JUNE 26, 1990

The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in special session on Tuesday, June 26, 1990, at 9:30 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Courthouse, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Michael J. Bakich, Chairman; C. W. "Chick" Gregg; Don Bailey; Richard Swartz; and Thomas J. Windram. Others present were: Annette Star Lustgarten, County Attorney; Alan A. Thelen, County Manager; Ava Kronz, Assistant to the County Manager; James C. Watkins, Clerk; Robert K. McKee, Chief Deputy Clerk; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.

Commr. Bakich, Chairman, called the meeting to order.


Mr. James C. Watkins, Clerk, gave opening remarks stating that under Article V, of the Constitution, it provides that the Clerk is Clerk of the Circuit Court, as well as Clerk of the County Court. Under Clerk of the Circuit Court, there are certain fees that are charged by which the office is funded, and that portion of the Clerk's Budget is submitted this date, for informational purposes, as the Clerk has the approval or disapproval of how those monies will or will not be spent. He stated, however, the portion concerning the County Court, for the Board of County Commissioners, comes out of the Fine & Forfeiture portion of the budget, which is generated by the Fine & Forfeiture Fund. A third portion of the Clerk's Office deals with Article VIII, of the Constitution, which concerns General County Government, which are the functions of the Clerk as County Comptroller, County Auditor, Property Records, and anything with General County Government that the Clerk does in that capacity. He noted this particular portion is funded out of ad valorem taxation and the Board of County Commissioners has oversight, with respect to that budget, just as they do with the Sheriff's Department, or any of the other constitutional officers. He stated his staff would present to the Board this date budget oversights being the Fine & Forfeiture and the General Fund, along with an explanation of requested increases. He then distributed copies of a memo, which he directed to the Chairman of the Board, regarding certain mandated costs of the Clerk's Office. He stated he decided to fund computerization for half a year, rather than a full year, which adjusted the costs downward, over what was originally requested. He stated he and his staff also decided that, rather than requesting 100% of the cost of the computerization, from the Board of County Commissioners, 50% of said costs would be funded from fees of the Clerk's Office and 50% by the Board of County Commissioners. He noted the Clerk's Budget had been adjusted downward from what the Board had in the packet before them this date.

Mr. Jim Schuster, Finance Director, addressed the Board and reviewed Exhibit I, of said packet, entitled "Summary of Revisions", which he noted quantifies and categorizes changes to the Clerk's Budget by "Mandates", "Highlights", and "Other". It was noted with changes in each category, as indicated, the Revised Tentative Budget was reduced downward by $226,747.00.

Discussion occurred regarding Exhibit I (Summary of Revisions); Exhibit II (Mandated vs Non-Mandated Increases); and Exhibit III (1990 vs 1991 - Changes in Budget Dollars). It was also noted that the total tentative 1990-91 budget was $4,465,555.00, which indicates a 13.9% increase over the 1989-90 budget.

Commr. Gregg clarified the fact that all mandated costs were costs which were previously paid out of the General Fund, however, are now being allocated in the Clerk's Office.

Mr. Watkins, Clerk, noted that said costs are still being paid out of the General Fund - it is just a difference of accounting - last year it was paid out of the Board of County Commissioner's General Fund and this year it will be paid out of the Clerk's General Fund.

Mr. Schuster, Finance Director, reviewed Exhibit IV (1991 Budget Changes in Percents) with the Board. It was noted that an increase of 8% (as instructed by the Board), for salaries (including cost of living, merit, benefits, etc.), was included in the figures before the Board this date.

A brief discussion occurred regarding computer hardware and software costs, at which time it was noted that the costs given for same would double in the second and third years.

Mr. Bob McKee, Chief Deputy Clerk, stated that the memorandum which was distributed to the Board, regarding revisions, reflected the first year cost (50%) for same, however, noted that the booklet, which was before them, reflected the accurate costs (100%), overall, for the second year.

Finance Department

Mr. Jim Schuster, Finance Director, reviewed the portion of Exhibit III (1990 vs 1991 - Changes in Budget Dollars) pertaining to the Finance Department. He discussed the new computer software system, alluded to earlier, which will be purchased, as the old system was purchased approximately 8 years ago, as well as discussed an additional personnel position, which it is felt will be needed to handle the additional clerical work brought on by the Jail operations and functions.

Mr. Schuster noted that the Finance Department's Budget would be increased, overall, by 22.6%, with 3.9% of it being due to "Mandates"; 10.2% due to "Highlights"; and "All Other" costs 8.5%.

Administrative Services

Mr. Neil Kelly, Director of Administrative Services, reviewed the Administrative Services section of Exhibit III, alluded to earlier, stating there would be an increase of $184,470.00 in the Administrative Services' Budget for FY 1990-91, which accounts for a 25.5% increase, overall, with 5.8% being due to "Mandates"; 9.8% due to "Highlights"; and "All Other" costs 9.9%. He stated the "Highlights" section also included a new position (Systems Security Analyst) for Data Processing, which resulted from audit comments. He then reviewed a portion of Exhibit V (1991 Budget Changes in Dollars), being "Expenditures by Funding Source".

Further discussion occurred regarding computerization and whether or not it would be compatible between departments and the offices of the constitutional officers, at which time Mr. Watkins, Clerk, stated he would like to see it be a cooperative, hand-in-hand effort, so that whatever is done by the Clerk's Office, will communicate with, and compliment, what the Board is trying to do.

Courts Management

Ms. Beth Lange, Director of Courts Management, reviewed Exhibit V (1991 Budget Changes in Dollars) with the Board, stating that three of the areas in the Clerk's Management are funded by the Fine & Forfeiture Fund, being the Victim/Witness Assistance Office; County Court; and County Probation Office. She stated her division was asking for $1,176,894.00, which amounts to an increase of $176,392.00. She then reviewed Exhibit IV (1991 Budget Changes in Percents) stating that the increase, overall, amounted to 17.6%, with 6.8% being due to "Mandates"; 2.0% due to "Highlights"; and "All Other" costs 8.8%.

Commr. Bakich thanked the Clerk and his staff for providing a budget which was easily understood - far more understandable than over previous years.

Mr. Watkins, Clerk, requested the Board to allow the Clerk's staff to be present, should they see a need to make any changes in the budget presented this date, and to allow them to make suggestions to the Board as to how said changes could, in fact, be accomplished. He stated he, as well as his staff, felt they presented a conservatively prepared budget for FY 1990-91, noting that the major costs would be for the new computer hardware and software.

Property Appraiser

Mr. Thelen, County Manager, informed the Board (for informational purposes) that staff had received the Property Appraiser's Budget, in the amount of $844,234.00, which amounts to approximately a 6% increase, and noted that it was included in the packet before them this date. He stated $35,000.00 had been deducted for fractional assessments which were lost during the legislative session, therefore, the Property Appraiser, Mr. Havill, requested that that portion of his budget be deleted.

Commr. Bakich noted this meeting was a workshop session, therefore, no action would be required at this time.

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting adjourned at 10:25 a.m.







6-26-90.BCC MIN