The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, July 19, 1994, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Catherine C. Hanson, Chairman; Welton G. Cadwell, Vice Chairman; Rhonda H. Gerber; Don Bailey; and G. Richard Swartz, Jr. Others present were: Frank T. Gaylord, County Attorney; Peter F. Wahl, County Manager; Ava Kronz, BCC Office Manager; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.
Reverend Robert Wooten, Paisley United Methodist Church, gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Chairman opened the meeting.
There were no changes to the agenda.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved the Minutes of May 24, 1994 (Regular Meeting), as presented.
CLERK OF COURT'S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:
Request from the City of Clermont for hand held radios presently in the County's surplus inventory.
Bonds - Contractor
Request for approval of Contractor Bonds, as follows:
4959-94 Cavalier Homes, Inc. (Residential)
5209-94 William L. Blackwelder (Electrical Signs)
5314-94 William R. Sims (Roofing)
5054-95 Action Air and Electric, Inc. (Class B A/C)
5313-95 Randolph C. Colbert (Plumbing Contractor)
Request for approval of Satisfaction of Assessment Liens (39) as follows, and authorized proper signatures on same:
Lawrence P. Reynard and Alma Wilson $4,501.22
Mt. Plymouth Subdivision
Alvin L. Hamilton 756.81
Alvin L. Hamilton 756.81
Richard Crews 768.90
M. B. Rose 660.81
Donna Bailey 1,119.10
Hiram Woods 617.41
Hiram Woods 617.41
Hiram Woods 617.39
Colista A. Shaw 622.66
Charlotte G. Bailey 628.95
Henry Rudy, Jr. 631.74
Gary W. Richter 626.76
Gary W. Richter 626.76
Gary W. Richter 267.63
Victor Ulmer 1,476.95
John Meek 670.64
John Meek 619.20
John Meek 619.20
John Meek 619.20
John Meek 619.20
John Meek 619.14
William E. Childers 696.60
William E. Childers 1,547.32
James T. Chenault 619.90
Jackson Sellards 622.55
Jackson Sellards 622.55
Jackson Sellards 622.55
Jackson Sellards 622.55
Kelly J. Raymond and Alice C. Everson 618.97
Anthony Giraldo 2,206.23
Hilltop Subdivision (Ike Avenue)
Lisa L. and Randy L. Qualls 1,240.52
Astor Forest Campsites
Marjory W. Ellis 2,787.51
Charles W. and Vera M. Marks 2,157.86
Ruth Banks 772.87
Lake View Heights
Frank L. and Louise Adams 899.08
Birr Park Subdivision
William E. Christensen and Margaret Christensen 3,446.27
Crystal Lake Heights Subdivision
G. Warren and Martha L. Koons 2,247.24
Request for approval of Satisfaction of Judgment for Terry Anna Marie Cavitalo, in the amount of $250.00, Case
No. 92-193CFA DB, and authorized proper signatures on same.
Request for approval of Satisfaction of Judgment for Bobby Conner, in the amount of $250.00, Case No. 89-1923-CF, and authorized proper signatures on same.
Request to acknowledge receipt of the list of warrants paid prior to this meeting, pursuant to Chapter 136 of the Florida Statutes, which shall be incorporated into the Minutes as attached Exhibit A and filed in the Clerical Support Division of the Clerk's Office.
Request to acknowledge receipt of Receipt of Notice from the Florida Public Service Commission, in regard to Resolution by Putnam County Board of County Commissioners for extended area service (EAS) between all exchanges in Putnam County, and petition by residents of the Florahome 659 exchange for EAS to the Keystone Heights exchange in Putnam County.
Request to acknowledge receipt of Receipt of Notice from the Florida Public Service Commission, in regard to a Second Amended Notice of Public Hearing to Florida Power and Light Company, Florida Power Corporation, Gulf Power Company, Tampa Electric Company, in re: Adoption of Numeric Conservation Goals and Consideration of National Energy Policy Act Standards, Policy Act Standards (Section 111), Tuesday, July 12, 1994, 6:30 p.m., County Center, 601 East Kennedy Boulevard, Second Floor, County Commission Board Room, Tampa, Florida.
Request to acknowledge receipt of Receipt of Notice from the Florida Public Service Commission, in regard to Notice of Hearing by JJ's Mobile Homes, Inc., Office of Public Counsel, The City of Mt. Dora, George Wimpey of Florida, Inc., in re: Docket No. 921237-WS, Application for Amendment of Certificate Nos. 298-W and 248-S, in Lake County, by JJ's Mobile Homes, Inc., and Docket No. 940264-WS, Investigation into Provision of Water and Wastewater Service, by JJ's Mobile Homes, to its certified territory, in Lake County, Wednesday, July 13, 1994, 10:00 a.m. and July 14, 1994, 10:00 a.m., if needed, City Hall Council Chambers, 201 East Main Street, Tavares, Florida, 32778.
Request to acknowledge receipt of Notice from the Florida Public Service Commission, in regard to a Notice of Commission Hearing regarding Expanded Interconnection, Phase II, and Local Transport Restructure, Monday, August 22 through Friday, August 26, 1994, 9:30 a.m., Room 106, Fletcher Building, 101 East Gaines Street, Tallahassee, Florida, 32399-0863.
Request to acknowledge receipt of Legal Notice: Notice of Application for Transfer of Certificate No. 522-W from Lake Griffin Utilities, Inc., to Harbor Hills Utilities, L.P. Any objection to said application must be made, in writing, within thirty (30) days from date of notice to the Director, Division of Records and Reporting, Florida Public Service Commission, 101 E. Gaines Street, Tallahassee, Florida, 32399-0870, with a copy of said objection mailed to: Harbor Hills Utilities, L.P., c/o Kevin P. Maloney, Esquire, Devcon Associates, 350 Bay Street, Suite 1200, Toronto, Ontario, CA M5H 256 and Lake Griffin Utilities, Inc., c/o Steven M. Roy, Esquire, McLin, Burnsed, Morrison, Johnson & Robuck, PA, 1000 West Main Street, Leesburg, Florida, 34748.
Request to acknowledge receipt of unclaimed excess proceeds due landowners on applications for tax deeds, in the amount of $1,769.00. Said funds are to be transferred from the Clerk's Account to the Board of County Commissioner's Account.
Request to acknowledge receipt of Ordinance No. 94-25, from the City of Tavares, amending the boundaries of the City of Tavares, by including within the city limits property generally described as 85 acres located on the southwest corner of Lane Park Cutoff and CR 561. The proposed ordinance will be considered at the following public meetings: Planning and Zoning Board Meeting on July 7, 1994, at 3:00 p.m.; Tavares City Council Meeting on July 20, 1994, at 5:00 p.m.; and Tavares City Council Meeting on August 3, 1994, at 5:00 p.m.
