAL THAT'S FUNDED OUT OF OUR INDIGENT HEALTH CARE PROGRAM, AND YOU SEE THE $3.5 MILLION CONTINUING COMMITMENT TO TAMPA GENERAL THAT SHOWS UP UNDER A TITLE CALLED "COUNTYWIDE SPECIAL PURPOSE REVENUE FUND," BUT THE COMPONENT THAT IS ACTUALLY PAYING THAT BILL IS OUR INDIGENT HEALTH CARE PROGRAM. BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: DID YOU HAVE -- DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I THOUGHT THAT WAS ON. I THOUGHT -- I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT MR. BECKNER HAD ONE. MR. JOHNSON, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, SOME OF THE THINGS YOU JUST SAID ANSWERED SOME OF THEM. SO GO THROUGH THESE WITH ME SO I CAN BETTER UNDERSTAND IT. AND I'M GOING TO BE GOING BACK AND FORTH A LITTLE BIT IN MY COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BETWEEN THE NONDEPARTMENTAL ALLOTMENTS AND THE RESERVES AND REFUNDS. >>ERIC JOHNSON: OKAY. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, HERE WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EMERGENCY ACQUISITION OF EQUIPMENT -- AND I THINK I ASKED SOMETHING LIKE THIS THE LAST CYCLE AROUND -- ACTUAL WE SPENT 584,000 IN '08 AND ADOPTED RECOMMENDED AND PLANNED '09, '10, AND '11, WE'VE GOT TWO MILLION, THEN IT DROPS DOWN TO ONE MILLION. I'M THINKING IT'S NOT REALLY A RISK. I DON'T THINK I CAN REALLY SAY IT THAT WAY BECAUSE THAT HAS A NEGATIVE CONNOTATION, BUT I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY WE CAN'T REDUCE THAT EVEN A LITTLE BIT MORE, AND, OF COURSE, IF THERE'S SOME PROBLEMS WITH EMERGENCY ACQUISITION OF EQUIPMENT, YOU COME BACK TO THE BOARD AND WE APPROVE IT. I KNOW THAT ELIMINATES YOU DOING IT WITHOUT COMING BACK HERE IN TERMS OF THE THRESHOLD, BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS WHOLE BUDGET IS ABOUT TRYING TO JUST FILL IN THE GAPS AS BEST AS WE CAN, IN SOME CASES ONE-TIME DOLLARS AND IN SOME CASES SPLITTING WHAT WE HAVE HERE AND SPLITTING WHAT WE HAVE THERE. AND I THINK AGAIN KEEPING WITH WHAT I HAD IN THIS SAME QUESTION LAST TIME, GOING FROM THE NONDEPARTMENTAL TO 351, THE RESERVES. I KNOW WE HAVE THIS EMERGENCY ACQUISITION OF EQUIPMENT PUT ASIDE, BUT THEN IF YOU GO TO 351, UNDER GENERAL FUND RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCY -- AND I KNOW HOW CONTINGENCIES ARE VERY IMPORTANT, AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT RAPING THE CONTINGENCY FUNDS AND GETTING IT DOWN TO -- TO A DANGEROUS LEVEL, BUT WE'VE GOT A RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCY '08 36 MILLION, '09 36 MILLION, '10 ADOPTED, '11 ADOPTED. IT POPPED UP TO 39 MILLION AND 38 MILLION THOSE LAST TWO YEARS. EXPLAIN THIS SO I BETTER UNDERSTAND. I ABSOLUTELY CONCUR WITH YOU AND MR. MERRILL ABOUT THE -- THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING OUR BONDING RATES HIGH, AND IF WE GO -- NOT A HARD QUESTION, MIKE, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO RUN OVER HERE, BUT MAYBE YOU CAN ANSWER IT. IT'S NOT -- BUT IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE -- THE PERCENTAGE RATIOS OF OUR BUDGET AND OUR CONTINGENCIES, OUR BUDGET CERTAINLY IS GOING DOWN. WHY IS IT NOT THAT WE CAN -- I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT REDUCING OUR RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCY. WHY IS IT THAT WE CAN'T KEEP THE SAME? I MEAN, IT WAS 36, 36, 36, THEN WE POPPED IT UP TO 39 AND 38. THAT'S A COUPLE OF MILLION DOLLARS I BETCHA WE CAN USE IN A COUPLE DIFFERENT PLACES, AND THEN AGAIN, I'M LOOKING AT THAT, MIKE, IN THE GENERAL FUND COUNTYWIDE. THEN EXPLAIN TO ME THIS THEN. WHEN I LOOK AT THE UNINCORPORATED AREA GENERAL FUND, THE RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCY STAYS THE SAME, AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY, AND MAYBE YOU COULD EXPLAIN THAT FOR ME. >>MIKE MERRILL: I'M GOING TO LET ERIC GO FIRST. >>ROSE FERLITA: SURE YOU ARE. [LAUGHTER] >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONER, YOU'VE ACTUALLY DONE A GREAT JOB OF LINKING SOME OF THE CHALLENGES BETWEEN OUR NONDEPARTMENTAL AND OTHER APPROPRIATIONS AND RESERVES. WHAT REALLY DRIVES THE ISSUE IS FUND BALANCE, WHICH IS WHAT WHEN WE TALK TO THE BOND RATING AGENCIES THEY LOOK AT, AND THEIR AREA OF CONCERN IS IS FUND BALANCE GROWING, SHRINKING, OR STAYING THE SAME? WHEN WE PREPARE THE BUDGET, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO BASED ON HISTORICAL EXPERIENCE IS TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE BUDGET IS A CEILING AND WE'LL SPEND LESS. WE DON'T ALWAYS KNOW WHERE WE'LL SPEND LESS, BUT WE KNOW THAT THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES TO SAVE WHEN WE HAVE TURNOVER OR WHEN FOR WHATEVER REASON EQUIPMENT DOESN'T COME IN THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ANTICIPATED THAT WE WERE GOING TO PURCHASE, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS WHEN KEVIN BRICKEY, MY ECONOMIST, STANDS IN FRONT OF YOU AT YOUR WORKSHOP AT THE EARLY PART OF THE YEAR AND HE LOOKS FIVE YEARS INTO THE FUTURE, IF YOU LOOKED AT THE DETAILED SCHEDULE OF THE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST AS OPPOSED TO THE SUMMARY SCHEDULE, THERE'S TWICE AS MANY COLUMNS BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE TO DO GOING FORWARD IS TO NOT ONLY PREPARE A BUDGET OR PROJECT A BUDGET, BUT WE HAVE TO PROJECT HOW MUCH OF THE REVENUES WILL ACTUALLY BE RECEIVED AND HOW MUCH OF THE EXPENDITURES, AND TYPICALLY PART OF WHAT KEVIN DOES IS HE PREPARES THAT IS TO LOOK AT HISTORICAL SPENDING PATTERNS TO SAY WE WILL SPEND LESS THAN THE BUDGET, AND THAT MONEY WILL CARRY OVER HIS BEGINNING FUND BALANCE TO THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR, AND WE ARE FORCED BY STATE LAW TO BE SOMEWHAT CONSERVATIVE WITH REVENUE ESTIMATES, AND WE HISTORICALLY HAVE TAKEN IN MORE REVENUE. AND SO PART OF WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS TO LOOK AT WHERE WE'LL END UP AT THE END OF EACH FISCAL PERIOD. IN THAT EXERCISE WE'RE LOOKING FIVE YEARS OUT. HERE WE'RE LOOKING AT -- AND THERE'S A SCHEDULE EARLIER IN THIS DOCUMENT THAT SAYS WHERE DO WE THINK WE'LL BE AT THE END OF FISCAL '10, WHICH BEGINS FISCAL '11, AND WHERE DO WE THINK WE'LL BE IN FISCAL '11, AND IT'S REALLY THE FUND BALANCE THAT RATING AGENCIES LOOK AT, SO HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO EVERYTHING ELSE? AS WE TIGHTEN UP THE BUDGET, WHETHER IT'S REDUCING THE EMERGENCY ACQUISITION OF EQUIPMENT LINE ITEM OR AS WE TIGHTEN UP DEPARTMENTS -- AND PART OF WHAT WE DID THIS SUMMER, COMMISSIONER, AT YOUR ENCOURAGEMENT, IS WE WENT INTO LINE-ITEM BUDGETS AND LOOKED AT HISTORICAL SPENDING AND TIGHTENED THOSE UP, GIVING DEPARTMENTS A SMALLER LIKELIHOOD THAT THEY'LL CARRY OVER ANY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY AT THE END OF THE YEAR. THE CHALLENGE WE HAVE IS IF WE TIGHTEN UP BUDGETS AND IF OUR RESERVES ARE LESS THAN HOW MUCH WE STARTED THE YEAR WITH, WHICH THEY ARE -- FUND BALANCE IS HOW MUCH CASH WE CARRY FORWARD FROM THE PRIOR YEAR TO THE CURRENT YEAR, AND A PORTION BUT NOT ALL OF THAT GETS SET ASIDE IN RESERVES. SOME OF IT GETS APPROPRIATED. OUR CHALLENGE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T INADVERTENTLY TIGHTEN UP THE BUDGET TO WHERE WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH MONEY AT THE END OF THE YEAR AS WE STARTED OUT BECAUSE IF WE HAVE LESS MONEY IN FUND BALANCE AT YEAR END, THAT'S A WARNING SIGN, AND WHAT MIKE AND I HAVE TO DO IS THEN EXPLAIN WHY THE FINANCIAL COMMUNITY SHOULD NOT BE CONCERNED THAT WE'RE SPENDING MORE THAN WE'RE TAKING IN BECAUSE AT THE END -- IT'S LIKE THE BANK STATEMENT THAT WE EACH GET FROM OUR BANK, YOU KNOW. ROUGHLY YOU WANT TO HAVE THE SAME BANK BALANCE AT THE END OF THE MONTH AS YOU HAD AT THE BEGINNING BECAUSE IF YOU DIDN'T, IT'S A WARNING SIGN THAT YOU SPENT MORE MONEY THAN YOU TOOK IN THAT MONTH, AND OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN'T DO THAT VERY LONG BEFORE YOU HAVE A PROBLEM, AND SO WE CAN TIGHTEN UP, TO GET BACK TO YOUR QUESTION, A LITTLE BIT, BUT AS WE TIGHTEN UP THE BUDGET, WE HAD TO LOOK AT MAKING SURE THAT WE SET ENOUGH OF THE DOLLARS ASIDE IN THE RESERVES THAT WHEN THE END OF THE YEAR COMES, WE HAVEN'T ENDED UP WITH A SMALLER FUND BALANCE, WHICH IS A SIGN OF POTENTIAL FISCAL DISTRESS, AND LET ME TURN IT OVER TO MIKE. >>ROSE FERLITA: WELL, BUT LET ME -- BECAUSE YOU GUYS GO INTO YOUR LINGO AND YOUR TERMINOLOGY. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, I UNDERSTAND AND I WAS FOLLOWING YOU. IT WAS A LITTLE LONGER THAN I HAD HOPED, BUT I FOLLOWED ALONG. AND THE BUDGET CEILING IS THERE AND I UNDERSTAND ABOUT FUND BALANCE AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK FORWARD WITH ALL THE THINGS WE HAVE, AND THERE'S CERTAINLY CHALLENGES IN TERMS OF A FIVE-YEAR FORECAST, AND THAT'S FINE, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT A LITTLE BIT OF REDUCTION HERE, A LITTLE BIT OF REDUCTION THERE SO THAT WE CAN GET THROUGH THIS. LET'S FACE IT. WE ARE JUST TRYING TO PUT BAND-AIDS ON SOME THINGS. >>ERIC JOHNSON: SURE. >>ROSE FERLITA: PROBABLY COME OCTOBER, WE HAVE TO START WORRYING ABOUT THE ZERO COLUMNS WE HAVE IN FY 11, WE KNOW THAT, BUT WE HAVE ENOUGH CHALLENGE RIGHT NOW WITH '10 GETTING THAT DONE. I MEAN, THERE'S NO SECRET ONCE WE'RE FINISHED WITH THIS, WE'RE DONE. BUT THERE AGAIN, IF IT'S THAT MUCH HIGHER, I DON'T SEE WHY IT CAN'T BE RELAXED A LITTLE BIT, NOT DEPLETED BUT RELAXED. AND I KNOW YOU HAVE TO ANTICIPATE WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN FIVE-YEAR FORECAST OUT, BUT I'M DOING THE SAME THING. I'M USING YOUR SAME FORMULA GOING BACK AND SAY -- FOR INSTANCE, ANOTHER ONE. I MEAN, THERE'S SEVERAL. WE DON'T NEED TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM, ERIC, BUT THIS IS GOING TO BE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO WHEN YOU GET INTO THE FINE-TUNING OF THIS SO WE CAN GET TO THAT BALANCE WE NEED TO GET TO. PAGE 341, SMALL AMOUNT, BUT THERE AGAIN, SMALL AMOUNTS TOGETHER COLLECTIVELY WILL ADD UP TO A LOT. A MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT. YOU GOT 150,000, 150,000, 150,000. LOOK WHAT WE ACTUALLY SPEND. $6,100. THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE DOLLARS THAT WE CAN GET THERE. THIS IS ALL GOING TO BE CREATIVE FINANCING, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. THAT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING WE CAN USE, LET'S SAY, FOR INSTANCE, BY PUTTING THAT DOWN TO WHAT HISTORICALLY WE HAVE SPENT. WE HAVEN'T SPENT ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THAT, AND AGAIN, IF YOU NEED A MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT TO COME IN, YOU COME TO US, WE GOTTA FIND IT, BUT AT LEAST IT'S NOT SITTING THERE. I AGREE WITH THE BANK ACCOUNT, BUT IF I'VE GOT A WHOLE BUNCH OF DEBT THAT I NEED TO SATISFY AT LEAST IN PART, IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE FOR ME NOT TO PAY MY DEBT BUT HAVE A LOT OF MONEY IN THE BANK. YOU GOTTA BALANCE IS SO YOU LOOK GOOD FINANCIALLY. YOU TAKE THAT MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT, RELAX IT A LITTLE BIT, AND -- BECAUSE THIS IS BACK AND FORTH. GO BACK TO PAGE 336 IN TERMS OF GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES. TO ME THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I DON'T THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>ROSE FERLITA: PAGE 336. THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT, AND I'M GLAD THAT COMMISSIONER SHARPE IS FOLLOWING ME PARTICULARLY. THE HART SAVER BUS PASSES. >>ERIC JOHNSON: WELL -- >>ROSE FERLITA: THIS FOR THE LOWER -- LET ME JUST FINISH AND THEN I'M DONE. >>ERIC JOHNSON: WE'RE PASSING THAT PAGE OUT FOR EVERYONE ELSE, COMMISSIONER. >>ROSE FERLITA: OH, 336 IN THEIR BUDGET BOOK. DOES EVERYBODY NOT HAVE THEIR BUDGET BOOK? YEAH, OKAY. 336 -- GUYS, YOU HAVE IT OR -- YEAH? ALL RIGHT. 336 UNDER PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT, THAT LOOKS LIKE A SMALL ITEM BUT A BIG TICKET TO OUR EMPLOYEES. HART SAVER BUS PASSES, 172,000. THAT HELPS US WITH -- WITH THE ENVIRONMENT IN TERMS OF NOT USING THEIR CARS, CATCHING THE BUS, DOING THE PASSES. I THINK THOSE ARE VERY, VERY IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF PARTICULARLY THE BENEFITS THAT WE -- WE WANT TO GIVE AND AFFORD TO OUR LOWER-PAID EMPLOYEES. I MEAN, THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR A LOT OF REASONS. WE TALK ABOUT CONGESTION. THERE IT IS WITH A SIMPLE BUS PASS. THEY USE IT. THEY USE IT AND WE'RE TAKING IT AWAY, AND WE'VE GOT SO MANY OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON. SO I GUESS IN CLOSING -- AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR INDULGENCE, BOTH COLLEAGUES AND YOU GUYS, ALL I'M SAYING IS WE HAVE TO BE CREATIVE. CREATIVE IS THE WORD, AND WE TAKE A LITTLE BIT FROM HERE, A LITTLE BIT FROM THERE, AND PUNCH IT IN SOMEPLACE ELSE WHERE WE CAN SAVE SMALLER TICKET ITEMS LIKE THESE BUS PASSES. THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO THE EMPLOYEES THAT DON'T MAKE SO MUCH. THEY'RE NOT USING THEIR CARS, THEY'RE HELPING THE ENVIRONMENT, THEY'RE AIDING CONGESTION, AND THEY'RE GETTING TO WORK IN A WAY THAT THEY CAN AFFORD TO GET TO WORK. SO I DON'T KNOW IF IN THAT JUGGLING BACK AND FORTH I NEED TO FLAG THIS, BUT THAT'S JUST AN EXAMPLE -- >>MARK SHARPE: I WISH YOU WOULD. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. FLAGGED. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: I THINK UNIVERSALLY THERE'S INTEREST IN FLAGGING THE BUS PASS ITEM PARTICULARLY SINCE WE'RE -- ACTIONS TOWARDS GOING TO DOUBLE THEIR INSURANCE PAYMENTS COMING UP SOON, SO WE CERTAINLY NEED TO HELP OUR EMPLOYEES ANY WAY WE CAN. SO LET'S FLAG THAT. DO YOU WANT TO FLAG THOSE OTHER ITEMS THAT YOU -- >>ROSE FERLITA: NO, I WANT YOU TO LOOK AT THE OTHER ONES, MR. JOHNSON. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO FLAG THEM BECAUSE THERE'S A BUNCH MORE IN THAT SAME THING. WE DON'T NEED TO GO ANYMORE. I THINK I'VE MADE MY POINT, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING WHERE IN THE PAST WE'VE LET IT LIE IN THE CONTINGENCIES AND RESERVES, YOU CAN JUGGLE BACK AND FORTH. WE CAN STILL MAKE IT THROUGH THIS, AND IF WE'VE MISJUDGED, IT'S NOT A RISK, IT'S JUST SIMPLY YOU HAVE TO COME BACK TO US WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH THAT, JUST HAVE A THRESHOLD THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSION HAS TO APPROVE. SO WHAT. THAT'S FINE. I MEAN -- >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, I APPRECIATE, ACTUALLY, THE -- THE QUESTIONS. I WANT TO DRINK THE COFFEE YOU'VE BEEN DRINKING BECAUSE IT'S -- >>ROSE FERLITA: [INAUDIBLE] >>MARK SHARPE: I SAID I WANT TO DRINK THE COFFEE YOU'VE BEEN DRINKING. >>ROSE FERLITA: IT'S CUBAN, STRAIGHT, NO SUGAR, SO GOOD LUCK. >>MARK SHARPE: YOU'RE SHARP -- YOU'RE SHARP THIS AFTERNOON. I -- BUT I AGREE. I THINK THAT WE'VE HAD THESE LARGE FUND BALANCES, AND WHAT YOU SAID WAS YOU -- I WANT TO GO BACK TO WHAT YOU SAID, THOUGH, ERIC, THAT -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: YES, SIR. >>MARK SHARPE: -- WE WANT TO -- WE WANT TO -- WE OVER BUDGET SO AT THE END WE DON'T HAVE A GREAT DISCREPANCY WITH WHAT WE BUDGETED AND HOW WE ENDED UP. >>ERIC JOHNSON: HERE'S WHAT WE DO, COMMISSIONERS. WHEN WE ADOPT A BUDGET, WE ARE ALREADY FORECASTING BASED ON HISTORICAL PATTERNS HOW MUCH WON'T BE SPENT. WE DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW WHICH DEPARTMENT. WE'RE NOT -- IF WE KNEW THAT DEPARTMENTS DIDN'T SPEND THE MONEY, WE WOULDN'T GIVE THEM AS MUCH MONEY, BUT WE KNOW THAT SOME DEPARTMENTS WILL HAVE CHALLENGES AND WILL SPEND MONEY UNEXPECTEDLY AND OTHERS WILL HAVE UNEXPECTED OPPORTUNITIES, SO WE DO IT ACROSS THE ORGANIZATION BY TYPE OF -- OF EXPENDITURE. WE CAN LOOK AT HISTORICAL SPENDING PATTERNS ON PERSONNEL COSTS. WE CAN DO THE SAME THING WITH OPERATING EXPENSES. WE CAN DO THE SAME THING WITH EQUIPMENT, AND WE DO THAT, AND WE GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS TO DETERMINE WHAT DO WE NEED TO HAVE IN RESERVES SO AT THE END OF THE YEAR WE DON'T HAVE A DRAWDOWN IN FUND BALANCE BECAUSE THE DRAWDOWN ON FUND BALANCE SUGGESTS WE SPENT MORE MONEY THAN WE TOOK IN, AND - - >>MARK SHARPE: OR WE JUST DON'T SPEND THE MONEY. I MEAN, IF THERE'S A DRAWDOWN BECAUSE IT WAS AN UNANTICIPATED COST -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: YES. >>MARK SHARPE: -- WE JUST HAVE TO TIGHTEN OUR BELT. >>ERIC JOHNSON: WELL, IN THE MEANTIME, WE MAY HAVE TRIGGERED A CONCERN BY THE FINANCIAL COMMUNITY THAT WE ARE SPENDING IRRESPONSIBLY BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A BOARD POLICY THAT SAYS IF WE DISCOVER THAT WE'RE SPENDING MORE THAN WE'RE TAKING IN, WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING MIDYEAR FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION, BUT THE CHALLENGE IS -- JUST AS YOU'VE HEARD RECENTLY FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, WE MADE IT TO THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER BEFORE THEY TOLD US THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO TURN BACK $20 MILLION MORE THAN THEY TOLD US ABOUT THREE MONTHS EARLIER, SO SOMETIMES WE HAVE UNEXPECTED GOOD NEWS, SOMETIMES WE HAVE UNEXPECTED BAD NEWS. IT'S ALL A MATTER OF JUDGMENT AND EXPERIENCE TO TRY TO GAUGE WHAT'S THE RIGHT AMOUNT, AND, YOU KNOW, IN RESPONSE TO WHAT COMMISSIONER FERLITA RAISED, WE CAN TIGHTEN UP. IF WE DISCOVER THAT WE'RE GETTING THROUGH THE YEAR AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A DRAWDOWN OF THE FUND BALANCE BY THE END OF NEXT YEAR, WE'LL HAVE TO INITIATE SOME MIDYEAR ACTIONS TO FORCE SPENDING DOWN IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T GET THERE BECAUSE -- >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD -- I THINK -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: THAT'S OUR JOB TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN THAT WE DREW DOWN -- AND WE DID DRAW DOWN SOME MONEY LAST YEAR, BUT WE DREW IT DOWN FOR ONE-TIME USES BECAUSE THE SAME THING HAPPENED LAST YEAR. THE SHERIFF GAVE US GOOD NEWS AND WE PUT IT INTO SOME ONE- TIME USES. >>MIKE MERRILL: I MEAN THE OTHER THING TO REMEMBER -- AND IT'S A BUSINESS CALL. I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE THERE'S SOME FORMULA THAT WE PULL UP ON THE COMPUTER, BUT THE OTHER THING TO KEEP IN MIND IS THAT WE'VE ALSO DRAWN DOWN OTHER RESERVES TO PAY OFF DEBT. >>MARK SHARPE: RIGHT. >>MIKE MERRILL: SO WE'RE TRYING TO BE SENSITIVE TO NOT HAVING A LOT OF CASH SITTING AROUND BUT HAVING ENOUGH, SO WE'VE DRAWN DOWN THAT MONEY TO PAY OFF DEBT, AND WE'RE ALSO AT A PERIOD IN TIME WHERE WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE'S GOING TO BE. I MEAN, HOW LONG WILL THE RECESSION LAST, WHAT KINDS OF THINGS WILL POP UP, YOU KNOW, THAT NOBODY EVER THOUGHT OF, JUST LIKE A YEAR AGO, SO WHILE WE'RE TRYING TO BE MORE CONSERVATIVE IN OUR BUDGETING, WE'RE DRAWING DOWN SOME RESERVES TO PAY OFF DEBT, YOU KNOW, IT'S -- IT'S A TIME WHEN THEN THE ANTENNA GOES UP AND YOU SAY, WELL, YEAH, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE PARKING A LOT OF MONEY, BUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK DOWN THE ROAD AND SEE THE POSSIBILITIES, THAT'S WHY THE FINANCIAL MARKETS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, PLAYING IT TOO CLOSE TO THE LINE, AND SO I THINK FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, WE FEEL LIKE WE'VE PRETTY MUCH MARCHED UP TO THE EDGE, BUT IT IS A BUSINESS CALL, AND CLEARLY IT'S YOUR -- YOUR DECISION, BUT -- AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT IF WE, YOU KNOW, SKINNIED IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT MORE THE WORLD WOULD END, BUT IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, OUR PROFESSIONAL RECOMMENDATION BASED ON TALKING TO RATING AGENCIES, TALKING TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS, AND, YOU KNOW, THE MAYOR YESTERDAY WHEN WE WERE DONE WITH THE FIRST MEETING ASKED ME, YOU KNOW, WHERE IS OUR -- WHERE IS OUR FUND BALANCE AT TO GET A COMPARISON TO WHERE THEY'RE AT, AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST ABOUT WHERE WE NEED TO BE, AND THEY DREW DOWN SOME OF THEIRS TO BALANCE THEIR BUDGET AS WELL, SO IT'S AN ART, BUT IT'S -- IT'S OUR ART. >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, THANK YOU, AND I APPRECIATE THE LINE OF QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU. JUST ONE COMMENT, MIKE, AND I REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, AND YOU GUYS HAVE DONE AN INCREDIBLE JOB. THIS IS A DIFFERENT TIME, THOUGH, AND JUST LIKE LAST WEEK, I REFERENCED THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SOME -- AND I HOPEFULLY WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AT SOME OTHER WORKSHOP - - TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE RESERVES EVEN FOR THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM. WE'VE GOT THE JUDGES ASKING US, BEGGING US FOR HELP, AND IF SOME OF THOSE -- THOSE FUND BALANCES OR THOSE RESERVES ARE SITTING THERE AND AT LEAST IN PART WE CAN ACTIVATE THEM SO THAT THEY CAN USE SOMETHING WITHIN WHAT THE STATUTES SAY THEY CAN USE, AGAIN, I KNOW IT'S GOOD TO SAVE IN GOOD TIMES, BUT IN BAD TIMES YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPLIT IT. SAVE LESS THAN YOU HAVE IN THE PAST AND HOPE THAT AS YOU GO FORWARD THERE ARE NOT GOING TO BE SOME EMERGENCIES. IF THERE ARE, WE CAN TAKE SOME EMERGENCY MEASURES, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S ABSOLUTELY A BUSINESS CALL, BUT IT'S KIND OF LIKE WE HAVE TO FLEX THAT BUSINESS DECISION AND BUSINESS POSTURE BECAUSE OF THE ARENA THAT WE'RE IN AND THE CLIMATE THAT WE'RE IN, SO THAT'S JUST A PHILOSOPHICAL CONVERSATION BECAUSE THERE'S NO RIGHT OR NO WRONG, YOU KNOW. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MIKE. NEXT ITEM. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM WOULD BE THE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. MANUS O'DONNELL IS COMING FORWARD TO PRESENT THAT. >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD AFTERNOON, MANUS. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. MANUS O'DONNELL, THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR HUMAN SERVICES TEAM. LET ME FIRST PROVIDE YOU A FRAMEWORK BY WHICH WE MADE THE DECISIONS ABOUT THE GRANTS. THE ORGANIZATION MUST PROVIDE A HUMAN SERVICE ACTIVITY. THEY HAVE TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE AND/OR MORE COST-EFFICIENT THAN THE COUNTY COULD PROVIDE THE SERVICE, AND WOULD HAVE TO BE AVAILABLE FOR ALL RESIDENTS. AND ACCORDING TO THE COMMISSION'S REQUEST, STIMULATED BY COMMISSIONER WHITE, WE DID EXTEND THE APPLICATION PERIOD FOR THE -- THE GRANTS, AND I THINK WE RECEIVED TWO ADDITIONAL APPLICATIONS. THE COMMITTEE THAT REVIEWED THIS SPENT WEEKS DOING IT. THEY CONSISTED OF MEMBERS OF THE CITIZENS ADVISORY BOARD, UNITED WAY, CHILDREN'S BOARD, BUDGET STAFF, AND COUNTY PROFESSIONAL STAFF IF IT HAPPENED TO BE IN THEIR TOPIC AREA. WE ALSO HAVE BEEN DOING FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS VARIOUS LEVELS OF PRIORITY. THE FIRST LEVEL OF PRIORITY -- OF PRIORITY PROVIDED BASIC SERVICES FOR FOOD, SHELTER, AND SAFETY FOR PEOPLE. THAT'S DOING A DIRECT PROVISION OF THAT SERVICE TO AN INDIVIDUAL. LEVEL TWO ENABLED A PERSON TO BE SELF-SUFFICIENT SO THEY COULD PROVIDE THOSE THINGS FOR THEMSELVES. THOSE WOULD BE THINGS LIKE HELPING THEM WITH A JOB SEARCH, TRANSPORTATION, AND CHILD CARE. LEVEL THREE ENHANCED THE QUALITY OF LIFE. THAT HELPS A PERSON TO MAXIMIZE THEIR POTENTIAL. THAT WOULD BE THINGS LIKE COUNSELING PROGRAMS, ART PROGRAMS, AND THINGS FOR PERSONAL GROWTH. IN FY 10 CATEGORY ONE, THE DIRECT PROVISION OF BASIC NEEDS TO PEOPLE -- >>KEN HAGAN: MANUS, COULD YOU HOLD ON ONE SECOND. COMMISSIONER FERLITA WANTED TO ASK -- >>ROSE FERLITA: I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU. I KNOW WE USUALLY KEEP OUR QUESTIONS TO THE END, BUT MANUS, I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW THE CATEGORIZATION. DO YOU HAVE IT LISTED SOMEPLACE, OR THEY'RE ALL INTERTWINED AND THEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CATEGORIES? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: I HAVE A -- I HAVE A LIST OF HOW EACH AGENCY IS CATEGORIZED. WE HAVE A COPY OF THAT. >>ROSE FERLITA: I MEAN, WE'VE GOT COMPETITIVE AND NONCOMPETITIVE, BUT IN TERMS OF THE URGENCY OF EACH OF THOSE CATEGORIES, IT SURE WOULD BE GOOD TO SEE THAT SO WE SEE WHAT'S QUALITY OF LIFE AND WHAT'S -- WHATEVER. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THAT, AND MAYBE SOMEBODY COULD COPY THOSE REAL QUICK. IT JUST MAKES IT EASIER FOR ME TO FOLLOW YOU, MANUS. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: I HAVE TWO DOCUMENTS WE'LL PASS AROUND. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. THANKS. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: THE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE COMING AROUND GIVE YOU THE BACKGROUND THAT I JUST GAVE YOU AND TELLS YOU WHAT LEVEL ONE, LEVEL TWO, AND LEVEL THREE PRIORITIES ARE, AND ATTACHED TO THAT IS THE -- IS ALSO THE RATING SHEET THAT WE USED TO RATE EACH OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS. THE SECOND THING THAT IS COMING AROUND IS A LIST OF ALL OF THE ORGANIZATIONS AND WHETHER THEY FELL INTO SERVICE LEVEL ONE, TWO, OR SERVICE LEVEL THREE. I HOPE THAT THAT -- THAT PROVIDES YOU THE INFORMATION THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR AT THIS TIME. >>ROSE FERLITA: IT'S -- I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT IT'S JUST EASIER TO FOLLOW IT THIS WAY. YES, IT IS. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: OKAY. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: SO IN FY 10 WHAT WE SAID IS THAT WE WANTED TO CUT THE ORGANIZATIONS' FUNDING ACCORDING TO THE PRIORITY LEVEL THAT THEY FELL IN, SO LEVEL ONE SHOULD GET LESS OF A REDUCTION BECAUSE THAT'S A MORE IMPORTANT SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY. SO IN FY 10 WE CUT LEVEL ONE 15%, LEVEL TWO 20%, AND LEVEL THREE 25%. AND WHAT'S RECOMMENDED IN THE BUDGET IS CONSISTENT WITH THAT. THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENCE, AND THAT IS THAT IF THE COUNTY HAPPENS TO OWN A BUILDING, WE GAVE THEM PREFERENCE IN FY 11. FOR EXAMPLE, MOSI AND THE HISTORY CENTER ARE OWNED BY THE COUNTY, AND WE FELT THAT WE NEEDED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT; HOWEVER, IN FY 11 THE CUTS ARE MORE DRASTIC. THERE'S MORE IMPACT ON THE AGENCIES. IN CATEGORY ONE WE'VE RECOMMENDED THAT THEY NOT BE CHANGED FROM FY 10, THAT THEY BE CONTINUED, BUT CATEGORIES TWO AND THREE WOULD BE ELIMINATED IN FY 11. WE FELT THAT THE EMPHASIS HAD TO GO ON PROVIDING FOOD, SHELTER, AND BASIC NEEDS FOR INDIVIDUALS. ALSO IN THE -- IN THE BUDGET BOOK -- AND IF YOU'RE FOLLOWING ON PAGE 345 AND FOLLOWING, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S OTHER CATEGORIES. SOME OF THEM HAVE NOT BEEN REDUCED BY -- BY THE AMOUNTS THAT I JUST MENTIONED, AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEY HAVE SPECIAL FUNDS. FOR EXAMPLE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT OR TOURIST TAX. THOSE ARE FUNDED BASED ON THE ESTIMATES THAT WE EXPECTED TO BE RECEIVED FOR REVENUE IN THOSE CATEGORIES. CATHOLIC CHARITIES, I WANT TO POINT OUT, ALSO WAS NOT DECREASED IN FY 11, AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEY RECEIVE THEIR FUNDING FROM LICENSE TAG FEES FOR THE CHOOSE LIFE LICENSE TAGS. ACADEMY FOR HOPE WAS LISTED IN THE GRANT FOR COUNTY FUNDING FROM -- FROM THE COUNTY GENERAL FUNDS IN FY 09. IN FY 10 WE MOVED THEM OVER TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT. SO THEY PUT A REQUEST IN FOR BOTH OF THEM -- FOR BOTH FUNDS. WE'RE ONLY FUNDING THEM IN ONE THIS YEAR, SO WE'RE GOING TO FUND THEM IN ONE NEXT YEAR, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE A DIFFERENT ONE. I'D LIKE TO THANK NIKKI MORTON, JOHN ALMAND, AND ALBERT COLEMAN WHO ARE STAFF WITH THE BUDGET DEPARTMENT THAT WORKED CLOSELY WITH US, AND THEY'RE HERE TO HELP ANSWER ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. >>KEN HAGAN: I'VE GOT -- COMMISSIONER SHARPE WANTS TO SPEAK, BUT A QUESTION I'VE GOT -- AND THIS MIGHT BE MORE FOR -- FOR ERIC OR PAT, BUT HOW ARE WE DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN THE FISCAL YEAR '11 BUDGET WITH THE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS COMPARED TO THE REST OF -- THE REST -- OUR OTHER DEPARTMENTS, AND WHAT I MEAN IS THAT CLEARLY MANUS DEFINED A -- A SYSTEM THAT THEY USE TO PRIORITIZE AND TO BASE THEIR FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS, NOT ONLY "F" YEAR '10 AND "F" YEAR '11, AND A NUMBER OF THEM HAVE ZEROS NEXT TO THEM. AND I'VE SPOKEN WITH MANY OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS, I'M SURE OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE AS WELL, AND I'VE FRANKLY SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, THIS YEAR HAS BEEN SUCH A CHALLENGE, WE'RE NOT EVEN LOOKING AT FISCAL YEAR '11 YET. >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT'S RIGHT. >>KEN HAGAN: HE'S SAYING, YOU KNOW, BASED ON A SYSTEM THEY'VE COME UP WITH, THEY'RE RECOMMENDING ZERO, SO ARE WE TREATING THIS DIFFERENT THAN WE ARE OTHER DEPARTMENTS, OR HOW -- HOW ARE WE GOING TO EXPLAIN THAT OR -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: WELL, COMMISSIONERS, I THINK IT'S AT THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD. THE KEY WITH THE PROCESS THAT WE USE IS THAT WE DO A BIENNIAL APPLICATION PROCESS, SO WE'VE GONE THROUGH ALL OF THE AGENCIES APPLYING FOR FUNDING. WE'VE DONE THE EVALUATION. I COULD TELL YOU THE FIRST YEAR WE HAD -- THE FIRST TIME WE HAD A BIENNIAL BUDGET, THE ORGANIZATION THAT HAD BEEN HANDLING THESE NONPROFITS DID AN ANNUAL CYCLE AND THE BOARD CAME TO ME THE SECOND YEAR AND SAID, WHAT DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT A BIENNIAL BUDGET CYCLE THAT WE'RE NOW BEING -- DEALING WITH THE NONPROFITS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS? YOU HAVE SOME OPTIONS HERE. CERTAINLY WE HAVE A MINI BUDGET PROCESS NEXT YEAR WHERE WE'LL DO AN UPDATE. IF THE ECONOMY IS BETTER, THERE WILL BE OPPORTUNITIES; IF THE ECONOMY IS WORSE, WE'LL BE REVISITING, MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS. IT'S REALLY AT THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD. IF WE GO FORWARD WITH WHAT WE HAVE, WE NORMALLY WOULD SIGN TWO-YEAR CONTRACTS. IF THERE'S FUNDING FOR ONE YEAR, IN EFFECT THERE WILL BE A ONE-YEAR CONTRACT WITH NO EXPECTATION THE SECOND YEAR. IF THE BOARD IS COMFORTABLE HAVING THOSE COME BACK NEXT YEAR FOR CONSIDERATION AND MAKING SOME FINE-TUNING NEXT YEAR, WHICH IN SOME CASES IS FINE-TUNING FROM WE'RE NOT GIVING YOU ANYTHING TO WE'RE GIVING YOU, YOU KNOW, SOME SMALLER AMOUNT THAN WE HAVE OR SOME EQUAL AMOUNT, YOU KNOW, WE'LL HANDLE IT HOWEVER YOU CHOOSE. WE'VE DONE THE APPLICATION PROCESS. WE WOULDN'T REPLICATE THAT. YOU CAN ADDRESS SOME OF THESE NOW IF YOU WANT TO, YOU CAN WAIT AND SEE WHERE WE ARE NEXT YEAR. OUR CHALLENGE IS WE TOOK VERY HEAVY HITS IN THE PROGRAMS THAT YOU OVERSEE BEFORE WE WENT TO ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCES OF FUNDING, AND -- AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE USED THE APPROACH THAT MANUS HAS DESCRIBED. WE CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THEY MAY BE TAKING CUTS FROM OTHER SOURCES AS WELL, AND -- BUT -- >>KEN HAGAN: IT JUST -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: WE'LL HANDLE THIS AT THE BOARD'S PLEASURE. >>KEN HAGAN: IT JUST APPEARS TO ME THAT IN THESE UNCERTAIN ECONOMIC CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE FACING WE'RE GOING TO BE FINE-TUNING EVERY DEPARTMENT, AND I MEAN, I THINK YOU'VE ALMOST SAID AS MUCH AS FAR AS USING TERMS AS "BUYING TIME" AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF IT REQUIRES ANY TYPE OF OFFICIAL DIRECTION OR NOT, BUT, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY I'M NOT IN A POSITION TO -- YOU KNOW, TO GO ON RECORD SAYING I'M GOING TO SUPPORT ZERO FOR ALL OF THESE RIGHT NOW. IT JUST APPEARS AGAIN THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, READDRESSING ALL OF THIS AGAIN NEXT YEAR, UNFORTUNATELY. I DON'T KNOW THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD OR THE COMMENTS THEY HAVE, BUT -- >>PAT BEAN: WELL, I WOULD JUST ALSO EMPHASIZE WHAT ERIC HAS SAID. WE HAVE SPENT VERY LITTLE TIME TALKING TO YOU ABOUT THE BUDGETS OF OUR AGENCIES THAT WE OPERATE, OUR AGING SERVICES DEPARTMENT. I DON'T BELIEVE YOU'VE ACTUALLY SEEN HOW THAT DEPARTMENT IS REALLY HURT IN '11, SO I AGREE WITH YOU. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE COMING BACK AND LOOKING AT ALL OF THOSE, AND WE CERTAINLY ARE WILLING TO LOOK AT THESE. I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO STAY WITH WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW FOR '11 BECAUSE ALL YOU'RE DOING NOW IS YOU'RE GOING TO ADOPT A BUDGET FOR '10. >>KEN HAGAN: I UNDERSTAND. >>PAT BEAN: AND SO LET'S NOT SPEND A LOT OF TIME DEALING WITH '11 AT THIS POINT. >>KEN HAGAN: AND I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT. I JUST DON'T WANT TO GIVE THE IMPRESSION OR BE IMPLYING -- >>ROSE FERLITA: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: YEAH, BECAUSE WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT, SO AS LONG AS WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE, I'M FINE WITH THAT. >>PAT BEAN: WE'RE FINE WITH THAT. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: MANUS, EXCELLENT JOB. THE COORDINATION -- ERIC TALKED BRIEFLY ABOUT THIS AS WELL -- WITH -- YOU KNOW, THERE ARE OTHER -- THERE ARE AGENCIES HERE OR NONPROFITS THAT WE'RE GIVING TO THAT ARE ALSO RECEIVING FUNDS FROM OTHER AGENCIES SUCH AS THE CHILDREN'S BOARD. I HAD A LONG TALK SEVERAL DAYS AGO WITH MS. PANACEK ABOUT SOME OF THE AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAMS, AND I GUESS THEY HAVE A GROUP THAT MEETS AND TALKS ABOUT WAYS TO MAXIMIZE AFTERSCHOOL OPPORTUNITIES. ARE WE PARTICIPATING IN THOSE CONVERSATIONS? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: YES. I HAVE ATTENDED AND PARKS AND RECREATION STAFF ALSO ATTEND THOSE MEETINGS. >>MARK SHARPE: OKAY. SO WE ARE GOING TO ALL THE MEETINGS; RIGHT? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: I'M SORRY, I DON'T GET TO ALL THE MEETINGS. >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, MANY? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: YES. >>MARK SHARPE: SEND A DEPUTY IF YOU CAN'T GO. AND YOU'RE DOING A FANTASTIC JOB, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO COORDINATE WITH THEM BECAUSE THERE ARE GOING TO BE CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AND ACTIVITIES WHICH I THINK WE'RE PARTICIPATING IN WHERE IT MIGHT BE THAT AT SOME POINT BECAUSE THEY ARE A TAXING AUTHORITY AND THEY DO PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE COMMUNITY AS WELL, THEY MIGHT HAVE TO TAKE UP MORE OF THE RESPONSIBILITY, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE COORDINATED AND DISCUSSED WELL AHEAD OF TIME. AND THEN ANOTHER ISSUE FOR ME, AND I -- I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THIS GROUP SINCE I WAS ELECTED, AND I'VE BEEN -- I JUST WANT YOU TO -- TO -- I GUESS THIS WOULD BE ERIC REALLY. I WANT YOU TO -- TO REACH OUT TO THE FLORIDA AQUARIUM AGAIN, AND THEY HAVE AN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WHICH WOULD PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR EVERY -- I THINK THEY'RE LOOKING AT MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENT TO GO THROUGH THEIR FACILITY AND TO DO STUDIES IN LIFE SCIENCES BUT IN THE FIELD OF AQUAMARINE RESEARCH AND SUCH. THEY WANT TO EXPAND THEIR FACILITY, AND I KNOW -- I KNOW THEY'RE TALKING NOW TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THEY ARE TALKING TO THE CITY -- I BELIEVE THE CITY HAS PLEDGED MONEY -- AND I KNOW THIS IS EXTREMELY TIGHT TIMES, BUT AT LEAST CAN WE ENGAGE IN THE CONVERSATION? THIS IS GOING TO BE A MULTIYEAR PROJECT ON THEIR PART. THEY ARE WELL AWARE OF OUR BUDGET ISSUES, BUT I THINK THAT IN LIGHT OF THE -- THE WORK THAT THEY'LL BE DOING AND IN PARTICULAR WITH YOUNG SCHOOLCHILDREN FOR ME IN PARTICULAR, IT'S AT LEAST WORTHY TO CLOSELY EXAMINE TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY WAY THAT WE CAN PROVIDE SOME ASSISTANCE. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: TO YOUR FIRST POINT, COMMISSIONER, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH UNITED WAY AND THE CHILDREN'S BOARD. THEY BOTH HAVE COPIES OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE COUNTY BUDGET. AND WE'RE CONTINUING TO TALK WITH THEM ABOUT THE IMPACTS ON THE COMMUNITY AND HOW THE FUNDERS CAN WORK TOGETHER TO MINIMIZE THOSE IMPACTS. >>MARK SHARPE: FANTASTIC. I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE DOING, MANUS. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. WAS THAT NECESSARY TO FLAG OR HE'S ALREADY -- >>MARK SHARPE: [INAUDIBLE] FLAG. >>ROSE FERLITA: AND BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT YOU'VE MENTIONED, COMMISSIONER SHARPE, THE PARTNERSHIPS AND THAT'S WHAT THIS IS GOING TO BE GOING FORWARD, AT LEAST LOOK AT THAT OPPORTUNITY FROM THE STANDPOINT OF EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES WITH THEM AND THE SCHOOL SYSTEM, THE CITY OF TAMPA, AND US, SO -- >>MARK SHARPE: THANK YOU, MA'AM. >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT'S SECOND TO YOUR FLAG. JUST VERY QUICKLY GOING BACK TO WHAT THINGS YOU HAVE SAID HERE, MANUS, AND ALSO WHAT MS. BEAN JUST TALKED ABOUT. SHE REFERENCED AGING SERVICES, AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT A NONPROFIT, BUT IT'S STILL UNDER YOU, AND AGAIN, IT'S BACK TO WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. WE'RE NOT REAL COMFORTABLE WITH NOT BALANCING 2011. WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. SO WE HAVE TO BE OKAY WITH IT FOR NOW OUT OF NECESSITY, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT -- AND WE WILL BE IN A PREDICAMENT THEN TO BEGIN THOSE BUDGET DISCUSSIONS RIGHT AWAY AFTER WE BALANCE FY 10, BUT MY CONCERN IS NOT SO MUCH ON FY 11. I WAS GIVEN SOME INFORMATION THAT SAYS -- AND BOY, YOU TALK ABOUT HAVING TO BE EFFICIENT AND REASONABLE AND THIRDLY AND MOST IMPORTANTLY COMPASSIONATE, ESPECIALLY WITH OUR GERIATRIC POPULATION, AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT AGING SERVICES AND THE POTENTIAL THAT THEY'RE NOT ONLY GOING TO BE CUT IN FY 10 BUT PERHAPS MAYBE SOME OF THAT IS GOING TO BE ACCELERATED TO FY 10 -- 11, I'M SORRY, BUT ACCELERATED TO FY 10, THAT'S HUGELY IMPORTANT TO RESTORE. I MEAN, I'M SURE THAT MY COLLEAGUES HAVE GOTTEN THE SAME AMOUNT, MORE, LESS, I DON'T KNOW. SENIOR CITIZENS ARE SAYING, WELL, WHAT AM I GOING TO DO, I CAN'T EVEN WASH MY CLOTHES, I CAN'T EVEN WALK. I NEED SOMEBODY IN MY HOME TO PLEASE HELP ME. AND NOT ONLY THAT IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO FOR OUR SENIOR CITIZENS, IT'S THE SMART THING TO DO BECAUSE WITH THAT EXTRA ASSISTANCE IN THEIR HOME, A LOT OF THEM WILL BE HELPED FROM NOT FALLING, BEING HOSPITALIZED, DOING ALL THOSE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO COST US MORE, SO I'M NOT ONLY JUST ASKING YOU TO FLAG THIS POTENTIALLY BUT BEGGING YOU TO GIVE US SOME SORT OF RELIEF. I KNOW WE HAVE POUNDED ON THE IDEA, SUPPORTED WHOLEHEARTEDLY ABOUT OUR PARKS AND RECS AND MR. THORNTON, AND ALL OF US HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO THAT FOR OUR CHILDREN, THAT'S IMPORTANT, BUT LET'S GO TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE GAMUT. THIS IS SO SERIOUS, MANUS, BECAUSE I'M SURE YOUR AIDES DON'T KNOW HOW TO ANSWER THESE. THEY CAN HARDLY -- >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>ROSE FERLITA: -- ABLE TO MAKE IT TO THE PHONE TO SAY HELP ME, SO PLEASE LET'S DO WHAT WE CAN TO HELP. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: OKAY. IF I MIGHT CLARIFY, THE CUTS ARE IN FY 11. WE DID TALK ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF IT HAVING TO BE ACCELERATED INTO '10 IF WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH REVENUE. ERIC JOHNSON HAS GIVEN US MORE RECENT UPDATES AND HAS INDICATED THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE NECESSARY, PARTICULARLY FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AGING. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. AND YOU SEE, THAT'S NOT KNOWN BY THE PUBLIC, SO IT'S JUST SO IMPORTANT ABOUT WHAT YOU'VE SAID, AND I THANK YOU FOR VERBALIZING THAT, AND ERIC, I THANK YOU FOR FINDING THE MONEY. AND ONE LAST QUESTION TOO. I WAS ACTUALLY IN A MEETING TODAY WITH MR. JOHNSON AND TALKING ABOUT THESE DIFFERENT LEVEL ONE, LEVEL TWO, LEVEL THREE PROGRAMS, AND SO ARE YOU SAYING, MANUS, YOU'VE PRETTY MUCH STUCK TO THIS FORMULATION, 15%, 20%, 25%? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: WE HAVE STUCK WITH THAT. THE CATEGORIZATION, THE LEVEL ONE, TWO, AND THREE WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR THREE YEARS NOW. >>ROSE FERLITA: YOU'VE KIND OF STUCK TO THAT THIS YEAR? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: WE STUCK WITH IT EXCEPT FOR THE ONES WHERE THE COUNTY OWNS THE BUILDINGS. THEY GOT CUT IN FY 10 ACCORDING TO THAT SCHEDULE. IN FY 11 THEY WERE GIVEN A LITTLE EXEMPTION. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WHAT I MIGHT ASK, ALTHOUGH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I KNOW THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NONPROFITS, NOW THAT I KNOW THAT FORMULATION -- AND FOR SOME REASON I DIDN'T HAVE ACCESS TO IT BEFORE. I KNOW THAT YOU-ALL PROVIDED IT LAST YEAR -- EXCUSE ME. I WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO BACK AND SEE HOW THOSE FORMULATIONS WORK DEPENDING ON THE NEEDS, DEPENDING ON THE USES, AND WHAT EACH OF THESE DO AND THEN PERHAPS COME BACK DEPENDING ON THAT, IS THAT OKAY? >>KEN HAGAN: YEAH. WE'RE GOING TO ADD THAT TO THE AGENDA FOR NEXT THURSDAY. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR NOW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOUR HELP. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: ERIC, I GUESS -- I GUESS I DISAGREE WITH YOU ON -- ON THIS ANALYSIS, AND AGAIN, YOU GOTTA UNDERSTAND I HAD A LOT TO DO WITH PUTTING THIS TWO-YEAR THING TOGETHER, AND WHERE I AGREE WITH YOU -- DISAGREE WITH YOU IS YOUR FORECASTING THE WAY YOU'RE DOING. WHAT I WOULD DO TO BE ABLE TO GET YOUR BANG FOR YOUR BUCK AND YOUR TWO-YEAR CONTRACTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT WITH ALL YOUR DIFFERENT AGENCIES -- WHAT THE LEGISLATURE DOES AS AN EXAMPLE, THEY BUILD -- THEY BUILD A BUDGET, AND IF -- DURING THAT TIME PERIOD OF A YEAR, IF THOSE ANTICIPATED REVENUES DON'T WORK OUT, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIAL SESSION TO GO BACK IN AND ADDRESS, BUT WHAT THEY DO IS THEY FUND PROGRAMS, THEY FUND LINE ITEMS, AND WHAT YOU DO IS YOU FUND '10 AND YOU FUND '11 WITH AN ANTICIPATION OF WHAT -- WHAT'S GOING TO BE THERE AND WHAT -- LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, THEY MAY END UP BEING ZERO, BUT WHAT YOU DO IS YOU HAVE A TWO-YEAR CONTRACT IN THAT WITH AN UNDERSTANDING WITH THE AGENCIES THAT WHEN RECONCILIATION HAPPENS IN '11, DISCUSSIONS WILL OCCUR IF THE FUNDS AREN'T THERE. TO -- SOMETHING LIKE WHAT KEN WAS JUST SAYING. TO TELL AGENCIES, YOU KNOW, MASS ZEROS LIKE THAT WHEN WE KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, IT -- IT SORT OF REMINDS ME OF WHAT HAPPENS WITH, YOU KNOW, THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND THE DIFFERENT THINGS. WE SCARE THE WORLD, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY STARTS, YOU KNOW, KILLING COMMISSIONERS AND IT'S OPEN SEASON ON US BECAUSE YOU'VE ZEROED EVERYTHING, YOU'VE DONE EVERYTHING LIKE THAT, AND -- I THINK YOU -- THERE'S A DIFFERENT PROFESSIONAL APPROACH TO DOING IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY THAT THIS IS WHAT THE COUNTY -- IF IT'S CONTINUATION FROM ONE YEAR TO THE NEXT AND THEN REALIZING WHAT YOUR REVENUES ARE, KNOWING THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO TWEAK IT ANYWAY, YOU DO IT THAT WAY. I -- I DON'T -- I WOULDN'T -- I WOULDN'T DO IT THIS WAY AND ZERO OUT A WHOLE TWO PAGES OF AGENCIES LIKE THAT THAT'S JUST GOING TO BE A NIGHTMARE FOR THIS SIDE OF THE TABLE. >>KEN HAGAN: WELL STATED. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >>MARK SHARPE: GOOD JOB. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MANUS. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM THAT WE SHOULD COVER IS ITEM "F," WHICH IS GOVERNMENT AGENCIES. ERIC'S GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH THOSE. >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONERS, WE HANDED THAT OUT. AND FOR THE PUBLIC IT BECOMES ON -- STARTS ON PAGE 335 WHERE WE SHOW THAT OVERWHELMINGLY IN TERMS OF MONEY THAT IS PROVIDED TO OTHER AGENCIES COMES OUT OF WHAT'S CALLED THE SALES TAX REVENUE FUND, 46 MILLION OUT OF THE ALMOST $80 MILLION NEXT YEAR. WHAT THAT REFLECTS IS THAT ALL OF THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT TAX FLOWS THROUGH THE COUNTY'S ACCOUNTS BEFORE BEING DISTRIBUTED TO OUR PARTNERS, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE THREE MUNICIPALITIES. GASOLINE TAXES ALSO FLOW THROUGH IN PART, AND SO THERE'S $2 MILLION IN GASOLINE TAXES THAT FLOW THROUGH. SO THERE ARE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES THAT MAY BE SHARED, BUT THE LARGEST AMOUNT THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN WOULD BE THE COUNTYWIDE GENERAL FUND WHERE WE WILL SPEND 17.7 MILLION VERSUS 20.2 MILLION THIS YEAR IN OUR COUNTYWIDE GENERAL FUND AND JUST A SMALL REDUCTION IN OUR UNINCORPORATED FUND. IN TERMS OF THE CHANGES, THE MOST SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE PROVIDING FROM GENERAL REVENUE IS THAT AS THE TAX BASE DECLINED, THE TAX BASE WITHIN THE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS WITHIN TAMPA, TEMPLE TERRACE, AND PLANT CITY ACTUALLY DECLINED FASTER THAN THE OVERALL DECLINE IN PROPERTY VALUES, AND IN FACT, WHEN WE DELIVERED WITH THE AGENDA LAST FRIDAY A LIST OF ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES THAT WE'VE BEEN COMPILING SINCE THE BUDGET WAS DELIVERED IN JUNE, WE'VE ACTUALLY DRIVEN DOWN THE NUMBERS THAT ARE PRINTED IN THIS DOCUMENT. THERE WILL BE $38,000 LESS PAID TO PLANT CITY, $74,000 LESS PAID TO TEMPLE TERRACE, AND 1.4 MILLION LESS PAID TO THE CITY OF TAMPA. AND THAT'S BASED ON THE UPDATE TO THE VALUES THAT WERE DELIVERED TO US AT THE END OF JUNE BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER, SO THE NUMBERS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT HAVE BEEN FURTHER REDUCED BASED ON THOSE AMOUNTS I'VE JUST DESCRIBED. ALSO ON THAT SAME PAGE WE SHOW THE FUNDS THAT ARE PROVIDED TO THE TAMPA SPORTS AUTHORITY, WHICH IS OUR TWO-THIRDS SHARE OF -- OF COVERING PROPERTY TAXES IN THE OPERATING DEFICIT. AGAIN, SINCE WE DELIVERED THE BUDGET IN JUNE, WE'VE WORKED WITH THE SPORTS AUTHORITY STAFF AND REDUCED THEIR REQUEST FOR COUNTY FUNDING. IN ADDITION, LAST WEEK MIKE AND GENE GRAY BROUGHT BEFORE THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS TO HAVE SOME TOURIST TAXES PICK UP PART OF THE SUBSIDY OF OPERATING THE TAMPA SPORTS AUTHORITY. THE COUNTY RECEIVED THE BENEFIT OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE $800,000 THAT THEY AGREED TO, AND THEREFORE, WE HAVE FURTHER REDUCED -- AND IT'S REFLECTED AGAIN IN THE DOCUMENT WE DELIVERED TO YOU FRIDAY. WE FURTHER REDUCED THE COMMITMENT OF PROPERTY TAXES TO THE OPERATION OF THE TAMPA SPORTS AUTHORITY BY $533,000, AND WE HAVE -- BECAUSE WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING FOR US A TIE BETWEEN WHAT WE WERE ASKING THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL TO DO AND SOMETHING THAT WE THINK WOULD BE OF VALUE TO THE TOURIST INDUSTRY. WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS TO ASSUME THAT THAT $533,000 FREED UP FROM THE TAMPA SPORTS AUTHORITY WILL BE DEDICATED TOWARDS RESTORING OUR REDUCTION IN REGIONAL PARKS, SO AGAIN, WHERE YOU WILL SEE THAT IS ON THE FLAG LIST THAT WE DELIVERED ON FRIDAY THAT WE'VE ACTUALLY REDUCED THE FLAGGED COST TO RESTORE FUNDING FOR THE REGIONAL PARKS FROM WHAT HAD BEEN $2.5 MILLION TO NOW A LITTLE UNDER $2 MILLION. SO WE'VE APPLIED THE $533,000 SAVINGS TO REDUCING THE DEFICIT REQUIRED TO RESTORE THE FULL OPERATION OF OUR REGIONAL PARK SYSTEM. OTHER THAN THAT, BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. WE DO HAVE, AS I'VE INDICATED, COMMUNITY INVESTMENT TAX DOLLARS THAT ARE DEDICATED, AND THOSE DOLLAR AMOUNTS ARE ADJUSTED BASED ON THE ESTIMATES OF -- OF TAX REVENUES. I WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON ONE QUESTION BECAUSE IT RELATES TO THE CIT, AND THAT IS THE STATE HAS RELEASED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, BOTH ON PROPERTY TAXES AND ON -- AND ON SALES TAXES AND ON OTHER STATE REVENUES, AND AS WE GET TO THE DISCUSSION OF THE STATUS OF THE BUDGET, THE STATE HAS PROVIDED -- I THINK IT WAS DONE ON BEHALF OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS, BUT THEY'VE PROVIDED AN UPDATE ON WHAT THEY BELIEVE WILL HAPPEN TO OUR PROPERTY TAX BASE NEXT YEAR. WE BUILT A BUDGET ASSUMING AN 8.8% FURTHER REDUCTION IN THE VALUE OF PROPERTY IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY NEXT YEAR, WHICH WOULD IMPACT THE FISCAL '11 BUDGET. THE STATE HAS A SLIGHTLY BETTER ESTIMATE OF 8.5, AND SO THAT WILL HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS AVAILABLE AS WE TALK ABOUT FISCAL '11, BUT WE FACTORED THAT IN. IN TERMS OF THE STATE, IF YOU'VE READ THAT THE STATE HAS HAD SOME ESTIMATES OF REVENUES THAT HAVE -- HAVE LOOKED A LITTLE BIT BETTER, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT'S BEEN IN THE AREA OF CORPORATE INCOME TAX, WHICH WE DON'T BENEFIT FROM AND DOCUMENTARY STAMP TAX, WHICH WE DON'T BENEFIT FROM, AND SO ACTUALLY THE STATE'S ESTIMATE OF SALES TAX REVENUE IS A LITTLE BIT WORSE THAN IT WAS. AT THIS POINT WE'RE GOING TO HOLD THE LINE. OUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE WAIT UNTIL THE STATE COMES OUT WITH THEIR NEXT SET OF ESTIMATES IN NOVEMBER, AND AT THAT POINT WE'LL ADVISE YOU OF ANY CONCERNS WE HAVE, BUT AT THIS POINT, THE AREAS OF THE STATE BUDGET THAT ARE IMPROVING ARE THE AREAS THAT UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T BENEFIT FROM. THEY'RE THE REVENUES THAT THE STATE COLLECTS BUT NOT THE REVENUES THAT THEY SHARE WITH US. BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON GOVERNMENT AGENCIES YOU MAY HAVE. >>KEN HAGAN: ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR ERIC ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. CAN WE GO INTO THE RECONCILIATION PROCESS? >>PAT BEAN: WE DID HAVE INTERFUND TRANSFERS. >>KEN HAGAN: OH, OKAY. I'M SORRY. >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE ANOTHER SCHEDULE TO POINT OUT. WHAT I WANTED TO DO IS JUST TO POINT OUT SOME OF THE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES REFLECTED IN THIS BUDGET THAT HAVE DRIVEN OUR ABILITY TO BALANCE THE BUDGET IS THAT WE HAVE REDUCED THE USE OF OUR OPERATING REVENUES, GENERALLY PROPERTY TAXES, TO FUND OUR CAPITAL PROGRAM, AND I -- IF YOU'D LIKE, I CAN JUST STOP WITH THAT EXPLANATION AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE TODAY OR AFTER THIS, BUT -- BUT ESSENTIALLY THE GENERAL FUND SUBSIDIZES A LARGE NUMBER OF OTHER AREAS, INCLUDING PROVIDING THE MATCH TO GRANTS IN SEVERAL AGENCIES. WE HAVE HISTORICALLY MADE SUBSTANTIAL COMMITMENTS TO OUR CAPITAL PROGRAM, AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT WE HAD TO CUT BACK AS WE LOOKED TO COME UP WITH $144 MILLION WORTH OF REDUCTIONS TO BALANCE THE FISCAL '10 BUDGET AND THEN ADDITIONAL CUTS TO BALANCE THE FISCAL '11, SO I JUST WANTED TO NOT GLOSS OVER THE FACT THAT NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE ALL OF THE AGENCIES THAT ARE FUNDED IN THE GENERAL FUND THAT MAY BE IMPACTED BY BUDGET REDUCTIONS, BUT WE HAVE A VARIETY OF OTHER FUNDS THAT WE OPERATE THAT HAVE BEEN IMPACTED AS WELL, AND THE INTERFUND TRANSFER PAGE IS WHERE WE SHOW THE INTERACTION, AND SO I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: I KNOW I SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THIS UP EARLIER. I WAS JUST -- WHEN LORI WAS TALKING WITH REGARD TO THE -- THE -- OUR PLANNED PROGRAMMING FOR OUR -- OUR MEETINGS, I KNOW THAT THE BOARD HEARINGS WILL BE -- WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC, BUT I -- I DO REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT -- WHETHER IT'S A ZONING HEARING MASTER MEETING, AN MPO MEETING, AN EPC MEETING -- I'VE EVEN GONE DOWN TO THE CAC MEETINGS. WE HAVE AN INDIGENT HEALTH CARE TASK FORCE THAT MEETS, A TRANSPORTATION TASK FORCE COMMITTEE THAT MEETS. FOR THE PUBLIC TO REALLY -- I SPECIALLY AT THIS TIME WITH ALL THE QUESTIONS AND CHALLENGES AND CONCERNS, I THINK IT'S ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL THAT WE FIND A WAY TO HAVE A CAMERA ON AND THE AUDIO WORKING SO THAT CITIZENS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR SO LONG AS IT CONFORMS TO ALL LEGAL REQUIREMENTS. WHAT'S OCCURRING IS ONE OF THE BEST WAYS TO, YOU KNOW, KEEP PEOPLE INFORMED AND TO ANSWER QUESTIONS BEFORE THEY COME, AND ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THEY'RE GOING TO SAY IF THEY DON'T GET TO SEE THESE MEETINGS IS WHAT'S GOING ON, SO I KNOW YOU'RE WORKING WITH OTHER AGENCIES TO SEE IF THEY CAN HELP WITH THE FUNDING STRATEGIES, BUT LET'S LOOK FOR THE -- IN THIS ONE IF WE CAN DO IT AND WE CAN DO IT FOR LESS THAN THEY CAN DO IT, I SAY LET'S DO IT, BUT I STILL WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS AVAILABLE. >>KEN HAGAN: DIDN'T WE COVER THAT EARLIER? >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, I'M NOT SURE. I'M CONCERNED -- I'M CONCERNED -- I JUST WANT TO -- I WANT TO MAKE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE PROVIDING COVERAGE FOR THESE FOR NOT JUST OUR BOARD HEARINGS BUT OTHER MEETINGS -- >>KEN HAGAN: I SPECIFICALLY ASKED ABOUT THAT, AND THEN I SAID DO WE NEED TO FLAG IT OR ARE WE GOING TO BRING IT BACK FOR AN AGENDA ITEM, AND MS. BEAN SAID WE'RE BRINGING BACK FOR AN AGENDA ITEM. ISN'T THAT ACCURATE? >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, I'M GOING TO FLAG IT, SO -- >>KEN HAGAN: WE ALREADY COVERED THIS. >>ROSE FERLITA: I THOUGHT WHAT WE HAD COVERED WAS YOU WERE SAYING YOU WERE GOING TO TRY TO GET SOME OF THOSE OTHER AGENCIES TO PARTNER IN THE -- >>MARK SHARPE: RIGHT. >>ROSE FERLITA: -- IN THE PAYMENT, BUT I THINK WHAT COMMISSIONER SHARPE IS SAYING IS IF THAT THEY CAN'T, BECAUSE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IT, THEN HE WANTS TO FLAG IT TO BE REINSTATED WITHOUT THEIR PORTION, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >>MARK SHARPE: RIGHT. THAT'S EXACTLY, RIGHT. >>KEN HAGAN: I SPECIFICALLY ASKED IF DU-4, I BELIEVE IT WAS, WHICH IS WHAT COMMISSIONER SHARPE WAS REFERRING TO, NEEDED TO BE FLAGGED. I ASKED EDITH, AND SHE SAID NO, THAT IT WAS BEING HANDLED - - IT WAS -- BRINGING IT BACK AS AN AGENDA ITEM. EDITH, IS THAT ACCURATE? >>EDITH STEWART: YES, SIR. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE COVERED THIS. >>ROSE FERLITA: BUT THEN FOR CLARIFICATION, I THOUGHT YOU ASKED SHOULD IT BE FLAGGED OR IT'S OKAY, IT'S COVERED, BUT I THOUGHT THAT WAS BASED ON THE PREMISE THAT WE WERE GOING TO TRY TO GET SOME PARTNERING CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THEM. >>MARK SHARPE: I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S COVERED. [APPLAUSE] >>KEN HAGAN: WAS I UNCLEAR, EDITH, WHEN I ASKED YOU ABOUT THIS EARLIER? >>EDITH STEWART: SIR, YOU DID, AND YES, BUT WE WILL NEED TO CLARIFY THE POINT THAT HE'S MAKING AT THAT TIME. >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, I THINK -- GREAT. I'M GOING TO MAKE THE CLARIFICATION, THEN IF SOMEONE WANTS TO SECOND MY -- >>ROSE FERLITA: YEAH, SECOND. >>MARK SHARPE: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. GREAT. >>ROSE FERLITA: AND SECOND. YOU'RE RIGHT, MR. HAGAN, BUT HE'S GOING ONE STEP FURTHER THAT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THEIR FLOW CHART. THANKS. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. >>MARK SHARPE: THANK YOU. >>PAT BEAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER, WHEN DID YOU WANT TO BRING UP YOUR ITEM? I DID PASS OUT A MEMO ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU WANTED TO ADD AN ITEM TODAY. >>KEVIN BECKNER: IF IT PLEASES THE BOARD, I CAN DO THAT NOW. IT SHOULDN'T TAKE TOO LONG. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. I SAW THAT REGARDING VICTIM ASSISTANCE, CONSUMER PROTECTION. IS IT NECESSARY TO DISCUSS IT OUT OF ORDER? TYPICALLY WE GO DOWN THE FLAGGED ITEM LIST. IT WAS MY EXPECTATION THAT WE WERE GOING TO DISCUSS FUNDING SOLUTIONS THAT WE WERE GOING TO VOTE ON TODAY. >>PAT BEAN: WHEN WE GET TO THOSE ITEMS IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >>KEN HAGAN: YOU WANT IT TAKEN UP EARLY OR -- >>KEVIN BECKNER: I CAN TAKE IT EITHER POINT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WHY DON'T WE JUST GO DOWN THE FLAGGED LIST -- >>PAT BEAN: WHY DON'T WE DO IT WHEN WE GET TO THE ITEM THEN. >>KEN HAGAN: THAT'S FINE. >>PAT BEAN: YOU DO NEED TO GIVE ERIC A CHANCE TO JUST GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON REVENUES, THEN WE'RE READY TO GO INTO FLAGGED. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONERS, THE MATERIAL WE PROVIDED FRIDAY INCLUDED THE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE BUDGET SO THAT WE COULD DISCLOSE -- AND THAT'S AVAILABLE ON-LINE TO THE PUBLIC THAT MAY BE VIEWING THIS -- DISCLOSE ALL OF THE ADJUSTMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE SINCE THE BUDGET WAS DELIVERED IN JUNE, AND THE BOTTOM LINE FOR OUR COUNTYWIDE GENERAL FUND IN FISCAL '10 REMAINS THE SAME; THAT IS, THAT WE HAVE $11.2 MILLION AVAILABLE. THE SECOND SCHEDULE LOOKED AT FISCAL '11, AND ON THAT SCHEDULE THE DEFICIT THAT IN JUNE THAT WE STILL HAD TO CLOSE TO BALANCE THE FISCAL '11 BUDGET HAD BEEN 6.9 MILLION. IN THE SCHEDULE WE GAVE YOU FRIDAY, IT SHOWED UP AS $1,857,000, SO SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCED BUT STILL A DEFICIT. AS I MENTIONED A FEW MINUTES AGO, LOOKING AT THE STATE REVENUE ESTIMATING CONFERENCE UPDATE ON AD VALOREM, THAT HELPS FISCAL '11, AND IT HELPS US BY ABOUT $1.1 MILLION. SO AT THIS POINT WITH -- WITH ALL THE ADJUSTMENTS THAT -- THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE, WE'VE GOT $11.2 MILLION IN OUR COUNTYWIDE GENERAL FUND AVAILABLE FOR FISCAL '11 -- EXCUSE ME -- FISCAL '10, AND WE'RE ABOUT THREE-QUARTERS OF A MILLION DOLLARS OUT OF BALANCE FOR FISCAL '11, SO TECHNICALLY THERE IS NO MONEY ON THE TABLE TO RESTORE ANYTHING IN FISCAL '11. I WANT TO GO THROUGH THE MSTU OR UNINCORPORATED GENERAL FUND AND THEN COME BACK AND JUST GIVE YOU A COUPLE IDEAS ABOUT HOW YOU MIGHT PROGRESS WITH YOUR DISCUSSION OF FLAGGED ITEMS. IN THE UNINCORPORATED FUND, AGAIN, THE SCHEDULE WE GAVE YOU -- >>KEN HAGAN: ERIC, HOLD ON ONE SECOND. >>ERIC JOHNSON: YES, SIR. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: SEE, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT, BOARD. WHAT YOU DO IS YOU CONSTRUCT '11, AND THEN WHENEVER ALL THESE UPDATES AND THINGS HAPPEN BETWEEN NOW -- EITHER RECONCILIATION OR UP OR DOWN IN '11 YOU BALANCE IT, BUT YOU CRAFT A -- A SECOND-YEAR BUDGET WITH THE NUMBERS IN THERE HOW YOU WOULD PROCEED IN -- IN YOUR TWO-YEAR CONTRACTS WITH EVERYBODY AND YOUR AGENCIES AND WHATEVER. THAT STUFF THAT HE'S JUST TALKING ABOUT'S WHAT I'M -- THAT'S WHAT THE LEGISLATURE DOES. THEY HAVE SPECIAL SESSIONS, AND IF THEY FIND THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN ARREARS, THEY HAVE A SPECIAL SESSION AND GO DOWN AND CUT, BUT YOU DON'T -- YOU DON'T SCARE AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS UNNECESSARILY UNTIL YOU KNOW YOUR HARD REVENUE NUMBERS, AND I -- I GUESS I'M IMPLORING YOU TO BUILD THAT SECOND-YEAR BUDGET AND KNOW WHAT YOUR DEFICIT IS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD TACKLE IN YEAR TWO. >>KEN HAGAN: PLEASE CONTINUE, ERIC. >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONERS, IN THE UNINCORPORATED GENERAL FUND, THE DOCUMENT WE DISTRIBUTED SHOWED THAT WE WERE -- WE HAD $11,952,000 AVAILABLE IN FISCAL '10. THAT DOCUMENT INDICATED THAT THE ONGOING AMOUNT, THE AMOUNT THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS, WAS $1.1 MILLION. USING THE REVENUE ESTIMATING CONFERENCE NUMBERS FROM LAST WEEK, WE SHOULD HAVE $580,000 MORE IN FISCAL '11, SO WITH - - THE COUNTYWIDE FUND IS ABOUT THREE-QUARTERS OF A MILLION DOLLARS OUT OF BALANCE IN FISCAL '11, THE UNINCORPORATED FUND HAS $1.7 MILLION AVAILABLE IN FISCAL '11, SO IN EFFECT, THE UNINCORPORATED FUND HAS RECURRING DOLLARS AVAILABLE, THE COUNTYWIDE DOES NOT. THE ONE OPTION THAT I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THE BOARD TO CONSIDER AS YOU MOVE FORWARD -- AND OBVIOUSLY THE BUDGET DOESN'T GET PUT TO BED UNTIL THE 17th OF SEPTEMBER. WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING WE COULD WITH TAKING OUT DEBT, WHICH WOULD TAKE ONE-TIME MONEY AND CONVERT IT INTO A FUTURE REVENUE STREAM SO THAT YOU CAN CLOSE THE GAP IN THE BUDGET. ONE OPTION AVAILABLE WITH THE DOLLARS THAT WE'RE DESCRIBING AS AVAILABLE IN '10 IS -- AND I THINK THIS MAY GET TO COMMISSIONER NORMAN'S ISSUE OR PERHAPS NOT, BUT LET ME TAKE A SHOT AT IT. TAKE THE MONEY THAT'S AVAILABLE IN '10. IF THERE'S SOME ONE-TIME ITEMS THAT YOU WANT TO FUND, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS AN ITEM FROM THE PUBLIC DEFENDER THAT'S A ONE-TIME REQUEST, YOU CAN CONSIDER THE ONE-TIME REQUEST, TAKE THE BALANCE, SPREAD IT OUT OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS, AND USE THAT TO MAKE DECISIONS NOW AS TO WHAT PROGRAMS YOU WOULD RESTORE, NOT JUST FOR FISCAL '10 BUT WHERE YOU COULD MAKE THAT ONGOING COMMITMENT, AND THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION THAT'S AVAILABLE TO THE BOARD. THE ALTERNATIVE IS BALANCE THE FISCAL '10 BUDGET, WE COME BACK NEXT YEAR. WE CERTAINLY WILL HAVE REVISED NUMBERS. WE DON'T KNOW HOW SIGNIFICANT THEY WILL BE, BUT REBALANCE FISCAL '11 BASED ON WHAT INFORMATION WE HAVE NEXT SUMMER. >>KEVIN WHITE: ERIC, THOSE NUMBERS WILL CHANGE YEAR TO YEAR; CORRECT? >>ERIC JOHNSON: THEY'LL CHANGE, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'LL HAVE $10 MILLION MORE. YOU KNOW, THE -- THE CHALLENGE AT THIS POINT IS WE DON'T HAVE REVENUE ESTIMATES FOR PROPERTY TAX REVENUE FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER BECAUSE HE ONLY DOES THAT ONE YEAR AT A TIME, AND HE WON'T GIVE US AN OFFICIAL ESTIMATE UNTIL NEXT JUNE FOR FISCAL '11. WHAT WE HAVE IS THE STATE REVENUE ESTIMATING CONFERENCE, WHICH IS FOUR ECONOMISTS IN A ROOM WITH FOUR MODELS COMING UP WITH THEIR BEST ESTIMATE OF WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IN TERMS OF VALUES, AND THEY'LL REVISE THAT PROBABLY THREE TIMES BEFORE YOU HAVE TO BALANCE THE BUDGET NEXT YEAR, SO -- >>KEVIN WHITE: THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. >>ERIC JOHNSON: NUMBERS WILL CHANGE. HOW SIGNIFICANTLY WE DON'T KNOW DEPENDING ON WHETHER YOU'RE OPTIMISTIC ABOUT HOW FAST THINGS TURN AROUND. WE COULD BE IN A MUCH BETTER POSITION. BUT BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW TODAY AND THE BEST ESTIMATES THAT WE OBTAIN INFORMATION FROM, THERE'S VERY LITTLE AVAILABLE TO YOU TODAY TO BALANCE -- TO RESTORE ANYTHING TODAY AND TO CONTINUE THAT INTO FISCAL '11. THE OPTION THAT YOU HAVE IS TO SPREAD OUT THE MONEY THAT YOU HAVE -- JUST AS WE'VE DONE WITH THE SHERIFF'S MONEY. WE TOOK THE SHERIFF'S ONE-TIME MONEY AND WE'VE TRIED TO SPREAD IT OUT SO THAT WE CAN USE IT TO RESTORE PROGRAMS. CAN YOU TAKE THE MONEY THAT'S AVAILABLE IN FISCAL '10, SPREAD IT OUT, AND USE THAT AMOUNT TO RESTORE PROGRAMS WITH SOME CONFIDENCE THAT YOU WON'T BE REVISITING THOSE SAME PROGRAMS NEXT YEAR. AS AN EXAMPLE, VICTIM ASSISTANCE. >>KEN HAGAN: THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK. >>ERIC JOHNSON: IF WE'VE GOT $11 MILLION AND YOU WANT TO PUT $2 MILLION IN TO VICTIM ASSISTANCE, TAKE SIX OF THE 11 AND SAY WE'VE GOT ENOUGH MONEY TO MAKE A COMMITMENT FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS AND ASSUME THAT BY THE TIME WE GET TO THAT FOURTH YEAR THE ECONOMY IS TURNING UP AND YOU'LL HAVE THE GROWTH TO SUSTAIN THAT. I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA. >>KEN HAGAN: WHY -- WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE OPTIONS. I GUESS WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS WHY ARE YOU SUGGESTING SPREADING IT OUT OVER THREE YEARS AS OPPOSED TO TWO OR FOUR? WHY THREE? >>ERIC JOHNSON: WELL, I'D LIKE TO DO FOUR, BUT I DIDN'T FIGURE I COULD GET AWAY WITH THAT. [LAUGHTER] MY CONCERN IS -- >>PAT BEAN: I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO GET AWAY WITH THREE. >>ROSE FERLITA: YOU'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO GET AWAY WITH THREE. >>PAT BEAN: THAT'S WHAT I SAID. >>ERIC JOHNSON: WELL, THE OTHER EXTREME IS IF WE SPEND $11 MILLION TO RESTORE $11 MILLION WORTH OF PROGRAMS, I THINK WE'LL BE BACK HERE NEXT YEAR TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE COME UP WITH $11 MILLION TO KEEP THOSE PROGRAMS GOING. WE'VE DONE AS MUCH AS WE CAN. WE TAKE POLICY DIRECTION. THE LONGER YOU STRETCH IT OUT, THE MORE LIKELY THAT IT'S SUSTAINABLE. IF WE DIVIDE IT BY TWO, WE JUST RISK THAT THE CHALLENGE TWO YEARS FROM NOW FOR THOSE OF US THAT ARE SITTING HERE TWO YEARS FROM NOW IS GREATER THAN IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN, BUT -- BUT -- >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. >>PAT BEAN: ERIC, THEY'RE NOT GOING FOR IT. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND THAT WAS MY CONCERN WAS IF -- IF WE DON'T SPREAD IT OUT, IT -- THIS GIVES US -- YOU'RE JUST BUYING MORE TIME AS WE TRY AND BRIDGE THIS GAP, IS THAT WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING, ERIC, WITH THE THREE YEARS VERSUS - - >>ERIC JOHNSON: YES, SIR, BECAUSE THERE'S NO SUGGESTION THE ECONOMY IS TURNING AROUND BY NEXT YEAR. NOBODY IS SUGGESTING THAT. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND IT WOULD ENSURE THAT THESE PROGRAMS WHICH WE HEAR THE MOST ABOUT FOR -- FOR RESTORATION OR INCREASED FUNDINGS THAT THEY ARE NOT PLACED IN PERIL AS THEY ARE THIS YEAR; IS THAT CORRECT? >>ERIC JOHNSON: YES, SIR. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: OKAY. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. ARE WE READY TO BEGIN THE RECONCILIATION PROCESS? WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO DOWN STARTING WITH F-1, GO DOWN THE LINE. >>PAT BEAN: YES. >>KEN HAGAN: WE'LL DISCUSS THEM, YOU'LL GIVE US YOUR RECOMMENDATION, ASSUMING YOU HAVE ONE, MS. BEAN, AND THEN THE BOARD WILL DISCUSS AND VOTE ON AS MANY OF THEM AS WE ARE -- THAT WE HAVE THE INFORMATION TO MAKE DECISIONS TODAY? >>JIM NORMAN: TAKES FOUR NOW, RIGHT, NOT TWO? >>KEN HAGAN: RIGHT. TAKES FOUR VOTES, AND THEN OF COURSE, ANY ITEM THAT WE'RE UNABLE TO VOTE ON TODAY, WE WILL REVISIT AGAIN NEXT THURSDAY. ANY QUESTIONS WITH THE PROCESS? COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: NO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT F- 1 WHEN WE START. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: WE READY? >>PAT BEAN: I THINK WE'RE READY TO START WITH F-1, AND I BELIEVE PROBABLY YOU'RE GOING TO COMMENT ABOUT THE FEE ISSUE. >>ROSE FERLITA: WELL, WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO TAKE THEM OFF THE LIST, THAT'S FOR SURE. THE PEOPLE THAT ARE AFFECTED BY THIS MOSTLY HAVE WORKED TOO HARD TO GET THAT REQUESTED FLAG. I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT ON THIS FLAGGED ITEM LIST, OF COURSE, SUBJECT TO ANY FUNDING THAT WE REALIZE FROM FEE INCREASES NEXT WEEK, BUT I DON'T WANT TO PROJECT OR MENTALLY POLL WHETHER OR NOT THOSE FEES ARE GOING TO BE SUPPORTED OR NOT, SO I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE IT WHERE IT IS, AND THEN DEPENDING ON WHAT'S NEXT WEEK, THEN WE'LL DO THIS SUBJECT TO WHAT HAPPENS THEN. I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY FAIR WAY TO -- TO KEEP THIS RECOGNITION FOR ANIMAL CRUELTY INVESTIGATORS, SO THAT'S MY MOTION. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. SO I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST -- THAT IS A MOTION -- THAT WE GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION THAT -- THAT -- COMMITTING US TO SUPPORTING THIS SUBJECT TO THE -- >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: -- FEES THAT ARE -- >>ROSE FERLITA: EXACTLY, RATHER THAN TAKE IT OFF AND BRING IT BACK ON, MR. CHAIRMAN, YES. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT THE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FERLITA, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. NO DISCUSSION, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>KEN HAGAN: MR. THORNTON. >>PAT BEAN: YES. ITEM F-2, THE AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM. >>MARK THORNTON: GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. MARK THORNTON, DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION, AND CONSERVATION. SINCE YOUR EARLIER INFORMATION ON THE TWO FLAGGED ITEMS, FIRST ONE IS THE AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM, FOLLOWING THE DIRECTIVE OF THE BOARD AFTER SEVERAL WORKSHOP DISCUSSIONS. I HIGHLIGHTED THE -- OUR RECOMMENDATIONS THERE. WE HAVE RESTRUCTURED THE PROGRAM SO THAT WE CAN MAINTAIN WITH AS MANY FULL -- CURRENT FULL-TIME STAFF AS POSSIBLE AND ONLY HAVING TO REDUCE 16 POSITIONS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT I BELIEVE AT THIS POINT SEVEN OF THOSE ARE VACANT, SO FURTHER REDUCING THE NEGATIVE IMPACT TO PEOPLE. THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN PREVIOUS WAS THE FEE STRUCTURE, AND AGAIN, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE -- WE DO WHAT WE CAN TO MAXIMIZE FEDERAL ASSISTANCE THROUGH THE SCHOOL READINESS PROGRAM. AND -- BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE ISSUES AND CONCERNS OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE NOT YET IN THE SCHOOL READINESS PROGRAM. BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE A FEE FOR MANY YEARS, QUITE A FEW OF OUR PARTICIPANTS PROBABLY ARE NOT IN THERE, AND THEY MAY BE PUT ON A WAITING LIST. WE DON'T WANT TO ELIMINATE THEIR ABILITY TO -- TO USE OUR PROGRAM, SO AS WE -- WHAT WE'VE DONE IS -- IS GIVEN YOU THE BOTTOM-LINE NUMBER OF WHAT WE NEED, ADDITIONAL DOLLARS OF 1.8 MILLION, TO FUND OUR PROGRAM IN ITS ENTIRETY. FOR EVERY DOLLAR THAT WE RECEIVE IN EITHER SCHOOL READINESS, CHILDREN'S BOARD, COMMUNITY SERVICES BLOCK GRANTS, IT WILL REDUCE THAT DEPENDENCY ON THAT ADDITIONAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE. I WANT TO ADD THAT THE TOTAL SCHOOL READINESS FUNDING FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IS AT OR OVER $47 MILLION. WE WOULD ONLY BE NEEDING TO -- TO RECEIVE AT LEAST 1.8 MILLION SO THAT WE REDUCE OUR DEPENDENCY ON THE GENERAL FUND. I BELIEVE THAT WE'LL GET THERE. WE MAY NOT GET THERE IN OCTOBER, AND AS THE STIMULUS MONEY BECOMES MORE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE EARLY LEARNING COALITION, WE'LL GET THERE, AND SO WE REALLY ARE LOOKING AT THIS 1.8 AS AN FY 10 CONCERN SO THAT WE -- WE MAINTAIN AS MUCH OF THE PROGRAM AS POSSIBLE. FY 11, IF WE'RE GETTING ALL OF THE FEDERAL MONEY THAT WE CAN, THE POTENTIAL FOR US IN OUR PROGRAM IS $3.9 MILLION. NOW WE START REALLY BENEFITING FROM THE SCHOOL READINESS, SO WITH THAT, I DO HAVE IN THERE THE FEE STRUCTURE, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT -- THAT IN ORDER TO -- TO BENEFIT GREATLY TO THE -- THE FEDERAL FUNDING ASSISTANCE, WE'VE SET OUR FEE -- OUR HIGH FEE OR OUR HIGH RATE OR FULL RATE AT $48, BUT WE'VE ALSO ADJUSTED BASED ON INCOME. ALL OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN OUR PROGRAM, 93% OF THOSE WOULD GENERALLY BE RECEIVING A SCHOLARSHIP OR SOME ASSISTANCE FROM EITHER THE COUNTY OR SCHOOL READINESS. 93% WOULD PAY LESS THAN $30 OR $30 OR LESS. I THINK THAT -- THAT WE'VE ACCOMPLISHED WHAT WE WANTED TO DO IS TO PROVIDE THIS PROGRAM SO THAT PEOPLE WOULD NOT HAVE TO LOSE THEIR JOBS OR QUIT THEIR JOBS TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR KIDS. WITH THAT, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >>KEN HAGAN: I KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN -- I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR QUITE A WHILE, AND IT'S BEEN SOMEWHAT FLUID FROM I GUESS DIFFERENT PROPOSALS THAT WE'VE SEEN. I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT, BUT TO UNDERSTAND IT CORRECTLY, THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS IS 1.8 MILLION AS OPPOSED TO WHAT WE ORIGINALLY HAD HERE THAT WOULD BE SEVEN MILLION? >> WE'VE WORKED THAT DOWN TO NEEDING AN ADDITIONAL 1.8 MILLION, YES, SIR. >>MARK SHARPE: EXCELLENT JOB. >>KEN HAGAN: AND 93% OF THE PARTICIPANTS WILL PAY $30 OR LESS? >>MARK THORNTON: LESS, YES, SIR. >>JIM NORMAN: MOVE THE ITEM. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: AND THIS ITEM IS BELOW OR THE FEE STRUCTURE IS BELOW THAT OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND -- >>MARK THORNTON: FAR BELOW. >>KEN HAGAN: -- AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT? >>MARK THORNTON: AND THE YMCA, YES, SIR. >>KEN HAGAN: I THINK THIS GOES -- >>MARK THORNTON: I COULD CLARIFY THE SCHOOL. THE SCHOOL'S FEE IS 40, BUT THEY GO FROM 20 TO 48, NOT 40 BUT 48, AND WITH OUR 30 IN THERE AND A MAJORITY OF OUR MEMBERS GETTING 30 OR LESS, WE WILL BE SUBSTANTIALLY LOWER THAN ANY OF OUR AGENCY COMPETITORS, THE SCHOOL AND THE "Y," OF COURSE, BUT THE PRIVATE SECTOR FAR BELOW. >>KEN HAGAN: AND I JUST WANT TO SAY I KNOW I ASKED YOU BEFORE TO DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO TRY TO KEEP THE PROGRAM WHOLE, AND IT CERTAINLY APPEARS THAT YOU'VE DONE THAT. SO -- >>MARK THORNTON: THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: MARK, LET ME CONGRATULATE YOU FOR WORKING THROUGH THIS. I TELL YOU WE -- AUTOMATICALLY OUR OWN PERSONAL FLAGS WENT UP ABOUT THE URGENCY OF DOING THIS TO PROTECT PARENTS AND THEIR JOBS, AND THEIR CHILDREN OBVIOUSLY, AND EVERYTHING -- WE LEARN BY COMPARISONS, NOT BY CRITICISMS, BUT WE CERTAINLY LEARN BY COMPARISONS, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE ADJACENT GOVERNMENTS, WE HAVE REALLY TRIED TO BITE THE BULLET ON SOME OF THOSE COSTS, ABSORB AS MANY AS WE CAN SO THAT ULTIMATELY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE NEED AND WHAT WE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAVE ABSORBED IS REASONABLE TO SAY THE MOST, SO WE HAVE NOT JUST TURNED IT OVER TO OUR CITIZENS AND SAID, THIS IS WHAT YOU'VE GOT TO PAY IF YOU WANT IT. I THINK IT'S STILL COMPETITIVE. IT'S LESS THAN WHAT THEY WOULD PAY SOMEPLACE ELSE. IT KEEPS THE CHILDREN SAFE. IT PROTECTS THEM WITH THE TIME THEY NEED TO PROTECT THEIR JOBS, AND JUST JOB WELL DONE, AND I TRULY, TRULY APPRECIATE ALL THE EFFORTS THAT YOU AND YOUR STAFF AND MY COLLEAGUES HAVE DONE ON THIS. IT'S AN IMPORTANT ISSUE, AND WE'VE ADDRESSED AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED BETTER THAN MOST PEOPLE WOULD HAVE ANTICIPATED. >>MARK THORNTON: AND WE DON'T WANT TO BE HERE NEXT YEAR ON THIS ITEM. WE THINK WE'VE ADDRESSED IT FOR AT LEAST THE TWO YEARS. >>ROSE FERLITA: YOU DON'T LIKE THESE LITTLE PARTIES, HUH? >> WE DON'T WANT YOU HERE EITHER. >>ROSE FERLITA: ANYWAY, THANK YOU, MARK. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM, THOUGH -- AND YOU HAVE ALSO BEEN MEETING WITH THE CHILDREN'S BOARD? >>MARK THORNTON: YES. >>MARK SHARPE: AND HAVE YOU WORKED THROUGH AN UNDERSTANDING? SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT A VOUCHER OF SOME SORT. ARE WE GETTING -- >>MARK THORNTON: THAT'S THE SCHOOL READINESS PROGRAM. IT'S A VOUCHER PROGRAM, AND ACTUALLY WE MEET QUITE FREQUENTLY WITH THEM. THEY HAVE SEVERAL GROUPS THAT MEET ON THIS ISSUE. IT'S AMAZING HOW EXTENSION -- EXTENSIVE THE -- THE FINGERS GO OUT INTO ALL AREAS OF AFTERSCHOOL CARE. WE MEET ON THE -- THE PARTNERS FOR OUT OF SCHOOL TIME GROUP, BUT WE'RE ALSO -- >>MARK SHARPE: WILL YOU BE MAKING A PRESENTATION WITH ME ON THE 20th THEN? >>MARK THORNTON: I'LL BE THERE. >>ROSE FERLITA: HE WANTS YOU TO GO UP THERE FIRST, MARK. >>PAT BEAN: HE'LL BE RIGHT BEHIND YOU, WAY BACK. >> I THOUGHT IT WAS THE OTHER WAY AROUND. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND MARK, I ALSO WANT TO SAY CONGRATULATIONS AND GREAT JOB IN WORKING THROUGH THIS. LIKE I SAID, I KNOW WE'VE RECOGNIZED HOW HARD THAT YOU'VE WORKED PUTTING THIS BUDGET TOGETHER AND TRYING TO WORK THROUGH THIS VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION. JUST SO THAT I'M CLEAR, SO ARE YOU -- FOR FY 10 WE'RE LOOKING FOR 1.8 MILLION, IS THAT -- >>MARK THORNTON: YES. >>KEVIN BECKNER: AND FOR FY 11, DO WE HAVE A DETERMINATION ON THAT YET? >>MARK THORNTON: WE'RE NOT GOING TO -- WE'RE NOT MAKING THAT RECOMMENDATION NOW. I THINK THAT AGAIN IF WE GET AT LEAST 1.8 MILLION IN FEDERAL ASSISTANCE -- AND THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY OUT THERE -- THEN WE WON'T HAVE TO ASK FOR ANY ADDITIONAL SO THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A NONREOCCURRING EXPENSE. IF WE DON'T, WE'LL HAVE TO BE HERE SAYING IT'S IN THE BUDGET, BUT WE'RE HOPING THAT IT'S A ONE-TIME ISSUE FOR FY 10 BECAUSE WE KNOW HOW THE ISSUE OF FY 11 BUDGET IS. >>KEVIN BECKNER: SO THEN WE'RE APPROVING 1.8 MILLION, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE APPROVING TODAY, AND THEN THERE'S NOT ANY ADDITIONAL FOR FY 11 AT THIS TIME, IS THAT MY -- IS THAT CORRECT? >>MARK THORNTON: THAT'S WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING. >>PAT BEAN: THAT'S WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING, YEAH. >>KEN HAGAN: WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MARK. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM IS THE ITEM TO FURTHER REDUCE THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION BASED ON NEW PROPOSALS FROM THE DELEGATION. >>JIM NORMAN: CLARIFY THAT FOR ME. >>PAT BEAN: MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THERE WAS A REQUEST TO ELIMINATE THE TWO POSITIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY THERE. I DO KNOW THAT WE DID HAVE WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE DELEGATION, THOUGH, THAT WAS ASKING FOR AT LEAST ONE POSITION TO REMAIN. >>JIM NORMAN: OKAY. I JUST NEEDED TO CLARIFY WHAT THAT MEANT BECAUSE THE -- WHAT I'VE -- WHAT I'VE SEEN FROM MEMBERS IS THAT IT WAS THE ONE, AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY KNEW DIFFERENT. >>KEN HAGAN: YES, MA'AM. >> CANDACE HUNDLEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION. THE MEMBERS OF THE DELEGATION SEND THEIR GREETINGS AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ME TO APPEAR. I HAVE INFORMATION THAT I CAN PASS OUT TO YOU ABOUT WHAT THE OFFICE DOES. WE DO FAR MORE THAN PUT ON ONE MEETING PER YEAR, AND WE HAVE LISTED THE THINGS THAT WE DO DO IN THIS DOCUMENT. I KNOW MANY OF YOU ARE AWARE OF THAT ALREADY. I DON'T KNOW IF I NEED TO REITERATE IT. AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE OR -- OR GO THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS WE HAVE IF YOU'D LIKE. I THINK WE HAVE PROBABLY TOO FEW THAN NEEDED, WHICH SPEAKS TO THE FRUGALNESS OF OUR OFFICE. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I DIDN'T HEAR THE LAST -- WE HAVE TOO WHAT? >> [INAUDIBLE] >>PAT BEAN: GO TO THE MIKE. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I COULDN'T HEAR. YOU WERE WALKING AWAY AS YOU WERE TALKING. I DIDN'T HEAR THE LAST PART. >> I'M SORRY. WE WERE PASSING INFORMATION OUT ABOUT THE OFFICE AND THE NEEDS OF THE OFFICE, WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS, WHICH REPRESENTATIVE WEATHERFORD, WHO IS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE DELEGATION, SENT TO YOU IN FEBRUARY WAS TO CONTINUE THE TWO POSITIONS CURRENTLY IN PLACE THROUGH THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR AND THEN TO REDUCE THE BUDGET TO ONE PERSON SO THAT WE'D CARRY ON CORE FUNCTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE DELEGATION. THE BUDGET -- WE HAVE ALREADY TURNED BACK 13,000 PLUS IN FEBRUARY. OUR BUDGET WILL DROP FROM ABOUT 200,000 TO 179 NEXT YEAR, WHICH INCLUDES A ONE-TIME PAYOUT TO THE RETIRING EMPLOYEE, AND IT DROPS TO 86,000 IN 2011. THAT IS OBVIOUSLY FAR MORE THAN 50% OF OUR CURRENT BUDGET AND FAR EXCEEDS THE -- THE REQUEST OF THE -- OF THE BOARD OF EACH ENTITY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AM I STILL -- >>KEN HAGAN: YES. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: YOU DON'T HAVE TO STAND UP BECAUSE I HAVE A COUPLE THINGS I WANTED TO SAY. PLEASE SIT DOWN. >> I'M GLAD TO BE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE DELEGATION. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: OKAY. IF -- OKAY. FIRST OFF, BOARD MEMBERS, AS YOU ALL KNOW, I FLAGGED A NUMBER OF ITEMS TOTALING $68 MILLION IN BUDGETARY NOTATIONS. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR ME PERSONALLY EASIER AND MORE PLEASANT TO HAVE FLAGGED ITEMS FOR BUDGET REQUESTS. IN FACT, I HAVE SPOKEN MANY, MANY TIMES, OVER 50 TIMES, WITHIN THE COUNTY AND TO MY DISTRICT, AND I TOLD THEM THAT I WOULD MAKE NO REQUEST FOR BUDGET INCREASES, AND THERE'S SEVERAL ITEMS THAT I -- THAT I KNOW HAVE BEEN NOTED, AND THERE ARE ITEMS THAT HAVE NOT MADE IT TO THIS POINT. AS WE LOOK INWARD, WE DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY ANY LONGER -- AND IT'S JUST NOT THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION. THERE ARE MANY OTHERS THAT I'VE NAMED. IT WAS LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL CUTS TO FIND THE COACHES FOR KIDS, TO -- AS WE'RE FLAGGING THESE ITEMS -- AND I THINK THEY TOTAL ABOUT $20 MILLION BUT TO FIND THE FUNDS WITHOUT RAISING TAXES, WITHOUT HAVING TO GO ALL THE WAY IN TO THE - - TO THE RESERVES BUT FINDING THOSE FUNDS TO DO THIS. IF WE TALK ABOUT EFFICIENCIES, IF WE TALK ABOUT COST CUTTING, THEN WE NEED TO SAY, WELL, WHAT IS IT THAT ARE VITAL SERVICES? I CAN NO LONGER SIT ON THE FENCE AND SAY -- I'M TRULY GOING TO LOOK FOR EFFICIENCIES, I'M GOING TO LOOK FOR WHAT'S INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES, I'M GOING TO LOOK AT AREAS THAT I HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC, AND I KNOW THAT YOU TOO HAVE -- YOU-ALL AS WELL, THAT WE HAVE PROGRAMS WHICH OUTLIVE THEIR TIME. THIS TO ME IS ONE THAT WAS VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE I'M A FRIEND OF -- FRIENDS WITH MANY OF THESE FOLKS. I WAS SURPRISED THAT -- THAT ONLY THREE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE DELEGATION WROTE TO ME. I THOUGHT WE WOULD HAVE HAD EVERY DELEGATION MEMBER DOWN HERE SAYING GOTTA HAVE THIS, GOTTA HAVE IT. THE CHAIRMAN IN HIS CAPACITY, HE CONTACTED US AS WELL, AND THEY TALKED ABOUT THE VITAL SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED. I PULLED UP -- ONE OF THE LETTERS ALLUDED TO OR TWO OF THE LETTERS ALLUDED TO HELPING WITH SERVICES WITHIN THEIR OFFICES, AND WE HAVE AN AR SYSTEM HERE AND COULD FIND NO ARs WHERE -- WHERE ACTUALLY THERE'S HELP WITH THE CONSTITUENTS IN THE COUNTY, AND SO MAYBE THERE'S A TRACKING METHOD WHERE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY BEING HELPED, BUT, YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT -- AS UNCOMFORTABLE AS IT IS TO MAKE THESE REQUESTS -- AND IT WOULD BE -- AGAIN, AS I'VE SAID, IT WOULD BE NICE TO JUST SAY ADD MONEY, ADD PROGRAMS, AND I WILL ALSO SAY AS I'M COMING TO KIND OF A WRAP-UP ON THIS PART OF MY COMMENTS, MANY OF YOU HAVE BEEN VERY PROFESSIONAL, HAVE TAKEN THIS IN THE SPIRIT WHICH HAS BEEN INTENDED, AND IT'S NOT PERSONAL, AND AS I GO THROUGH MY FLAGGED ITEMS, I'M ALREADY SEEING AREAS WHERE DEPARTMENTS HAVE SAID, YEAH, WE CAN FIND ADDITIONAL CUTS AS A RESULT OF THIS LOOKING INWARD, AND MR. JOHNSON SHARED WITH ME THIS MORNING THAT -- THAT AS A RESULT OF THIS LOOKING INWARD, FLEET MANAGEMENT CAME UP WITH THE ADDITIONAL FUNDS. AND I DON'T THINK MS. SUBADAN IS HERE TODAY, BUT -- AND NORMALLY I DON'T PICK OUT AN INDIVIDUAL PERSON, BUT MS. SUBADAN OF ALL THE FOLKS I'VE WORKED WITH HAS HANDLED THIS IN A WAY WHICH HER SUPERIORS NEED TO KNOW HAS BEEN VERY HELPFUL AND IT'S BEEN TAKEN IN THE INTENTION THAT IT'S BEEN, BUT COMING NOW TO LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION, I LOOK AT THE CONTINUATION OF THIS AS AN UNNECESSARY BENEFIT THAT WE'RE OFFERING TO THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATIONS. THEY HAVE AN OFFICE IN TALLAHASSEE, THEY HAVE A DISTRICT OFFICE, THEY HAVE STAFF SUPPORTED THROUGH THEIR DEPARTMENTS AND COMMITTEES IN TALLAHASSEE, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY STAFF MEMBERS ARE THERE. THEY HAVE STAFF MEMBERS IN THE LEGISLATIVE OFFICES THAT THEY -- THAT THEY HOLD. IF THAT HAD BEEN A GREAT CONCERN, I THINK THAT I WOULD HAVE HAD MORE OF THEM WRITE TO ME, AND I WOULD ASSUME THAT THEY WROTE TO THE OTHERS. MY SUGGESTION -- AND I TALKED TO ERIC ABOUT THIS TODAY -- IS THAT YOU FIND A WAY -- IF WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THIS - - AND I LOOK AT IT AS NOT PERSONAL BUT THAT WE FIND A WAY TO CONSOLIDATE THESE SERVICES IN TO MS. STEWART'S OPERATION, THAT -- AND IF IT NEEDS TO BE FLAGGED TO COME BACK ON THE NEXT ROUND TO SEE HOW THAT CAN BE DONE -- THAT THIS -- ALLOW YOU TO CONTINUE SO YOU REAP YOUR -- YOU KNOW, YOUR RETIREMENT. I THINK YOU HAVE A RETIREMENT DATE, DON'T WANT TO INTERFERE WITH THAT, BUT THAT WE KEEP THAT ONE POSITION, AND AFTER YOUR POSITION IS COMPLETE, THEN WE ZERO OUT THIS DELEGATION OFFICE OR MORE PROPERLY SAID THAT MS. STEWART THROUGH COMMUNICATIONS -- AND SHE'S IN TALLAHASSEE, SHE HAS THE LOBBYING RESPONSIBILITIES -- THAT MS. STEWART'S OFFICE ABSORB THESE RESPONSIBILITIES, AND SO I SEE A LIGHT OR TWO ON. I KNOW AGAIN IT IS VERY UNCOMFORTABLE. I GET THE -- THE LONG LOOKS AND THE GLARES AND THE STARES, BUT IT WAS MS. SUBADAN WHO ROSE TO THE TOP AND WAS HELPFUL AND HAS BEEN STELLAR WITH THIS, BUT I THINK THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO LOOK FOR COACHES FOR KIDS -- FOR KIDS, IF WE'RE GOING TO BE TRULY TO OUR -- OUR STATEMENTS THAT WE'VE GOT TO FIND THE EFFICIENCIES, THEN WE'VE GOT TO LOOK AT THESE OTHER AREAS. SO WITH THAT I'M SURE WE'VE GOT OTHERS WHO WILL WANT TO COMMENT. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: MR. -- MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU. CERTAINLY ANYTHING THAT WE LOOK AT WITHIN THIS DIFFICULT BUDGET TIME THAT'S FRIVOLOUS IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS, AND FOLLOWING UP ON MY COLLEAGUE'S COMMENTS ABOUT MS. SUBADAN, I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT, AND SHE'S BEEN INCREDIBLE IN TERMS OF OUR ENERGY WORK GROUP, IN TERMS OF THE AWARDS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS THAT SHE'S GOTTEN, AND CERTAINLY THAT'S REFLECTIVE OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AS HAVE MANY OTHER PEOPLE ON DIFFERENT STAFFS IN DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS. EVERYBODY'S TRYING TO DO THE BEST THEY CAN DO, AND I APPLAUD THEM ALL, ALTHOUGH WHEN WE LOOK AT EACH OF THESE DIFFERENT FLAGS, WHAT IS HAPPENING SOMEPLACE ELSE WE ACKNOWLEDGE, WE ADDRESS, AND WE GO ON TO THE NEXT FLAG ITEM. SO ALTHOUGH WE'RE GIVING THEM COMPLIMENTS, REALLY, THAT'S NOT GERMANE TO WHAT WE'RE LOOKED AT HERE. FOR ME THIS IS NOT ABOUT FRIENDSHIPS BETWEEN US OR OTHER LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS OR STATE OFFICIALS OR FEDERAL OFFICIALS. WE MAY HAVE THOSE FRIENDSHIPS, AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THEM, BUT WHAT IS IMPORTANT FOR ME HERE IS TO MAINTAIN THAT RELATIONSHIP BECAUSE IT -- IT SERVES A PURPOSE, AND THAT PURPOSE IS TO CONTINUE THAT RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS AT OTHER LEVELS DOING DIFFERENT THINGS WITH DIFFERENT RESPONSIBILITIES BUT ULTIMATELY ALL HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION. THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. THEY SUPPORT ISSUES THAT WE START HERE AND SEND TO TALLAHASSEE AND SAY, GUYS, WE ARE IN THIS TOGETHER. PLEASE HELP US, SUPPORT THIS FOR THE GOOD OF OUR CONSTITUENTS. AND PART OF THAT IS A RELATIONSHIP, AND I THINK AT THE CORE, AT THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THAT IS HAVING SOMEPLACE WHERE WE CAN ADDRESS THE FACT THAT WE ARE ALL REPRESENTING THE SAME PEOPLE, SO IT BEING IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AS A PART OF OUR ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE IS VERY IMPORTANT. I THINK IT'S BEEN REFERENCED BY THE INFORMATION THAT WE GOT THAT MIAMI-DADE RECOGNIZED THAT BRINGING IT BACK WAS IMPORTANT, AND I DON'T THINK I WANT TO MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE AS MIAMI-DADE, TAKE THIS OUT, AND THEN PERHAPS LATER REALIZE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE HAD THAT RELATIONSHIP CONTINUE BY THE BOND IN TERMS OF WHAT -- IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS, IT IS NOT A GREAT DEAL, AND I AGREE WITH MR. HIGGINBOTHAM. THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS FOR EVERY -- MANY OTHER DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE APPROPRIATIONS. THERE'S AN OFFER TO RETURN 13,000 OF THAT IN FEBRUARY AND PERHAPS, WITH MY CONVERSATIONS WITH WILL WEATHERFORD, PROBABLY MORE AT THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR. THE REQUEST IN FY 10 IS REDUCED, AND THAT INCLUDES SOMETHING THAT ADDS TO THAT TOTAL. IT'S A ONE-TIME -- ONE TIME IS VERY IMPORTANT IN THIS SEASON -- A ONE-TIME PAYOUT TO A 35-YEAR EMPLOYEE OF APPROXIMATELY 50,000, AND THEN THE REQUEST DIMINISHES IN FY 2011. AND SO THAT BEING SAID, ALTHOUGH I ABSOLUTELY APPRECIATE THE ENERGIES AND THE STICKTOITIVENESS FOR -- THAT COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM HAS SHOWN, I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO CONTINUE, NOT FOR OUR GOOD, NOT FOR THEIR GOOD, BUT FOR THE PEOPLE WE BOTH REPRESENT. SO THAT BEING SAID, IF IT'S APPROPRIATE, I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO REMOVE THAT FLAG OF ELIMINATING THEIR DOLLARS. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: YEAH. ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THIS LIST, COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, I'M FINDING SOME I DON'T LIKE ON HERE, SO -- [LAUGHTER] I APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU'VE DONE, AND ALL OF US TACKLED DIFFERENT AREAS, AND IT'S NOT -- THE ONLY THING I DISAGREE WITH YOU ON IS NOT PITTING ONE PROGRAM AGAINST THE OTHER, THIS AGAINST THAT OR THIS IS GOING TO GO TO THAT. GOING DOWN THIS LIST, WE FUNDED PARKS, WE FUNDED THOSE THINGS. THIS IS A FLAGGED ITEM THAT STAND ON ITS OWN, MERIT ON ITS OWN. IT'S A DANGEROUS THING TO START PITTING ONE AGAINST THE OTHER AND SAYING IT'S GOING TO -- IT'S THE VALUE THAT -- IT'S A POT OF MONEY THAT IS THERE VALUE OF THAT SERVICE, AND I BELIEVE THERE IS VALUE IN THAT SERVICE, AND I GUESS WHAT I -- AND I -- AND I GUESS I'M STRUGGLING WITH IT LIKE COMMISSIONER FERLITA ON THE MOTION HERE. I GUESS I'VE -- I WOULD CO-MOVE WITH HER THAT WE WOULD FUND THE -- THE ALLOCATED THING HERE THAT -- AND BOARD MEMBERS, THE CUT THROUGH '11 IS OVER 60% FROM WHAT EXISTS TODAY, OVER 60%, FOLKS. THAT'S A SIZABLE -- THAT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE -- THEY'RE HOLDING THEIR OWN OR GOING DOWN 5% OR SOMETHING. THAT'S A SIZABLE -- AND ACTUALLY, I WAS TAKING THE POSITION THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY WALKED THE WALK. I APPRECIATED THE -- THE EFFORT BY -- BY WEATHERFORD AND CRIST ON MAKING THIS WORK, AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THESE NUMBERS TO US, AND I WOULD MOVE -- I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'D DO THAT. I GUESS I'D MOVE THE -- THAT. IS THAT WHAT YOU -- >>ROSE FERLITA: [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S WHAT I WAS DOING. YOU CAN DO IT OR I CAN DO IT. IT DOESN'T MATTER. >>JIM NORMAN: OKAY. I SECOND YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: SO THAT THE -- THE INITIAL BUDGET RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR WAS TO WHAT? WAS TO ELIMINATE THE -- >>PAT BEAN: NO, WAS TO HAVE THE ONE POSITION CARRY THROUGH. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WELL, IS THAT WHAT SHE'S ASKING FOR? >>PAT BEAN: THAT IS WHAT SHE'S ASKING. >>KEN HAGAN: DO WE EVEN NEED A MOTION THEN? >>JIM NORMAN: YEAH, THE FLAG -- THERE'S A FLAG THERE. >>PAT BEAN: IT HAS A FLAG TO REMOVE IT, SO WHAT YOU WOULD DO IS SAY YOU WANT TO CONTINUE WITH -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: [INAUDIBLE] >>PAT BEAN: YEAH, JUST VOTE DOWN THE FLAG. >>JIM NORMAN: [INAUDIBLE] >>ROSE FERLITA: SO PROCESSWISE WE STILL HAVE TO COME UP WITH IT BECAUSE IT'S FLAGGED AND WE NEED FOUR, WHETHER THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE SAYING AND THAT'S WHAT SHE'S SAYING? >>PAT BEAN: YES. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: BEFORE WE TAKE A MOTION, I'M GOING TO OFFER A SUBSTITUTE MOTION HERE, AND I COULD HAVE OFFERED MY MOTION, BUT I WANTED THE BENEFIT OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS, AND YOU'RE RIGHT, IT IS ABOUT RELATIONSHIPS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE LOBBYISTS THAT ARE CONTRACTS, HIGHLY PAID, WELL-TRAINED, WELL-SKILLED. WE HAVE MS. STEWART AND HER FOLKS WHO CAN TAKE OVER THIS AND WHO CAN CONTINUE THAT. IF THIS PROGRAM WAS SO NEAR AND DEAR, I THINK WE WOULD HAVE HEARD FROM EVERY ONE OF THE DELEGATION MEMBERS SAYING YOU GOTTA KEEP IT. WE ARE AT A TIME WHERE WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE DOLLARS, AND WE'VE GOT TO LOOK, AND I DON'T THINK -- YOU KNOW, I HEARD ONCE BEFORE SEVERAL MONTHS AGO WHEN I SUGGESTED THAT -- THAT WE HAVE ONE OF OUR COUNTY BUDGET HEARINGS SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN HERE, AND I HEARD, YOU'RE GOING TO PIT ONE COMMUNITY AGAINST THE OTHER, AND ONCE WE DID THAT, THE FEEDBACK THAT WE HAVE HAS BEEN REMARKABLE AND IT'S BEEN EXTREMELY HELPFUL. THIS IS NOT ABOUT PITTING ONE AGAINST THE OTHER, IT'S ABOUT TRULY BEING CONSERVATIVE, IT'S ABOUT STEPPING UP TO THE TABLE. IT'S ABOUT THE BEST USE OF OUR DOLLARS, AND YOU MENTIONED THAT WE'RE FUNDING THESE THINGS. WELL, WE'RE MARKING THESE ITEMS HERE TO BE EARMARKED AND FLAGGED FOR FUNDING. WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING TO COME FROM? YOU KNOW, WHAT IS IT THAT WE -- WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE GOING TO CUT? >>JIM NORMAN: DO YOU WANT TO START HAVING THAT DIALOGUE, COMMISSIONER, BECAUSE I WILL HAVE IT WITH YOU. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: NO, I STILL HAVE THE FLOOR. BUT THIS IS NOT ABOUT PITTING ONE AGAINST THE OTHER, THIS IS ABOUT BEING PRUDENT WITH OUR MONEY, AND MY SUBSTITUTE MOTION HERE WILL BE TO ELIMINATE THIS DEPARTMENT TO ONE POSITION ON OCTOBER 1 WHEN WE GO THROUGH THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE AND THEN TO CONTINUE THROUGH THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S RETIREMENT, AND THEN THE RESPONSIBILITY WOULD BE TRANSFERRED, AND I HAVE EVERY BIT OF AN OUNCE OF CONFIDENCE THAT THE DUTIES OF COMMUNICATION AND RELATIONSHIPS COULD BE WELL CONTINUED THROUGH THE OFFICE OF MS. STEWART. SO MY SUBSTITUTE MOTION IS THAT WE TAKE THIS ONE SMALL STEP FORWARD BEYOND -- >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: WE'VE GOT TWO SECONDS. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, I WANT TO RECOGNIZE YOU ALSO BECAUSE I KNOW YOU WORKED VERY DILIGENTLY TO LOOK FOR COST SAVINGS AND EFFICIENCIES, AND I -- AND I ADMIRE YOUR TENACITY IN LOOKING AT EVERYTHING UNDER THE MICROSCOPE. COMMENTING SPECIFICALLY TO THIS DELEGATION, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN HERE FOR A LITTLE OVER NINE MONTHS, AND I'VE RECOGNIZED AND REALIZED THE VALUE THAT THIS DELEGATION SERVES TO OUR COMMUNITY. ALONG WITH MS. STEWART, I WENT TO TALLAHASSEE TO TRY TO ADDRESS A SENIOR MOBILITY ISSUE DOWN IN SOUTH COUNTY, AND I'VE MET WITH MANY OF OUR -- OUR DELEGATES THERE, AND THE AMAZING THING IS IS THAT IT DIDN'T MATTER THAT I HAD A DIFFERENT PARTY AFFILIATION THAN THESE DELEGATES, BUT THEY SAW AND THEY RECOGNIZED AN ISSUE THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO OUR COUNTY AND TO OUR COMMUNITY, AND THEY WORKED WITH ME TO -- TO -- TO PROVIDE A SOLUTION TO WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO ACHIEVE, AND FROM THAT EXPERIENCE, I JUST HAVE TO SAY THAT IT WAS JUST ABSOLUTELY AMAZING HOW THEY HAVE SO MUCH COMMITMENT IT OUR COUNTY, AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT THIS DELEGATION, AND I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO NEED THEIR HELP IN THIS DELEGATION FOR MANY MORE ISSUES THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE FACING IN THE FUTURE, ESPECIALLY IN THESE DIFFICULT ECONOMIC TIMES. SO COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, AGAIN, I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO -- WOULD SUPPORT THE ORIGINAL MOTION THAT WOULD BE ON THE TABLE, AND I AGAIN JUST WANT TO THANK OUR DELEGATES. WANT TO THANK EDITH STEWART FOR WHAT SHE DOES FOR US IN TALLAHASSEE, AND AGAIN JUST SAY I THINK THIS IS JUST AN INVALUABLE PROGRAM. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER WHITE. >>KEVIN WHITE: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I TOO THINK THIS IS A VALUABLE COMMODITY, BUT IN THIS -- IN THIS PARTICULAR TIME I JUST CAN'T SEE GOING FORWARD WITH THIS WHEN WE PAY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR LOBBYISTS THAT WE HAVE NOW. AND LOOKING AT SOME OF THE OTHER POSITIONS THAT WILL BE CUT, OUR CONSUMER PROTECTION AND SOME OTHER AGENCIES THAT PEOPLE WILL BE LOSING POSITIONS, I JUST -- I JUST REALLY CAN'T SEE CONTINUING TO HAVE MORE AND MORE PAID LOBBYISTS AND PAID STAFF. I THINK THEY DO A WONDERFUL AND REMARKABLE JOB, BUT WE HAVE -- THESE ARE TOUGH TIMES. WE HAVE TO MAKE TOUGH DECISIONS, AND WE HAVE PROFESSIONAL AND PAID LOBBYISTS RIGHT HERE THAT I THINK THAT ARE MORE THAN CAPABLE OF DOING THE JOB, AND AS WE'VE SAID, DURING THESE TOUGH TIMES PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE ON MORE AND MORE RESPONSIBILITIES, AND IF -- IF THE PEOPLE THAT WE PAY HERE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AREN'T WILLING TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE AND CONTINUE TO GO TO WORK HARDER AND GO TO BAT FOR OUR -- OUR -- OUR CONSTITUENTS HERE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, THEN, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO SAY, BUT THESE ARE SOME TOUGH TIMES AND WE NEED TO MAKE SOME TOUGH DECISIONS, AND I COMPLETELY, YOU KNOW, AGREE WITH SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES. THIS IS AN INVALUABLE PROGRAM, BUT LIKE I SAID, WHEN IT COMES TO KIDS AND OTHER SENIOR CITIZENS' PROGRAMS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, I THINK WE NEED TO GET OUR PRIORITIES STRAIGHT. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I'M OBVIOUSLY GOING TO STICK TO MY FIRST MOTION AND NOT SUPPORT THE SUBSTITUTE ON THE TABLE. AND I AGREE, THIS IS A TIME WHEN WE NEED TO BE EFFICIENT. WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL WITH WHERE WE CHOOSE AND WHAT WE CHOOSE AND HOW WE CHOOSE IT AND WHAT WE COMPARE IN TERMS OF WHAT WE SUPPORT AND WHAT WE DON'T, AND WE'RE SPENDING A LOT OF DOLLARS ON OUR LOBBYISTS BUILDING THAT RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR COLLEAGUES IN TALLAHASSEE, AND I DON'T WANT TO SEND THE WRONG MESSAGE TO THEM. COMMISSIONER BECKNER IS RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO NEED THEIR HELP JUST LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO NEED OURS. THIS IS GOING TO BE A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT AT ANY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT, SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MOST OF THE MORE POPULATED COUNTIES HAVE. AGAIN, I REFERENCED THE FACT THAT DOWN SOUTH THEY MADE A MISTAKE AND BROUGHT IT BACK, AND THIS IS -- THESE ARE DOLLARS WELL SPENT, AND I ACTUALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THEY DIDN'T TRY TO PULL RANK AND ALL OF THEM START CALLING US TO BOMBARD US ABOUT HOW IMPORTANT IT WAS FOR US TO KEEP THAT ACCOMMODATION HERE FOR THEM. THEY KNEW AS WE SHOULD KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE ELECTED OFFICIALS IN TALLAHASSEE, IT'S ABOUT THE PEOPLE THEY REPRESENT AND WE REPRESENT. THEY HAVE MADE EFFORTS, AS MR. NORMAN SHOWED, IN REDUCING IT AND CONTINUING TO REDUCING IT IN THE NEXT CYCLE, AND I THINK THERE'S SUCH A THING AS BREAKING THAT RELATIONSHIP APART AND HAVING A HARDER TIME LOBBYING THEM WHEN WE WANT TO GRAB THEIR ATTENTION AND TELL THEM HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CONSTITUENTS NEED YOUR HELP, GUYS. JUST LIKE THEY NEED OURS, WE NEED YOURS. THERE'S A FINE LINE BETWEEN DOING WHAT WE NEED TO DO AND BECOMING EXTREME IN TERMS OF BEING PENNY WISE AND DOLLAR FOOLISH, SO IT'S A GOOD INVESTMENT. IT'S GOING TO BRING BACK RETURNS ON REPRESENTATION IN TALLAHASSEE FOR OUR CITIZENS, SO I'M ABSOLUTELY FOR IT, AND I THANK YOU FOR COMING. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO LET IT GO. I THINK THEY FOLLOW PROTOCOL. JUST LIKE WE HAVE A CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN, I RECEIVED LETTERS FROM BOTH, AND AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, MATCHING EVERYBODY'S FLAGSHIP CONSERVATISM, I DON'T KNOW OF A BETTER LEADER AS A CONSERVATIVE LEADER THAN WE'RE BLESSED WITH WILL WEATHERFORD BEING OUR CHAIR THIS TIME THAT WROTE THE LETTER THAT REQUESTED A 60% REDUCTION, SO THAT'S WHY I'M SUPPORTING IT. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, IF YOU CAN RESTATE YOUR MOTION ALSO. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'M SORRY? >>KEN HAGAN: WHEN YOU'RE FINISHED WITH YOUR COMMENTS, PLEASE RESTATE YOUR MOTION. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SURE. THE COMMENTS THAT I'VE HEARD ON MIAMI-DADE, THERE WERE TOTALLY DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THAT, AND I DID THE RESEARCH. I GET IT. AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS KIND OF MOVING FROM DELEGATION REPRESENTATIVE TO LOBBYIST, AND MR. BECKNER, WHEN YOU WERE GETTING YOUR -- YOUR ASSIST STANCE, WAS IT MS. STEWART THAT WAS HELPING YOU WITH THAT? >>KEVIN BECKNER: ACTUALLY, MS. STEWART GUIDED ME THERE, BUT ALL OF THESE DELEGATES WITHOUT APPOINTMENTS THAT WE VISITED -- I MEAN, WE VISITED HALF OF THESE DELEGATES ON HERE AND DIDN'T HAVE TO HAVE AN APPOINTMENT. SAT DOWN WITH THEM, TOLD THEM WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO ACHIEVE. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND MS. STEWART DID THAT? >>KEVIN BECKNER: MS. STEWART HELPED GUIDE THAT. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THAT'S WHY I WAS DIRECTING MY MOTION TO MS. STEWART BECAUSE I FELT IT WAS MORE EFFICIENT THERE THAN THE WAY WE CURRENTLY HAVE IT. BUT MY MOTION, WHICH I KNOW IS LACKING IN -- IN SUPPORT, BUT I APPRECIATE THOSE WHO LOOK TO THE -- TO THE BENEFITS OF WHY I'VE TAKEN THIS EXERCISE WAS TO -- IN THE CURRENT BUDGET THAT WE ELIMINATE NOW THE OFFICE TO ONE POSITION, THAT THE END OF THE RETIREMENT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR THAT THOSE DUTIES WOULD ALL BE TRANSFERRED TO MS. STEWART AND HER DEPARTMENT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THE MOTION -- SUBSTITUTE MOTION'S BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, SECOND WAS COMMISSIONER SHARPE. NO OTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 4-3. COMMISSIONERS BECKNER, FERLITA, AND NORMAN VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. NEXT ITEM. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM IS TO REVIEW FLORIDA STATUTES AND REDUCE THE CIVIL SERVICE BUDGET BELOW THE STATUTORY MINIMUM BASED ON PROVISION IN THE STATUTES. I BELIEVE THAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS HAD SOMEONE ON HER STAFF LOOK AT THAT FROM A -- >>RENEE LEE: WE HAVE ISSUED A LEGAL OPINION ON IT, COMMISSIONER, AND IF YOU'D -- WE'VE DISTRIBUTED THAT MEMO TO EACH OF THE COMMISSIONERS, AND SAM HAMILTON IS HERE TO REPORT TO THE BOARD WHAT THAT SAYS. THANK YOU. >>SAM HAMILTON: GOOD AFTERNOON. SAM HAMILTON, COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. VERY BRIEFLY, WHAT THE MEMO SAYS, THE STATE LAW WHICH IS A SPECIAL ACT OF THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE, WHICH DOES APPLY TO YOU MANDATES THE ANNUAL FUNDING BASED ON A STATUTORY FORMULA, SO ESSENTIALLY AS A MANDATE IT'S NOT PERMISSIVE. YOU DON'T HAVE THE DISCRETION. THE ONE VEHICLE YOU COULD PURSUE, OBVIOUSLY, IS LEGISLATIVE CHANGE, EITHER A REVISION TO THE STATUTE, WHATNOT. THERE ARE VARIOUS AGENCIES THAT ARE SUBJECT TO IT, OF WHICH THE COMMISSION IS ONE. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THIS WAS ONE OF MINE TOO, AND I WANT TO THANK THE DIRECTOR -- THE DEPARTMENT FOR HIS HELP AND HIS WORK AND STEPPING UP, AND I KNOW THIS IS ONE WHERE WE'VE LOOKED INTERNALLY TO FIND ADDITIONAL EFFICIENCIES. I DON'T HAVE ANY -- ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS. I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A DISCUSSION ON HIPAA, AND I KNOW WHY WE CAN'T DO THAT AT THIS POINT. WE'LL GET TO THAT DOWN THE LINE, BUT YOU'VE BEEN A GREAT HELP, AND THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. GENE GARDNER, DIRECTOR OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CIVIL SERVICE BOARD. >>KEN HAGAN: DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE? >> NO, SIR. >>KEN HAGAN: THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS AFTERNOON. >> THANK YOU. >>PAT BEAN: SO ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO REMOVE THE FLAG? >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: REMOVE THE FLAG. SECOND. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE TO REMOVE THE FLAGGED ITEM. NO FURTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM IS F-5, REDUCING THE OPERATING MILLAGE TO OFFSET IMPACT OF INCREASES IN DEBT SERVICE MILLAGE. >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONERS, YOU'VE ALREADY DONE THAT IN ADOPTING THE MILLAGE RATES LAST WEEK, SO NO ACTION IS REQUIRED. IN EFFECT, YOU'VE ALREADY DONE THAT. YOU'VE PREVENTED THE INCREASE IN THE MILLAGE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN AUTOMATIC BY PROVIDING THE NECESSARY FUNDING. >>PAT BEAN: SO WE DON'T NEED ANY ACTION THERE. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. >>PAT BEAN: F-6, REDUCE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMISSION'S GENERAL FUND BUDGETS BY 870,000 -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: THERE'S A -- >>PAT BEAN: I'M SORRY. MY READING GLASSES NEED TO BE ADJUSTED OBVIOUSLY. IT LOOKS LIKE AN 8 TO ME. >>KEVIN WHITE: GOT TO GO TO THAT NEXT LEVEL? >>PAT BEAN: YEAH, I THINK SO. [LAUGHTER] >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONERS, THERE'S A CORRECTION HERE. THE WORDS SHOULD HAVE BEEN "RESTORE THE EPC GENERAL FUND BUDGET." >>MARK SHARPE: I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. >> [INAUDIBLE] >>ROSE FERLITA: AND I'LL SECOND THAT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SHARPE TO RESTORE THE EPC'S GENERAL FUND BUDGET BY 670,000. THE SECOND COMMISSIONER FERLITA. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? PLEASE -- >>JIM NORMAN: DO WE KNOW WHERE IT'S GOING, WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE RESTORED TO? >>PAT BEAN: DO WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION? >>KEVIN WHITE: DR. GARRITY'S HERE. >>PAT BEAN: DR. GARRITY'S HERE. >>JIM NORMAN: WE'RE JUST PUTTING 670 IN THERE. WHAT'S IT GOING TO? ALL THE MAKERS OF THE MOTION, I GUESS. >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD AFTERNOON, DR. GARRITY. >>RICK GARRITY: GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. RICK GARRITY WITH EPC. WHAT THAT DOES, COMMISSIONERS, IS RESTORE FUNDING FROM THE 20% RECOMMENDED CUT TO 14%. >>JIM NORMAN: WHAT -- WHAT LINE ITEM -- IN OTHER WORDS, WE TALKED ABOUT LINE ITEMS AND WHAT EACH ONE WAS GOING TO DO, AND WHERE'S THE MONEY GOING TO GO TO EACH, AND THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. >>RICK GARRITY: IT WOULD PREVENT US FROM ELIMINATING BETWEEN SIX AND EIGHT ADDITIONAL POSITIONS BEYOND THE 14%. THESE WOULD BE POSITIONS THAT WOULD REDUCE OUR ENGINEERING SUPPORT FOR INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER PROGRAMS BY 40%. IT WOULD BE A POSITION THAT WOULD HAVE A LOSS OF ABILITY TO RESPOND TO 100 WASTEWATER COMPLAINTS, OVERFLOWS, AND SPILLS. IF WE WENT WITH A 20%, WOULD DOUBLE THE WASTEWATER PERMIT REVIEW TIME AND DECREASED FIELD INSPECTIONS. IT WOULD END THE COUNTY'S HISTORIC LANDFILL PROGRAM CONSISTING OF MAPPING AND ENABLING REDEVELOPMENT OF 173 OLD LANDFILLS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY. IT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE OUR POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM AND GREEN PROGRAMS. IT WOULD COMPLETELY ELIMINATE OVERSIGHT OF ALL OF THE WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS. IT WOULD RESULT IN THE LOSS OF AN ENGINEERING REVIEW AND GROUNDWATER PROTECTION AND WETLANDS AND FURTHER REDUCE COMPLIANCE AND CONSTRUCTION PLAN REVIEW IN THE WETLANDS PROGRAM. AND IF I CAN READ TO YOU AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT GOING TO 20% WOULD DO, THIS IS AN E-MAIL I GOT THIS MORNING OFF OF OUR WEB SITE FOR OUR SURVEY. THIS PERSON SAYS, HE E-MAILED THE EPC FOR THE -- FOR THE STATE WITH GREAT CONCERNS WITHIN MY COMMUNITY. WHEN CONTACTED BY THE STATE, THEY INFORMED ME THAT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY HAS JURISDICTION AND WILL BE CONTACTING ME SHORTLY. WITHIN ONE HOUR OF THAT CALL MR. JEFFREY SKLUT PHONED ME AND TOOK ALL OF MY INFORMATION. HE MADE THE APPOINTMENT AROUND MY BUSY SCHEDULE THE FOLLOWING DAY AND CAME OUT TO MY COMMUNITY, LISTENED, INSPECTED, AND OBSERVED, AND ALSO HAD TO PUT UP WITH A LOT OF GRIEF FROM RESIDENTS. AT ALL TIMES MR. SKLUT REMAINED PROFESSIONAL, COURTEOUS, ANSWERED ALL QUESTIONS, AND REGARDLESS OF THE TONE OR ATTITUDE OF THE RESIDENTS, HE INTRODUCED HIMSELF WITH A HANDSHAKE AND HIS BUSINESS CARD AND EXPLAINED EVERYTHING MULTIPLE TIMES. YOU HAVE A FINE EMPLOYEE WITH MR. SKLUT AND ASSET WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT. THIS IS ONE OF THE POSITIONS THAT WOULD BE RIF'D. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU, DR. GARRITY, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY WITH YOUR STAFF IN LOOKING TO FIND MORE EFFICIENCIES, AND IT'S PRETTY EVIDENT YOU'VE BEEN BEATEN UP PRETTY BAD BY THIS BUDGET PROCESS. [LAUGHTER] >>RICK GARRITY: YES, COMMISSIONER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU -- >>KEN HAGAN: THAT'S PRETTY FUNNY. >>KEVIN BECKNER: -- AND ALL YOUR STAFF DO TRYING TO AGAIN FIND EFFICIENCIES, AND I WOULD GLADLY SUPPORT MY COLLEAGUES IN HAVING THIS FUNDING RESTORED. >>KEN HAGAN: DID YOU MAKE THE MOTION? >>MARK SHARPE: I MADE THE MOTION. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SHARPE AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER FERLITA TO RESTORE THE 670,000 TO THE EPC BUDGET. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>ROSE FERLITA: DR. GARRITY, PLEASE DON'T TAKE THAT BANDAGE OFF BEFORE YOU LEAVE THIS BUILDING, PLEASE. [LAUGHTER] >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM F-7. THIS WAS FLAGGING FOR FURTHER EFFICIENCIES THE LAW LIBRARY. AND -- >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS WAS ANOTHER ONE THAT I HAVE -- HAVE FLAGGED FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. AND I'VE GOT SOME -- I'LL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, BUT I THINK YOU'VE GOT SOMEONE HERE WHO WANTED TO MAKE A PRESENTATION, SO I'LL YIELD TO THAT, BUT I STILL WOULD -- I DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP MY SPOT IN THE LINE. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT YOU HAD SOMEONE HERE. >>KEN HAGAN: GOOD AFTERNOON. DID YOU WANT TO MAKE ANY -- >> I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT. >>KEN HAGAN: SURE. >> I'M HERE NOT ONLY REPRESENTING THE LIBRARY BOARD BUT ALL OF THE CITIZENS WHO HAVE BEEN CONTACTING YOU ABOUT NOT CUTTING FUNDS FOR THE LAW LIBRARY. THE LAW LIBRARY PROVIDES NOT ONLY PUBLIC LEGAL RESOURCES IN THE COUNTY FOR ANYONE TO USE FOR WHATEVER THEIR LEGAL NEED, THE SAME HARD TIMES THAT HAVE BROUGHT YOU -- EXCUSE ME. I'M A LITTLE EMOTIONAL. THE SAME HARD TIMES THAT HAVE BROUGHT YOU TO THESE TOUGH DECISIONS IS THE PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHY WE NEED A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN REPRESENT THEMSELVES OR FOR ATTORNEYS HAVING TO CUT BACK THEMSELVES BEING PROPERLY PREPARED TO REPRESENT THEIR CLIENTS. IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT NOT ONLY IS IT A VALUABLE SERVICE BUT A VERY NEEDED ONE. >> CAN I HAVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. >> I BEG YOUR PARDON. NORMA WISE, DIRECTOR OF THE LAW LIBRARY. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. WISE. COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. AND I DIDN'T INTEND TO GO BEFORE THE PRESENTER, SO THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK HERE. THIS IS ANOTHER ONE THAT I HAVE MARKED FOR -- FOR RECONSIDERATION. IT MAY BE ONE WE WANT TO -- TO FLAG TO BRING BACK FOR MORE DISCUSSION, BUT I -- I UNDERSTAND AND I -- THE -- THE ISSUE WITH THE STATUTE AND HOW IT DESIGNATES THE USE OF THESE FUNDS. I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT WE DO HAVE SOME DISCRETION IF THERE ARE UNUSED FUNDS THAT THEY CAN BE REALLOCATED AND IN PARTICULAR BACK IN COURT INNOVATION OR THAT CAN AT SOME -- AND I DON'T FOLLOW THAT PROCESS, SO IF I COULD JUST HAVE A DISCUSSION A BIT HERE WITH ERIC AS TO HOW THAT WILL TAKE PLACE, AND AS I LOOK THROUGH THE -- THIS BUDGET REQUEST, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT -- I KNOW IT'S ASKING FOR MINIMAL SERVICE, BUT MINIMAL SERVICE INCREASES GIVES A PAY RAISE OF 10% AND I THOUGHT WE WERE IN A PAY FREEZE, A PAY RAISE FREEZE, SO I THINK WE NEED TO DISCUSS THIS AS WELL, BUT IF YOU COULD KIND OF WALK ME THROUGH THIS BECAUSE I'VE GOT SOME THOUGHTS ON HOW TO ADDRESS THIS SO IT'S FAIR TO THOSE, BUT IN PARTICULAR THIS MINIMAL SERVICE LEVEL AND PAY RAISES. >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONER, I'M NOT UP ON THE -- THE SPECIFICS ABOUT PAY RAISES, BUT THE -- THE MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL THAT WAS DELIVERED BY THE LAW LIBRARY WAS TWO POSITIONS WITH FUNDING OF $300,000, WHICH INCLUDES THEIR BOOK BUDGET AS WELL AS SOME OPERATING DOLLARS, THE DIRECTOR'S POSITION, AND THE PARALEGAL. AND THEN THEY BUILD FROM THERE WITH TWO ADDITIONAL POSITIONS, A SENIOR LIBRARIAN, AND A SENIOR LIBRARIAN ASSISTANT, AND THEN ULTIMATELY SOME ADDITIONAL OPERATING DOLLARS. AS WE CURRENTLY HANDLE IT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, COMMISSIONER, IS OUT OF THE $65 FEE THAT IS SPLIT 25% FOR USE FOR LAW LIBRARY SERVICES, WE SET THAT ASIDE ALONG WITH ANY REVENUES THAT ARE GENERATED BY THE LAW LIBRARY, WE FUND OPERATIONS, AND SUBSEQUENTLY, IF THERE ARE DOLLARS THAT WERE NOT USED THAT WERE ALLOCATED FOR THIS PURPOSE IN THE SUBSEQUENT FISCAL YEAR, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO USE THOSE FOR OTHER ELIGIBLE PURPOSES, AND AS THE BOARD IS AWARE FROM MIKE BRIDENBACK'S PRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATION, ONE OF THE PROGRAMS THAT WE HAD CUT IN FISCAL '11 WAS THE COURT INNOVATION FUND, AND SO I THINK THE BOARD HAS SOME DISCRETION IN TERMS OF THE LEVEL OF FUNDING, AND YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN OPTIONS IN THE SUBMISSION THAT WAS PRESENTED BY THE LAW LIBRARY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SO IF WE WERE TO -- TO APPROVE THIS AT THE MINIMAL SERVICE LEVEL -- BUT THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH PAY RAISES -- AND THIS IS ON PAGE 2 OF THEIR SUBMISSION, AND I KNOW YOU'VE HAD TONS OF THEM, BUT IT SAYS THIS ALSO INCLUDES BOARD -- THE LIBRARY BOARD RECOMMENDED 10% INCREASE IN THE LAW DIRECTOR'S PAY SINCE FY 05 AND BETTER ALIGN ITSELF WITH STAFF, BUT I THOUGHT WE WERE IN A FREEZE WHERE THAT'S CONCERNED, SO I THINK WE'VE GOT AN INCONSISTENCY HERE, BUT IF WE WERE TO FUND AT THE MINIMAL SERVICE LEVEL OF TWO STAFF PEOPLE AND WE HAVE ADDITIONAL FUNDS THAT COME IN, THEN THAT -- THOSE ADDITIONAL FUNDS -- IF WE WERE TO AUTHORIZE IT AT THAT LEVEL, THOSE ADDITIONAL FUNDS COULD THEN BE USED IN ONE OF THOSE OTHER AREAS THAT'S DESIGNATED BY STATUTE? >>ERIC JOHNSON: AND I BELIEVE THE WAY THAT WE WOULD SUGGEST YOU MIGHT HANDLE THAT IS WE'LL SET ASIDE THE MONEY IN FISCAL '10. YOU'LL APPROVE A BUDGET AT THE LEVEL THAT YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE, AND AT THE END OF FISCAL '10, ANY DOLLARS NOT EXPENDED FOR THE LAW LIBRARY WILL BE THEN AVAILABLE FOR OTHER ELIGIBLE USES. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SUCH AS? >>ERIC JOHNSON: AND SO IN FISCAL '11, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THE COURT INNOVATION FUND HAS BEEN SHORTCHANGED FROM WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING PROVIDED, ALTHOUGH THAT FUND HAS ADEQUATE FUNDING IN FISCAL '10, YOU WOULD IN EACH SUBSEQUENT YEAR TAKE ANY MONEY ORIGINALLY SET ASIDE ACCORDING TO THE STATUTE FOR LAW LIBRARY, AND ANY REMAINING DOLLARS AT YEAR END WOULD BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR ANY OTHER LEGAL PURPOSE FROM THAT -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: SO THAT WOULD HELP IN OTHER COURT SYSTEMS? AND I KNOW I'VE READ THROUGH THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, AND THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT ARE RAISED, BUT I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT -- AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CORRECT HERE, ERIC. IF WE MAKE A MOTION THAT THIS IS FUNDED AT MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL WITHOUT THIS PAY INCREASE THAT THOSE FUNDS WOULD BE ABOVE AND BEYOND -- I'M TRYING TO READ THIS. IT'S 300,000. >>ERIC JOHNSON: WOULD BE MADE AVAILABLE IN FISCAL '11 FOR OTHER ELIGIBLE PURPOSES, AND SO WE WOULD THEREFORE -- SINCE WE'RE LOOKING AT A FISCAL '11 BUDGET, WE'LL MAKE AN ESTIMATE OF HOW MUCH WOULD BE UNEXPENDED IN FISCAL '10 FROM THAT SOURCE, AND WE WOULD ADDRESS WHAT I BELIEVE IS ANOTHER FLAGGED ITEM BY THE BOARD, WHICH IS TO START TO RESTORE FUNDING FOR THE COURT INNOVATION FUND IF -- IF -- IF THIS - - >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: OKAY. >>ERIC JOHNSON: -- SUGGESTION IS APPROVED. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND BOARD MEMBERS -- >>MARK SHARPE: WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: OKAY. IN THEIR DECISION UNITS, THEY HAVE -- PART OF THEIR RECOMMENDATION WAS MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL OF $300,000. THAT'S TWO EMPLOYEES. BUT IN THIS MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL IT DOES ASK FOR THE DIRECTOR TO RECEIVE A 10% PAY INCREASE. AND SINCE WE'RE BEING CONSISTENT WITH EVERYBODY ELSE ACROSS THE BOARD, THAT THE PAY INCREASE NOT BE GIVEN, THAT WE GO WITH THIS MINIMAL SERVICE LEVEL, THAT THEN YOUR AUTHORIZED FUND EXPENDITURE WOULD BE 300,000. ANY FINES THAT ARE GENERATED WITH A COURT FEE THAT WOULD GO IN THIS DIRECTION COULD BE USED FOR VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE OR -- BUT IN PARTICULAR THE COURT INNOVATION FUND. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THERE'S A SECOND. >>ROSE FERLITA: WELL, IN TERMS OF -- LET'S START BACKWARDS HERE IN TERMS OF THE VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE FUND. THAT'S FINE, THE 25% TO FUND INNOVATIONS TO SUPPLEMENT STATE FUNDING, BUT IF YOU'RE TAKING THAT AWAY FOR VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE INSTEAD OF FINDING SOME OTHER FUND FOR VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE, OTHER FUND INNOVATIONS ARE GOING TO GO AWAY, SO IT'S JUST SWITCHING WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ALLOCATE THAT 25% TO. IN TERMS OF THE 25% BASED ON STATUTE THAT HAS TO GO TO FUND PERSONNEL AND LEGAL MATERIALS FOR THE PUBLIC AS PART OF THE LAW LIBRARY, THAT'S BY STATUTE, AND I KNOW THAT WE CAN REDIRECT IT IF AT THE END THERE ARE SOME DOLLARS THAT THE LAW LIBRARY DOESN'T USE OR DOESN'T NEED AND WE INCORPORATE THAT STATUTORY ALLOWANCE AND REDIRECT THOSE DOLLARS, BUT I THINK RIGHT NOW WE NEED TO MAINTAIN WHAT IS RECOMMENDED ON PAGE 323. I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT A FURTHER REDUCTION IN TERMS OF THE LAW LIBRARY. I WENT THROUGH THIS EXERCISE MYSELF, AND IF YOU REMEMBER, I WENT AND TOOK A TOUR, AND WE DON'T LIKE TO SAY THAT WE'RE WRONG, BUT I WAS ABSOLUTELY WRONG, AND I LOOKED AT IT AGAIN WITH DIFFERENT CONSIDERATIONS, AND I THINK, MS. WISE, YOU WERE THERE. >> YES, MA'AM, THANK YOU. >>ROSE FERLITA: AND I THINK IRONICALLY ENOUGH -- I APPRECIATE THIS REPORT FROM RENEE LEE THROUGH SAM HAMILTON, AND UNLESS SAM HAMILTON DISAGREES, HE PROBABLY WENT TO THE LAW LIBRARY TO GET THIS INFORMATION, SO I WON'T SUPPORT MR. HIGGINBOTHAM'S REQUEST. I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT. I THINK THE STATUTE TELLS US WHAT WE NEED TO DO. ANYTHING LEFT OVER WE CAN REDIRECT, BUT IT'S -- IT SHOULD BE MAINTAINED AS IS. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING FUNDING FOR THE LAW LIBRARY BECAUSE THERE HAD BEEN A LOT OF THINGS CIRCULATING THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO AWAY WITH THE LAW LIBRARY, AND I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THAT I WAS VERY MUCH POISED TO TAKE A VERY STRONG STANCE IN MAINTAINING THIS FACILITY. THE LAW LIBRARY'S EXTRAORDINARILY IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY TO OUR -- TO INDIGENT PEOPLE WHO CAN'T NECESSARILY AFFORD TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE LEGAL SERVICE -- LEGAL SERVICES. AND OF COURSE, A LOT OF ATTORNEYS DO ALSO USE THIS LIBRARY. I THINK IT'S A NECESSITY ABSOLUTELY -- AN ABSOLUTE NECESSITY IN OUR COMMUNITY, AND -- AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FREE UP SOME FUNDING FOR THE VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS AND OTHER THINGS, AND I THINK YOU'LL -- WHEN YOU HEAR MY PRESENTATION, YOU'LL -- YOU'LL SEE WHERE WE'LL FIND SOME ADDITIONAL DOLLARS TO FIND -- TO FUND THOSE PROGRAMS, BUT I WOULD ALSO TEND TO TAKE A STANCE THAT -- TO KEEP THE FUNDING AS HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED WITHINSIDE OF OUR BUDGET, SO AGAIN, COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD, I WANT TO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR DILIGENCE IN CREATING EFFICIENT CIRCUMSTANCES BUT I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE ORIGINAL -- OR ACTUALLY, I WON'T BE SUPPORTING YOUR MOTION. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: WELL -- AND I TOO -- LET ME GET IN LINE BY TELLING YOU I GREATLY APPRECIATE THE SERVICE THAT YOU PROVIDE AND THAT THE LAW LIBRARY PROVIDES FOR EVERYONE, AND PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO OFTENTIMES CAN'T AFFORD TO HIRE COUNSEL. >> EXACTLY. >>MARK SHARPE: SO I GET THAT AND I RECOGNIZE IT, BUT I WOULD ONLY ASK OUR BOARD MEMBERS -- IN THERE IS AN ALSO PROVISION FOR A 10% PAY INCREASE, AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEY THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE DIRECTOR'S SALARY BE IN LINE -- HASN'T HAD AN INCREASE SINCE 2005. WELL, I THINK IN LIGHT OF THE DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, THAT WE WERE EVEN CONSIDERING -- I DON'T THINK WE WERE GOING TO CONSIDER ELIMINATING IT. WE'RE NOT GOING TO ELIMINATE IT, BUT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE GOING WITH 10% PAY INCREASES EITHER, SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. I DEEPLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE DOING, AND WE'RE COMMITTED TO KEEPING YOU -- >> I UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY. >>MARK SHARPE: -- BUT I THINK THE PAY INCREASE IS NOT WARRANTED. >> I UNDERSTAND. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MY INTENTION IS NEVER TO CLOSE THIS, MY INTENTION IS TO LOOK FOR MORE EFFICIENCIES, AND MY MOTION DOES NOT CLOSE THE LIBRARY. IT'S LOOKING FOR THE EFFICIENCIES. YOU KNOW, WHAT'S NOT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION HERE IS THE ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE AVAILABLE. WE HAVE SPACE IN THE PUBLIC LIBRARY. I'LL WAIT. >>ROSE FERLITA: I CAN HEAR YOU, MR. HIGGINBOTHAM. KEEP GOING. I'M LISTENING. DON'T WORRY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: WE HAVE -- WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND -- AND I LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT THERE, COMMISSIONER. >> THERE'S SPACE IN THE PUBLIC LIBRARY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THERE IS SPACE IN THE PUBLIC LIBRARY THAT IS AVAILABLE. THE PUBLIC LIBRARY HAS LIBRARIANS WHO ARE TRAINED IN THIS SPECIALTY OF LIBRARY LAW. YOU'VE GOT THAT THERE. YOU HAVE STETSON, WHICH IS AT THIS POINT NOT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC IS MY UNDERSTANDING. IT IS OPEN ACROSS THE BAY. I WAS -- I THINK THAT IT WAS THE DIRECTOR OR SOMEONE IN THEIR DEPARTMENT GAVE ME RIGHT AT 60 CASES, FEDERAL CASES OR STATE AND FEDERAL CASES, THAT EXPLAINED THEIR NECESSITY OF HAVING THE LAW LIBRARY, AND I STOPPED LOOKING AFTER 42 BECAUSE THEY WERE ALL RELATED TO PRISONS AND PROVIDING THOSE RIGHTS TO THE PRISONERS, AND THE -- IF I'M GOING TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF SOMEONE IN THIS BUDGET DECISION, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE WITH THE LAWYERS BECAUSE I GOT A LOT OF THESE E-MAILS FROM THESE ATTORNEYS, AND I SAW THE CIRCULAR THAT THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CIRCULATED AROUND TARGETING ME -- IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GOOD IF THEY WANTED TO SPEAK TO ME FIRST BEFORE THEY SENT THAT OUT. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE GOTTEN SOME FACTS STRAIGHT, BUT I'LL TELL YOU, THIS IS ABOUT WHAT'S -- DOING WHAT'S RIGHT, IT'S ABOUT MAYBE SOMEBODY OTHER THAN ME -- IF WE WANT TO LOOK AT ALL THE FACTS FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO TOURED, GO READ -- GO READ THESE MINUTES. YOU'LL FIND THAT THERE'S EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DIRECTOR THAT AREN'T MET. YOU'LL FIND THERE'S DIRECTION ON PRESENTING A BUDGET OF THIS LIBRARY BOARD TO THE LIBRARY BOARD BEFORE IT COMES OVER HERE, AND IT'S HARD -- IT WAS HARD TO FIND MINUTES, AND I'M STILL LOOKING FOR ONE YEAR OF MISSING MINUTES. YOU KNOW, I WAS MOVED BY SOME -- ONE LETTER I RECEIVED YESTERDAY THAT WAS HANDWRITTEN, BUT, YOU KNOW, FOR ATTORNEYS TO WRITE TO ME RIGHT NOW AND SAY, YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT TO HAVE IT TO CUT MY EXPENSES WHEN, AS I UNDERSTAND LEXISNEXIS IS $80 A MONTH, AND THROUGH THE BENEFITS OF THE BAR ASSOCIATION THEY HAVE ACCESS TO -- TO -- TO THE STATUTES AND THE CODES AS WELL, BUT AS WE MAKE THIS DECISION, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT'S REVEALED IN THESE MINUTES AND HOW THE BUDGET'S BEING HANDLED, AND THAT'S WHERE I STARTED LOOKING AT THIS HARDER WAS ONCE THERE WAS -- IT SEEMED LIKE WHERE THERE WAS SMOKE, THERE MUST BE FIRE. THAT'S WHY I DUG INTO THIS AFTER THE PUSHBACK I RECEIVED, BUT ALL I'M RECOMMENDING IS THAT WE GO WITH THEIR REQUEST OF MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL, WHICH WOULD BE TWO PEOPLE. ANY OF THOSE EXCESS FUNDS WOULD BE USED IN AREAS AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. THAT GIVES US THE NEXT BUDGET PERIOD RIGHT NOW TO EXPLORE THE LIBRARY. THERE ARE LIBRARIANS THERE WHO HAVE THAT -- THAT EDUCATION AND THAT TRAINING, AND I'M GOING TO STICK TO MY MOTION, BUT, YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT THIS, AND OTHER BOARD MEMBERS HERE ARE WELCOME TO LOOK AT IT. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: I'LL TRY A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE -- WE APPROVE THE RECOMMENDED BUDGET BUT ELIMINATE THE SALARY RAISES DOWN TO THE SAME THING THE OTHER COUNTY EMPLOYEES ARE RECEIVING. >> SECOND. >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. DID YOU SECOND IT? YEAH. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: AND I WAS JUST GOING TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION FROM YOU, COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, BECAUSE THE 10% SALARY INCREASE -- AND THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE ALSO ADDRESSING, AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT OUT BECAUSE I CERTAINLY WOULD NOT SUPPORT A SALARY INCREASE OF THAT MAGNITUDE IN THESE TRYING TIMES, ESPECIALLY AS WE'VE BEEN CUTTING JOBS AND CUTTING PAY ACROSS THE BOARD. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO GET CLARIFICATION. WITH THE -- SO THAT'S THE ONLY THING, THEN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THEN, TAKING OUT IS JUST THE 10%? >>ROSE FERLITA: HIS MOTION. >>KEVIN BECKNER: COMMISSIONER NORMAN'S MOTION. THAT'S -- I'LL SUPPORT -- I'LL SUPPORT THAT MOTION THEN. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU. I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE WITH THAT, AND COMMISSIONER SHARPE, THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT. IN FAIRNESS, 10% VERSUS 2.5% THAT EVERYBODY ELSE IS GETTING, THAT BRINGS IT BACK INTO THE REALM OF FAIRNESS, BUT IN TERMS OF ELIMINATING THE OTHER POSITION, NO, I WON'T SUPPORT IT, I'LL SUPPORT HIS, COMMISSIONER NORMAN'S THAT IS, AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ATTORNEYS USING IT AND THEY CERTAINLY DO, AND I APPRECIATE OUR LEGAL COMMUNITY DOING THAT, BUT JUST RIGHT NOW -- AND LIKE THIS, THERE WERE MANY. MY LEGISLATIVE AIDE, MS. CURY, JUST BROUGHT THIS, AND A LADY JUST CALLED, NICOLE RENNINGER, WHO'S A RESIDENT, PLAIN-OLD RESIDENT, NOT IN THE LEGAL COMMUNITY. SAID, I USE IT A LOT, YOU KNOW WHY, BECAUSE WE CAN'T USE SOMETHING ELSE. SHE'S GOT KIDS 15, 17, 19. ONE HAS ASPIRATIONS OF BEING A LAWYER, AND THOSE THREE KIDS USE IT A LOT. IT'S THERE FOR JUST OUR LEGAL COMMUNITY. I THINK YOUR COMPROMISE IS GOOD, COMMISSIONER NORMAN, AND I WILL CERTAINLY SUPPORT THAT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN TO -- TO KEEP THE LEVEL OF FUNDING MINUS THE 10% PAY INCREASE. THERE WAS A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BECKNER. NO OTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 5-1. COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: THANK YOU, MS. WISE, FOR YOUR COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. >>PAT BEAN: WELL, BEFORE WE GO TO THE NEXT FLAGGED ITEM, I JUST WANT TO CORRECT THE RECORD THAT -- >>DAN KLEIN: EXCUSE ME. WE DIDN'T GET -- >>PAT BEAN: SORRY. >>KEVIN WHITE: YOU NEED US TO RE-RECORD OUR VOTES ON THAT OR WHAT? >>RECORDING SECRETARY: YES. JUST ONE MOMENT. THANK YOU. >>ROSE FERLITA: WELL, WHILE WE'RE BRINGING THAT UP, MAY I ASK YOU A QUESTION? >>RECORDING SECRETARY: YES. >>ROSE FERLITA: DID WE HAVE A SUBSTITUTE THAT WE DIDN'T VOTE ON? >>KEVIN WHITE: THERE WAS A SUBSTITUTE, AND THEN HE MADE ANOTHER SUBSTITUTE. >>ROSE FERLITA: THEN WE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING WITH HIS BECAUSE IT WAS THE FIRST VOTE? >> RIGHT. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. FINE. THANKS. >>KEN HAGAN: PLEASE RE-RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-1. COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM VOTED NO. >>PAT BEAN: BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER, THOUGH, I WANT TO BE ABSOLUTELY SURE THAT THE BOARD UNDERSTANDS THAT THERE ARE NO SALARY INCREASES PLUGGED IN TO THE 2010 OR 2011 BUDGET FOR ANY EMPLOYEES. IT'S ZERO FOR ALL EMPLOYEES FOR -- >>JIM NORMAN: THAT'S WHAT I SAID. >>PAT BEAN: I KNOW, BUT -- >>JIM NORMAN: ONLY WHAT THE -- >>ROSE FERLITA: [INAUDIBLE] >>PAT BEAN: THERE WERE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS MADE THAT I WASN'T SURE IT WAS CLEAR, AND I WANTED IT TO BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR. OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM F-8. THIS IS HUMAN RESOURCES. ERIC IS GOING TO HANDLE THIS PRESENTATION. >>ERIC JOHNSON: YES, COMMISSIONERS. IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM'S CONCERN, WE HAVE -- THIS IS ONE OF THE ORGANIZATIONS WHERE WE HAVE GONE BACK, IDENTIFIED AN ADDITIONAL SAVINGS OF $113,000, AND WHAT I WANTED TO SAY IS THAT THIS IS AN AREA WHERE I MADE A COMMITMENT TO COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM EARLIER TODAY, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT OPPORTUNITIES ORGANIZATIONWIDE TO DRIVE DOWN OUR COST FOR HR ACTIVITIES THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY ORGANIZATION, SO WE'VE PUT A DOWN PAYMENT HERE. WE'VE ALSO FOUND ADDITIONAL SAVINGS IN THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND THAT IS MANAGED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT -- THAT WHILE WE'VE PUT SOME MONEY ON THE TABLE, IT'S OUR EXPECTATION THAT WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK ON THAT OVER THE NEXT YEAR. >>KEN HAGAN: ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: [INAUDIBLE] AND I NEED TO -- SINCE IT WAS MY FLAG, I NEED TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT WITH THANKS THE HUMAN RESOURCES -- >> SECOND. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: -- FOR COMING UP WITH ADDITIONAL SAVINGS. >> SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN WHITE: YOU DON'T HEAR MY SECONDS DOWN HERE, DO YOU? >>PAT BEAN: HE NEEDS HIS HEARING FIXED. [INAUDIBLE] >>KEVIN WHITE: THANK YOU. HE MISSED FOUR ON ME YESTERDAY. >>KEN HAGAN: I MEANT TO SAY KEVIN WHITE, NOT KEVIN BECKNER. OKAY. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>JIM NORMAN: IT'S HARD TO TELL THEM APART. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM F-9. THIS IS FLAGGED FOR FURTHER EFFICIENCIES REGARDING HIPAA COMPLIANCE. MANUS O'DONNELL IS HERE. I CAN TELL YOU I BELIEVE THAT THE THING THAT WAS IN QUESTION WAS SOME COSTS FOR CONSULTING SERVICES -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THAT'S RIGHT. >>PAT BEAN: -- AND IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THAT AND TREAT THAT THE WAY YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT SOME OTHER THINGS TODAY THAT IF WE NEED THOSE CONSULTING SERVICES, WE COME BACK TO THE BOARD AND ASK FOR THE MONEY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: YEAH, THAT WAS MY SUGGESTION AS FAR AS FUNDING FOR THE SAVINGS THAT WE PULL THAT, AND IF IT'S NEEDED IN THE FUTURE, THEN THEY COME BACK. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: MANUS O'DONNELL. I'M ALSO THE HIPAA COMPLIANCE AND SAFETY OFFICER -- PRIVACY OFFICER. THE -- WE HAVE A CONTRACT WITH CONSULTANTS, AND THEY COME HERE EVERY MONTH AND PROVIDE US NOT ONLY CONSULTING SERVICES, BUT THEY ACTUALLY WORK DIRECTLY WITH THE DEPARTMENTS IN THEIR OFFICES. JUST SO THAT YOU KNOW WHAT THE -- THE -- THE SERVICES THAT THEY PROVIDE TO US. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU. MANUS, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF APPROXIMATE AVERAGE CONSULTING FEES FOR THIS? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: THE TOTAL AMOUNT IS ABOUT $200,000. WE'VE BEEN REDUCING THAT -- NO, IT'S ABOUT $170,000, I THINK. THE OTHER -- >>ROSE FERLITA: IS THAT WHAT YOU'VE BEEN SPENDING OR IS THAT WHAT YOU'VE HAD IN RESERVE FOR THE SPENDING? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: NO, THAT'S -- I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T BRING WITH ME HOW MUCH WE'VE ACTUALLY SPENT. >>ROSE FERLITA: ERIC, DO YOU KNOW THAT? DID YOU HEAR WHAT I SAID? YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE. >>ERIC JOHNSON: I'M SORRY. >>ROSE FERLITA: I'M WONDERING WHAT THE ACTUAL AMOUNT IS THAT THEY HAVE SPENT ON AN AVERAGE FROM WHAT WE CAN TELL HISTORICALLY -- >>PAT BEAN: DO YOU KNOW? >>ROSE FERLITA: -- AS OPPOSED TO WHAT WE HAVE IN RESERVE. DO YOU KNOW THAT? >>ERIC JOHNSON: I DON'T KNOW THAT AT THE MOMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, BUT WE COULD FOLLOW UP FOR YOU NEXT MEETING. >>ROSE FERLITA: AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO, WHETHER WE CAN HOLD THAT TILL THE NEXT TIME OR NOT, BUT I'M GOING TO TELL YOU WHY. I'M THE ONE THAT TALKED ABOUT MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS A WHILE AGO. IN '08 WE SPENT 6100 I THINK IT WAS, BUT WE'VE BEEN SAVING 150,000. OVERALL, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT APPLIED TO YOU. JUST THAT WAS IN NONDEPARTMENTAL ALLOTMENTS, RIGHT, MR. JOHNSON? BUT IN THIS CASE -- BUT IN THIS CASE, GIVEN MY PHARMACEUTICAL EXPERIENCE FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS, I DON'T WANT ANY DELAYS WHEN YOU NEED A CONSULTANT ABOUT HIPAA. IT'S VERY SENSITIVE, IT'S VERY -- IT'S -- IT'S -- IT REEKS OF LIABILITY ISSUES. I DON'T WANT YOU TO HAVE TO STOP TO GET THAT -- THAT ADVICE FROM THE CONSULTANTS, NOT EVEN TILL THE TIME WE COME BACK TO THE NEXT BOCC MEETING. IT'S A VERY CONTENTIOUS ISSUE AND IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE IN TERMS OF PATIENT PRIVACY. I KIND OF TEND TO THINK WE BETTER BE VERY, VERY CAREFUL. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: YEAH. WE ARE CONSTANTLY SENDING UP INFORMATION TO THE CONSULTANTS TO GET THEIR OPINIONS, TO GET THEM TO REWRITE SOME OF OUR POLICIES. >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. I'M NOT TRYING TO INTERRUPT YOUR -- I'M SUPPORTING YOU, AND I THINK THERE'S TOO MUCH TO AND FROM TYPE COMMUNICATION WITH THEM FOR YOU TO WAIT FOR US. I MEAN, GENTLEMEN, HIPAA IS HIPAA IS HIPAA, AND WE ARE IN A LOT OF TROUBLE IF WE DON'T COMPLY WITH THAT EVERY STEP OF THE WAY OR IF THERE ARE ANY DELAYS. IT COULD CAUSE SOME PROBLEMS, AND MS. LEE, I DON'T HOE IF YOU WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THAT, BUT I THINK THIS IS A CATEGORY IN AND OF ITSELF. >>RENEE LEE: AND COMMISSIONER, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DOES SUPPORT THE HIPAA OFFICE'S OFFICER WHEN WE CAN, BUT I DO AGREE WITH YOU THAT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO HAVE RESOURCES WHEN WE'VE GOT A -- A CONTENTIOUS OR CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE GOING ON. I THINK THERE ARE WAYS TO ENGAGE A HIPAA OFFICER OR CONSULTANT IF WE NEED TO, AND I THINK THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR HAS AUTHORITY UP TO $50,000 TO DO SOMETHING WITH THE PURCHASE ORDER IF NECESSARY. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: YEAH. AND THAT -- FROM OUR DISCUSSIONS -- AND THAT PURCHASING ABILITY RIGHT THERE GETS THAT MOVING AND FREES THESE FUNDS IN OTHER AREAS IF, IN FACT, THEY'RE NEEDED, BECAUSE I'M SENSITIVE TO THAT AND UNDERSTAND AS WELL THE SENSITIVITY WITH YOUR HIPAA REGULATIONS, BUT I KNOW THAT -- I THINK -- ERIC, IF YOU WERE -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONER, WE JUST WENT ON-LINE AND LOOKED. THIS YEAR BETWEEN WHAT WE HAVE -- LOOKING AT WHAT WE'VE BUDGETED, HOW MUCH WE'VE SPENT YEAR-TO-DATE, AND HOW MUCH WE HAVE ENCUMBERED, MEANS OUTSTANDING IDENTIFIED OBLIGATIONS, THERE'S $60,000 THAT WAS BUDGETED THIS YEAR THAT IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT WE'LL USE, SO WHAT I WOULD OFFER UP AS MAYBE A COMPROMISE TO MOVE IN THE DIRECTION THE BOARD'S TRYING TO GO IS TO OFFER UP $60,000 BE CUT FROM EACH OF THE NEXT TWO YEARS. WE'LL MONITOR IT. WE'RE NOT GOING TO NOT USE SERVICES IF WE NEED THEM, AND IF WE FIND THAT WE NEED A FEW MORE DOLLARS, WE'LL EITHER IDENTIFY THEM INTERNALLY SOMEPLACE ELSE OR WE'LL COME BACK TO THE BOARD, BUT -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND I'M CERTAINLY FINE WITH THAT. >>ERIC JOHNSON: IN THE SPIRIT OF WORKING WITH YOU, I THINK THAT WE'D OFFER THE $60,000 UP. >>ROSE FERLITA: CAN YOU PLEASE TELL ME WHAT WE'RE LEAVING AS OPPOSED TO WHAT WE'RE REMOVING? I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF MY CONCERNS THAT I BELIEVE I WAS ASKING THE QUESTIONS AT THE TIME. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: I THINK THE TOTAL BUDGET RIGHT NOW IS 223 MILLION, SO THEREFORE -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: THOUSAND. >>ROSE FERLITA: WATCH IT. OH, BOY. [LAUGHTER] >>ERIC JOHNSON: MANUS HAS BEEN AROUND ME TOO LONG. HE'S THINKING BIG NUMBERS. >>ROSE FERLITA: I THINK HE'S USING THE SAME GLASSES PAT BEAN IS USING OR NOT. OKAY. SO WITH THAT AMOUNT OF BUDGETARY ALLOWANCE, YOU THINK 60% - - 60,000 IS PROBABLY OKAY? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: I THINK WE COULD WORK WITH IT. WE WOULD HAVE TO CUT BACK WHAT THE CONSULTANT'S DOING WITH US RIGHT NOW, BUT WE COULD WORK WITH THAT. >>ROSE FERLITA: AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A LUXURY ITEM, OKAY. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: YES, MA'AM. >>ROSE FERLITA: IF YOU THINK YOU CAN CUT BACK AND DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO, THAT'S FINE, BUT THIS LINE ITEM IS VERY, VERY, VERY IMPORTANT, SO DON'T BE CUTTING BACK ON CONSULTING FEES THAT YOU NEED, MANUS. I JUST -- THAT'S NOT GOOD BUSINESS. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: I THINK THE OFFER THAT ERIC MADE IS A SOUND OFFER. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. >>KEN HAGAN: CAN WE HAVE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT? >>ROSE FERLITA: SO MOVED. >>KEN HAGAN: WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FERLITA. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >>KEVIN BECKNER: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER BECKNER. NO FURTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTES. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>PAT BEAN: COMMISSIONERS, THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM F-10, WHICH IS THE 911 EMERGENCY TELEPHONE. WE HAVE NOT FINISHED OUR COLLECTION OF INFORMATION FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE ON ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE ORIGINAL REQUEST. YOU SEE SEVERAL OF THEM HERE TOGETHER. THAT ONE I THINK, THOUGH, WE HAVE IDENTIFIED AS NOT ONE THAT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE HAS ANY INTEREST IN WHATSOEVER, THE 911. THIS IS THE ADDRESSING PORTION OF 911, AND SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT IF COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, WHO MADE THE FLAG -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'LL GLADLY WITHDRAW IT. DO YOU NEED -- I MAKE A MOTION TO WITHDRAW. >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT TWO WE HAVE JUST RECEIVED FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE INFORMATION IN THE LAST THREE OR FOUR DAYS. I'M TRYING TO GET A MEETING SET NOW SO THAT THE -- THERE WERE FIVE OF YOU WHO WANTED TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THAT, AND I WANT TO GET THAT MEETING SET NOW THAT WE HAVE THE INFORMATION, SO I WOULD ASK THAT YOU DEFER THOSE TWO ITEMS AND -- >>ROSE FERLITA: SO MOVED, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>PAT BEAN: -- AND GIVE US A CHANCE TO HAVE THAT MEETING. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION COMMISSIONER FERLITA, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM WOULD BE F-13, WHICH IS FLAGGED ALSO, FLEET MANAGEMENT. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: ME AGAIN. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: YEAH. I JUST EARLY ON RECOGNIZED THE DIRECTOR FOR HER HELP, AND IN ADDITION TO THE EIGHT MILLION THAT THEY HAD IDENTIFIED THAT WOULD BE UTILIZED, SO THANK YOU, AND I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THIS AS PRESENTED. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. NO FURTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM IS F-14. >>ROSE FERLITA: MS. BEAN, BEFORE WE GO TO THAT, MR. HAGAN, MAY I ASK HIM A QUESTION -- >>KEN HAGAN: SURE. >>ROSE FERLITA: -- RELATED TO THIS? MR. JOHNSON, F-14, WE LOOK AT IT ON THE FIRST PAGE AND WE LOOK AT IT ON THE THIRD PAGE -- JUST A QUESTION, JUST FOR CLARITY FOR ME. PAGE ONE OF 10, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ADJUSTMENTS TO RECOMMENDED BUDGET, UNDER PROCUREMENT SERVICES IT ALSO LISTS THE SAME THING. I'M JUST WONDERING OR MAYBE I'M MISREADING IT, ARE WE, IN FACT, ADJUSTING THIS -- THIS EFFICIENCY TWICE, AND BY THE WAY, THANKS, DR. BANKS. ARE WE ADJUSTING IT TWICE? IT LOOKS LIKE IT -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: NO, COMMISSIONERS. THAT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION. IN THE CASE OF ITEMS LIKE THIS WHERE THE DEPARTMENT HAS RESPONDED, IN EFFECT YOU'RE ACCEPTING THE CHANGE THAT WE FACTORED IN. WE KIND OF JUMPED THE GUN AND ASSUMED THAT IF WE COULD CUT THE BUDGET THAT YOU WOULD BE ACCEPTING OF THAT, SO, YES, WHERE WE'VE COME BACK WITH ADDITIONAL EFFICIENCIES, WE'VE ALREADY FACTORED THOSE IN, BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE SINCE THOSE WERE TRIGGERED BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM'S INQUIRY THAT WE DIDN'T GLOSS OVER THE FACT THAT THOSE WERE RESPONSES TO THE FLAGGING ITEM, SO WE WON'T DOUBLE COUNT THEM, BUT THAT'S AN EXCELLENT POINT. >>ROSE FERLITA: IN THAT CASE, IT'S FINE. I'D BE HAPPY TO MOVE THAT. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DID ON THIS ITEM THAT I REQUESTED, AND AS WE GET BEYOND THIS, IF WE COULD LOOK AT THAT RATING SYSTEM AND MAYBE COME UP WITH SOME FURTHER THOUGHTS AND ANALYSIS HOW TO MAYBE DERIVE SOME COST SAVINGS HERE, BUT UNRELATED TO THIS, I'LL MAKE -- UNLESS SOMEONE MADE THE MOTION ON IT. >>ROSE FERLITA: I DID, BUT YOU CERTAINLY CAN, MR. HIGGINBOTHAM. GO AHEAD, AND I'LL GIVE YOU THE SECOND, OKAY. >>KEN HAGAN: WE'VE GOT MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, SECOND COMMISSIONER FERLITA. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>PAT BEAN: AND THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM F-15, FLAGGED FOR FURTHER EFFICIENCIES RELATED TO SECURITY SERVICES. CARL HARNESS IS HERE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM. I CAN SUMMARIZE IT IF YOU'D LIKE. WE HAVE, IN FACT, HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. THERE ARE PROVISIONS ON THE TABLE THAT THEY HAVE RETURNED BACK TO US. WE ARE LOOKING AT SOME OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE CAN PUT ON THE TABLE. I'M NOT SURE THAT WE'RE REALLY READY THIS AFTERNOON FOR ANY FINAL ACTION, AND THAT IS ONE THAT I THINK THE COMMITTEE OF FIVE WANTED TO ALSO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON, SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE DEFER THIS ONE UNTIL WE GET THAT MEETING. >>ROSE FERLITA: SO MOVE. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: MAKE A MOTION TO DELAY. >>KEN HAGAN: MOTION COMMISSIONER FERLITA, SECOND COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>PAT BEAN: ITEM F-16 HAS TO DO WITH THE REGIONAL PARKS TO THE SEVEN-DAY SCHEDULE. MARK IS COMING TO THE MICROPHONE. >>MARK THORNTON: GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. MARK THORNTON. VERY BRIEFLY, THIS IS THE SECOND HALF OF THE MEMO ON THE COPY THAT YOU RECEIVED THIS MORNING. WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING HERE IS TO KEEP THE PARKS OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, AND BASICALLY WE'RE DOING THAT BY REDUCING OUR CURRENT VACANT POSITIONS, WHICH WE'VE HELD VACANT FOR OVER A YEAR AND WE'VE OPERATED WITHOUT THEM. THE POSITIONS I BELIEVE INITIALLY CUT WERE 54 POSITIONS, SO THE -- WE WOULD KEEP THE ONES THAT ARE CURRENTLY FILLED AND ONLY LOSE THE VACANT ONES. IN ORDER TO DO THIS, TO COME UP WITH THE NUMBERS THAT -- THAT WE NEED TO BALANCE, INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH -- AND MANY OF YOU HAVE PROBABLY HEARD THIS THROUGH EITHER LETTERS, CALLS, AND/OR THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, IS THAT WHEN THE -- THE BUDGET STARTED BEING REDUCED OR NEEDING TO BE REDUCED IN THIS AREA, WE HAD AN OUTPOUR OF FOLKS WANTING TO SAY, YOU KNOW, LET'S HAVE SOME FEES AND IMPLEMENT SOME FEES TO KEEP THESE PARKS OPEN. WE GAVE YOU KIND OF AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON AND HOPE TO -- WE NEED TO REALLY FINE-TUNE THAT SOME MORE, BUT IT GIVES YOU THE GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT WE HAVE, AND THERE ARE SOME -- THE PRIMARY -- THERE'S SOME NEW FEES THAT WILL BE -- THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING WE LOOK AT TO BALANCE THIS BUDGET AND KEEP THESE PARKS OPEN, AND THAT'S THE ENTRANCE FEE ARE WHERE WE'VE -- JUST A QUICK SAMPLE THERE OF $2 A VEHICLE, AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE KIND OF MIRRORING WHAT THE STATE PARKS WOULD DO ON THESE THINGS, ALTHOUGH THEY'RE MUCH HIGHER. INCREASING EXISTING FEES, AND THE NEW FEES WOULD BE THE ENTRANCE FEES AND BOAT LAUNCH FEES, OF WHICH THOSE FOLKS THAT REALLY WANTED TO HELP US OUT STRONGLY SUPPORTED LOOKING AT THESE AREAS. THE ONE ISSUE IS IS THAT WE DON'T HAVE A HISTORY AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT IN THAT, SO WE DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A SURPLUS IN THIS TO LOOK AT. WE CAN DO A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE RECOMMEND, THAT WE POSSIBLY ESTABLISH THESE FEES NOT EFFECTIVE UNTIL, SAY, JANUARY 1st, WHICH WOULD BE THREE-FOURTHS OF THE YEAR, TO GIVE US TIME TO -- TO SET UP TO COLLECT FEES BECAUSE IT DOES TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF AN EFFORT AS WE'VE FOUND IN OTHER AREAS WHERE WE'VE HAD NEW FEES. AND THEN THE -- THE SECOND ISSUE IS THAT WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'LL COLLECT. HOPEFULLY BY THIS TIME NEXT YEAR WE'LL COME BACK AND SAY THE ADDITIONAL 2.5 MILLION THAT WAS PROPOSED FOR FY 2011 WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT BECAUSE THE FEES THAT WE GENERATE TO MAINTAIN OUR REGIONAL PARKS ARE THERE AND SOLID AND PREVENT FURTHER REDUCTIONS IN OUT YEARS. SO I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: NO, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH THIS. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT MORE WORK TO DO. IT'S JUST I -- THIS IS ONE THAT I REALLY FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT, AND I'M SURE THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS FEEL THE SAME WAY, BUT WE ABSOLUTELY MUST KEEP OUR PARKS OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK AND DO OUR UTMOST TO KEEP THEM OPEN AS LONG AS POSSIBLE WITH AS LONG HOURS OF OPERATIONS AS POSSIBLE. IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO OUR CITIZENS, ESPECIALLY IN A DOWNED ECONOMIC TIME. IT WAS INTERESTING TO READ THAT DURING THIS TIME THERE'S BEEN A RECORD NUMBER OF PEOPLE COMING TO THOSE STATE AND LOCAL PARKS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO -- >>MARK THORNTON: ABSOLUTELY. >>MARK SHARPE: -- A WAY OF SOMETIMES LEAVING BEHIND THE STRESSES OF THE DAY. SO ANYWAY, I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'VE DONE, AND LET'S CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE CITIZENS AND SEE IF YOU CAN BRING THEM INTO THE PROCESS EVEN FURTHER TO DO -- TO BRING ABOUT GREATER IMPROVEMENTS. APPRECIATE IT. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND I APOLOGIZE, MARK, THAT I HADN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO READ THROUGH YOUR MEMO THAT YOU SENT HERE, BUT A QUESTION ON THE FEES. IS THERE A DIFFERENTIATION FOR THE FEE THAT YOU'RE CHARGING, THE $2 -- IS THAT FOR EVERYBODY THAT GOES IN TO USE THE PARK, OR ARE WE GIVING SOME TYPE OF BREAK TO PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, PAY TAXES HERE, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT FEE STRUCTURE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? >>MARK THORNTON: IT -- THAT'S A $2 PER CAR, SO I GUESS HOWEVER MANY PEOPLE YOU CAN STUFF IN A CAR, SO THAT WOULD LOWER THE COST. >>KEVIN BECKNER: KIND OF LIKE THE DRIVE-IN MOVIE THEN? >>MARK THORNTON: THAT'S RIGHT. WE'RE ALSO LOOKING -- >>KEN HAGAN: SNEAK INTO A TRUNK. >>MARK THORNTON: IF YOU CAN FIT INTO A TRUNK. WE'LL HAVE ANNUAL PASSES. WE MAY WANT TO, AND WE HADN'T CONSIDERED THAT BECAUSE AGAIN, SOME OF THE FUNDING THAT HAS BEEN ADDED TO THIS WAS TOURIST DEVELOPMENT, SO IF WE START CHARGING MORE FOR VISITORS, WHICH WE DO HAVE A LOT OF, WE MAY SHOOT OURSELF IN THE FOOT ON THAT, SO WE MAY WANT TO KEEP THAT ACROSS THE BOARD EQUAL FOR EVERYONE, AND WE CAN EVALUATE THAT OVER TIME BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE REALLY THE EXPERIENCE AND HISTORY OF WHAT WE WILL COLLECT AND HOW IT WILL AFFECT, SO I THINK WE'LL LOOK AT THAT BEFORE WE BRING THE FEES BACK IN SEPTEMBER FOR YOU TO APPROVE ULTIMATELY, BUT I THINK THAT THE LOW-COST OPTIONS WOULD BE AVAILABLE, AND PROBABLY YOU'RE GOING TO SELL A PASS, AN ANNUAL PASS TO THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY RESIDENTS, WHICH IS GOING TO REALLY FURTHER REDUCE THEIR COST. THE VISITORS ARE GOING TO PAY THAT $2 A CAR. >>KEVIN BECKNER: WELL, AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO BECAUSE WHEN I WAS GROWING UP IN OUR PARKS BACK UP IN INDIANA IS THAT TAXPAYERS WERE ALLOWED TO GO AHEAD AND PURCHASE AN ANNUAL PASS, AND VISITORS COULD ALSO PURCHASE ONE. IT WAS USUALLY A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT TAXPAYERS WERE GIVEN THAT BREAK, AND I WOULD CERTAINLY IMPLORE YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND TO COME BACK WITH SOMETHING BECAUSE I THINK HAVING AN ANNUAL PASS AND ENCOURAGING THAT ALSO ENCOURAGES USES BECAUSE IF YOU PAY FOR A PASS, YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO GO OUT AND ENJOY THE PARKS A LITTLE BIT MORE, AND IT'LL GIVE PEOPLE SOME MORE INCENTIVES. >>MARK THORNTON: THAT'S RIGHT. >>KEVIN BECKNER: AND IF YOU'RE A REGULAR USER TO THE PARK, YOU KNOW, THAT $2 CAN ADD UP EVEN IF YOU'RE STUFFING IN ALL YOUR RELATIVES AND EVERYBODY -- >>MARK THORNTON: IN THE TRUNK. >>KEVIN BECKNER: -- INSIDE THE TRUNK. >>MARK THORNTON: I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THIS WOULD COVER 14 SITES IN THE COUNTY. WE STILL HAVE ANOTHER 192 AND WELL OVER 54,000 ACRES OF PARKLAND THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE NO CHARGE, FREE. ALL OF OUR ELAPP SITES, ALL OF OUR GENERAL PARKS, UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO A SPECIAL EVENT LIKE A YOUTH TOURNAMENT OR WHATEVER, SO THIS IS A GOOD OPTION, BUT -- BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HASN'T BEEN REALLY BROUGHT OUT IN ALL THIS DISCUSSION IS HOW MANY ELAPP SITES WE HAVE AND HOW BEAUTIFUL AND WONDERFUL THEY ARE, AND THEY'RE OPEN EVERY DAY FREE OF CHARGE AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE SO. AND LASTLY, WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK ON VOLUNTEER SUPPORT GROUPS WHICH WILL ADDRESS F-23, I BELIEVE, WHICH WAS ALSO PART OF -- THE VETERANS PARK IS PART OF OUR REGIONAL PARK SYSTEM, AND THEY HAD OFFERED TO KEEP THAT OPEN TWO DAYS. WE ARE GOING TO WORK WITH THEM TO DO THAT AND OTHER VOLUNTEER GROUPS AS YOU'VE HAD THEM COME FORWARD IN PUBLIC HEARINGS. >>KEVIN BECKNER: GREAT. THANKS AGAIN. AND LIKE I SAID, I JUST THINK WE SHOULD -- IF YOU COULD COME BACK WITH A PROPOSAL THAT AGAIN MIGHT GIVE OUR TAXPAYING RESIDENTS HERE A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK -- >>MARK THORNTON: SURE. >>KEVIN BECKNER: -- AND THEN A REASONABLE FEE FOR OTHERS, I THINK THAT WOULD BE GREAT, BUT THANKS AGAIN FOR YOUR HARD WORK, MARK. >>JIM NORMAN: IS THAT FEE FOR TRUCKS AND WINNEBAGOS TOO? >>MARK THORNTON: WELL, THE WINNEBAGOS WILL BE PAYING A CAMPING FEE UNLESS THEY'RE JUST PASSING THROUGH. >>JIM NORMAN: PICKUP TRUCKS CAN HOLD A WHOLE LOT OF KIDS, MAN. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: YEAH. THANK YOU, MARK, FOR THIS WORK, AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS STRUCTURE. I KNOW I'VE SUGGESTED TO ERIC IN OUR DISCUSSIONS ON THE CUTS THAT I PROPOSED THAT IF SOME OF THIS IS ONE-TIME FUNDS, THAT AS YOU SET UP SOME TYPE OF A -- OF A COLLECTION POINT, WHETHER IT'S LOW-TECH, IT WILL LEAD TO HIGH-TECH, THAT THESE ONE-TIME EXPENDITURES BE USED IN THOSE AREAS AND THAT YOU LOOK AT PRIORITY IN YOUR MAJOR PARKS AS FAR AS KEEPING THOSE FULLY STAFFED WHERE YOU HAVE -- I KNOW YOU GOT LITHIA AND MEDARD. IS THERE ANOTHER CAMPING PARK? >>MARK THORNTON: E.G. SIMMONS. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. I KNEW THERE WAS. THAT BEFORE WE START LOOKING AT THOSE AREAS FOR CUTTING BACK ON YOUR RANGERS -- BECAUSE THEY'RE YOUR REVENUE GENERATORS, AND WHEN I LOOKED AT THE NUMBERS AT 4.9 MILLION PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING THROUGH OUR PARKS AND THAT EXCEEDS ALL THE OTHER ATTRACTIONS AND -- PUT TOGETHER HERE IN THE COUNTY, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO -- TO MAKE SURE WE'RE TENDING TO THAT ASSET IN THE BEST WAY, SO I WANT TO CONGRATULATE YOU. I'VE SPOKEN EXTENSIVELY WITH THE PUBLIC, THE PEOPLE WHO FISH AND CAMP, AND THEY'RE OPEN, UNDERSTAND, AND WANT SOME EQUITY WITH THE PEOPLE WHO WERE NOT IN THIS AREA USING OUR PARKS AND WE'RE FOOTING ALL THE BILL, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND LOOK FORWARD TO YOU BRINGING IT BACK. >>MARK THORNTON: THANK YOU. >>MARK SHARPE: MOVE THE ITEM. >> SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: AND MARK, I JUST WANT TO SAY LASTLY, YOU KNOW, GOOD WORK. OUR PARKS AND TRAILS ARE -- GREATLY INCREASE THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF OUR RESIDENTS -- >>MARK THORNTON: ABSOLUTELY. >>KEN HAGAN: -- AND WE SIMPLY CANNOT ALLOW THEM TO CLOSE, SO APPRECIATE YOUR HARD WORK. >>MARK THORNTON: THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER SHARPE, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>PAT BEAN: COMMISSIONERS, COULD I INQUIRE HOW LONG YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TODAY BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE SOME OTHER ITEMS THAT COULD TAKE A WHILE TO HAVE DISCUSSION. >>KEN HAGAN: I TELL YOU, I WANTED TO GO AS FAR AS WE CAN. YOU KNOW, WE ONLY HAVE ONE OTHER BUDGET WORKSHOP TO GO, AND WE HAVE A NUMBER OF ITEMS WE HAVE TO COVER THEN, SO -- AND WE HAVE TO BE HERE AT 6:00 FOR PUBLIC HEARING ANYWAY. I DON'T KNOW IF THE -- THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD, IF THEY WANT TO -- IT WOULD MAKE IT A LOT EASIER FOR US THE FARTHER WE CAN GO TODAY; IS THAT RIGHT? >>PAT BEAN: WELL, CERTAINLY, BECAUSE YOU JUST DO HAVE THE ONE WORKSHOP, AND COMMISSIONER SHARPE WON'T BE HERE FOR PART OF THAT AT LEAST. AREN'T YOU GOING TO BE AT THE CHILDREN'S BOARD? >>MARK SHARPE: IS THAT -- THE 20th? YES. I GET ALL THE MEETINGS CONFUSED. YES. >>KEN HAGAN: I WOULD ENCOURAGE -- >>MARK SHARPE: LET'S GO AS FAR AS WE CAN. >>PAT BEAN: WE'LL GO FURTHER. THE NEXT ITEM, THEN, IS CAFETERIA BENEFITS. THIS WAS FLAGGED BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: YEAH, IT'S ME AGAIN. I KNOW THIS IS DEFINITELY NOT ONE THAT'S BEEN POPULAR, BUT AS I STATED EARLY IN THE MEETING TODAY, WE NEED TO LOOK INWARD, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE BENEFITS THAT -- THAT WE'RE PROVIDING, AND ONE OF THE MOST MAJOR ONES, WHICH IS RECURRING FUNDS, $13 MILLION THAT RECURS EACH YEAR, AND I THINK IT MERITS A LOOK. I KNOW THAT IT MAY CAUSE SOME ISSUES WITH THE UNIONS WITH THEIR CONTRACTS, BUT THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT -- NUMBER ONE, THAT WE SHOULD NO LONGER OFFER TO NEW EMPLOYEES, AND SECONDLY THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS -- AND MY PROPOSAL WAS TO TOTALLY ELIMINATE IT SO THOSE FUNDS COULD BE UTILIZED ELSEWHERE, AND I KNOW THAT -- IT HITS MY FAMILY LIKE IT'S GOING TO HIT EVERYBODY ELSE'S, BUT LET'S HAVE THE DISCUSSION, AND I KNOW THAT, COMMISSIONER BECKNER, YOU HAD MADE A MOTION OR BROUGHT FORTH THE PAY CUT THAT WE'RE TAKING AND HOW THIS IS SYMBOLIC. WELL, THIS IS -- THIS IS ONE THAT IS NOT SYMBOLIC. THIS IS SIGNIFICANT, BUT IT IS RECURRING FUNDS. IT IS A BENEFIT THAT I HAVEN'T FOUND THAT WE'RE -- THAT'S BEING OFFERED ANYWHERE ELSE IN THIS MAGNITUDE, SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT, ONE -- FIRST PART OF THE MOTION IS THAT IT BE NO LONGER OFFERED TO NEW PEOPLE WHO ARE -- NEW EMPLOYEES WHO ARE HIRED, AND SECONDLY, THAT -- WELL, THAT'LL BE ONE MOTION, THAT IT'S NO LONGER OFFERED. AND THEN MY SECOND MOTION IS GOING TO BE THAT WE AT MINIMUM REDUCE THIS BY 50% THIS YEAR AND THEN LOOK FOR FURTHER CUTS. I HAVE TWO MOTIONS I'M MAKING. ONE IS THAT CAFETERIA BENEFIT BE NO LONGER OFFERED TO NEW PEOPLE WHO ARE BROUGHT IN, AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN CONTRACTS ARE NEGOTIATED, AND THEN SECOND MY CUT OF 50%. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I'M NOT NECESSARILY AT THIS POINT RESPONDING FOR OR AGAINST THE TWO MOTIONS THAT MR. HIGGINBOTHAM HAS MADE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT THE CAFETERIA BENEFIT. I THINK IN SOME CASES -- I WASN'T USED TO IT EITHER AT THE CITY, AND I DON'T THINK MR. WHITE -- WELL, NEITHER ONE OF US HAD THAT OPPORTUNITY AT THE CITY IN TERMS OF CAFETERIA BENEFITS. SOME PEOPLE LOOK AT IT AS A LUXURY DOLLAR EXTENSION THAT WE GIVE TO OUR EMPLOYEES. WHAT I THINK AT A TIME WHEN OUR EMPLOYEES ARE HAVING DIFFICULTY PAYING FOR INSURANCE, THE CAFETERIA BENEFITS I THINK COME IN UNDER A DIFFERENT LIGHT. I AGREE THAT WE DON'T WANT TO GIVE ANYTHING THAT'S EXTRAVAGANT OR THAT'S EXTRA OR THAT'S -- THAT'S -- THAT'S NOT NECESSARY, BUT IN A LOT OF CASES, FROM TALKING TO EMPLOYEES, I THINK ESPECIALLY THE -- THE LOWER-PAID EMPLOYEES, THEY USE THIS TO TRY TO SUPPLEMENT THEIR INSURANCE PAYMENTS, AND BECAUSE OF THAT -- AND I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD CRAFT THIS, MR. JOHNSON, OVER TO YOU, THIS PARTICULARLY STANDS OUT, EXTRAORDINARILY STANDS OUT TO ME ABOUT SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T THINK ABOUT. EMPLOYEES USE THIS TO SUPPLEMENT WHAT THEY NEED TO PAY FOR INSURANCE. I DON'T WANT THIS GOING AWAY EVEN IN SOME FORM OR FASHION TO DISALLOW THEM FROM CONTINUING THAT INSURANCE. THEY HAVE DEPENDED ON IT. FOR THOSE OF US THAT IT DOESN'T ADDRESS NEEDS FOR THE INSURANCE, THEN SO BE IT, BUT WHY COULDN'T WE BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS SOMETHING YOU CAN TELL ME RIGHT IMMEDIATELY NOW. WHY COULDN'T WE TAKE THESE DOLLARS, ROLL THEM BACK INTO THE COUNTY'S PERCENT OF PARTICIPATION. THAT WOULD REDUCE THE EMPLOYEE'S AMOUNT TO PAY, AND IN CASES WHEN THEY DIDN'T HAVE INSURANCE OR THEY DIDN'T WANT INSURANCE OR THEIR SPOUSE HAS INSURANCE, IT DOESN'T GO SOMEPLACE ELSE, IT JUST SIMPLY GOES TO INSURANCE SO THE EMPLOYEES WHO NEED THE CAFETERIA DOLLARS TO PAY FOR THEIR INSURANCE ARE COVERING -- ARE GETTING COVERED BY A REDUCTION IN THEIR PORTION OF THE COST, THE PEOPLE THAT DON'T, THEN IT DOESN'T GET MISDIRECTED, IT ACTUALLY GOES BACK INTO THE COUNTY, BUT AT LEAST WE DON'T TAKE AWAY THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THESE DOLLARS TO COMPENSATE AT LEAST IN PART FOR PAYMENTS THAT OUR EMPLOYEES NEED TO KEEP THAT -- THAT HEALTH INSURANCE? I'M JUST VERY, VERY CONCERNED THAT SOME PEOPLE REALLY COUNT ON THIS FOR INSURANCE PAYMENTS, AND IF WE REDUCE IT IN SOME FORM OR FASHION, I DON'T WANT PEOPLE PULLING OUT OF THE INSURANCE PLAN BECAUSE THEY CAN'T PAY FOR IT BECAUSE THEY'VE PLANNED ON THIS. IF IT'S EXTRAVAGANT AND IT'S EXTRA DOLLARS, YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT. TAKE IT AWAY FROM ME, TAKE IT AWAY FROM SOMEBODY ELSE, BUT THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME EMPLOYEES THAT ARE COUNTING ON THIS TO PAY FOR THAT INSURANCE, AND I DON'T WANT TO PUT THEIR HEALTH CARE IN JEOPARDY. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT? >>ERIC JOHNSON: WELL, COMMISSIONER, THE -- WE UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN, AND CERTAINLY WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DISCOURAGE IS WHAT OUR CONSULTANT HAS CALLED THE DEATH SPIRAL FOR OUR HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM, WHICH IS CREATING INCENTIVES FOR EMPLOYEES TO RISK NOT BUYING INSURANCE, AND IF OUR HEALTHIEST EMPLOYEES BAIL OUT OF OUR HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM, THE COST PER COVERED PARTICIPANT GOES UP, AND THAT DRIVES UP OUR COST, WHICH DRIVES LOWER PARTICIPATION, AND AT SOME POINT THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE ARE THE ONES THAT WE CAN'T AFFORD TO HAVE THERE UNLESS THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF HEALTHY PEOPLE THERE. ONE OF THE ISSUES HERE -- AND I THINK ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE HAVE THE COMBINATION OF A COUNTY SUBSIDY OF EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE SEPARATE FROM A CAFETERIA IS THAT IT DISCOURAGES PEOPLE FROM TAKING OUR INSURANCE IF THEY CAN GET INSURANCE FROM THEIR SPOUSE, AND SO BY GIVING AN EMPLOYEE A CAFETERIA BENEFIT AND ALLOWING THEM TO CHOOSE BETWEEN SPENDING IT FOR THE COUNTY'S HEALTH INSURANCE OR IF THEY HAVE THAT COVERAGE FROM ANOTHER EMPLOYER THAT THEIR SPOUSE MAY PARTICIPATE WITH OR AS, FOR EXAMPLE, A MILITARY RETIREE, WE'RE NOT ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO SPEND OUR MONEY NEEDLESSLY ON HEALTH INSURANCE, THEY CAN CHOOSE TO SPEND IT ON SOME OTHER BENEFIT. IN DISCUSSING THIS ISSUE WITH COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, I POINTED OUT MY OWN EXPERIENCE AS A FEDERAL EMPLOYEE WHERE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DECIDED TO REDUCE THE COSTS OF RETIREMENT BY CHANGING THE PLAN, AND I THINK THEY'VE DONE IT EVEN SINCE I LEFT YEARS AGO WHERE YOU APPLY A NEW BENEFIT PROSPECTIVELY. THE DIFFERENCE THERE MIGHT BE THAT A NEW EMPLOYEES IS HIRED UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE COST OF HEALTH INSURANCE IS, WHAT THEIR COUNTY PAY OR -- AND BENEFITS ARE. IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU PROBABLY READ ABOUT FROM TIME TO TIME, THAT UNIONS AS THEY'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH EMPLOYEES TO TRIM COSTS AGREE TO A TWO-TIER BENEFIT STRUCTURE, AND NEW EMPLOYEES COME IN UNDERSTANDING EXACTLY WHAT THE COMBINATION OF PAY AND BENEFITS ARE. NOW, WE HAVE NOT MADE A RECOMMENDATION IN THIS BUDGET. WE CERTAINLY TALKED ABOUT THE CAFETERIA BENEFIT. WE'VE LOOKED AT THE ISSUE OF EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE, AND WE DON'T WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE THAT ARE EXISTING MEMBERS OF OUR HEALTH PLAN TO TAKE A RISK AND BAIL, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY COME BACK WITH ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM, AND AS I DISCUSSED WITH COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, YOU DON'T ACHIEVE QUICK RESULTS IN TERMS OF SAVINGS, BUT THE BOARD CAN CONSIDER GOING FORWARD, CHANGING THE BENEFIT STRUCTURE. CERTAINLY WE'D HAVE TO NEGOTIATE THAT WITH OUR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING UNITS, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'VE SEEN AROUND THE NATION, THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR BENEFIT STRUCTURE GOING FORWARD, AND OVER TIME YOU HAVE AN INCREASING NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES WHO HAD THE OLD BENEFIT WHO RETIRE AND THEY'RE REPLACED BY PEOPLE THAT HAVE A DIFFERENT BENEFIT STRUCTURE AND ACCEPTED THEIR EMPLOYMENT WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING, SO HOWEVER THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO GO, WE'LL BE GLAD TO FOLLOW UP WITH MORE DETAIL. >>ROSE FERLITA: I JUST THINK AT THIS POINT -- AND I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, AND I'M NOT SURE I'M FOLLOWING YOU EVERY STEP IN THE WAY, AND I KNOW OTHER COMMISSIONERS ARE WANTING TO SPEAK, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF PERHAPS THERE MIGHT BE A CONSIDERATION TO HOLD THIS ONE AND LOOK AT SOME OF THE EXPLANATIONS OR THE OFFERINGS THAT YOU MIGHT RENDER FOR US TO REVIEW. >>PAT BEAN: WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO WHATEVER THE BOARD'S DECISION IS. >>ROSE FERLITA: I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS WANT TO DO THAT, BUT I SURE WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION. THIS COULD BE A VERY SENSITIVE ISSUE FOR EMPLOYEES. >>PAT BEAN: YES, IT IS. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'M OPEN TO THAT. >>ROSE FERLITA: YOU HAD A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. WOULD YOU CONSIDER JUST WITHDRAWING IT NOW UNTIL WE GET MORE INFORMATION, COMMISSIONER? >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: TO GATHER MORE INFORMATION, SURE. >>ROSE FERLITA: YES. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: WE CAN DEBATE BACK AND FORTH HERE. I KNOW YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT'S WHAT THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE. I HAVE NO PROBLEM, BUT THIS IS -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I LIKE YOUR THOUGHT ON HOW TO INCORPORATE THAT, BUT WE'VE GOT TO LOOK AT THIS CUTTING BACK ON BENEFITS. LET'S GO THIS WAY AND COME BACK WITH IT. I KNOW I'VE PUT SOME TIME INTO IT AND I KNOW YOU-ALL HAVE, AND I LIKE YOUR SUGGESTION, SO LET'S COME BACK TO THE TABLE WITH THIS ONE. >>PAT BEAN: OKAY. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: THANK YOU. AND SO I'VE MADE THE MOTION TO TABLE OR TO BRING IT BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING. IS THERE A SECOND OR -- >> SECOND. >>ROSE FERLITA: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: AND I SUPPORT BRINGING THIS BACK, BUT I WANT TO SAY IF WE THINK BACK A COUPLE WEEKS AGO WITH OUR HEALTH INSURANCE DISCUSSION, AS A RESULT OF THIS BOARD DELAYING MAKING A DECISION ON THE HEALTH CARE PROVIDER, THE RATES FOR OUR EMPLOYEES ARE GOING TO POTENTIALLY DOUBLE. ERIC JOHNSON STATED THAT. AND NOW WE'RE POSSIBLY CONSIDERING DOUBLING THEIR RATES WHILE TAKING AWAY THIS BENEFIT. THIS WILL HAVE A DEVASTATING EFFECT ON MANY OF OUR EMPLOYEES, SO WITH THAT, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO CONTINUE IT AND BRING IT BACK, BUT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS. >>MARK SHARPE: I WOULD LIKE TO -- >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: -- ECHO THAT POINT BECAUSE WE WERE GETTING READY TO NEGOTIATE A FIXED AMOUNT THAT THE COUNTY WOULD PAY FOR HEALTH INSURANCE, WHICH WOULD REDUCE -- WELL, WHICH WOULD HAVE HELD AT A -- AT A -- AT THE CURRENT LEVEL THE HEALTH CARE COSTS TO EMPLOYEES. THE DECISION WE MADE WILL INCREASE THE COST TO OUR EMPLOYEES, AND THEN IF WE LOOK AT REDUCING THIS BENEFIT, THIS CAFETERIA BENEFIT -- AND I'M ALL FOR -- WE HAVE TO RE -- HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT CAFETERIA BENEFITS IN THE FUTURE AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO -- WHAT WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE, ERIC, BECAUSE WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES, BUT THIS WOULD BE A DRAMATIC INCREASE IN THE COSTS TO OUR EMPLOYEES AND PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO CAN LEAST AFFORD IT, AND THE DEATH SPIRAL THAT WAS ADDRESSED WILL OCCUR, AND THE PEOPLE WHO ARE LEAST AFFORD TO LOSE THEIR HEALTH CARE WILL LOSE IT. I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO READDRESS THIS WHOLE ISSUE -- I KNOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT NOW -- BUT WITH HUMANA AND CIGNA BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO BRING THIS BACK UP. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, DO YOU NEED TO MAKE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'D JUST CALL THE QUESTION. >>KEN HAGAN: WE HAD A MOTION TO DEFER THE ITEM BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM, SECOND -- WAS IT COMMISSIONER FERLITA? COMMISSIONER BECKNER, DID YOU WANT TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS? >>KEVIN BECKNER: YEAH, JUST A QUICK COMMENT BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THIS LATER. I THINK WHAT I'D LIKE PERHAPS THE STAFF COULD ALSO BRING BACK IS MAYBE SEPARATE OUT THE HEALTH INSURANCE FROM THE OTHER PARTS OF THE CAFETERIA BENEFITS. AND I APPRECIATE, NUMBER ONE, THAT WE'RE ABLE TO HAVE EVEN A BRIEF CONVERSATION ABOUT HEALTH CARE WITHOUT PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE STANDING UP AND SCREAMING AT US, SO I APPRECIATE THE CIVILITY HERE TODAY BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY SENSITIVE ISSUE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. I THINK WE HAVE TO BE EXTRAORDINARILY CAREFUL BECAUSE I'M ALL FOR WE'VE GOT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE BENEFITS THAT WE'RE OFFERING, BUT HEALTH CARE IS SO, SO, SO IMPORTANT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE JUST TAKE OUR TIME BEFORE WE DECIDE WE'RE GOING TO CUT BACK OUR EMPLOYEES' HEALTH CARE, AND ON THE SAME NOTE OF HEALTH CARE, MS. BEAN, IF YOU COULD PERHAPS BRING -- I HADN'T HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THE RFP FOR THE HEALTH CARE, SO MAYBE IF AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING IF YOU COULD BRING THAT BACK TO US AND GIVE US AN UPDATE WHERE WE'RE AT IN THAT, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE ON THE MOTION. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM, COMMISSIONERS, IS THE ITEM RELATED TO VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE, ITEM F-18. LET ME JUST SAY THAT I WANT TO BE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR ON THE RECORD THAT THERE ARE DOLLARS OUT THERE, BOTH AT THE STATE LEVEL AND AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, TO HELP TO FUND THIS PROGRAM. I KNOW THAT JAN MacLEOD FROM THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE OFFICE HAS PROVIDED ALL OF THAT INFORMATION TO THE VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE OFFICE, AND WE WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO GO AFTER THOSE DOLLARS AS A WAY OF HELPING US WITH OUR BUDGETING ISSUES THAT WE'RE FACING THIS YEAR AND NEXT YEAR. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. I KNOW COMMISSIONER FERLITA'S LIGHT WAS PUSHED FIRST, BUT YOU HAD ASKED ABOUT THIS ITEM. >>ROSE FERLITA: IT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE. EITHER WAY, I MEAN, I THINK WE WANTED TO DO SOMETHING THAT WAS COOPERATIVE BETWEEN US AND THE STATE ATTORNEY AND EVERYBODY ELSE, SO -- BUT SO LONG AS THERE ARE OUTSIDE SOURCES -- AND JAN, AGAIN, HAS BEEN INCREDIBLE AT FINDING THEM. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH ASKING FOR THOSE TYPES OF ASSISTANCES AND GRANTS, BUT IT'S A MATTER OF SEMANTICS. I WANT THEM TO HELP US AS OPPOSED TO US HELPING THEM. I THINK AGAIN -- AND COMMISSIONER NORMAN SPOKE LOUD AND CLEAR, AND I ABSOLUTELY APPLAUD HIM. WE NEED TO TAKE HOLD OF THIS WHETHER IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY OR NOT, SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT CAN SUPPLEMENT IT, JAN, THAT YOU'RE WORKING SO HARD TO DO, FINE, BUT I'M NOT TRYING TO TAKE WHAT I THINK IS OUR PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR VICTIMS AND PUT IT ON THEM AND THEN US SUPPLEMENT THEM, I WANT IT THE OTHER WAY. SO IT'S -- LIKE I SAID, IT'S A MATTER OF THE WORDING OR THE SEMANTICS, BUT I THINK WE SPOKE ABUNDANTLY ABOUT THAT. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND I WANT TO THANK MY BOARD MEMBERS FOR INDULGING ME ON THIS BECAUSE I THINK WHEN WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH THE BUDGET, WE'VE RECOGNIZED THERE ARE SOME EXTRAORDINARILY IMPORTANT PROGRAMS AND AGENCIES THAT ARE ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK, AND TWO OF THEM I IDENTIFIED HERE, AND THERE COULD BE MORE THAT WE COULD FURTHER IDENTIFY, IS CERTAINLY THE VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND THE CONSUMER PROTECTION AGENCY. WHEN I STARTED THINKING ABOUT THESE AGENCIES, I STARTED THINKING WHAT THESE TWO AGENCIES HAVE IN COMMON, AND I THINK THE TWO THINGS THAT THEY HAVE IN COMMON IS, NUMBER ONE, THE DEMAND FOR THESE SERVICES ARE DRIVEN BY CRIMINALS, BY PERPETRATORS, AND BY OFFENDERS, AND MY QUESTION IS -- I STARTED THINKING TO MYSELF IS WHY SHOULD THE MAJORITY OF THE COSTS FOR THESE PROGRAMS BE BORNE BY LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS? WHY SHOULDN'T WE DO WHAT WE CAN TO COLLECT AND RECOUP THOSE COSTS FROM THE CRIMINAL, THE OFFENDERS, AND THE PERPETRATORS THAT CREATE THE DEMAND FOR THESE SERVICES? SO I REALLY HAVE VIEWED THESE AS -- AS DEMAND-BASED SERVICES. I'VE PASSED OUT A PROPOSAL TO ALL OF YOU, AND YOU CAN FOLLOW ALONG WITH ME, AND I'LL -- AND PLEASE FORGIVE ME IF WE'RE KIND OF GOING IN ORDER HERE FOR OUR VIEWING PUBLIC AND PEOPLE WHO MIGHT NOT HAVE A COPY OF THAT, BUT WHAT I STARTED DOING IS WITH THE HELP OF OUR -- OUR LEGAL STAFF -- AND I JUST WANT TO THANK RENEE AND SHEREE FISH, AND THERE'S MANY OTHER PEOPLE THAT REALLY HELPED PUT THIS TOGETHER, AND THIS IS NOT BY ANY WAY COMPLETE. THERE'S STILL MORE WORK THAT WE HAVE TO DO ON THIS. THE FIRST THING WE STARTED TO DO IS TO IDENTIFY DIFFERENT INCOME STREAMS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE AND FEES THAT ARE CURRENTLY CHARGED TO OUR INMATES AND TO PEOPLE WHO GO THROUGH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. TO START, I WILL ALSO MAKE A CLARIFICATION THAT WHEN I MENTIONED THE BUDGET HERE, I HAD MENTIONED A BUDGET OF $2,575,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR '9 AND THEN A MILLION DOLLARS, WHICH WAS ACTUALLY A BUDGET THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY JAMES SUDBERRY. LET ME JUST ALSO MAKE A COMMENT HERE FOR THE RECORD IS THAT I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT THESE ARE THE APPROVED AMOUNTS FOR THESE BUDGETS, I'M USING THIS FOR ILLUSTRATION PERIOD -- PURPOSES FOR -- TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT WE MIGHT NEED TO FUND. ALSO, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE REVENUE STREAMS, I ALSO WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR FOR THE RECORD THAT THESE ARE EXAMPLES. STAFF IS STILL CONTINUING TO COMPILE AN EXTENSIVE LIST OF ALL THE FEES AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ARE BEING CHARGED RIGHT NOW, AND THAT ULTIMATELY IT IS THE SHERIFF THAT MUST APPROVE THOSE FEES AND THAT AS A BOARD WE CAN RECOMMEND THE FEES, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE CANNOT INSTITUTE THEM AS A BOARD. THE FIRST FEE THAT WE TOOK A LOOK AT WERE BOOKING FEES. INMATES THAT ARE BOOKED INTO THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY JAIL ARE CURRENTLY ASSESSED $25, AND IF YOU LOOK AT -- FOR FISCAL YEAR '07, WE'VE COLLECTED ROUGHLY ABOUT $806,447. IN FISCAL YEAR '8 WE COLLECTED 754,171. AND YEAR-TO-DATE THROUGH FISCAL YEAR '09 WE COLLECTED $531,209. FOR FISCAL YEAR '7 AND '8 THE BOOKING FEE WAS $20. IN FISCAL YEAR 2008 THE SHERIFF'S BOOKED ABOUT 70,000 INMATES INTO JAIL. YEAR-TO-DATE, 2009, THERE WERE $43,979 -- I'M SORRY, 43,979 INMATES WITH A YEAR-END PACE OF 72,635. THIS IN THEORY SHOULD GENERATE ABOUT $1,815,875. ONE ISSUE THAT WE'RE FACING RIGHT NOW IS THE ACTUAL COLLECTION OF THESE FEES. ON AVERAGE WE'RE COLLECTING ROUGHLY ABOUT 50% OF THOSE FEES, AND THERE'S A VARIETY OF ISSUES THAT WE'RE STILL RESEARCHING, BUT SOME OF THE ONES THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED SO FAR HAPPEN TO BE THAT MANY PEOPLE THAT ARE BOOKED IN TO JAIL AND THEY DON'T RETURN, THERE'S NOT A COURT-MANDATED PAYMENT FOR THIS PARTICULAR FEE WHEN THEIR CASE IS DISPOSED OR WHEN THEY'RE RELEASED, SO CURRENTLY WE ARE -- AND I'VE BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS WITH CHIEF JUDGE MENENDEZ ON HOW WE CAN ENFORCE THE COLLECTION OF THIS FEE -- OF THESE FEES. WITH THE PROPER ENFORCEMENT IN PLACE AND OTHER MECHANISMS IN PLACE THAT PERHAPS COULD ALSO INCLUDE INITIATING THE ACCEPTANCE OF CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS BY THE INMATES, I BELIEVE THAT WE COULD INCREASE COLLECTIONS BY ROUGHLY ABOUT 80%. SO I WANTED -- I'M PRESENTING VERY CONSERVATIVE ASSUMPTIONS HERE. YOU'LL SEE IN YOUR PROPOSAL THAT I HAVE OUTLINED WHAT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF BOOKING FEES MIGHT GENERATE IN INCOME, AND AGAIN, I WANT TO ALSO STATE FOR THE RECORD HERE THAT THESE ARE NOT FINAL FEES, THESE ARE NOT WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, THESE HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY LEGAL, AND LEGAL'S ALSO DOING ADDITIONAL RESEARCH AS WELL AS I MENTIONED THESE HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. IF YOU LOOKED AT JUST IMPLEMENTING A 50 -- IF YOU INCREASE THE BOOKING FEE TO $50, YOU'LL SEE BY 72,000 BOOKINGS THAT THAT WOULD GENERATE ROUGHLY ABOUT $1,800,000. AT $60 IT'S 2,160,000; 75 2,700,000, AND 100 3,600,000, AND IF WE HAD AN 80% INCREASE IN COLLECTIONS, THEN AGAIN THOSE GO UP CONSIDERABLY TO 2,800,000, 3,456,000, 4,320,000, AND 5,760,000. THE SECOND FEE THAT WE CURRENTLY DO NOT CHARGE BUT POLK COUNTY ASSESSES IS A $2-PER-DAY PER DIEM TO INMATES. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE FISCAL YEAR '10 AND '11 BUDGET BY SHERIFF GEE, THE AVERAGE DAILY POPULATION IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IS ABOUT 3,847 INMATES. IF WE ASSUME THAT THIS FIGURE REMAINED CONSTANT AND WE CHARGED $2 A DAY, WE WOULD GENERATE APPROXIMATELY $2,808,310. IF WE APPLIED THE SAME COLLECTION RATES AT 50%, WE WOULD GENERATE 1,404,000, AT 80% 2,246,000, SO WHEN WE LOOK AT A SUMMARY, BY JUST IMPLEMENTING FOR AN EXAMPLE A $60 -- INCREASE THE BOOKING FEES TO $60 AND INSTITUTE THE $2 A DAY CELL OR SUSTENANCE CHARGE, WE WOULD GENERATE REVENUE OF ANYWHERE BETWEEN 3,500,000 AND 5,700,000, WHICH IF YOU LOOKED AT THE TOTAL BUDGET FOR THE VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND AS WELL AS THE CONSUMER PROTECTION PROGRAM AS IT'S STATED NOW, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GENERATE ENOUGH REVENUE TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE PROGRAMS AS WELL AS PROBABLY OTHER PROGRAMS, AND JUST TO CLARIFY FOR THAT ALSO FOR THE RECORD, THAT WOULD FREE UP GENERAL REVENUE TO ALLOW US TO DO THAT. IT'S REALLY MY OPINION THAT -- AGAIN, AS I STATED, THAT THESE ARE DEMAND-DRIVEN SERVICES, AND I THINK WE NEED TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE TO WORK WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, WITH THE COURTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE INSTITUTING BY STATUTE AND/OR BY COUNTY ORDINANCE THE APPROPRIATE FEES SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN CONTINUE THE APPROPRIATE MAINTENANCE OF OUR JAIL AS WELL AS TO FUND CRITICAL PROGRAMS. I ALSO BELIEVE THAT IF WE INSTITUTE THESE FEES, MORE IMPORTANTLY I THINK WE NEED TO SEND A VERY STRONG MESSAGE TO OUR CRIMINALS OUT THERE THAT IF YOU COMMIT A CRIME AND GO TO JAIL IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, IT'S GOING TO COST YOU, AND SO AS WE KNOW IN THE OLD ADAGE IS THAT CRIME DOESN'T PAY, BUT I BELIEVE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CRIMINALS WILL, AND WITH THAT, I AM OPEN FOR COMMENTS FROM MY BOARD MEMBERS, AND DEPENDING UPON THEIR SUGGESTIONS, I WOULD HAVE A MOTION THAT I WOULD LIKE TO PUT ON THE TABLE. >>KEN HAGAN: ERIC, HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW - - REVIEW THIS, YOU OR PAT? >>ERIC JOHNSON: YES, SIR, AND I THINK THE KEY IS THE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE LAST PAGE, WHICH IS TO WORK WITH THE PARTIES THAT CAN MAKE THIS WORK, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND THE CHIEF JUDGE, SO -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'LL SECOND IT. I'D LIKE TO SEND IT FORWARD TO SEE WHAT WE COULD BRING BACK. >>KEN HAGAN: FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THAT IN THE BEST CASE SCENARIO, THIS WOULD MORE LIKELY APPLY TO FISCAL YEAR '11, OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT COULD REALISTICALLY GET ACCOMPLISHED FOR THIS YEAR? >>ERIC JOHNSON: I DON'T KNOW. IT DEPENDS ON HOW COOPERATIVE THE OTHER PARTIES ARE IN TERMS OF MOVING FORWARD. WE'D CERTAINLY BE GLAD TO WORK WITH COMMISSIONER BECKNER AND SEE WHAT WE CAN GET MOVING. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. SO ASSUMING -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: I DON'T THINK YOU CAN COUNT ON REVENUE UNTIL WE HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS, BUT IF THE BOARD IS INTERESTED IN PURSUING THIS, WE'D CERTAINLY BE WILLING TO WORK. IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE THE COOPERATION OF THOSE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS TO BE EFFECTIVE, AND SO -- >>KEVIN BECKNER: CHIEF JUDGE -- I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU. >>KEN HAGAN: ONE MORE QUESTION. WHAT -- ASSUMING THAT THIS GOES FORWARD, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE IT WILL, WHAT IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION WITH RESPECT TO THE TWO PROGRAMS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FUND AS FAR AS SETTING ASIDE MONEY OR POTENTIALLY SETTING ASIDE MONEY OR -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: WELL, COMMISSIONER, I THINK THIS IS AN AREA WHERE, AS I MENTIONED TO COMMISSIONER BECKNER, WE'VE GOT A BOARD POLICY THAT BASICALLY SAYS WE'RE NOT GOING TO EARMARK MONEY. ON THE OTHER HAND, WE HAVE A HISTORY OF AS WE RATIONALIZE WHY WE'RE CHANGING FEES, THE -- YOU KNOW, THE RATIONALE FOR THAT, AND SO I THINK THAT IN THIS CASE SAYING THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED SOME PROGRAMS THAT THE BOARD HAS -- HAS INDICATED AN INTEREST IN RESTORING THAT RELATE TO CRIMES AND -- AND VICTIMS OF CRIME, IT'S A GOOD RATIONALE TO -- TO PURSUE THE FEE. WE WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT YOU DON'T EARMARK THE REVENUE GOING FORWARD BUT YOU USE THE TAG OF WHY ARE WE JUSTIFYING THE REVENUE NOW, WE'RE JUSTIFYING PURSUING REVENUE BECAUSE OF THE BOARD'S INTEREST IN SOME PARTICULAR AREAS WHERE VICTIMS OF CRIME ARE RELYING ON THE COUNTY FOR SERVICES AND THE BOARD IS LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO PAY FOR THOSE SERVICES, SO MAKE THE CONNECTION AT THE TIME THE FEES ARE RAISED, BUT DON'T NECESSARILY SEGREGATE THE REVENUES. >>KEN HAGAN: BUT IN THE INTERIM WE'RE STILL GOING TO NEED TO INSERT A MINIMUM LEVEL OF FUNDING FOR THESE TWO AGENCIES. >>ERIC JOHNSON: CERTAINLY. CERTAINLY. >>KEN HAGAN: I DON'T SEE GETTING AN ANSWER WITHIN THE NEXT 30 DAYS. >>PAT BEAN: NO, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN DO THAT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. >>PAT BEAN: AND BEFORE YOU STARTED COLLECTING THE MONEY AND ALL, IT WOULD BE A WHILE UNTIL -- FOR IT TO BUILD UP, SO -- >>RENEE LEE: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: LET ME ASK YOU THIS: WHAT IS -- WHAT WAS GOING TO BE YOUR RECOMMENDATION, OR DID YOU HAVE ONE WITH RESPECT TO THE FUNDING LEVELS FOREVER THESE TWO PROGRAMS FOR FISCAL YEAR '10? >>PAT BEAN: FOR VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE, I BELIEVE THAT WE FELT LIKE WE WOULD START AT 1.5 AND ASK THAT WE HELP THEM TO GO FORWARD AND APPLY FOR THE FUNDS THAT ARE OUT THERE. THERE ARE GRANT DOLLARS THAT ARE OUT THERE THAT THEY CAN APPLY FOR, AND ALSO USING YOUR PROGRAM THAT YOU'RE JUST IDENTIFYING, THAT SHOULD CARRY THEM, AND CERTAINLY THE BOARD COULD ALWAYS COME BACK IF WE'RE NOT ABLE TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN AND ADJUST THAT AT A LATER DATE, BUT I WOULD START WITH 1.5 FOR VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. >>PAT BEAN: WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. >>KEN HAGAN: AND THEN -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS WERE THERE OR OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WITH RESPECT TO CONSUMER PROTECTION, BUT I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE AT A MINIMUM SET ASIDE 500,000 FOR -- FOR THAT PROGRAM IN FISCAL YEAR '10, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE SHOULD INCLUDE THAT IN -- >>PAT BEAN: YES. >>KEN HAGAN: -- IN THE MOTION THAT COMMISSIONER BECKNER MAKES OR MAKE THAT A SEPARATE MOTION OR NOT, BUT -- COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. AND I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA, BY THE WAY, COMMISSIONER BECKNER. THANK YOU. I'M HAVING SOME REAL PROBLEMS WITH -- OF COURSE, WE DON'T WANT TO REMOVE THE FLAG FOR RESTORING THE VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, FOR INSTANCE, BUT OTHER THAN WHAT WE'VE GOT LISTED HERE, WHAT ARE YOU SUGGESTING, MS. BEAN, IN TERMS OF FUNDING? >>PAT BEAN: I'M SUGGESTING THAT -- BECAUSE EVEN IF COMMISSIONER BECKNER IS ROUNDLY SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING ALL OF THIS DONE, THE MONEY WON'T BE THERE RIGHT AWAY. IT WILL TAKE A WHILE TO GET ALL THE PARTIES TOGETHER, TO GET ALL THE PIECES PUT TOGETHER, AND TO START COLLECTING THE MONEY. I WOULD ENCOURAGE US, HOWEVER, TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO ALSO GO AFTER SOME OF THAT FEDERAL MONEY AND STATE MONEY THAT'S OUT THERE AND, THEREFORE, START THEM WITH AN ALLOCATION OF 1.5 MILLION. WE'LL WORK BOTH AS HARD AS WE CAN WITH THEM. JAN DOES PHENOMENAL WORK, AS YOU KNOW, IN TRYING TO BRING IN FEDERAL AND STATE DOLLARS FOR THESE KINDS OF PROGRAMS. >>ROSE FERLITA: WELL, AND I AGREE WITH YOU IN CONCEPT, BUT I DISAGREE WITH WHERE YOU'RE GOING OR HOW YOU'RE GETTING THERE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US FUND IT AT A HIGHER LEVEL AND -- WITH THE EXPECTATION THAT HOPEFULLY SOME OF THOSE DOLLARS WILL BE OFFSET BY -- BY GRANT REVENUES. I DON'T THINK WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AS A STARTING POINT FOR US IS ENOUGH FOR VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>ROSE FERLITA: I MEAN, EITHER WAY IT'S LIKE PUTTING IT UP FRONT FIRST. IF WE GET THE GRANTS, THEN YOU SUBTRACT IT FROM THAT, BUT AT LEAST WE KNOW WHAT THEIR OPERATING BUDGET WILL BE REGARDLESS OF WHO PAYS WHAT PERCENTAGE AT THE END OF IT. >>PAT BEAN: OKAY. SO YOU'RE SUGGESTING FUND THEM, AND THEN IF THEY GET THE GRANTS, WE TAKE SOME OF THOSE DOLLARS THAT WE'VE PUT IN OUT -- >>ROSE FERLITA: YES. >>PAT BEAN: -- OF THEIR BUDGET? >>ROSE FERLITA: YES. >>PAT BEAN: I'M OKAY WITH THAT. >>ROSE FERLITA: YES, BUT NOT AT THAT LEVEL, THOUGH, HIGHER, MAYBE MINUS 10% OF WHAT THEY'VE GOT HERE, AND WE'LL GO FROM THERE. AGAIN, THIS IS ALL JUST SOMETHING TO GET US TO SOMEPLACE ELSE WHILE THEY INCORPORATE EFFORTS TO DO FUNDING AND GRANTS, AND COMMISSIONER BECKNER'S PROPOSAL TAKES TIME TO CYCLE IN, BUT I -- I THINK WE NEED TO BUMP THOSE DOLLARS UP SOME MORE. SO IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I'LL JUST MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS BECAUSE, YES, THESE FUNDS WOULD NOT START RIGHT AWAY. AS I MENTIONED, LEGAL AND A LOT OF US HAVE STILL MORE WORK TO DO ON THIS AND WE STILL HAVE TO COMMUNICATE. THE SHERIFF WAS SENT A MEMO ON THIS, AND I HAVE NOT HEARD BACK FROM HIS AGENCY YET, BUT WE STILL HAVE TALKS TO DO WITH HIM AS WELL, AND TO ADDRESS A POINT BY MS. BEAN -- AND I'M GOING TO BE BRINGING BACK SOMETHING IN ADDITION THAT WILL ADDRESS THE ISSUES OF APPLYING FOR FUNDS AND GRANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL THAT -- IN FACT, IT SHOULD BE REQUIRED -- AND THIS IS WHAT I WANT TO BRING BACK TO THE BOARD SHORTLY -- THAT AGENCIES THAT QUALIFY FOR GRANTS FOR FUNDING, THAT THEY MUST SHOW SOME TYPE OF DUE DILIGENCE THAT THEY HAVE APPLIED FOR AVAILABLE STIMULUS FUNDING OR IN THIS CASE, WE CAN ALSO TALK ABOUT THAT THEY HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEY HAVE ON STAFF SOMEBODY THAT IS SKILLED IN APPLYING FOR AND WRITING GRANTS, OR IF THEY DON'T, THEN THEY CAN COME TO THE COUNTY, PAY US A FEE OR PAY US A CONTINGENCY FEE TO DO THE RESEARCH AND DO THESE GRANTS BECAUSE AS MUCH AS WE WANT TO HELP THESE AGENCIES AND THEY'RE IMPORTANT, THEY'VE GOT TO ALSO PUT FORTH EFFORT TO HELP US BECAUSE WE'VE GOT SO MANY OTHER THINGS TO FUND THAT IT WOULD NOT SIT WELL WITH ME TO CONTINUE TO APPROVE FUNDING AT MAXIMUM LEVELS FOR AGENCIES WHEN THEY HAVE NOT MADE ANY ATTEMPT TO GO OUT AND -- AND ACQUIRE AVAILABLE STATE OR FEDERAL DOLLARS. THAT ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO ME AT ALL, SO AS I MENTIONED, I'LL BE BRINGING SOMETHING BACK. TO YOUR QUESTION, YES, I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A SECOND MOTION, AND PERHAPS I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE THAT BEFORE WE PERHAPS DECIDE ON THE VICTIM ASSISTANCE AND CONSUMER PROTECTION AT THE CURRENT LEVELS THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A RECOMMENDED AMOUNT, PERHAPS HAVE THOSE DIRECTORS COME BACK TO US AND TALK ABOUT WHAT IMPACTS OR WHAT SERVICE IMPACT THAT MIGHT HAVE AT THOSE PARTICULAR LEVELS, AND THEN MAYBE WE COULD ALSO HAVE A DISCUSSION, SO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 500,000, WHAT WOULD THAT PROVIDE FOR THE AGENCY? IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 1.5 MILLION, HOW IS THAT GOING TO IMPACT THE -- THE -- THE VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE PROGRAM? >>PAT BEAN: I THINK COMMISSIONER FERLITA WAS LOOKING AT SOMETHING CLOSER TO TWO MILLION OR BETTER. >>ROSE FERLITA: I WAS LOOKING AT A 10% REDUCTION, LIKE 2.218, TWO MILLION -- 2,218,000. >>KEVIN BECKNER: OKAY. >>ROSE FERLITA: 10% REDUCTION. >>KEVIN BECKNER: I WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT. >>ROSE FERLITA: AND I'M OKAY WITH THE OTHER. I THINK THAT WE NEED MORE DOLLARS FOR THE VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE THAN -- >>KEVIN BECKNER: WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 10%. WE WOULD PROBABLY -- I WOULD IMAGINE -- ESPECIALLY I KNOW THEY'VE JUST APPLIED FOR SOME GRANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, SO IT WOULD PROBABLY OFFSET SOME OF THOSE EXPENSES, SO I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. DID YOU -- I CAN GO AHEAD AND STATE THE MOTION THAT I HAVE, AND THEN WE CAN THEN ADDRESS THE OTHERS IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT WITH YOU, MR. CHAIR. >>KEN HAGAN: SURE. >>KEVIN BECKNER: SO I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DIRECT STAFF TO WORK WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, CHIEF JUDGE MENENDEZ AND HIS STAFF, AND THE CLERK'S OFFICE TO REEVALUATE ALL CURRENT FEES THAT ARE BEING ASSESSED TO INMATES AND INDIVIDUALS CONVICTED OF CRIMES AND IDENTIFY POTENTIAL FEES THAT COULD BE ASSESSED AND AUTHORIZED BY STATE STATUTE OR COUNTY ORDINANCE AND BRING BACK RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOCC FOR CHANGING THE EXISTING FEE STRUCTURE OR INSTITUTING NEW FEES. THE SECOND PART WOULD BE WORK WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, CHIEF JUDGE MENENDEZ AND HIS STAFF, AND THE CLERK'S OFFICE TO IDENTIFY WAYS TO IMPROVE THE COLLECTION RATE OF FEES FROM INMATES AND INDIVIDUALS CONVICTED OF CRIMES. IDEAS TO INCLUDE ARE ACCEPTING CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS AT THE JAIL, REQUIRING THAT THE BOOKING FEE BE PAID ALONG WITH POSTING OF A BOND, OR REQUIRING THAT ALL ASSESSED FEES, INCLUDING THE BOOKING FEE, BE PAID AS TERMS OF AN INDIVIDUAL'S PROBATION OR PAROLE OR BEFORE THE FINAL DISPOSITION OF THEIR CASE. STAFF SHALL REPORT THEIR SOLUTIONS TO THE BOCC. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BECKNER. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >>MARK SHARPE: [INAUDIBLE] >>ROSE FERLITA: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. NO FURTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>KEN HAGAN: LET ME SAY BEFORE WE GO INTO THE -- SETTING ASIDE FUNDING FOR THE TWO AGENCIES, WITH RESPECT TO THE CONSUMER PROTECTION AGENCY, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THE CHIEF INVESTIGATOR POSITION IS CURRENTLY FUNDED FOR FISCAL YEAR '10. THE FLAGGED ITEM, WHICH IS THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF 741,000 ADDS BACK NINE POSITIONS FOR A TOTAL OF TEN. IF WE DO -- AND THIS IS FROM ERIC JOHNSON FROM E-MAIL. IF WE ADD 500,000 TO THE CURRENT COMMITMENT OF THE INVESTIGATOR, THAT WOULD ADD SIX INVESTIGATORS AND A SECRETARY FOR A TOTAL STAFFING OF EIGHT, PLUS THEY HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR A NINTH SHOULD THEY RECEIVE STIMULUS DOLLARS THAT HAVE APPLIED FOR. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THE BOARD'S COMFORTABLE WITH GOING FOR THAT, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS -- YOU KNOW, WOULD BE A GOOD MINIMUM LEVEL TO START WITH. COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I WOULD -- BEFORE WE GO AND APPROVE SOMETHING FOR CONSUMER PROTECTION, AGAIN, WITH SUCH A DRAMATIC REDUCTION, I WANT TO -- I'D LIKE TO HAVE SOME MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO HEAR -- AND ACTUALLY, FOR THE RECORD, I'M NOT EXTRAORDINARILY THRILLED THAT MR. SUDBERRY HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO ALLOWED TO MAKE A PRESENTATION LIKE MANY OF THE OTHER DIRECTORS. I KNOW THERE'S SOME CIRCUMSTANCES THERE, BUT I WANT TO BE ABLE TO HEAR THE IMPACT OF SUCH A DRAMATIC BUDGET REDUCTION, AND THEN AGAIN MAKE SURE THAT -- BECAUSE THIS IS AN IMPORTANT SERVICE. THESE ARE -- WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SERVICES TO OUR SENIORS THAT -- YOU KNOW, THIS AGENCY IS -- HAS INVESTIGATED LICENSED CONTRACTORS. YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE DONE SO MUCH ESPECIALLY FOR OUR SENIORS AND PEOPLE TO PREVENT FRAUD, THEY'VE DONE EDUCATION THAT -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT BEFORE WE APPROVE THAT BUDGET THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE IMPACTS OF THAT REDUCTION BECAUSE I'M JUST NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT PARTICULAR LEVEL AT THIS POINT IN TIME. SO I WOULD ASK THAT PERHAPS STAFF -- THAT WE REVISIT THIS, AND I WOULD ASK THAT MR. SUDBERRY BE ALLOWED TO COME BACK TO GIVE HIS OPINION OR THOUGHTS AS FAR AS WHAT -- HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT HIS UNIT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THAT -- MR. JOHNSON. >>ERIC JOHNSON: WELL, COMMISSIONERS, MR. SUDBERRY ANSWERED QUESTIONS WHEN WE PRESENTED THE CONSUMER PROTECTION BUDGET, AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WHAT COMMISSIONER HAGAN JUST MENTIONED WOULD BE A REDUCTION OF TWO INVESTIGATORS FROM THE CURRENT LEVEL. WE HAVE -- >>KEN HAGAN: I DON'T MIND IF WE WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION -- IT WILL HAVE TO BE NEXT THURSDAY -- AND MAKE THAT DECISION ON THURSDAY IF THE BOARD DOESN'T WANT TO MAKE IT TODAY, BUT >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'D LIKE TO HEAR -- YOUR FEELING AGAIN WAS -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: WELL, COMMISSIONERS, THE FLAGGED ITEM WOULD RESTORE NINE POSITIONS AS INDICATED. WE HAVE THE CHIEF INVESTIGATOR ALREADY FUNDED. WE ALSO HAVE THE ONE POSITION THAT HAS BEEN REQUESTED FOR FDLE STATE SURPLUS FUNDING, AND OF COURSE, THAT HAS NOT BEEN AWARDED, SO THERE'S NO CERTAINTY THERE, BUT THERE'S A LIKELIHOOD THERE. SO THAT WOULD GIVE US TOTAL FUNDING FOR 11 POSITIONS, WHICH IS, IN EFFECT, WHAT WE HAVE TODAY IN THAT SECTION OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE 17 POSITIONS IN THE DEPARTMENT TODAY. WE'VE FUNDED THREE OF THOSE GOING FORWARD. FOUR OF THE POSITIONS ARE ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS, SO THE FLAGGED ITEM RESTORES THE UNCLASSIFIED SUPERVISOR, AND WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE GRANT WOULD FUND ALL OF THE POSITIONS, INCLUDING A SECRETARY. OUR EXPECTATION GOING FORWARD WOULD BE THAT SINCE WE HAVE TAKEN POSITIONS FROM PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND REALIGNED THEM IN OUR RECOMMENDED BUDGET THAT IF THE BOARD WERE TO FULLY FUND THAT 11-PERSON STAFF, THAT WE WOULD ALIGN THAT WITH OTHER PUBLIC SAFETY FUNCTIONS TO ENSURE WE HAD ADEQUATE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT. WHAT COMMISSIONER HAGAN HAD ASKED ABOUT YESTERDAY WAS IF WE PROVIDED AN ADDITIONAL $500,000, AND I JUST INDICATED AND HE DISCUSSED, THAT WOULD PROVIDE NINE OF THE 11 POSITIONS. IT WOULD CUT TWO INVESTIGATOR POSITIONS. TO ME IT'S A COMPROMISE, BUT IT WOULD CONTINUE TO HAVE THE CHIEF INVESTIGATOR, SIX GUARANTEED INVESTIGATORS WITH THE POTENTIAL OF A SEVENTH IF THE GRANT IS APPROVED, PLUS THE SUPPORT POSITION OF A SECRETARY. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I'M HAPPY TO WAIT UNTIL WE -- TO BRING THIS UP THURSDAY. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: AND I WILL NOT -- I WILL NOT BE HERE. I -- ACTUALLY, THIS IS ONE INSTANCE WHERE I DO SUPPORT THE ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION, WHICH WAS -- WHICH WAS FOR THE ELIMINATION. I RECOGNIZE THAT IT DOES PROVIDE A VALUABLE SERVICE, BUT WE'RE KIND OF AT THAT POINT WHERE WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT SERVICES WE CAN PROVIDE, AND IF THERE'S DUPLICATIVE SERVICES, THEN I BELIEVE WE CAN LOOK TO THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, AND THAT -- IN THEIR CONSUMER PROTECTION EFFORTS, SO I GUESS IF I HAD AN OPTION, I WOULD SUPPORT THE CHAIRMAN'S RECOMMENDATION, WHICH WAS THE REDUCTION OF TWO, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR THE FULL ELIMINATION. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: THANK YOU. AND JUST A COUPLE OF CLARIFICATIONS. WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS RIGHT NOW, WHO WOULD BE RUNNING THAT DEPARTMENT? >>ERIC JOHNSON: WELL, IT WOULDN'T BE A DEPARTMENT, COMMISSIONER. KEVIN JACKSON IS THE CHIEF INVESTIGATOR, AND AS I JUST INDICATED, OUR EXPECTATION WOULD BE THAT WE'LL LOOK AT ALIGNING IT WITH ANOTHER PUBLIC SAFETY FUNCTION. CURRENTLY UNDER ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CARL HARNESS WE HAVE SEVERAL FUNCTIONS, AND WHAT WE'VE LOOKED AT IS HOW WE MIGHT BETTER ALIGN THOSE FUNCTIONS TO PROVIDE SUPPORT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING AND THAT WE'LL BE DOING OVER THE NEXT YEAR IS LOOKING AT COMBINING BACK-ROOM OPERATIONS IN ORDER TO DRIVE DOWN THE NUMBER OF SUPPORT POSITIONS AND IN ORDER TO DRIVE DOWN THE NUMBER OF ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGERS, SO IF YOU GO FORWARD AND IF YOU WANTED TO RESTORE THE ENTIRE PROGRAM AS FLAGGED, YOU WOULD HAVE THE FUNCTION, BUT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD IN STREAMLINING THE ORGANIZATION, AND THAT'S - - THAT'S WHAT WE'VE -- >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: I GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION. >>MARK SHARPE: I'LL SECOND YOUR MOTION. >>ROSE FERLITA: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEVIN BECKNER: FOR RIGHT NOW -- >>KEN HAGAN: LET COMMISSIONER BECKNER FINISH. HE HAD THE FLOOR. >>KEVIN BECKNER: I GUESS RIGHT NOW UNTIL I HEAR WHAT TYPE OF LEADERSHIP, YOU KNOW, AND WHAT THE FUNCTIONS ARE GOING TO BE, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH APPROVING THIS BECAUSE FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WE'RE ELIMINATING THE DIRECTOR'S POSITION, AND IF THERE'S MORE EFFICIENCIES CREATED, THAT'S FINE, BUT AT THE SAME POINT IN TIME, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ALSO FUNDING THAT 500,000, IS THAT -- DO WE HAVE GRANTS ON TOP OF THAT THAT PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING OR -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: THE $500,000 WOULD BE IN ADDITION TO THE CURRENT FUNDING OF THE CHIEF INVESTIGATOR AND COULD BE SUPPLEMENTED BY THE GRANT FUNDING, SO IT WOULD HAVE POTENTIALLY NINE OF THE 11 CURRENT POSITIONS ASSIGNED TO THE FUNCTION. >>KEVIN BECKNER: BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO KNOW WITH THE CUTS WHO'S GOING TO HANDLE OVER 120,000 PHONE CALLS A YEAR AND WHO'S GOING TO BE RESPONDING TO OUR SENIORS WHEN THEY'RE CALLED UPON, AND I CERTAINLY -- WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO COMMISSIONER SHARPE, YOU KNOW, IF I KNOW THAT IF I HAD A ISSUE -- A CONSUMER ISSUE AND WAS A VICTIM OF FRAUD, THE LAST THING THAT I WANT TO DO IS CALL INTO A 1-800 NUMBER AND NEVER GET A RESPONSE OR GET A SIGNIFICANT BUSY SIGNAL. SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PROVIDING ADEQUATE SERVICES TO OUR SENIORS AND OUR CITIZENS AND ALSO THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS THAT THEY PROVIDE ARE ALSO CONTINUED, SO AGAIN, I WOULD -- I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT IN THE MOTIONS, BUT I WOULD MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE COME BACK AND REVISIT THIS NEXT WEEK WITH AGAIN A CLEARER EXPECTATION AS FAR AS WHO WOULD HANDLE THE SERVICES AND WHAT EXACT IMPACTS COULD WE EXPECT BY MAKING SUCH A DRAMATIC BUDGET REDUCTION. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, WHY DON'T WE DO THIS BECAUSE WE SHOULDN'T BE MAKING A DECISION TODAY BASED -- I THINK -- I'D LIKE TO SEE THE STREAMLINING, SO COULD YOU BRING BACK THE STREAMLINING OPTION? THAT IT WAY IT COULD BE WEIGHED AND CONSIDERED AND WE COULD ADDRESS THAT -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: I THINK THAT'S REFLECTED IN YOUR CURRENT FLAG. YOUR CURRENT FLAG HAS NO REDUCTION IN THE INVESTIGATORS UNLESS WE LOSE THE GRANT DOLLARS. >>KEVIN BECKNER: HOW MUCH IN GRANT DOLLARS ARE WE EXPECTING? >>ERIC JOHNSON: I DON'T KNOW. THERE'S I THINK 22 POSITIONS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED UNDER THE STATE STIMULUS PROGRAM. EXCUSE ME 12.5 UNDER THE STATE STIMULUS, THERE'S FOUR UNDER THE FEDERAL STIMULUS. I DON'T THINK I HAVE ALL OF JAN'S OTHER PAPERWORK WITH ME. >>KEVIN BECKNER: WHEN WOULD IT BE EXPECTED WE'RE GOING TO -- WHEN WE WOULD LEARN ABOUT THE -- IF WE GET ACCEPTED FOR THE GRANTS OR HOW MUCH WE'RE GETTING FOR THE GRANTS? >>PAT BEAN: WELL, THEY'RE COMING IN ONE AT A TIME BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, SHE HAS SEVERAL DIFFERENT GRANTS THAT SHE'S APPLIED FOR THAT INCLUDE THESE POSITIONS, AND I KNOW THAT JUST YESTERDAY WE RECEIVED ONE OF THE GRANT AWARDS, AND WE'LL BE RECEIVING THEM. WE CAN'T TELL YOU EXACTLY WHEN BECAUSE AS SOON AS WE SEND THEM IN, THEY START WORKING ON THEM, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY WILL ACTUALLY NOTIFY US. >>KEVIN BECKNER: OKAY. I WOULD STICK WITH THE -- WITH THE MOTION -- THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION OF COMING BACK NEXT THURSDAY, AND IF YOU COULD PROVIDE JUST MORE CLARIFICATION AND PERHAPS EVEN IF YOU -- WE NEED TO HAVE A -- COME TO MY OFFICE AND WE CAN TALK FURTHER ABOUT IT SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE IMPACTS ARE, THAT WOULD BE FINE. >>ERIC JOHNSON: SURE. >>KEVIN BECKNER: WE COULD REVISIT THIS NEXT THURSDAY. >>KEN HAGAN: DID WE GET A SECOND TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM? >>MARK SHARPE: I SECONDED IT, ALTHOUGH I'M NOT CLEAR. >>KEN HAGAN: COULD YOU RESTATE THAT MOTION, COMMISSIONER HIGGINBOTHAM. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: WELL, WE HAD TWO MOTIONS. ONE I WAS SECONDING. I THINK WE'RE ALL GETTING PUNCHY HERE. THAT WE SUPPORT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF -- AS STATED BEFORE THE FLAG, AND THEN WE HAD ANOTHER ONE -- >>MARK SHARPE: THAT WAS MY RECOMMENDATION. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS IN THE FORM OF A MOTION. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: AND I MADE THE SECOND TO YOUR -- >>MARK SHARPE: OH, OKAY. GOOD. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. SO YOU SECONDED COMMISSIONER SHARPE'S RECOMMENDATION. >>AL HIGGINBOTHAM: YES. >>KEN HAGAN: WAS -- >>MARK SHARPE: STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. >>KEN HAGAN: TO ELIMINATE THE PROGRAM? AND THEN YOU HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION. >>KEVIN BECKNER: I HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO COME BACK AND REVISIT THIS NEXT WEEK. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. DID WE HAVE A SECOND TO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION? I'LL PASS THE GAVEL AND I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. I'LL SECOND COMMISSIONER BECKNER'S MOTION TO BRING THIS BACK NEXT WEEK. >>MARK SHARPE: OKAY. ALL RIGHTY. WE HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER BECKNER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAGAN, WHICH IS TO BRING BACK TO THE BOARD THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF A -- >>KEN HAGAN: THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS. >>ROSE FERLITA: DISCUSSION. >>KEN HAGAN: FOR THE NEXT -- FOR THE WORKSHOP NEXT THURSDAY. >>MARK SHARPE: OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR -- OR RECORD YOUR VOTES. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 5-2. COMMISSIONERS NORMAN AND SHARPE VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. NOW, DO WE WANT TO APPROVE THE -- THE FUNDING FOR THE VICTIM ASSISTANCE MINUS THE 10%? >>KEVIN BECKNER: I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT AND WOULD - - DID YOU MAKE A MOTION, COMMISSIONER FERLITA, TO DO THAT? >>ROSE FERLITA: I WAS USING THAT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO WHAT MS. BEAN WAS -- WAS SUGGESTING. I'M -- I'M IN FAVOR OF FUNDING IT COMPLETELY, BUT -- BUT IN THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION TO GET SOME COMPROMISE HERE, I WOULD DO THAT. I MEAN -- >>KEVIN BECKNER: WELL, I WOULD SECOND YOUR MOTION, THEN, TO FUND IT AT LESS 10%, AND THEN ADDITIONAL -- SUBTRACTED BY ANY ADDITIONAL GRANT DOLLARS THAT WE MIGHT RECEIVE THAT CAN BE RETURNED TO GENERAL REVENUE. >>ROSE FERLITA: BUT -- BUT KEEPING IN MIND, OF COURSE, THAT SOME OF THE GRANT DOLLARS WILL GO AWAY, AND THAT'S NOT IN KEEPING WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER NORMAN HAD SAID AND I WAS SUPPORTING ABOUT DOING THIS IN SOME SORT OF IN PERPETUITY WITH A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE OF FIVE, RIGHT, MR. NORMAN? WOULD YOU JUST -- >>JIM NORMAN: WHAT I'D LIKE IS -- AND MAYBE IT COULD COME BACK ALSO ON THURSDAY, BUT THAT DOESN'T REALLY AFFECT THIS MOTION, BUT TO HAVE A BASE FUND THAT WOULD ALWAYS BE THERE SUPPORTED BY GRANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. IN OTHER WORDS, IT WOULD NEVER DROP BELOW THAT. IN OTHER WORDS, WE GO -- >>ROSE FERLITA: I'M FINE WITH THAT. I THINK WE HAVE TO SEPARATE THAT, BUT I'M FINE WITH THAT. HOWEVER WAY WE HAVE TO CRAFT THAT, IT'S FINE. >>JIM NORMAN: YES. WORK WITH -- >>ROSE FERLITA: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] SECURITY GOING ON. WORK WITH OBER'S OFFICE -- >>ROSE FERLITA: RIGHT. >>JIM NORMAN: -- TO BRING BACK THAT -- WHAT'S EVER GOING TO BE PUT IN THE BUDGET ALL THE TIME. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. BUT WOULDN'T YOU RECOMMEND, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT WE DO THAT SEPARATELY? >>KEN HAGAN: I RECOMMEND -- YEAH, WE DO IT SEPARATELY -- >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. WELL, LET'S DO THAT SEPARATELY. >>KEN HAGAN: -- THE INITIAL MOTION FOR THE FLAGGED AMOUNT MINUS THE 10% BY COMMISSIONER FERLITA, SECOND COMMISSIONER BECKNER. ANY COMMENTS ON THAT MOTION? IF NOT, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>JIM NORMAN: I'D JUST MOVE THAT WE ASK STAFF TO WORK WITH MARK OBER ABOUT ESTABLISHING A BASELINE THAT IS A CONTINUATION -- >>MARK SHARPE: SECOND. >>JIM NORMAN: -- AND WE WOULD PLUG THAT IN AS A PERPETUITY, TAKE SUPERMAJORITY TO ELIMINATE IT. >>KEVIN BECKNER: AND IF I COULD JUST MAKE A NOTE ON THAT. I'VE GOT IDEAS THAT I CAN BRING BACK AND WORK WITH STAFF ON AS WELL THAT I THINK ALSO WOULD ADDRESS THAT ISSUE. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND COMMISSIONER SHARPE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>ROSE FERLITA: MR. HAGAN -- >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. IT'S KIND OF ALONG THE LINES OF CONSUMER PROTECTION AND PRS AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO I JUST HAVE A REQUEST. I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN JUST MAKE IT NOW, THERE WON'T BE ANY DISCUSSION. >>KEN HAGAN: SURE. >>ROSE FERLITA: BUT SINCE WE'RE BRINGING BACK STUFF NEXT WEEK. MR. JOHNSON, I DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT ABOUT THIS, BUT I HAVE AN INCLINATION TO SUGGEST THAT PRS IS -- I'VE NOT BEEN IMPRESSED WITH WHAT THEY DO AND HOW THEY DO IT AND WHAT WE GET BACK ON THE RETURN OF THOSE DOLLARS, SO BECAUSE OF THAT -- THAT INCLINATION, I WONDER IF PERHAPS MAYBE NEXT WEEK YOU COULD BRING BACK -- OR BEFORE THEN, GIVE IT TO US BEFORE AND WE CAN DISCUSS IT THEN. GIVE ME AN IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY PUTTING INTO THAT PROGRAM. I JUST HAVE BEEN CONTINUALLY UNIMPRESSED WITH WHAT THEY DO AND HOW THEY DO IT. SO THAT'S JUST A REQUEST TO GET BACK INFORMATION, PRS. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM IS THE EMPLOYEE RELATIONS, LABOR RELATIONS DIVISION DIRECTOR POSITION. ERIC JOHNSON IS HERE TO SPEAK TO THAT. >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONERS, THAT WAS NOT AN EFFICIENCY. THAT WAS ONE OF OUR RECOMMENDED STREAMLINING EFFORTS IN THE AREA OF MANAGEMENT. >>KEN HAGAN: WHO WAS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR FLAGGING THIS? COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: NO, I DID NOT FLAG IT. I JUST HAVE A COMMENT TO MAKE. AND MR. JOHNSON, I -- I AGREE, THIS WAS -- THIS WAS PROBABLY AN EFFORT BY ADMINISTRATION IN TERMS OF EFFICIENCY. IT DEALS WITH THE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE, AND I -- I WON'T SUPPORT THIS BEING REINSTATED POSITION BECAUSE I THINK IT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION, ALTHOUGH IT'S NOTHING THAT MS. LEE CAN WARN ME ABOUT STEPPING ON IN TERMS OF THE CHARTER, BUT IT'S JUST AN OPINION THAT I THINK WE NEED TO SUPPORT THE -- THE MORE EFFICIENT MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE THE ADMINISTRATION IS SUGGESTING, AND OF COURSE, IF THAT DOESN'T WORK, THEN THE TRADE-OFF ON THAT IS, MR. JOHNSON, I'LL HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER WHITE. >>KEVIN WHITE: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I BELIEVE THIS WAS MY FLAGGED ITEM. I THINK THIS WAS THE POSITION THAT I FLAGGED AFTER RECEIVING THE WHITE PAPER THAT I PASSED OUT A FEW WEEKS AGO OUTLINING THE EFFICIENCIES THAT COULD BE SAVED WITHIN THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SHOWING THAT WE HAD DUPLICATIVE SERVICES IN HUMAN RESOURCES IN VIRTUALLY EVERY DEPARTMENT THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY AND -- AND EACH NOT ACTING IN CONCERT WITH EACH OTHER NOR FOLLOWING THE SAME PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES AS WAS OUTLINED IN THAT -- IN THAT PAPER, SO I THINK THIS IS NOT ONLY THE SECOND IN COMMAND WHO HELPED DRAFT THIS PAPER NOT TITLED AFTER ME BUT JUST NAMED THE WHITE PAPER. I THINK THIS PERSON IS AN INVALUABLE TOOL TO THE HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, AND I THINK IT OUGHT TO BE SAVED, AND IN THE INTEREST OF CONTINUING TO STREAMLINE AND CUT EFFICIENCIES, I BELIEVE THIS -- THIS POSITION IS ESSENTIAL TO MR. GEORGE WILLIAMS AND WOULD BE PART OF HIS RIGHT HAND IN MOVING FORWARD WITH FURTHER ELIMINATIONS AND CUTS AND ASSISTANCE TO HIM. >>KEN HAGAN: WHILE THERE REALLY HASN'T BEEN ANY LOBBYING FOR THIS POSITION AS FAR AS I'M AWARE OF, IT DOES KIND OF REMIND ME OF A SITUATION WE WERE IN LAST YEAR WHERE WE STARTED IDENTIFYING CERTAIN POSITIONS, AND, YOU KNOW, I'M ALWAYS UNCOMFORTABLE WHENEVER WE GO THERE, SO I'M NOT GOING TO -- I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THE ITEM. COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. AND I -- AND I -- I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THIS, BUT -- AND IN TERMS OF THE EFFICIENCIES, NOT TO BE MISCONSTRUED, I'M NOT SUPPORTING THIS BECAUSE I'M NOT APPRECIATING EFFICIENCIES IN TERMS OF DUPLICITY, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT CAN BE TAGGED SPECIFICALLY TO THIS PERSON BECAUSE OF THE SUBMITTAL OF THE WHITE PAPER. I JUST THINK AGAIN THIS IS STREAMLINING IN MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE. THAT SHOULD BE BACK TO THE ADMINISTRATION, AND I WON'T SUPPORT IT. NOT THAT I'M NOT SUPPORTING EFFICIENCIES. I CERTAINLY AM. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>JIM NORMAN: AND I GET WHAT COMMISSIONER HAGAN WAS SAYING. YOU NEVER WANT TO -- BUT I WOULD SECOND TO COME BACK THURSDAY IF YOU COULD GET MR. WILLIAMSON AND THE ADMINISTRATION TO SHOW ME THAT -- LET'S MOVE IT AWAY FROM HERE A MINUTE. IF YOU -- LIKE THE IP, IF THERE WAS DEPARTMENTS ALL OVER THE PLACE THAT HAD THEIR OWN IP UNITS AND WE HAD ONE CENTRAL IN THE COUNTY AND THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT KIND OF STUFF -- IF -- IF MR. WILLIAMSON CAN SHOW ME THAT THERE ARE MULTIPLE GROUPS OUT THERE LIKE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND BY KEEPING THIS SHOW ME THE ELIMINATIONS OF THOSE DEALS -- IF YOU WANT TO GET WITH HIM AND BRING IT BACK THURSDAY, I WOULD SECOND YOU TO DO THAT, IF YOU WOULD SHOW ME -- SHOW ME WHERE THE DOLLARS AND CENTS WERE AND THOSE OTHER -- >>KEVIN WHITE: I MEAN, I'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT, MR. NORMAN, BUT A LOT OF THOSE WERE OUTLINED IN THE HANDOUT, BUT I'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. >>JIM NORMAN: I MEAN -- YEAH, BUT SHOW US -- WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS SHOW US I GUESS -- >>KEVIN WHITE: A BREAKDOWN OF SAVINGS? NOT A PROBLEM. >>JIM NORMAN: YEAH. AND I WOULD SECOND YOU FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING BACK SAVINGS AND SHOW IT TO US. I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. >>KEVIN WHITE: NO PROBLEM. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: I THINK THAT WOULD END UP BEING IN TERMS OF WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION SUGGESTED BY THIS REDUCTION. IT'S GOING TO PROBABLY BE A POINT-COUNTERPOINT. IF THEY WERE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK AND DISCUSS WHY, THEN I THINK YOU, MR. JOHNSON, SHOULD BE ABLE TO ADDRESS FOR US WHY NOT. ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? BECAUSE IF YOU'RE NOT, I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD WITH -- >>ERIC JOHNSON: COMMISSIONERS, I JUST NEED TO TELL YOU THAT I HAVE GRAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE DOCUMENT THAT WAS FORWARDED. >>ROSE FERLITA: I DO TOO. >>ERIC JOHNSON: I'VE HAD A DISCUSSION WITH THE AUTHORS. CERTAINLY THE IDEAS THAT WERE BEHIND THE WHITE PAPER WERE VALID, THE INDUSTRY STANDARDS THAT WERE APPLIED WERE FROM GOOD INDUSTRY SOURCES. THE METHODOLOGY WAS SERIOUSLY FLAWED, THE CONCLUSIONS ARE FLAWED, AND I -- I'VE SHARED THAT WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS. MY CONCERN IS THAT WE NOW HAVE AN UPHILL BATTLE BECAUSE OF THE POOR JOB THAT WAS DONE IN DRAWING CONCLUSIONS. I HAVE MADE A COMMITMENT, AS I INDICATED EARLIER, THAT HUMAN RESOURCES WILL WORK OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT YEAR TO IDENTIFY EFFICIENCIES. THERE CERTAINLY ARE SOME DUPLICATION, BUT THAT REPORT FAR OVERSTATED THAT DUPLICATION, AND IT HAS ACTUALLY CREATED A DIFFICULTY WITH HR IN WORKING WITH ALL OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS THAT WERE ANALYZED IN THE REPORT. >>KEVIN WHITE: WELL, IF THAT'S THE CASE, MR. JOHNSON, I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE THAT TOO. >>ERIC JOHNSON: YEAH. I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT IT WAS DELIVERED, AND I'VE SHARED THAT WITH THE AUTHORS OF THE REPORT, AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES OF DUPLICATION BECAUSE THERE'S CERTAINLY ISSUES OF DUPLICATION. THEY WERE FAR OVERSTATED BY THAT REPORT. >>ROSE FERLITA: AND MR. JOHNSON -- >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA HAD THE FLOOR. >>ROSE FERLITA: -- I HAD A BACKUP QUESTION. I AGREE WITH YOU, AND IT WAS LIKE OUT OF NOWHERE WE GOT THIS, AND AGAIN, IT'S BACK TO WHY WE'RE MAKING AN ATTEMPT TO SAVE THIS PARTICULAR POSITION WHEN I THINK THAT YOU GUYS HAVE ADDRESSED AND RECOGNIZED THE NEED FOR EFFICIENCIES AS WE GO FORWARD, AND I THINK HR WILL AND SHOULD CONTINUE TO RECOGNIZE THOSE EFFICIENCIES, BUT THAT PAPER THE WAY IT WAS PRESENTED, HOW IT WAS DONE DIDN'T IMPRESS ME, AND MS. BEAN YOU KEPT VERY OBVIOUSLY QUIET, SO I GET THE SENSE THAT PROCEDURALLY IT WASN'T DONE APPROPRIATELY. DID YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT COMING THAT DAY? >>PAT BEAN: NO, MA'AM. >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. I REST MY POINT. I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS MOVING FORWARD. I'M JUST NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS RESTORATION OF FUNDS, AND THAT'S MY POSITION. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER WHITE, ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO BRING IT BACK NEXT WEEK? >>KEVIN WHITE: I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO BRING IT BACK NEXT WEEK, AND WE'LL GET ALL THE INFORMATION FROM ADMINISTRATION AND THE STAFF AS WELL AS HR. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. THAT MOTION'S BY COMMISSIONER WHITE, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN. AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT IT BASED ON MY EARLIER COMMENTS AND THOSE OF MR. JOHNSON'S, BUT PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE ON THE MOTION. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 4-3. COMMISSIONERS FERLITA, HAGAN, AND SHARPE VOTED NO. >>KEN HAGAN: NEXT ITEM. >>PAT BEAN: THE NEXT ITEM IS TO RESTORE THE SICKLE CELL ASSOCIATION FUNDING. MANUS O'DONNELL WILL COME FORWARD TO TALK ABOUT THIS ONE. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: COMMISSIONERS, I -- I WOULD START OFF JUST BY CAUTIONING THAT A LOT OF AGENCIES WOULD ASK FOR FUNDS TO BE RESTORED IF WE RESTORE ANY THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THE PARAMETERS THAT WE SET OF CATEGORY ONE, TWO, AND THREE AND THE PERCENTAGES THAT WERE APPLIED TO EACH; HOWEVER, THE COMMITTEE THAT REVIEWED THIS HAD A VERY DIFFICULT TIME TRYING TO DECIDE WHETHER THIS WAS A CATEGORY ONE OR A CATEGORY TWO. IT'S IN CATEGORY TWO RIGHT NOW. WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND -- BECAUSE WE AS A COMMITTEE HAD A TIME TRYING TO DECIDE. WE FINALLY DID DECIDE TO PUT IT IN CATEGORY TWO BECAUSE IT'S IDENTIFYING PEOPLE WHO ARE AT RISK AND EDUCATING THEM. IT'S NOT DIRECT PROVISION OF HEALTH, BUT THE ARGUMENT COULD BE MADE THAT IT IS A HEALTH ISSUE AS WELL, SO WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IS THAT WE RESTORE THIS AS A CATEGORY ONE, WE CLASSIFY IT THAT WAY AND $2,498 WOULD BE RESTORED TO THE AGENCY. >>MARK SHARPE: I THINK -- >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: I AGREE WITH YOU, AND I THINK WE SHOULD RESTORE IT, AND SO I THINK I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DO THAT. >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. IS THIS MOTION FOR THE $6200 AMOUNT OR FOR THE RECOMMENDATION BY MANUS FOR 2400? >>ROSE FERLITA: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: WE'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE HERE. >>MARK SHARPE: I WAS RECOMMENDING MANUS' RECOMMENDATION. WHAT ARE WE -- WHAT'S THE -- >>KEN HAGAN: THERE'S A $3800 DIFFERENCE. >>KEVIN WHITE: I WAS LOOKING AT THE $6200 AMOUNT IS WHAT I WAS SECONDING. >>ROSE FERLITA: THAT'S NOT WHAT HE'S RECOMMENDING, THOUGH. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE, WHAT'S YOUR MOTION? >>KEVIN WHITE: IT WAS AN ITEM I FLAGGED. >>MARK SHARPE: WELL, MY RECOMMENDATION IS WE GO WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. WHAT -- I APOLOGIZE. WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? THE DIFFERENCE IS $30,000. WHAT WOULD THE DIFFERENCE MEAN IN TERMS OF -- >>MANUS O'DONNELL: WHAT WE WOULD RESTORE TO THE AGENCY, INSTEAD OF $6242, WE WOULD RESTORE $2498. >>KEVIN WHITE: WE'RE TALKING $6200, NOT $62,000. >>ROSE FERLITA: MAY I ASK CLARIFICATION? YOU'RE BUMPING IT FROM A LEVEL TWO NONPROFIT TO A LEVEL ONE, AND THAT'S THE HIGHEST LEVEL WITH THE LOWEST REDUCTION, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: YES, MA'AM. >>ROSE FERLITA: YOU SEE WHAT HE'S SAYING, COMMISSIONER SHARPE? >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE, WAS YOUR -- >>MARK SHARPE: WELL -- OKAY. IT'S A RELATIVELY SMALL DIFFERENCE. WHAT -- HOW DID WE SELECT ONE OVER THE OTHER? I'M JUST -- AND WHAT WOULD WE BE DOING IF WE WENT WITH THE HIGHER LOWER THAN THE LOWER NUMBER? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: THE -- >>JIM NORMAN: [INAUDIBLE] >>MARK SHARPE: [INAUDIBLE] TOOK A CUT. >>JIM NORMAN: THIS WOULD RESTORE THEM WHERE THEY WOULDN'T TAKE A CUT. THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. >>ROSE FERLITA: NO, THEY'RE TAKING A LESS CUT BECAUSE HE'S BUMPING IT UP FROM LEVEL TWO TO LEVEL ONE OF IMPORTANCE. >>JIM NORMAN: [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] RIGHT, BUT HE WOULDN'T HAVE A CUT. >>MARK SHARPE: I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE TREATED AS YOU WOULD TREAT ANY OTHER LEVEL ONE, OTHERWISE WE ARE NOW THEN GIVING IT EXTRAORDINARY -- AND NOT THAT I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S NOT A SERIOUS ISSUE BECAUSE IT'S A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE, BUT I THINK -- AS ARE ALL, SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT JUST BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE OF DISCREPANCY AND OTHERS ARE GOING TO BE SAYING WHY THIS AND NOT THE OTHERS, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE RESTORE IT BUT BACK TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION. THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. SO YOUR MOTION IS FOR THE $2400 -- >> >>KEVIN WHITE: SECOND. >>MARK SHARPE: COMMISSIONER WHITE SECONDED IT. >>KEN HAGAN: ANY OTHER COMMENT? >>ROSE FERLITA: AGAIN, THAT IS THE HIGHEST -- THE LOWEST PERCENTAGE ONE OF THE NONPROFITS COULD GET. >>MANUS O'DONNELL: A 15% REDUCTION, THAT'S CORRECT. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. SO YOU HAVE BUMPED IT UP IN TERMS OF IMPORTANCE TO MAKE IT REFLECT A LESSER REDUCTION? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: YES, MA'AM. >>ROSE FERLITA: IN KEEPING WITH ANY OTHERS THAT ARE IN THAT LEVEL? >>MANUS O'DONNELL: YES, MA'AM. >>ROSE FERLITA: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. MOTION COMMISSIONER SHARPE, SECOND COMMISSIONER WHITE. PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 6-0. >>JIM NORMAN: SO WHAT'S THAT NUMBER, COMMISSIONER SHARPE? [LAUGHTER] >>PAT BEAN: OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM F-21, WHICH IS TO RESTORE COMMUNITY LIAISONS TO FULL-TIME STATUS. >>EDITH STEWART: COMMISSIONERS, AS YOU ARE AWARE, WE RECOMMENDED THE REDUCTION OF THE COMMUNITY LIAISONS TO HALF-TIME. IN INTERVIEWING EACH OF THEM, THEY ASSURED ME THAT THEY COULD PRIORITIZE THEIR VARIOUS ASSOCIATIONS AND THE TIME THAT THEY WOULD SPEND WITH COMMUNITY COMMITTEES. THEY WOULD CONTINUE TO DO THE MAJOR FUNCTIONS THAT WE RECOGNIZED THAT THEY DO IN THE COMMUNITY, ASIA FEST, BLACK HISTORY HERITAGE, AND THE HISPANIC HURRICANE FORUMS. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: I THINK THAT'S A FAIR RECOMMENDATION. I REALLY FELT THAT -- AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE -- I APPRECIATE THE ARGUMENTS THAT I THINK WERE MADE BY BOTH COMMISSIONER FERLITA AND COMMISSIONER BECKNER, AND WE JUST AREN'T WHERE WE NEED TO BE YET WITH REGARD TO OUR OUTREACH AND OUR COMMUNICATION, AND THAT'S BEEN WELL COMMUNICATED TO ME, SO I WILL SUPPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION. I JUST HOPE THAT WE CAN DO MORE TO CONTINUE TO REACH OUT TO ALL THE COMMUNITIES AND GIVE THEM AS MUCH INFORMATION AS AVAILABLE, IN PARTICULARLY ABOUT HIRING OPPORTUNITIES, WHEN WE START HIRING AGAIN, LEADERSHIP POSITIONS, AND SUCH. >>KEN HAGAN: NOW, JUST TO CLARIFY, IS THIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION OR THIS IS TO RESTORE THE -- >>MARK SHARPE: THIS IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE HALF. IS THAT CORRECT? SO THERE WOULD STILL BE A REDUCTION, BUT IT WOULD NOT BE A ELIMINATION, IT WOULD BE HALF TIME TO -- EVERYONE WOULD BE RESTORED TO HALF. YOU'D HAVE HISPANIC, ASIAN, AND AFRICAN-AMERICAN. >>EDITH STEWART: ALL OF THEM ARE CURRENTLY FUNDED AT ONE HALF IN THE PROPOSED BUDGET. >>MARK SHARPE: OKAY. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER BECKNER. >>KEVIN BECKNER: WELL, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, AND I HAD ACTUALLY A FULLER PRESENTATION BUT WASN'T COMPLETE FOR TODAY. I DIDN'T THINK WE WERE GOING TO GET THIS FAR, BUT LET ME JUST MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY, THIS ORGANIZATION AS A WHOLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE LOOK AT LEADERSHIP ORGANIZATIONS, DOES NOT REPRESENT -- IS NOT IN MY OPINION A FAIR REPRESENTATION FOR THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY. WE -- WHEN YOU'RE CUTTING THIS POSITION TO HALF, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LESS COMMUNICATION THAN WHAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING FOR THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY. WE'RE LOOKING AT -- THAT THE COMMUNICATIONS THAT WE PROVIDE TO THE HISPANIC -- TO THE COMMUNITY ARE ALMOST ZERO, ESPECIALLY AS FAR AS ADVERTISING FOR -- FOR EMPLOYMENT FUNDING, AND IF YOU WERE TO COMPARE STATISTICS AS FAR -- ESPECIALLY AT THE MANAGEMENT LEVEL, THIS FAR, THE POPULATION THAT WE HAVE IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IS FAR HIGHER THAN WHAT'S REPRESENTED IN THIS ORGANIZATION, AND I JUST -- YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY AT THIS TIME WHEN THE HISPANIC POPULATION IS -- CONTINUES TO GROW AND THE NEED ESPECIALLY TO COMMUNICATE AND TO DO MORE OUTREACH WITH THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY, I JUST SEE THIS AS -- AS DETERIORATING ANY FURTHER, AND, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT RESTORING THAT POSITION TO -- TO AT LEAST FULL TIME TO REPRESENT THE -- SO WE COULD HAVE FURTHER REPRESENTATION TO THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY. I THINK BY PUTTING IT TO HALF TIME, I JUST DON'T THINK -- I THINK IT'S A REAL TRAVESTY AND SHOULD BE ALMOST A SLAP IN THE FACE FOR THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY, AND AS THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY CONTINUES TO GROW, THEY NEED OUR SERVICES, THEY NEED TO BE -- WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH THEM MORE THAN EVER, AND I WOULD NOT SUPPORT PUTTING THIS TO HALF-TIME. I WOULD SUPPORT BRINGING THIS -- RESTORING THIS TO FULL- TIME, AND ACTUALLY, I WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE RESTORE THE HISPANIC POSITION TO FULL-TIME. >>ROSE FERLITA: SECOND. >>JIM NORMAN: [INAUDIBLE] >>KEN HAGAN: ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ALL THE -- >>JIM NORMAN: HISPANIC OR ALL? >>KEN HAGAN: OR JUST THE HISPANIC OFFICE, COMMISSIONER BECKNER? >>KEVIN BECKNER: MY RECOMMENDATION -- I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE FAIR REPRESENTATION. WHAT I'VE SEEP AS FAR AS IN OUR ORGANIZATION, YES, WE ABSOLUTELY MUST DO MORE, ALSO COMMUNICATING WITH THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY AND OTHER COMMUNITIES. RIGHT NOW I JUST SEE THE HISPANIC LIAISON -- I SEE THE COMMUNICATION WITH OUR HISPANIC COMMUNITY BEING LESS THAN WHAT IT SHOULD BE, AND SO MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE THE HISPANIC LIAISON. >> WHAT ABOUT THE BLACK PEOPLE? >>KEN HAGAN: NOW, I'LL TELL YOU -- >>JIM NORMAN: I'LL SUBSTITUTE. GO AHEAD. >>KEN HAGAN: FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, I THINK ALL OF THE LIAISON OFFICES ARE AN ASSET IN OUR COMMUNITY. >>JIM NORMAN: THAT WAS MY MOTION, COMMISSIONER, SUBSTITUTE. >>KEN HAGAN: THEY PROVIDE A CRITICALLY IMPORTANT SERVICE, AND -- >>MARK SHARPE: I'LL SUPPORT THE SUBSTITUTE, WHICH IS FAIR AND EVEN, RIGHT, FOR ALL? >>KEVIN BECKNER: IF WE'RE -- >>ROSE FERLITA: BRING IT BACK FOR EVERYBODY. [INDISCERNIBLE CROSS TALK] >>KEN HAGAN: WE NEED TO RESTORE ALL THE OFFICES FULL-TIME. COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: AND LET ME JUST SAY SOMETHING, AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THAT ABSOLUTELY, AND I'M SORRY I DON'T HAVE MY FIGURES HERE ABOUT THE HUGE INCREASE IN PERCENTAGES IN THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY, PARTICULARLY IN MY DISTRICT, BUT THAT'S FINE. THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING. AS WE GO FORWARD, WE MIGHT THINK OF SOMETHING IN TERMS OF THE ASIAN LIAISON. I HAVE HAD KOREAN, JAPANESE, DIFFERENT -- DIFFERENT GROUPS OF THAT COMMUNITY COME TO ME AND SAY WE HAVE SOME PROBLEMS BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T SPEAK ALL THESE DIALECTS, WE DON'T EXPECT HER TO, SO I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH OF THAT SHE'S ACTUALLY HELPING THAT PARTICULAR SECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY WITH NO DISRESPECT TO WHATEVER SHE DOES, BUT IN -- IN HER CASE, I THINK IT'S A DIFFICULTY. I MEAN, LIKE, IF YOU'RE MEXICAN, CUBAN, SPANISH, FROM HONDURAS, IT'S ALL SPANISH. DIFFERENT WAYS TO SAY STUFF, BUT IT'S STILL SPANISH. AND THE ASIAN LIAISON HAS A PROBLEM, AND I UNDERSTAND. IT'S THE SEMANTICS OF TALKING THOSE DIFFERENT DIALECTS, SO WE CAN DO THIS, BUT I TELL YOU WHAT WE PROBABLY SHOULD DO AS WE GO FORWARD. ULTIMATELY MAYBE BRING HER DOWN TO 20 HOURS, AND THEN THE OTHER 20 HOURS -- SHE DOES A LOT OF AMBASSADORSHIP STUFF WITH GENE GRAY AND STUFF. I'VE ATTENDED SOME OF THOSE RECEPTIONS. SO I THINK SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE WE NEED TO SEPARATE WHAT SHE DOES BY COMPLAINTS BY HER OWN POPULATION. WE CAN'T UNDERSTAND HER, SHE CAN'T UNDERSTAND US, AND I CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT. THERE'S TOO MANY DIFFERENT DIALECTS, SO I WOULD SAY IT'S OKAY FOR NOW, BUT LET'S LOOK AT THE OPPORTUNITY FOR HER TO BE SHIFTED A LITTLE BIT OVER TO GENE GRAY AND THOSE TYPES OF RECEPTIONS THAT SHE DOES FOR THE AMBASSADOR OF MEXICO OR SOMEPLACE -- I'VE BEEN THERE BEFORE, AND SHE'S ALWAYS INVOLVED IN THAT, SO LET'S START LOOKING A LITTLE BIT MORE -- DEFINE MORE WHAT SHE DOES, BUT FOR RIGHT NOW I SUPPORT THE MOTION OR THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT PUTS EVERYBODY BACK AND GO FROM THERE. >>KEVIN BECKNER: JUST TO CLARIFY, IT IS EVERYBODY, SO I'LL RETRACT MY SUBSTITUTE. >>ROSE FERLITA: FINE. >>KEVIN BECKNER: AND MAKE THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO RESTORE ALL COMMUNITY LIAISONS TO THEIR POSITIONS. >>JIM NORMAN: THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER NORMAN. >>KEVIN WHITE: MR. CHAIRMAN, I WAS SITTING BACK HERE FOR A MOMENT LISTENING TO COMMISSIONER BECKNER'S MOTION, AND YOU KNOW, WE SAID WE'RE NOT SPEAKING TO -- AND I WILL SUPPORT THE NEW SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO RESTORE ALL OF THE LIAISONS, BUT I THINK THIS IS -- WHEN WE COME INTO TOUGH TIMES AND TOUGH DECISIONS ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S A, WELL, THE HISPANIC LIAISON, THE BLACK LIAISON, OR THE ASIAN LIAISON, AND IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T NEED REPRESENTATION IN EACH ONE OF OUR RESPECTIVE COMMUNITIES, BUT DURING THE YEAR -- NOT JUST AT BUDGET TIME -- WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT IT IS THAT YOU DO. I'M OUT IN THE COMMUNITY ALL THE TIME, I'M OUT IN WEST TAMPA, I'M OUT IN EAST TAMPA, AND I -- AND I'M NOT TAKING UP FOR ANY LIAISON MORE THAN THE OTHER. I HEAR TONY MOREJON'S NAME ALL OVER THE PLACE. HE'S DOING THINGS, HE'S OUT IN THE COMMUNITY, HE'S IN WEST TAMPA SANDWICH SHOP, HE'S ALL OVER THE COMMUNITY. EVEN SOME PEOPLE IN THE -- JUST PEOPLE IN EAST TAMPA, WHICH IS CONSIDERED CERTAIN AREAS THAT ARE JUST THE BLACK COMMUNITY, I SEE AND I HEAR TONY. I DON'T HEAR THE NAMES OF ALL OF THE OTHER LIAISONS UNLESS IT'S SPENDING THE COUNTY MONEY BUYING A TABLE, SITTING AT A DINNER WITH COUNTY EMPLOYEES SITTING THERE. THAT IS NOT THE WAY I WANT OUR DOLLARS SPENT, NOR IS THAT THE WAY I THINK OUR REPRESENTATION SHOULD BE. WE SHOULD BE DOING SOMETHING. NOW, I THINK IF WE HAD A MORE COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT WHAT IT IS THAT EACH ONE OF THE LIAISONS DO -- I KNOW THEY REPORT TO YOU. MAYBE WE OUGHT TO GET SOME TYPE OF REPORT TO US TO LET US KNOW WHAT EACH ONE OF THE LIAISONS ARE DOING. AND LIKE COMMISSIONER NORMAN SAID, WITH THE VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, EVERY TIME THE BUDGET PROCESS COMES UP, THIS IS ON EVERY BUDGET CYCLE TO BE CUT. NOW, I THINK -- WE KNOW WHAT THE VICTIM'S ASSISTANCE PROGRAM DOES. WE KNOW THE BENEFIT, WE KNOW THE NET BENEFIT THAT IT HAS TO OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR COUNTY. WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THESE POSITIONS ARE ACTUALLY DOING FOR US AND OUR COMMUNITY FROM EACH ONE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE POSITIONS. AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, AND THAT'S WHY I WAS SITTING HERE IN SILENCE BECAUSE I HAVE NOT BEEN INUNDATED WITH PHONE CALLS OR E-MAILS OTHER THAN THE HISPANIC LIAISON POSITION. I HAVE AT THE -- AFTER THE LAST BUDGET CYCLE STARTED GETTING SOME. I HAVE NOT GOTTEN ONE ABOUT THE ASIAN LIAISON, BUT I'VE GOTTEN -- I DON'T THINK I'VE GOTTEN 25 FOR THE AFRICAN- AMERICAN LIAISON, BUT I'VE GOTTEN 250 OR MORE FOR THE HISPANIC LIAISON POSITION BECAUSE WHETHER THAT'S BECAUSE THAT PARTICULAR LIAISON IS OUT THERE ACTUALLY WORKING OR HAS THE NETWORK OR IS ACTUALLY DOING HIS JOB, I DON'T KNOW. I'M NOT HERE TO FUND A POSITION JUST TO FUND A POSITION AND BEING THE ONLY AFRICAN-AMERICAN ON THE BOARD SAYING LET'S JUST GET THAT BECAUSE IT IS WHAT IT IS. NO, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO FUND SOMETHING FOR SOMEBODY OR A POSITION THAT IS ACTUALLY DOING THE JOB AND IS OUT HERE IN THE COMMUNITY WHOLEHEARTEDLY WORKING, AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT ANY OF THEM AREN'T DOING WHAT I'M SAYING. I'M JUST SAYING I DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT OR I DON'T SEE THEM UNLESS I'M AT A BANQUET OR AT A TABLE AND ALL I SEE ON PROGRAM IS HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AS A SPONSOR AND WE BOUGHT A TABLE AND WE HAVE EMPLOYEES SITTING THERE AT THE BANQUET REPRESENTING HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>MARK SHARPE: I -- ONE OF THE SUGGESTIONS THAT HAD BEEN BROUGHT UP AT ONE OF THE DINNERS I HAD ATTENDED IS THAT PERHAPS THE HISPANIC LIAISON OFFICE MIGHT ALSO OPERATE UNDER THE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS -- OR EMERGENCY -- OUR EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT BECAUSE SO MUCH OF IT IS COMMUNICATION, COMMUNICATION DURING EXTREME DURESS, HURRICANES AND SUCH, AND I THOUGHT THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN AN OPTION FOR HOW WE WOULD -- WE WOULD PROVIDE -- CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE, BECAUSE I WILL SAY IT IS VERY TRUE, TONY MOREJON IS EVERYWHERE, AND -- AND HIS -- GOES OUT OF HIS WAY TO COMMUNICATE TO PEOPLE AND HAS COME TO ME SINCE I'VE BEEN ELECTED IN 2004 TALKING ABOUT WAYS THAT WE CAN DO A BETTER JOB OF COMMUNICATING TO HISPANIC CITIZENS WHO -- AND PARTICULARLY ELDERLY WHO DON'T SPEAK THE LANGUAGE IN TIMES OF DURESS, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE -- IT'S SOMETHING WE COULD LOOK AT IN THE FUTURE, BUT I DO -- I DO THINK -- BECAUSE AS I'VE GONE OUT AND TALKED TO PEOPLE ABOUT THIS ISSUE -- THAT AT SOME POINT I'D LIKE TO THINK THAT EVERY CITIZEN IN THIS COMMUNITY FEELS LIKE THEY'RE BEING ADEQUATELY -- NOT ADEQUATELY -- SUPERBLY REPRESENTED REGARDLESS OF THEIR CONSIDER -- THEIR IDENTITY, THAT THEY GET QUALITY SERVICE AND THAT THEY FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR JOBS AND TO PARTICIPATE AND TO HAVE AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE, AND SO I WOULD JUST ASK THAT WE DON'T JUST CREATE THESE OFFICES AND THEN THINK OUR JOB'S DONE BUT THAT WE DO A BETTER JOB OF OUTREACH AND THAT EVERY DEPARTMENT FEELS LIKE THEY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO COMMUNICATE AND BE SENSITIVE AND UNDERSTANDING OF ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS. >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: ALL RIGHT. SO FOR NOW, I THINK LET'S JUST MOVE ON. WE'VE GOT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, AND LET ME JUST SAY I THINK THAT MR. WHITE BRINGS A GOOD POINT ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY AND WANTING TO KNOW WHAT THEY DO WHEN THEY DO HOW THEY DO IT, BUT -- BUT LET ME SEGUE FROM WHAT MR. SHARPE IS SAYING. WE HAVE A HUGE DIVERSITY IN THIS COMMUNITY, AND I THINK FOR RIGHT NOW THIS WILL ADDRESS THE DIVERSITY, AND WE ALSO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS COMING UP, AND EDITH, YOU AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS AND TALKING ABOUT THIS, AND THESE GUYS PUT ME AT THE FRONT -- FRONT OF THIS, AND THAT'S CALLED THE -- THE CENSUS. >>EDITH STEWART: RIGHT. >>ROSE FERLITA: SO I THINK RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BIGGER NEED THAN WE HAVE IN THE PAST ABOUT TRYING TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE VERY DIVERSIFIED POPULATION. IF THE MIX IS NOT AS GOOD AS IT SHOULD BE OR THE PERCENTAGE SHOULD BE DIFFERENT AS WE GO FORWARD, THAT'S FINE, BUT RIGHT NOW -- AND PARTICULARLY FOR ME AND TONY, MY -- MY DISTRICT IS SO GRATEFUL FOR WHAT HE DOES BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY PROBLEMS WITH THE HISPANIC POPULATION, AND I'VE GOT OLD FIGURES -- AND I'M SORRY I DON'T HAVE IT HERE -- AND IT'S CONTINUED, SO RIGHT NOW THIS MAY NOT BE THE PERFECT MIX, BUT IT GETS IT DONE, AND LET'S BE MORE RESPONSIBLE AND MORE SENSITIVE TO WHAT THEY DO, AND YOU TRY TO HELP US WITH THAT BRIDGE OF ACCOUNTABILITY, OKAY, EDITH. >>EDITH STEWART: WE'LL DO THAT. >>KEN HAGAN: WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER NORMAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SHARPE TO RESTORE THE LIAISON POSITIONS. NO FURTHER COMMENT, PLEASE RECORD YOUR VOTE. >>RECORDING SECRETARY: MOTION CARRIED 7-0. >>KEN HAGAN: OKAY. I WOULD SUGGEST WE BREAK AT THIS POINT. I KNOW COMMISSIONER WHITE WANTED TO HAVE ONE MOMENT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE. >>KEVIN WHITE: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. REAL BRIEFLY. A FEW BUDGET MEETINGS AGO WE WERE TALKING ABOUT AREAS IN WHICH TO FIND SAVINGS AND BE ABLE TO RESTORE SOME FUNDING FOR OUR -- OUR COUNTY BUDGET, AND I ASKED OUR HR STAFF AS WELL AS OUR BUDGET STAFF TO LOOK AT SOME -- SOME IDEAS THAT I WAS LOOKING AT, AND WE HAD OVER 300 -- AND IT HAD TO DO WITH INCENTIVIZING EARLY RETIREMENTS FOR ANYONE THAT HAD 30 YEARS OF SERVICE OR LONGER WITH HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. AT THAT TIME WE HAVE 375 EMPLOYEES NOW THAT HAVE 30 YEARS OF SERVICE OR MORE WITH HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, AND HR WENT A STEP OVER AND ABOVE AND BEYOND, WHICH I REALLY APPRECIATE, AND THERE WAS A SECOND CLASSIFICATION THAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT, AND THAT CLASSIFICATION IS AGED 62 WITH SIX YEARS OF SERVICE OR MORE, AND WHAT THAT WOULD DO IS IT WOULD VEST EMPLOYEES AND WILL ALLOW THEM TO PARTICIPATE IN THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM. AND WHAT THE INCENTIVES WERE WERE TO PAY THE GROUP HEALTH PLANS AND PREMIUMS FOR THREE YEARS ASSUMING A 10% INCREASE EACH YEAR. THERE WOULD BE A CASH PAYMENT ALTERNATIVE, WHICH WOULD BE PAYABLE TO THE FIRST YEAR, WOULD BE LESS -- LESS THE MEDICAL PREMIUM. THE COUNTY'S HEALTH INSURANCE STIPEND WOULD NOT BE PAID. BASIC LIFE INSURANCE WOULD BE PAID FOR THREE YEARS. ACCRUED ANNUAL SICK LEAVE WOULD BE PAID FOR THE FIRST YEAR. NOW, THIS WOULD BE A COMPLETE AND TOTAL VOLUNTARY PROGRAM FOR ANYONE THAT WOULD CARE TO RETIRE. THE 375 EMPLOYEES THAT QUALIFY OR THAT WOULD QUALIFY FOR THIS PROGRAM, THEIR SALARIES FOR -- FOR ONE YEAR IS $22.6 MILLION FOR THE SALARIES OF THE 375 EMPLOYEES. THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE EXTRA 231 EMPLOYEES WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE 62 WITH SIX YEARS OF SERVICE OR MORE. NOW, TO DO THAT OPTION WOULD COST THE COUNTY $25 MILLION OVER THREE YEARS. SO THAT WOULD BASICALLY COME OUT TO A LITTLE LESS -- A LITTLE MORE THAN EIGHT MILLION A YEAR WHERE WE'RE COMING UP -- WHERE WE'RE PAYING NOW $22 MILLION IN SALARIES. IF WE HAVE EMPLOYEES THAT HAVE 30 YEARS OF SERVICE OR MORE THAT WOULD -- AND ONE OF THE REASONS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE OPT NOT TO RETIRE IS BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD THE MEDICAL BENEFITS. SOME -- I'VE HAD PHONE CALLS SINCE WE MADE THIS SUGGESTION LAST TIME SAYING, WELL, I'M TOO YOUNG TO RETIRE. WELL, THAT'S FINE. THAT'S WHY THIS IS AN OPTIONAL PLAN. SOME PEOPLE WOULD LOVE TO RETIRE AND EITHER GO OFF AND RIDE OFF IN THE SUNSET AND GO GET A JOB AT WAL-MART, BUT THEY CAN'T AFFORD THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE. THIS WOULD GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE HEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS PAID FOR THE COUNTY FOR THREE YEARS AND STILL SAVE THE TAXPAYERS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY OVER 42 -- A LITTLE OVER $42 MILLION OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS, SO I THINK THAT WE -- THIS IS A PLAN THAT WE SHOULD LOOK AT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I'M JUST THROWING OUT, AND I'VE PASSED ALL THE NUMBERS OUT TO MY FELLOW COLLEAGUES AS WELL AS THE BOARD FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT THIS IN THE FORM OF A MOTION ON OUR NEXT -- ON OUR NEXT BUDGET SESSION THAT WOULD AT LEAST DIRECT THE ADMINISTRATION TO PUT THAT OUT AS A VIABLE OPTION. THIS HAS COME FROM HR. THEY'VE CRUNCHED THE NUMBERS, AND IT -- IT JUST SERVES AS A -- AS AN OPTION. ANYONE THAT'S BEEN HERE OVER 30 YEARS, IT'S -- IF THEY CHOOSE TO, THAT WILL HELP SAVE SOME JOBS FOR LOWER -- LOWER-TENURED PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY AND HOPEFULLY AFFORD THEM THE SAME OPPORTUNITIES THAT PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN HERE 30-PLUS YEARS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SERIOUSLY EP JOY, AND IF SOMEONE IS ON THE FRINGE OF NOT BEING ABLE TO COLLECT THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY AND/OR THEIR MEDICAID OR MEDICARE, HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BRIDGE THE GAP AND INCENTIVIZE THEM TO MAKE WAY AND LEAVE WAY FOR LOWER- TENURED EMPLOYEES TO BE ABLE TO STAY ON WITH THE MULTI -- THE POTENTIAL MULTI-MILLION-DOLLAR SAVINGS AND SAVE SOME LOWER-LEVEL JOBS AND KEEP SOME PEOPLE EMPLOYED. >>KEN HAGAN: SO IS THE BOTTOM LINE YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THIS AT OUR NEXT WORKSHOP? >>KEVIN WHITE: WELL, I JUST DISCUSSED IT HERE, AND I GAVE EVERYBODY THE BACKUP, AND I'D LIKE TO -- >>KEN HAGAN: AND THAT'S FINE. I WOULD SAY I, FOR ONE, AM NOT PREPARED -- I APPLAUD YOUR - - >>KEVIN WHITE: I DON'T WANT ANY ACTION. I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THE INFORMATION. >>KEN HAGAN: THAT'S FINE. ALL I'M SAYING IS AFTER FOUR HOURS OF BUDGET DISCUSSIONS, I'M NOT PREPARED TO REALLY COMMENT ON THIS PLAN RIGHT NOW; HOWEVER, I WOULD, YOU KNOW, LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS IT, YOU KNOW, AT OUR NEXT MEETING NEXT THURSDAY. COMMISSIONER FERLITA. >>ROSE FERLITA: MR. HAGAN, THANKS. MR. WILLIAMS, PLEASE COME UP HERE FOR JUST ONE QUICK SECOND. THANK YOU. I THINK I'M HAVING A DEJA VU ON F-19 HERE, I'M NOT REAL SURE. THIS SAYS FROM YOU TO ERIC JOHNSON, MANAGEMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR, COUP ADMINISTRATOR; RIGHT? >>GEORGE WILLIAMS: CORRECT. >>ROSE FERLITA: HAVE EITHER OF THESE TWO PEOPLE SEEN THIS? >>PAT BEAN: I HAVEN'T. >>ROSE FERLITA: MR. JOHNSON, HAVE YOU SEEN IT? MS. BEAN, HAVE YOU SEEN IT? ARE YOU READY TO WEIGH IN ON IT? >>PAT BEAN: I HAVEN'T SEEN IT. >>ROSE FERLITA: HAVE YOU SEEN IT, MR. JOHNSON? >>ERIC JOHNSON: I HAVE NOT REVIEWED IT. >>KEVIN WHITE: WAIT A MINUTE. I REQUESTED THIS, AND I KNOW MR. JOHNSON SHOULD HAVE SEEN IT. NOW, WHETHER THEY DID OR NOT, I DON'T KNOW, BUT SECONDLY, WE GET THINGS ALL THE TIME RIGHT ON THIS DAIS THAT WE -- THAT -- AND THIS IS NOTHING WE'RE PREPARING TO VOTE ON. NOW, ADMINISTRATION -- >>ROSE FERLITA: YOU BET WE'RE NOT. I JUST -- I JUST THINK THAT IT'S -- IT'S UNBELIEVABLE TO ME THAT YOU WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, MR. WHITE, ARE PRESENTING IT AND IT'S DIRECTED TO ERIC JOHNSON AND THE ADMINISTRATOR HASN'T EVEN SEEN IT, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU-ALL ARE TRYING TO DO HERE. I DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA, BUT IT'S -- >>KEN HAGAN: COMMISSIONER SHARPE. >>ROSE FERLITA: IT'S AMAZING TO ME. >>KEN HAGAN: AND THEN WE NEED A BREAK. >>ROSE FERLITA: LET'S GO. THIS IS DONE. WE HAVE ANOTHER MEETING IN TEN MINUTES. GO AHEAD, MARK. >>MARK SHARPE: WHO'S IN CHARGE? IF A DOCUMENT COMES FROM THE DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES -- AND I'M NOT GOING TO CRITICIZE YOUR EFFORT OR YOUR INQUIRY. THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THAT I THINK THAT COMMISSIONER WHITE HAS DONE IMPROPER, BUT IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT -- THAT A DOCUMENT OF THIS LEVEL OF EFFORT -- AND I HAVE HAD NO OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO OUR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, SO I'M NOT GOING TO IN ANY WAY IMPUGN HER AT THIS MOMENT, BUT -- BUT -- BUT IT STRIKES ME THAT THE -- THE BOSS SHOULD HAVE IT, SHOULD HAVE REVIEWED IT. IT'S BEING DISTRIBUTED, AND SO SOMEWHERE THERE WAS A -- THERE WAS A SLIP-UP, AND -- AND YOU FORWARDED THE INFORMATION, DID YOU NOT? >>GEORGE WILLIAMS: THAT IS CORRECT. >>MARK SHARPE: YOU DID. OKAY. SO THAT IS TROUBLING. >>KEN HAGAN: MS. BEAN, ADD -- WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET INTO LENGTHY DEBATE ON THIS. I DON'T HAVE ANY TOLERANCE FOR IT RIGHT NOW. ADD IT TO THE AGENDA FOR NEXT WEEK. WE'LL DISCUSS IT NEXT THURSDAY, 1:30. OKAY. WITH THAT, OUR WORKSHOP, WE'RE ADJOURNED, AND WE'LL RECONVENE IN TEN MINUTES. 1