Request to acknowledge receipt of Ordinance No. 94-401, adopted by the Town Council of the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, Florida, annexing property generally located at the intersection of Highway 19 and Revels Road, known as the Chon property, into the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, Florida.
Request to acknowledge receipt of Ordinance No. 94-05, adopted by the Town of Lady Lake, Florida, establishing the "Combat Automobile Theft" Program, as authorized under the Florida Uniform Traffic Control Law.
Request to acknowledge receipt of Resolutions from the City of Fruitland Park, adopted by the City Commission on June 23, 1994, as follows:
Resolution No. 94-012, annexing property generally located at the intersection of Judith Avenue and Mulberry Street into the City of Fruitland Park.
Resolution No. 94-013, annexing property generally located on Pine Ridge Dairy Road, west of Pagoda Road and East of Ridgewood Drive, into the City of Fruitland Park.
Resolution No. 94-014, annexing property generally located south of the intersection of Mulberry Street and CR 468 into the City of Fruitland Park.
Resolution No. 94-015, annexing property generally located on Dixie Avenue, north of the intersection of Dixie Avenue and U.S. Highway 441, into the City of Fruitland Park.
Resolution No. 94-016, annexing property generally located on U.S. Highway 441, north of the intersection of Dixie Avenue and U.S. Highway 441, into the City of Fruitland Park.
Resolution No. 94-017, annexing property generally located on U.S. Highway 441, north of the intersection of Dixie Avenue and U.S. Highway 441, into the City of Fruitland Park.
CLERK OF COURT'S OTHER BUSINESS
Ms. Barbara Lehman, Chief Deputy, Finance and Audit Department, explained this request.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from the Clerk of the Circuit Court for approval of an Investment Policy and authorization to advertise an Ordinance that will allow the County to invest excess funds in the Florida Local Government Surplus Funds Trust Fund (commonly referred to as the SBA), which is a money market fund currently paying 3.82%, subject to review and approval by the County Attorney.
It was noted that adoption of the Investment Policy would allow investment in longer term investments and the ordinance would expand the list of authorized investments from those currently allowed by the Florida Statutes.
Ms. Lehman referred to Page 5, Paragraph G, of the Investment Policy, noting that said paragraph contained new language which clarifies the fact that the Clerk will have final approval of all investments.
COUNTY ATTORNEY/SUITS AFFECTING THE COUNTY
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Mr. Frank Gaylord, County Attorney, explained this request, stating that it was a continuation of a public hearing pertaining to a proposed settlement agreement between Lake County and Glengarry Lakes, a proposed planned unit development (PUD) that was to be located in south Lake County adjacent to the Sawgrass development and to the Orange County line. He stated that the settlement agreement stems from a law suit that was filed as the result of a denial of approval, by the Board, of the development. He reviewed a map that he had prepared indicating the location of the proposed development.
Mr. Gaylord stated that the County was sued on two counts, with the first count being dismissed, however, he noted that it was dismissed prior to the Snyder ruling. He stated that he believed, in light of the Snyder case, the first count could probably be revisited. He stated that the second count alleges the violation of civil rights, in the taking of property without just compensation and denial of equal protection.
Mr. Gaylord stated that there is a court order requiring the County to mediate this matter, however, noted that it is very difficult for a County, or governmental agency, to mediate a matter, because the participants in the mediation process do not have the ability to bind a governmental agency. He noted that the plaintiffs and the County Attorney's Office have gone as far as they could go, in trying to resolve this matter.
Mr. Gaylord stated that the basis of the settlement agreement is to allow the applicant to re-enter the process with a county initiated change in the future land use map to either suburban, or urban expansion, and that approval of same would not mean that the Board was approving the development.
Mr. Rob Merrill, Attorney, representing the applicants, appeared before the Board stating that he felt his clients had gone as far as they could, in trying to resolve this matter, through a settlement, rather than continuing to fight about it. He stated that his clients were aware of the fact that some changes had been made, in the interim, and that they felt they would have a better chance of the Board approving the PUD, if they came back before them and requested a variation of what they had originally requested.
Discussion occurred regarding this matter, at which time Mr. Merrill answered questions from the Board regarding same.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Mr. Gaylord, County Attorney, informed the Board that, if they approved the request, they would need to spend time and effort in other directions, other than mitigating it, and, if they voted against it, they would be giving the County Attorney's Office direction to proceed and defend the actions of the previous Board.
Commr. Swartz stated that the developers came before the Board, were heard under the method by which the Board heard rezoning cases at that time, and were denied, by a 4-1 vote, approval of the PUD, for a variety of reasons, which he noted are part of that record. He further elaborated on the matter, noting that he was not willing to go along, at this point in time, with the proposal for a rural designation. He stated that he did not support the request for a settlement agreement and that, if the plaintiff wanted to pursue the issue of a "taking", then he felt Lake County should go into court and show that there was not a "taking". He stated that the "taking" issue is probably the weakest of the two issues and noted that they have already had one count dismissed.
Commr. Swartz suggested that the Board encourage the plaintiff to file papers just the way that any other property owner has to do that wants to change their land use designation and not ask the County to support an urban designation in the area of the County where the PUD is proposed.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the vote would not be for approval or denial of the PUD, but whether or not the previous Board acted properly when they voted 4-1 to deny the original request and whether this Board feels that the case should have been denied.
Commr. Bailey stated that he had originally voted against this case, but that he would support the settlement agreement, because he felt the County needed to move on and not continue to spend money on the case. He stated that things have changed in the development of the area in question and he wondered whether some of the area should not be revisited.
Commr. Hanson stated that she had originally voted against this case, due to the fact that access to the property was through Orange County and then back into Lake County, which made access difficult, however, she feels that things have changed, in the meantime, which may allow access directly into Lake County, without having to go into Orange County. She stated that she was going to approve the request, in order to resolve the matter as quickly as possible and stay out of further litigation.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried, the Board denied approval of a proposed settlement agreement in the case of E. O. Roper Trusts vs. Lake County - Case No. 91-931.
Commrs. Bailey and Hanson voted "No".
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/UTILITIES
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, explained this request, stating that, since it was submitted, staff had received an additional piece of correspondence from the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, which he distributed to the Board, for their perusal.
Mr. Richard Langley, Attorney, representing Silver Springs Citrus, Howey-in-the-Hills, appeared before the Board to discuss a request from said company for a building permit, to construct a new building on their site, to house their concentrate Chopping Plant and to answer any questions there might be from the Board.
In a memorandum from Mr. Jim Barker, Environmental Management Director, to the Board, he states that Silver Springs Citrus applied for and received TRC approval for a site plan, for a barrel thawing building at their current plant location. He states that Howey-in-the-Hills supplies water to the office building, which is within 300 feet of the construction site, thereby requiring the site to be supplied by Howey-in-the-Hills. He further states that concurrency procedures now require the proposed supplier to provide a letter which states their ability and desire to serve, before a building permit is issued. He stated that Howey-in-the-Hills was requested to provide this letter, by Silver Springs Citrus and the County, however, no response has been received, to date. He stated that the applicant's representative has requested an exemption to the connection requirement, in order to obtain a building permit.
The recommendation by staff, regarding this request, is that an exemption not be approved by the Board, but that Silver Springs Citrus execute a developer's agreement, which requires connection to the Howey-in-the-Hills water supply, when adequate capacity is shown to be available from the municipality, and that a building permit be issued after the agreement is executed.
Mr. Langley stated there is not one citrus plant in the State of Florida where a city provides their water and he feels the reason for that is that they do not want the liability of the water supply, noting that one shot of chloride through the system could ruin thousands and thousands of cases of juice and failure of the water supply could shut down the plant.
Mr. Langley noted that Mission Inn, which lies, in part, in the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, has its own water supply, always has, and continues to have it to this day and has never been asked, or made, to join the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, in that regard, so he feels it would be rather selective to force Silver Springs Citrus to join with Howey-in-the-Hills. He further stated that it is very important for Silver Springs Citrus to get on with their project, noting that they have already lost two months, trying to get ready, and they need the plant to be ready for this coming season. He answered questions from the Board regarding the matter. Mr. Gary Cooney, Attorney, representing the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, appeared before the Board stating that the request before the Board this date falls under the County's Land Development Regulation (LDR) that was adopted to attempt to eliminate uses of the acquifer, to be more environmentally sound. He stated that he felt there were several issues in the LDR provision in question in this case, which he elaborated on.
Mr. Cooney stated that the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills is currently being required to provide water to the offices of Silver Springs Citrus, so, if the Board is interpreting its regulation as being whether they are on the property or not, they are on the property and another issue is whether the County intended the regulation to apply only to new construction.
Mr. Cooney then addressed the issue of chlorination, which Mr. Langley alluded to, and how it can be handled, as well as the issue of timing, noting that County staff had notified Silver Springs Citrus, in April of this year, that this matter was an issue, however, it was not until County staff told them, once again, in June of this year, that they claim they heard about it. He stated that the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills is presently trying to determine the number of gallons of water needed, per day, by Silver Springs Citrus and would urge the Board to allow them to make the decision of whether or not they have the ability to furnish the needed water and as to whether they are going to.
Mr. Cooney stated that the LDRs do not give the Town an out, it tells them, as a regional system, that they have to provide water to a facility, when they are close enough to one to do so. He stated, however, that he understood it has been the practice of the County to allow an out, if a City decides that it does not have the capability to do so. He stated that, until they have all the facts and figures, they would urge the Board to not approve an exemption for the building permit being requested for the Chopping Plant.
Considerable discussion occurred, at which time Mr. Cooney and Mr. Langley answered questions from the Board regarding the request.
Mr. Dwayne Gorgas, Mayor of Howey-in-the-Hills, appeared before the Board stating that some comments had been made, based on little fact, and that he wanted to clarify them. He stated that Howey-in-the-Hills did not actively seek to be involved in this process. He stated that they were contacted by Silver Springs Citrus and requested to write a letter to the County stating that they did not want to supply water to the plant, in order for Silver Springs Citrus to obtain a building permit. He stated that the Town was also contacted by County staff, who indicated that there was a requirement for water service to be provided to the plant and that the Town should consider doing so and that is what they are attempting to do.
Mayor Gorgas stated that, in the first meeting that was held regarding the matter, the Town had no information, whatsoever, to base a decision on, however, the Town feels that it has since acquired enough information to, within 10 days, obtain advise from their engineer as to whether or not they have the ability to supply water to the Chopping Plant.
Commr. Swartz suggested that the Board issue whatever county approvals are necessary, for construction to begin on the Chopping Plant, and to allow Silver Springs Citrus to hook up to their own water supply, until the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills has determined whether or not it can, or wants to, supply water to Silver Springs Citrus. He stated that he felt this would be a way for the County to move forward, recognizing what the LDRs call for, but not putting an undue burden on Silver Springs Citrus.
A brief discussion occurred regarding whether this request should be treated as an expansion or as new construction.
Mr. Langley and Mr. Cooney reviewed a site plan of the plant and answered questions from the Board regarding same.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he wanted to make sure the Board did not do anything to hurt the County's ability to enact its LDRs.
Commr. Hanson stated that she felt the Board needed to move forward and define this matter, to deal with not only new development, but expansion of existing facilities.
Mr. Cooney noted, for the record, that he and Mr. Gaylord, County Attorney, were scheduled to meet on Wednesday, July 20, 1994, to discuss joint planning areas with all 14 of the municipalities and that this matter was an important part of that process, because the cities are operating under the impression that the LDRs state, when water/wastewater systems go in, the wells go off and they have to hook on. He stated that Mr. Gaylord will need direction from the Board regarding the matter, so that the Towns and Cities will know what they are getting into.
Considerable discussion occurred, at which time Commr. Swartz questioned whether this case was not one where the County should approve an exemption.
Mayor Gorgas reappeared before the Board stating that, if the Board approved to grant Silver Springs Citrus an exemption, then he felt there would be some ramifications and noted that the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills would be very vocal, as far as protecting its rights for future expansion. He suggested that the Board come up with a definition of what is expansion versus remodeling, or upgrading, because he felt it was a very significant point.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Silver Springs Citrus that they be exempted from a mandatory hookup with the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills, for their Barrel Thawing Building (Chopping Plant), but their Chopping Plant only, from the requirements of Section 6.12.01, of the County's Land Development Regulations, pertaining to central water connections, and that they be provided with a waiver to that connection and be issued any necessary building permits.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 10:25 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would take a 15 minute recess.
COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA
Commr. Cadwell requested that Tab 9, a request for approval of staff recommended prioritization of projects for the FDOT five year work program be pulled and discussed separately.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved the following requests:
Fire and Emergency Services/Grants
Request from Fire and Emergency Services for approval to apply for two State Emergency Medical Service Matching Grants and approval for the Chairman to execute the grant applications.
Request from Human Resources for approval for the Chairman to sign the Affidavit and Release of Property Damage Claim form submitted by Transportation Casualty Insurance Company.
Accounts Allowed/Planning and Development/Subdivisions
Request from Planning and Development for final plat approval for Westchester PUD, Phase I, and acceptance of a Letter of Credit, in the amount of $16,131.19, 151 lots - Commissioner District 2.
Contracts, Leases & Agreements/Building Department
Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance of an Agreement Between Lake County and The Plantation at Leesburg Limited Partnership (River Walk - Pod E) Relating to the Issuance of Building Permits While Platting is in Progress.
Deeds/Rights-of-Way, Roads and Easements
Planning and Development
Request from Planning and Development for acceptance of the following Non-Exclusive Easement Deed:
Steve and Eva Turner
Request from Public Services for acceptance of the following Statutory Warranty Deed:
Betty J. Bedsole, Trustee
Via Marcia (1-6405A)
Request from Purchasing for approval to advertise for bids, proposals, and professional services; award and issue purchase orders for quotes, bids, proposals, annual bids, state contract, G.S.A. Cooperative Bids, OEM repairs, sole source and proprietor source; and approve and execute contracts and encumber funds, as follows:
A) Authorization to Seek Bids, Proposals, and Professional Services
1) EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT $30,000.00
Authorization to seek bids and award to the low, most responsive bid, for the purchase of a Mobile Emergency Operations Center Trailer. Funding source is per the Emergency Management Grant, which has to be spent by November 1, 1994.
D) Issue Purchase Orders for Services or Commodities from Annual Bids, State Contract, G.S.A., or Cooperative Bids.
1) FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES $85,375.00
Safety Equipment/Authorization to piggy-back off of the City of Apopka's Bid No. 94-40, Safety Equipment Supply Bid for the purchase of fifty (50) new Scott 2.2 Air Packs and fifty (50) Scott Air Bottles. This price includes a $8,875 trade in allowance for fifty (50) Air Packs that are over ten (10) years. Fire and Emergency Services has also requested to standardize on Scott Air Packs and has provided Purchasing with a letter of justification (see attachment).
Safety Equipment is a sole source vendor. They are the only authorized distributor and service dealer, in the State of Florida, for Scott Air Packs. Funding source is through Fire and Emergency Services, 640, Capital Account.
Contracts, Leases and Agreements/Office of Tourism
Request from the Office of Tourism for approval of the First Amendment to the contract with Husebo Advertising, to extend the contract through September 30, 1994, subject to review and approval by the County Attorney.
PUBLIC SERVICES/STATE AGENCIES/ROAD PROJECTS
Commr. Cadwell explained this request.
Ms. Pay Mayhill, Development Services, City of Eustis, appeared before the Board to address the issue of the FDOT Five Year Work Program Priority Listing. She requested the Board to move Priority Item No. 4 up on the list to Item No. 2, at which time she gave the Board some background information on the matter and noted the reason for the request.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Public Services for approval of staff recommended prioritization of projects for the Florida Department of Transportation Five Year Work Program, with the exception that Priority Item No. 4 be moved up on the list as Priority Item No. 2.
ADDENDUM NO. 1
COUNTY MANAGER'S CONSENT AGENDA
DEEDS/RIGHTS-OF-WAY, ROADS AND EASEMENTS
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Planning and Development for acceptance of a Non-Exclusive Easement Deed from Kermit F. Clay.
CITIZEN QUESTION AND COMMENT PERIOD
No one present wished to address the Board.
COUNTY MANAGER'S DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, explained this request.
Commr. Swartz stated that he would like to see the Selection Committee expanded, or changed, to include regular employees, those employees that are mid-level, or in management, who work and deal with employees on a day-to-day basis, concerning issues of personnel and salaries, who know some of the concerns that employees have, so that they can have some input on the selection, review, and ultimate recommendation to the Board as to what firm will do the study. He stated that he felt Commr. Gerber, Ms. Lois Martin, Director of Human Resources, and any constitutional officer who wished to participate should be on the committee, as well. He stated that he felt Mr. Wahl, County Manager, and Ms. Kelly Soucy, Purchasing Manager, or Mr. Jim Stivender, Director of Public Services, should be replaced with regular employees, or that staff could come back to the Board with a further recommendation, if they wished, at a later date.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, concurred with Commr. Swartz, noting that, if the Board was not unwilling, he would like to have at least two of the Employee Advisory Committee members sit on the committee, as well.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Human Resources for approval to go out for Request for Proposals (RFPs), for a Classification and Compensation Study; to invite the other constitutional officers to participate; and approval of a Selection Committee, to review the proposals and make a recommendation to the Board.
E-911/CONTRACTS, LEASES AND AGREEMENTS/INFORMATION SERVICES
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Information Services for approval of the E911 Interlocal Agreement with Sumter County for call procedures when misroutes occur.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/RESOLUTIONS
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Planning and Development for approval and signature on a Resolution establishing a Comprehensive Plan Amendment Schedule for calendar year 1995.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/STATE AGENCIES
Commr. Swartz questioned whether staff had sent the vesting language contained in the Land Development Regulations (LDRs), with regard to requirements in the Green Swamp that the County has adopted, to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA).
Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planner, Planning and Development, appeared before the Board stating that the County Attorney's Office had submitted said language to DCA approximately two weeks ago, pursuant to Chapter 380, of the Florida Statutes.
Commr. Swartz questioned whether there were any vested rights determinations, based on the LDRs that were issued in the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern, at the time of adoption.
Mr. Knight stated that there had been some vested rights determinations, however, he could not say how many were in the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern.
Commr. Swartz stated that, if they were in the Green Swamp and DCA had not reviewed and approved those LDRs, then the County may have issued vesting letters to people who cannot rely on them, because DCA had not signed off on them.
Mr. Gaylord, County Attorney, interjected that, if some building permits had been issued in the Green Swamp, they would be tied into vesting letters and DCA was sent copies of each letter.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Planning and Development for approval to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Community Affairs and Lake County, to provide better coordination in the implementation of Section 380.05, of the Florida Statutes, and the Lake County Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations.
CONTRACTS, LEASES AND AGREEMENTS/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Jim Barker, Director, Environmental Management Services, explained this request.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved a request from Planning and Development for approval to award a contract to Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, for laboratory services required for the Landfill Groundwater Monitoring Program, as permitted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, subject to review and approval by the County Attorney.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/STATE AGENCIES
Mr. Frank Gaylord, County Attorney, informed the Board that an informal hearing had been held by the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), concerning the issue of vesting, with regard to the Land Development Regulations. He stated that DCA will have to make a final determination on the matter by the first week of September, 1994. He noted that staff would be providing DCA with some additional information, within the next two weeks. He then answered questions from the Board regarding same.
Commr. Cadwell stated, for the record, that he was concerned about the fact that Commr. Swartz had attended that hearing and questioned whether he had spoken, and, if so, whether he had spoken on behalf of the Board, or on behalf of himself.
Commr. Swartz stated that he had spoken, but had spoken on behalf of himself.
Commr. Cadwell informed Commr. Swartz that he felt it was wrong for him to attend the meeting and speak against the position that the Board had taken, because he feels when the Board makes a decision to take a stand on a particular issue, that the Commissioners need to stand behind it.
Commr. Swartz stated that he attended the meeting and spoke, however, he did not speak against the position of the Board. He stated that he attended the meeting in search of truth and accuracy and that, when he spoke, it was only to ensure that certain information had been provided to the Hearing Officer. He stated that he respected Commr. Cadwell's opinion, but disagreed with it, noting that it was a public meeting and any of the Commissioners could have attended, if they chose to do so, and, if another administrative hearing is scheduled to be held that he feels is important for him to attend, that he will do so.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/MUNICIPALITIES
Mr. Frank Gaylord, County Attorney, requested clarification from the Board concerning the matter of mandatory water/wastewater connections. He stated that, in trying to develop the joint planning areas and service areas with the cities, he needed to know whether, when one speaks of expansion, it means expansion to the physical facilities, or to the existing water facility servicing that use.
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, interjected that he felt the Board needed to set a workshop meeting to discuss the matter, because there were a number of issues related to the interpretation of the mandatory connection of water/wastewater and he did not feel that the matter was going to be resolved this date. He stated that there are a number of issues related to the servicing of particular existing facilities, be it individual residences, subdivisions, commercial properties, or industrial properties and the Board needs to be far more specific than they have been, either through the Comprehensive Plan, or through the Land Development Regulations.
It was noted that staff would come back with a recommendation of when the workshop should be held.
No action was taken at this time.
Mr. Frank Gaylord, County Attorney, informed the Board that he and the County Attorneys from Orange, Volusia, Seminole and Osceola counties will be meeting, on a monthly basis, the last Wednesday of each month and that the meetings will be rotated from county to county. He stated that, if the Commissioners had any issues related to those particular counties, that it would be a good forum in which to address said issues. He stated that the purpose of the meetings is to try to establish a relationship and dialogue between the counties so that, not only are they consistent within the County, they are consistent regionally.
Commr. Swartz suggested that such a relationship be established with Marion, Sumter and Polk Counties, as well.
No action was needed or taken.
Commr. Gerber brought to the attention of the Board the fact that the first Tuesday in September, September 6th, is Rosh Hashanah, a Jewish holiday, therefore, she felt the Board Meeting should be moved to the second Tuesday of the month, in order to accommodate those people who are Jewish.
A brief discussion occurred regarding the matter, at which time staff was directed to check into the possibility of altering the public hearing portion of the meeting and going forward with the regular Board Meeting.
It was noted that the matter would be brought back, for action, at a later date.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/MUNICIPALITIES
Commr. Bailey stated that he felt members of the Industrial Development Authority should be invited to attend the workshop meeting concerning mandatory hookup for water/wastewater, in trying to develop joint planning areas and service areas for the cities, because he feels it is important to industries in the County how the Board is going to define expansions, renovations, etc.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT/ZONING
Commr. Swartz requested staff to bring back to the Board, at a later date, vested rights determinations that the County is presently in the process of making. He stated that, if they are based on the Comprehensive Plan, then he feels the County is on firm footing, however, if they are based on the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) that are presently under challenge, then he feels that the County has put itself in a position of doing harm to both the County and to the individuals that they have issued vested rights determinations to. He stated that it is particularly true in the Green Swamp.
Commr. Bailey questioned why they would be treated any differently in the Green Swamp than in the rest of the County.
Commr. Swartz stated it was due to the fact that there is statutory authority in the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern.
Commr. Hanson questioned the County Attorney as to whether the areas of critical state concern were intended to be lifted, once the plans were all approved and in place.
Mr. Gaylord, County Attorney, stated that he felt the Green Swamp was always going to be an area of critical state concern, however, the issues related to them may change.
No action was needed or taken at this time.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Commr. Cadwell informed the Board, for informational purposes, that an Impact Fee Committee Meeting had been held on Monday, July 18, 1994, with the benefit districts and that the County had received unanimous support from each benefit district for its impact fee project.
Commr. Cadwell requested the County Attorney to investigate and come up with something, in writing, concerning whether or not the County could have a policy requiring a citizen who is a member of a particular committee, who chooses to run for public office, to resign from said committee, once he or she qualifies to run for said office, and bring same back, for discussion, at a later date. He stated that it has been hard to get anything done, particularly this year, with so many people who are running for office being on different committees and that he feels people may not be as articulate and say what they are thinking, because their opponent is sitting across the table from them. He stated that he did not want to see it become effective this election, because it was not policy when the candidates signed up to run, but he would like to see it become effective for future elections.
It was noted that the matter would be researched and brought back to the Board at a later date.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board appointed the Chairman, Commr. Hanson, to the Lake County Juvenile Justice Council.
On a motion by Commr. Bailey, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, the Board approved a Resolution deleting the reference to agricultural commodities, in the membership of the Agricultural Advisory Committee, and approved to concentrate on appointing those individuals who are most committed to agriculture.
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 11:25 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for lunch and would reconvene at 2:00 p.m.
BUDGETS/OFFICE OF BUDGET
The Chairman stated that the purpose of this workshop was to go over certain items that the Board had questioned, during the budget workshops that were held July 11-14, 1994, concerning the proposed budget for FY 1994-95.
Ms. Eleanor Anderson, Director, Office of Budget, distributed a handout containing summaries of changes to the proposed budget for FY 1994-95, by fund, for the Board's perusal.
Included in the Board's backup material was a handout containing information from various departments relating to questions that the Board had about their respective budgets, for the Board's perusal.
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, referred to a memorandum from Mr. Fletcher Smith, Director of Community Services, pertaining to the Lake County Medical Examiner's facility operational cost and the Morgue maintenance fees. He stated that the figures included in the proposed budget are based on the estimate of activities from each of the participating counties. He further stated that, in response to a question raised by the Board during the budget review meeting, regarding the matter of whether or not the $200 fee that is charged to each county for autopsies that the Lake County Coroner performs is appropriate and adequate, it appears to be so.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, stated that a question arose during the budget review meeting as to the paperwork involved when a county collects the resort tax directly at the county level. He noted that Seminole County switched during the past year and started collecting their own tax and that Mr. Dave Warren, Tourist Development Director, had submitted a copy of the form that is used by Seminole County, which separates the tourist tax from other taxes that are collected, for the Board's perusal.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, referred to a sheet, contained in the Board's backup material, from Ms. Kelly Soucy, Purchasing Manager, listing the make-up of the $487 computer charge-back, in response to a question that arose during the budget review meeting regarding same. He stated that Ms. Soucy had made a determination, based on the application itself, of the various units, at which time Ms. Soucy answered questions from the Board regarding same.
Commr. Swartz commended staff for trying to plan ahead for both the maintenance and purchasing of computers, noting that it was a good way to budget, so that when the time comes to have to replace, there will be money in the budget to do so. However, he questioned whether staff was over budgeting, in light of two factors, being (1) that the price of computer equipment is coming down and (2) that staff is assuming a price that, even today, is higher than what the equipment can be purchased for. He stated that the concept is fine, however, he wanted to see staff use realistic figures, which he elaborated on.
Discussion occurred regarding the matter, at which time staff stated the reason why they were requesting the number of computers listed in the handout and the reason they went with the figures that are listed.
Mr. Bruce Thorburn, Director of Information Services, informed the Board that the County is going to have to invest in some protection for the computers, noting that the County recently had a lightning strike that cost the County $4,500, because of equipment not being properly protected. He stated that, no matter what equipment the County decides to go with, they need to add the cost of protecting it onto the cost of the equipment itself, on the top end, because the County cannot afford to pay out $4,500 every time a storm hits the area.
Commr. Swartz stated that he felt there was room in this budget to allocate for said protection, he just felt that the numbers need to be revised and the County needs to get into something that is a little more reflective of what the County actually expects to spend, not only in terms of computer maintenance costs, but in rolling back all the prices of computers and printers that are being plugged into the budget this year.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, referred to a memorandum, contained in the Board's backup material, from the County Attorney, regarding capital conflict cases. He stated that a question was raised by the Board at the budget review meeting regarding fees for capital cases and that the Board had directed the County Attorney to inquire about pro bono representation on conflict cases with the local Bar Association.
Mr. Bruce Duncan, Assistant County Attorney, informed the Board that there is very little cooperation from the Bar Association, in that regard. He stated that a lot of their concern is that they spend more time collecting bills than doctors do and it takes up a considerable amount of their time, as opposed to doctors, who have personnel handling same. He stated the second thing is that, in talking to the local pro bono expert, as well as to the Florida Bar Association, in Tallahassee, the County cannot use criminal cases to satisfy its pro bono requirements, so the County cannot hook them in, in that respect either, so there is no incentive, other than the incentive to look good in the community.
Mr. Duncan stated that it looked as if they were not going to get a lot of cooperation from the Bar Association and he did not know where the County was going to get funding for same. He then answered questions from the Board regarding the matter.
Facilities and Capital Improvements
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, referred to a handout, contained in the Board's backup material, pertaining to Infrastructure Sales Tax Revenue, based on the low, medium, and highest estimates of collection, as well as interest, for the Board's perusal, in response to a question raised by the Board, during the budget review meeting, regarding same.
Office of Budget
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, informed the Board that some members of the Kitchen Cabinet were present in the audience, to address any questions the Board might have about a study that was conducted, by them, regarding the Office of Budget and whether it should remain under the Board, or go back under the Clerk of Circuit Court, Mr. James C. Watkins.
Commr. Gerber stated that, in the recommendation of the Kitchen Cabinet, regarding the Budget Office, it states that it would be a reasonable move to eliminate the Budget Office, if the Clerk of Circuit Court agreed to accept the responsibility and reallocate the Budget Office Analysts to the various departments, to perform duties which they outlined.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, stated that was one option, however, the overall intent is to cut costs, where possible. He stated that he believed one of the issues had to do with the fact that, if a department did not have the capability to do the job, then it should be reallocated.
Mr. David Ohnstad, a member of the Kitchen Cabinet, appeared before the Board to discuss and answer questions from the Board regarding the Kitchen Cabinet's recommendation. He stated how the Kitchen Cabinet conducted their study and how they came to the conclusion that they did, however, noted that the committee consisted of volunteers who conducted the study on their own time, so it was not an indepth study. He stated that all they tried to do was get an overview of the system and how it worked and to see whether or not they could make any recommendations that might make it (a) work better, (b) work less expensively, or (c) all the above.
Mr. Ohnstad stated that they broke into various groups, went into the different departments, talked to the department heads, and asked them questions relative to the budgeting process, not necessarily the Budget Department. He stated that all the people they talked to said that, if they had questions about (a) their budget, or (b) their expenditures, they would talk to the Finance Department, because that is where they got the most accurate information. He stated that, when asked where their budget reports were, not one of them could say where the reports were, because they do not use them.
Mr. Ohnstad stated that, regarding extra help during the budgeting process, they all stated that a lot of help comes from the Personnel Department, however, regarding information that is more specific to their job and what they are doing, they stated that it comes from within their departments. He stated that all the departments seemed to have a staff person that was more or less in charge of their budget. He stated that most of the departments felt that, within a reasonable length of time, they could come up with their budgets, using previous history, etc., and expanding on that with whatever new information comes in. He stated that they are all looking forward to having their own access to the Finance Department computer and will be able to obtain information on an immediate basis and generate their own budgets on the computer.
Mr. Ohnstad stated that the Kitchen Cabinet was not saying to eliminate the Budget Office, but that it needs to be out closer to the people that are actually using the information and, if that could be factored in, by taking those people that are in the Budget Office and putting them out into the field, in various departments, where they could actually be helping an individual department with whatever needs it has, be it revenue, expenditures, etc., they felt that would be a better way to do it.
Mr. Ben Seabrook, a member of the Kitchen Cabinet, appeared before the Board stating that it was a challenge to serve on said committee. He stated that he felt the Board needed to take a hard look to see if there is any redundancy in the system, or in the process, and, if so, eliminate it, because it is waste.
Commr. Cadwell stated that, after listening to the members of the Kitchen Cabinet and to people in the County, meeting with the Clerk's Office and Ms. Anderson, Director, Office of Budget, and receiving input from people whose opinion he respects, he feels that the County can save $150,000 the first year. He stated, for the record, that the Clerk's Office never once lobbied for the job, nor did he receive any pressure from Ms. Lehman, Chief Deputy, Finance and Audit Department, or anybody in the Clerk's Office, about taking over the job.
Ms. Sarah LaMarche, Assistant Finance Director, appeared before the Board, in response to questions by the Board regarding the changeover. She stated that there is probably some redundancy, but not a lot. She stated that she felt there would be efficiency, if the two departments were to be combined, as the Finance Department is quite heavily involved in the audit, from October 1 through March 31, with many of the employees working long hours, and that each side could pick up the slack for the other.
Discussion occurred regarding the potential savings that would occur by combining the duties of the two offices and whether additional employees would be needed. Ms. Lehman, Chief Deputy, Finance and Audit Department, noted that four additional people would need to be hired, if the duties of the two offices are combined, however, by doing so, it would result in a savings to the County of approximately $137,000 per year. She further noted that the total estimated budget for FY 1994-95, for the Finance Department to prepare the budget, would be $193,000.
Commr. Swartz stated that he was not convinced there would be any savings by moving the Budget Office back under the Clerk. He concurred with Ms. LaMarche, in that he does not feel there is much duplication of service between the Budget Office and Finance. He stated, if the Board makes the decision to request the Clerk to take over the function, that he believes what they are talking about is dispersing employees to other departments, rather than the consolidation of budget management, within a department, which he feels is the wrong direction for the Board to go.
Commr. Swartz stated one of the overriding reasons why the Board created its own Budget Office was to obtain more information than what it was getting, in order to make budget decisions. He stated that each year it has gotten better and better for the Board to obtain budget information, which has made it easier for them to make decisions and review how the County is spending money. He stated that during his first year on the Board, it was like operating in the dark and he did not want to see the County go back to that.
Commr. Swartz stated that he had respect for the Clerk, but he felt, to take the Budget Office away from the Board and put it under the responsibility of the Clerk was a step backwards and he would rather see more accountability and independence in the Budget Office, than do that. He stated that another reason he would urge the Board not to take this action is due to the fact that the County is in the process of trying to interlink offices within the system and the costs involved with same. He stated that he felt it was premature to make the move at this time, based on the two reasons he gave.
Commr. Swartz stated that he felt, if the Board were going to make a change in the Budget Office, the more prudent direction to go would be, as many other counties have done, both charter and non-charter, to have a Budget Office with the Chief Operating Officer being hired by the Board and that said person not be under the County Manager. He stated that he felt that would bring a checks and balance and level of accountability to the Board that is not present today.
Commr. Bailey stated that he felt, when the Clerk's Office used to do the budget reports, that any information the Board wanted probably would have been made available to them, they just did not ask for it. He stated that he felt the Constitutional Officers were going to have to work together better, to eliminate some of the duplication. He questioned whether the County Manager was convinced that there would be a savings to the County, if the Budget Office was given back to the Clerk.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, stated that there is a direction in organizations to give managers the tools that they have to have to manage. He stated that he felt, whether the Budget Office remains under the Board or not, departments have got to have the ability to understand their budgets, to work within their budgets, and to model projections and decision impacts. He stated that they have been forced to develop that, as county government has become more complex. He stated that he felt this move was the right way to go and that, with the capability and the need for the departments to manage their own budgets, the County has the ability to effect some savings, therefore, felt that giving the Budget Office back to the Clerk was a step in the right direction.
Commr. Bailey stated that he felt Ms. Anderson, Director of Budget, had done an outstanding job and that it was not an easy decision for him to make, but that he was going to support Commr. Cadwell's motion to give the Budget Office back to the Clerk.
Commr. Gerber stated that she did not have any doubt that the Clerk's Office could do a good job, but she was of the opinion that, financially, it was going to be a "wash", because she was assured by members of the Budget Office that there are departments that cannot do the job that they do, therefore, people will have to be put in those offices to help out. Regarding the issue of duplication, she stated that she saw none. She stated that she feels, if the Budget Office is taken out of the picture, it will decrease accountability to the Board, because the Finance Office is accountable to the Clerk and she feels that the County needs that separation. She stated that she would like to see some sort of phasing in and that she feels the Board should look at the work load in the Budget Office and decrease it incrementally, as needed. She stated that she was also concerned about the implementation of the new computer equipment and that she feels the County needs time to go through that process, before making a change. Due to these facts, she stated that she would not support Commr. Cadwell's motion.
Commr. Hanson stated that both the Clerk's Office and the Budget Office have become much more sophisticated than they were and that, aside from the issue of personnel, the Board has to be objective and make a decision. She stated that she feels the efficiencies that can be gained are in time management. She stated that the one thing that helped her make a decision to support Commr. Cadwell's motion was the availability of information, noting that the ones that need to use the information are the department heads and that, with that information at their fingertips, they will be better able to make decisions.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board approved to request the Clerk, effective October 1, 1994, to take over the budgetary functions of the Board of County Commissioners and directed the County Manager to make an effort to place the Budget Office employees in budgeted, unfilled positions, where they meet the minimum qualifications.
Commr. Swartz and Gerber voted "No".
RECESS & REASSEMBLY
At 3:20 p.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would take a 10 minute recess.
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, informed the Board that Mr. Wayne Hamilton, Risk Manager, had provided them with a list of the members of the Employee Safety Committee, as requested by Commr. Swartz during the budget review meeting. He noted that said committee would probably expand over time and split off into at least two subcommittees, to work on different issues.
No action was needed or taken.
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, informed the Board that Mr. Bruce Duncan, Assistant County Attorney, had prepared a memorandum addressing occupational licenses and their rate structure, for the Board's perusal, in response to a question that was raised as to what the County has to do to comply with the new statute.
No action was needed or taken.
COUNTY EMPLOYEES/HUMAN RESOURCES
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, informed the Board, for informational purposes, that Ms. Lois Martin, Director of Human Resources, had prepared a corrected Approved Personnel Changes list that was approved as part of the request that came to the Board at mid-year, for the Board's perusal.
No action was needed or taken.
Mr. Ron Roche, Director, Solid Waste Management Division, appeared before the Board to address concerns that the Board had about his budget and some requests that he had made for additional vehicles.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he felt, if the money is there, the Solid Waste Department should be given the money they need, to purchase whatever equipment and vehicles are necessary to do their job.
Commr. Swartz stated that he was tired of going through a roller coaster ride with the budget, since he has been on the Board, and he did not feel that the citizens of Lake County particularly like it either. He stated that, if the County stays at the present millage and assessment, it will spend all the money that will come in this year and he does not feel that that is the type of approach the County needs to take, if it is going to avoid any more of the roller coaster effect. He stated that there are several things on the horizon and he does not know what kind of impact they will have on the ad valorem revenue stream.
Commr. Swartz stated that he was not supportive of a number of the additional positions being requested in the FY 1994-95 budget. He stated that he would like to see the Board cut back on a number of those positions and then look at whether or not it is prudent to take that money and reduce the millage, or put it into the Contingency Reserve Account.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he felt the Board needed to have faith in their department heads and let them manage their departments and, if the County has the resources to acquire additional personnel and equipment, then the Board should let them do it.
Commr. Hanson stated that she agreed with Commr. Swartz that, if the County can, it needs to increase the Contingency Reserve Account, however, she does not feel, at this time, that the County needs to do a roll-back. She stated that she feels the only way the County is going to make growth pay for itself is to use the increase in assessments to pay for the services that are demanded by the community.
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, referred to his transmittal memorandum, in which he recognizes the fact that this is the first cut and that the County will be going through substantially more budgetary review, prior to the first and second public hearings. He stated that he also points out, in said memorandum, the fact that staff has included those items within the budget that they know are not necessarily going to continue in the budget. He stated that they will be making continual modifications to this budget, whether it is with used equipment, deleted positions, etc., as the County moves through the budget development process and that he has requested that those dollars be incorporated into a reserve account, so that the Board can choose to deal with them as they see fit. He stated that it is not a question of spending everything, it is a question of including the items.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Paul Bergmann, Senior Director, Planning and Development, appeared before the Board and addressed a concern the Board had raised about a Secretary I position that he was requesting for the Planning and Development Department, that will be utilized as a Receptionist, Telephone Operator, and Information Clerk and whether said position could be put off until the Planning and Development Department moves into the Administration Building.
Mr. Bergmann noted that he was requesting a total of six additional people for his department, however, none of them would be for the Planning Division.
Discussion occurred regarding the additional personnel being requested, at which time Mr. Bergmann answered questions from the Board regarding same.
Ms. Jean Kaminski, Executive Director of the Home Builders Association, appeared before the Board stating that she and Mr. Ben Seabrook were members of the Kitchen Cabinet and that their duty was to try to look at making the whole development process more efficient. She stated how she and Mr. Seabrook went about conducting their portion of the study and that their recommendation would be to upgrade the equipment in the Planning and Development Department, so that there could be a network between the zoning counter and the building permit counter, which would eliminate the duplication of functions and allow people to be served.
Mr. Seabrook appeared before the Board stating that some of the recommendations he and Ms. Kaminski made were money saving recommendations, but pertained to the level of service customers are given. He stated that there have been instances where individuals have come into the Building Department and sat for 45 minutes waiting to be served, only to find out that he/she was in the wrong place, so he feels the Information Clerk is a good idea.
Mr. Jack Bragg, Building Official, appeared before the Board and addressed some concerns the Board had about his particular budget and some additional positions that he had requested, at which time he reviewed a handout that he had prepared, consisting of building activity reports that the Board had requested at the budget review meeting, for their perusal.
Commr. Hanson stated that she did not have a problem with any of the six employees being requested for the Planning and Development Department - three in the Building Department, one in Code Compliance, an Information Clerk, and a Planner III, noting that the Board has added a tremendous work load on said department and that, from a customer service point of view, she felt the Board needed to approve all six of the positions.
Commr. Swartz stated that the purpose of the Kitchen Cabinet was to find ways for the County to be more economic and efficient and that, hopefully, the County will work toward that - one being in the renovation and relocation of personnel and the other in computerization. He stated that he felt, if the Board continues to give people to the various departments, rather than make them look for ways to be more efficient, it will be a wasted effort in the short term and that, in the long term, the County will be re-entering the same cycle that he would like to see it get out of. He stated that he would support the Information Clerk, because he felt it was needed, and that he would support an additional position in the Building Division, but he would not support all three of the positions for that division. He stated that he did not support the person in Code Compliance, nor the Planner III position.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he felt the requests being made were reasonable ones and that he would support them.
Commr. Bailey stated that he would support a motion to approve all six of the positions being requested, as he felt they were needed.
Ms. Kaminski reappeared before the Board stating that she felt, with the increased mandates from the State, increased permitting activity, and increased volume of work in the Building Division that they need the additional people being requested and urged the Board to approve them.
Commr. Gerber stated that she felt it was the computers that were costing the County money this year, not personnel, but that the County needs them both and she feels that they are going to make a big difference.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Bailey and carried, the Board approved a request from Planning and Development for authorization to hire six additional employees, as noted.
Commr. Swartz voted "No".
Mr. Pete Wahl, County Manager, informed the Board that they had directed staff to go back and rework the figures for the Reprographic Center. He stated that Ms. Kelly Soucy, Purchasing Manager, had been working on it, however, was not in a position, at this time, to give the Board a totally revised recap. He stated that said recap would be provided to the Board prior to the Board Meeting scheduled for July 26, 1994.
COUNTY EMPLOYEES/FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES/HUMAN RESOURCES
Commr. Swartz stated that he did not support the additional position being requested for Human Resources/Risk Management, a Safety Officer position. He suggested funding 50% of that position out of the Fire and Emergency Services budget and 50% out of the Personnel/Risk Management budget and not create a new position.
Ms. Karen Bowerman, Deputy Chief, Fire and Rescue, appeared before the Board stating that the position being requested for Fire and Rescue had absolutely nothing to do with safety. She stated that said position would be a civilian position, a Certified Fire Inspector, who will do nothing but review plans and attend TRC meetings.
Mr. Wahl, County Manager, interjected that there is another position that is grant funded in that department, through Emergency Management, and that he would have staff look at said grant and see if it is possible to fund that position and bring said information back to the Board at a later date.
Further discussion occurred regarding the matter, at which time Commr. Hanson requested Mr. Wahl to provide the Board with a list of the increases in personnel during the last four years, along with population, per year, for their perusal.
Commr. Swartz brought to the attention of the Board some line items that he felt should be reviewed. He stated that he did not want to see the line items inflated, noting that, if there is a justification for it that is fine, but, if not, he did not want to see them inflated. He noted some changes in the line items that he felt should occur, at which time it was noted that Mr. Wahl would meet with Commr. Swartz and go over the remainder of the line items that he was concerned about.
Ms. Eleanor Anderson, Director, Office of Budget, reviewed a handout that she had prepared, for the Board's perusal, containing additions and deletions to the Proposed Budget for FY 1994-95, by fund, at which time she answered questions from the Board regarding same. She noted that some of the changes were ones that were presented to the Board and others were ones that were brought to the Budget Office's attention during the week of July 11-15, 1994.
Discussion occurred regarding the need to set a Tentative Budget Hearing for FY 1994-95, at which time it was determined that said meeting would be set for Monday, September 12, 1994, at 6:30 p.m., to be held in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, in the Administration Building. The Final Budget Hearing was tentatively set for Tuesday, September 20, 1994.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:15 p.m.
CATHERINE C. HANSON, CHAIRMAN
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK