A
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
FEBRUARY
10, 2009
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in a
special workshop session on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 9:00 a.m., in the
Board of County Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Lake County Administration
Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Welton
G. Cadwell, Chairman; Jennifer Hill, Vice Chairman; Jimmy Conner; Elaine
Renick; and Linda Stewart. Others
present were Sanford A. “Sandy” Minkoff, County Attorney; Cindy Hall, County
Manager; Wendy Taylor, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; Neil
Kelly, Clerk; Barbara F. Lehman, Chief Deputy Clerk, County Finance; and Susan
Boyajan, Deputy Clerk.
JUDICIAL
PROJECT AND FUNDING ISSUES
Ms.
Cindy Hall, County Manager, stated that she would give some history of this
project and discuss what they were looking at today based on the dramatic turn
in the economy that no one was anticipating a couple of years ago. She explained that in 2007 they issued $90
million in bonds, and the plan at that time was that the project would cost
approximately $180 million and that they would have two bond issues two years
apart at $90 million each to pay for that.
She related that when they did the bonds in April of 2007, the bond
ratings, which were very good and in the AA category, reflected the fact that
they anticipated a second bond issue of $90 million. However, last summer as the sixth cent sales
tax started to decline, they came to the Board to inform them that the bonding
capacity had been reduced and they were looking at ways to reduce the scope of
the project. She recapped that the Board
at that time approved shelling out some space in the planned courthouse,
eliminating some other aspects that were parts of the project, and redesigning
the refurbishment of the current courthouse so that it would be much less
expensive. She stated that as part of
this year’s budget, the Board approved $11 million that would be dedicated to
the courthouse project, and unofficially they had earmarked the future revenue
from the infrastructure sales tax, which they estimated at $20 million, that
was currently dedicated to facilities to fund part of the courthouse. She mentioned that due to the declining
economic situation, sales tax, and property values, next year’s budget would be
very difficult. She reported that
although they did have bonding capacity left, they needed to be able to build
in the ability to pay the debt service into the budget, which would be
difficult in the tight budget anticipated for next year. However, she presented hand outs showing that
there was about $36 million left of the $90 million first bond issue that would
be dedicated to Phase II, pointed out that they did not need to build debt
service into the budget for a couple of years, and gave examples of what a bond
issue would look like if they were to do one, including the debt service. She also related that they had asked the
architects and construction managers to see if it would be possible to phase
the construction of the new building into two phases and a design for a Phase
II(A) that would coincide with the $46 million in cash they had mentioned above
that would be functional on its own, and they indicated that there might be a
way to accomplish that.
Mr.
Jim Bannon, Director of Capital Construction, stated that because of the
funding issues, they asked the architects to develop some design solutions to
reduce the size of the Judicial Center, which were shared by Judge Don F.
Briggs and Mr. Neil Kelly, Clerk. He
related that Heery Design would talk briefly about those ideas and that PPI
would give an overview of where they were on the project and offer
recommendations of how they should move forward.
Mr.
Doug Kleppin, Lead Designer with Heery Design, related that the building was
L-shaped with a leg that faces Main Street and a leg that parallels the
existing building with a natural expansion joint that occurs at that L that
they need for construction purposes, which divided the building systems
mechanically and electrically. They
proposed in effect to make that the phase break, with the first phase including
all the primary infrastructure for the courts, inmate delivery, and vertical
circulation for the public becoming the first piece of an operable courthouse
where all the systems are in place for at least the initial phase, the Phase II
(B), and for possible future expansion.
He mentioned that the smaller option was actually one that they
illustrated in August or September of 2005.
He pointed out that it would take some additional work with the
judiciary and the Clerk’s Office to find a solution that was amiable and
actually works for everyone.
Commr.
Conner inquired what the entire square footage of the complex as well as the
scaled-down version would be.
Mr.
Kleppin responded that the original plan was 286,000 square feet, and they
would reduce that by almost 100,000 square feet to about 190,000 square feet.
Mr.
Glen Mullins, Vice President Regional Manager with PPI Construction Management,
stated that Heery put together some very rough sketches for the concept that
Mr. Kleppin described, and commented that they have not had time to analyze
that completely and develop estimates on it.
However, they did some quick ora magnitude assessments of what that
might be, including the site work that was necessary in the existing judicial
parking lot, moving utilities around, preparing for the building, and the
construction of the portion of the scaled-down building and came up with a
range estimate of $65 to $70 million for that portion of the building.
Commr.
Renick pointed out that it seemed the County would still have to take on
additional debt service to do the minimum phase for that cost.
Ms.
Hall stated that although initially she hoped that they would come to a
decision today of whether or not to redesign, the consultants have indicated to
her that their recommendation was to put the documents out to bid and see what
the costs would be.
Mr.
Mullins explained that the market today was very good in terms of
competitiveness in the marketplace, and there might be some advantages to doing
that, since the design was done and they were ready to bid that project to find
out what the actual value is of the full courthouse. He related that when they bid a job, they
broke it down into bid packages, which were actual trade scopes of work, and
they would have 35 or more bid packages for this project which would help them
analyze the value of the work. Then, if
they did need to reduce costs, it would give them the information and
analytical data to work with going forward.
Commr.
Cadwell commented that if the Board did not want to borrow any more money, then
they definitely would have to make some changes to the project. However, he thought they needed to see what
was out there in the marketplace and how much difference there would in the
price, and then decide whether they wanted to take on any additional debt.
Commr.
Conner stated that he was interested in seeing a financing plan on how to repay
the cost of any building they decide to construct, and he stated that he did
not want to increase millage rates to pay a debt service in a down
economy. He also commented that he was
not going to support taking on $40 or $50 more in debt. He related that he would like to move this
project forward, however, because they could currently get a good value
regarding construction prices and that they needed to utilize the money that
they have already bonded.
Commr.
Cadwell commented that they had the documents ready to put out to bid for the whole
project, and asked if they had the documents ready for the scaled-down version.
Mr.
Mullins responded that they did not have the documents for the scaled-down
version, but they have the documents for the full version and that they have
been in discussions with Heery about the time frame for revising the documents
to put them out.
Commr.
Renick stated that she would not be comfortable bidding that if they were not
serious about building the full project, since there was a lot of time and
effort on the part of the people doing those bids.
Commr.
Conner asked if they could give a range for the estimate of the cost for
construction of the 286,000 square foot building.
Mr.
Mullins stated that his educated guess at this point would be about ten to
fifteen percent reduction in the market today, based on the competition they
currently see.
Commr.
Conner commented that even if the price came out to be 20 percent less than
anticipated, they would still be $29 million short of what they currently had
available for this project, which he did not think they could afford. He pointed out that they would also have to
build the operating budget for this new building into the budget.
Commr.
Cadwell asked what the time frame would be to put out two packages.
Mr.
Bob Egleston, Project Manager for Heery, emphasized that they had complete
drawings that they invested a lot of time and effort in working with the
judiciary and the courts to understand how the pieces went together, and they
wanted to use that. Also, he pointed out
that there was no risk in putting it out to bid. He understood that they were probably going
to scale back, but having an accurate square foot cost would help them to make
better decisions on what they could do to reduce the project. He also informed the Board that there was a
time consideration, because there would be a code change on March 1 for the
State of Florida, and they could lock in under the current code and not have
any more costs that would run into the project after the code changes. He explained that there was a two or three
month time frame in revising the drawings if they kept a portion of the project
as it currently was. He specified that
the code would require increased steel costs for more reinforcement to
withstand higher winds, which would make the structure of the building more
expensive.
Commr.
Renick stated that she did not think they should be concerned with the code
changes, because she thought they were being changed for a reason.
Commr.
Hill opined that there was no way of putting that plan together unless they put
it out to bid, and she thought that putting a second document out would
probably confuse the bid market. She
also noted that they spent almost two years already on this design with all the
stake holders to come up with the most efficient, cost-effective, and
functional building, and she thought that redesigning it would compromise that
and be short sighted of their future needs.
Mr.
John Carlson of PPI Construction stated that the value of bidding this project
would be to provide accurate, real time data from the marketplace that they did
not have now. He commented that the
market was incredibly dynamic right now, and they would break this project into
35 discrete packages of work with multiple bids for each of those pieces to use
at no risk to the County as data to make the right decisions going forward.
On
a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Stewart, and carried unanimously by
a vote of 5-0, the Board moved to place the Phase II documents as designed out
to bid, which would give them a working number to determine what they would be
able to build.
EFFICIENT INFRASTRUCTURE AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
OPPORTUNITIES
Mr.
Jim Stivender, Public Works Director, stated that Mr. Billy Hattaway with
Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. (VHB) was a specialist in communities that wanted
to be able to utilize different modes of transportation. He mentioned that if the Board saw the value
in this presentation, they wanted to have a full day workshop sometime later
this year involving all the cities. He
suggested that they have elected officials attend the presentation in the
morning and then have all the planners and engineers attend in the afternoon.
Mr.
Hattaway commented that he has seen a lot of things happen in the State of
Florida over his adult life and how things are working and not working both in
terms of transportation and growth in their communities. He opined that there were concerns about how
Lake County would see itself and want to grow in the future when the economy
picks back up and how the Board would deal with those challenges regarding the
issues of quality of life, transportation, and economic development. He commented that the slowdown in growth
gives the County time to reflect on what it has been doing in the last forty to
fifty years and to revisit what they would want to do differently once things
start to gear back up again. He opined
that there have been many negative consequences with the way that the area has
grown in the past. He noted that quality
of life was highly valued in this area, and every community needed to decide
what that meant to them. He commented
that an environment that was spread out and not supportive to walking has been
created. This has created many
problems, including obesity caused by physical inactivity. He pointed out that sprawl development
continues to consume a lot of previously undisturbed or agricultural land, and
there was a lot of cost which they have not recognized in the past that they
needed to be more aware of. He presented
a chart which showed that the number of miles that each person has driven has
doubled in the last 20 to 30 years, and that trend has continued because of the
change in development patterns. He
related that there were impacts to agriculture and nature, and he reported that
there were environmental costs to sprawl and that 27 percent of the greenhouse
gases come from transportation. He also
pointed out that the country uses a disproportionate share of energy, which has
cost it a lot around the world in terms of its relationships with other
countries.
Mr.
Hattaway stated that the five keys to success of place, which would get people
to walk more so that they would use their car less, were feelings of comfort,
welcome, safety, convenience, and efficiency.
He specified that in Florida, people needed shade from trees, awnings,
and some type of shelter; places to walk; and access to conveniences in close
proximity to where people live and could access on foot. He also stated that those spaces needed to be
attractive and well-maintained, with parks on a local scale and open space
where people could gather and recreate.
He commented that it gave a feeling of safety when there were people
about on foot that could watch out for each other.
Mr. Hattaway reported that the
Highway Trust Fund was in bankruptcy as of October of last year, and there has
not been any real political will to deal with it in the past, which would make
it difficult to continue to widen state roads using federal funds. He noted that driving was down over 100
billion miles from October of 2007 to October 2008, which meant that there was
less money going into the Highway Trust Fund to operate and maintain that
infrastructure. He stated that the
conventional suburban developments that were typically built for the last forty
years after the automobile became such a dominant force were auto dominant, low
density, had separate land uses, and every trip had to go out on the
arterial. However, a traditional
neighborhood had a gridded network of streets, focused on the pedestrian, had
mixed uses, was multi-modal, and was less dependent on the arterial. He pointed out that the way schools were
currently planned added about 30 percent increase in traffic due to bus traffic
and people taking their children to school, and that less than 8 percent of
children walk or bike to school today compared with 48 percent in 1969. He presented a chart that showed that the
less dwelling units per acre there were, the more people had to drive in order
to take care of their needs. He stated
that in terms of Lake County, he thought that one opportunity would be to look
at focusing growth in towns that advocate compact, walkable, bicycle-friendly
development including neighborhood schools, mixed use development, streets that
work for everyone, and a range of housing choices. He related that the goals that they would
look for would be achieving a sense of community and place; providing a range
of transportation, employment, and housing; preserving and enhancing the
natural and cultural resources; and promoting public health. He found that even though 30 to 40 percent of
the public would choose compact mixed use development, only 2 to 5 percent of
housing was this type of development, and this showed that there was a lot of
opportunity in the market to fill that gap.
He pointed out that the commuter rail coming into play and all the
transit systems that would feed off of that would provide more opportunities
for transit oriented development and that a recent study verified that that
would reduce automobile trips by 50 percent.
He showed a photograph illustrating that mixed use development could be
at a scale that was appropriate for the communities in Lake County. He commented that he has seen communities
change their course from suburban sprawl to focus more on compact development
and mixed use principles in towns and small cities, with education on
implications of current development patterns, collaboration to develop a
network, and integration of land use and transportation.
Commr.
Cadwell stated that they were thinking of having Mr. Hattaway come back to
sponsor a workshop at the college or other venue, and he received consensus
from the Board to do that.
RECESS AND REASSEMBLY
The Chairman announced at 10:05 a.m.
that there would be a ten-minute recess.
DISCUSSION OF 2009/10 BUDGET
Mr. Doug Krueger, Budget Director,
stated that they were about to embark on the budget preparation process for
fiscal year 2009/10 and that they wanted to get some direction before their
department started working on the budget.
He referred to a handout in the packet which was an estimated General
Fund Pro Forma Budget for FY 2009/10, and commented that the $3.8 million fund
balance figure could easily double. He
reported that it assumed a tax base for the fiscal year of $20.5 billion and
that their current tax base was just under $21 billion, which equates to about
a 2.5 percent reduction in their property tax revenues. He also assumed the current millage rate, which
would actually be a tax cut with the reduction in the tax base and lower than
the rollback rate. He noted that there
were also no adjustments made on the expenditure side to salaries and that the
transfer to the constitutional officers would be no more than the current
year. Also, no new debt service was
built into these projections, and they reduced their grants to $250,000. He pointed out that based on those
assumptions, they had a shortfall of $3.8 million. He added that included in this was the assumption
that they were going to generate a $23 million fund balance from the current
year to be carried over to next year, but he estimated that probably in the
general fund that number would be closer to $19 million, which could add
another $4 million to the imbalance. He
asked for direction from the Board on the approach to take, including using the
additional fund balance available in the health and property insurance,
reducing hours, and reducing reserves.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the
employee health insurance was something they could talk about and that they
could look at taking some of the money in that plan. In regard to the hours, he asked Ms. Hall if
she had talked about that with the Employee Advisory Committee and thought they
could be given a presentation for informational purposes to let them know what
they were looking at to balance the budget.
Ms. Hall stated that she did not know
if that had been discussed with the Employee Advisory Committee, but she
certainly could do that. Her perspective
was that employees were very supportive of all the things that had taken place
so far regarding their current raise policy and that they would support
possible future measures. She also
informed the Board that they were looking at reducing hours to possibly 36 or
32 hours and then adjusting the salaries accordingly to be consistent with the
number of hours reduced, allowing them to keep benefits and jobs.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he thought
they should look at that.
Commr. Conner commented that he thought
it was problematic for them to be spending more money than they were taking in,
especially in the long term. He thought
that in this fiscal year they needed to direct their County Manager to look at
their organization to evaluate the necessity of positions and that they needed
to make hard decisions about ways they could cut their expenses not limited to
the decrease in the hours.
Ms. Hall related that they have
instructed departments to cut down on their expenses as much as they possibly
could. She mentioned that the
departments were aware of the crisis going into next year and that anything
that they do not spend this year and was carried forward would help them out
next year. She also noted that Mr. Krueger
and his office currently were going through a detailed analysis of the
expenditures so far this year and were prepared to come back in March to give
the Board an update on that. She added
that they have been watching their positions very carefully, and they were at
the point that the departments and the programs were very lean, but the service
levels would become less responsive with additional cuts.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the
economic stabilization reserves were created for two things, and since they
were actually in a mandated catastrophe now, he thought they should use at
least part of that in the budget process.
Commr. Renick thought that looking at
using those reserves should be a last resort, in case they needed that for a
hurricane or other emergency situation.
She stated that she felt that they should look at everything, and she
thought Ms. Hall could come back to them after she and her staff did the
preparation that they needed to do.
Ms. Hall commented that that would be
sufficient direction for them at this point.
She also stated that they wanted the Board to be aware of where they
were going into next year and the types of things they were looking at and
wanted to know if there was anything in there that the Board absolutely did not
want them to consider. She stated that
they would put some information together as they went through the budget
process and come forward with some specific proposals for the Board to look at.
Commr. Cadwell added that in this
environment, they needed to look at all possible program and budget cuts.
Mr. Bob McKee, Tax Collector,
commented that the transfer that goes from the Board to their office should be
noticeably less next year, because it was proportionate to their collections,
and the County may have upwards of almost 2 million additional dollars when
they adjust their revenue inflows and outflows.
UPDATE ON STATE ROAD 50
Mr. T. J. Fish, Executive Director,
Metropolitan Planning Organization, stated that there was a one-mile zone that
was part of the Plaza Collina Development of Regional Impact, and when they
received approval from Lake County to move forward with that project, it
obligated them to satisfy conditions of DOT, including constructing that
mile. He reported that the DRI also
would owe $1 million to DOT in June at the anticipated completion date, so that
portion was moving forward. He presented
a graphic on the overhead that summarized the segments and the funding amounts,
and noted that the bid for the segment from Orange County to the Turnpike
interchange west of Hancock Road came in $12 million under the estimated
cost. He reported that their focus now
that DOT was moving forward with construction of the six lane portion that
would go west of Hancock Road was getting the unfunded segment on over to the
interchange with US Hwy 27 funded, which was the number one priority for other
arterial funding. He explained that DOT
only had two sources of money for these types of projects, which were the
Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) such as US 27 and other arterials such as SR
50. He noted that the segment shown in
red on the map was on DOT’s supported list of stimulus package projects and was
looking good if Congress does what they were expected to do. He also mentioned that they were asking DOT
to fund the interchange itself with US Hwy 27 through the SIS program, and that
was the number one priority for that funding.
He commented that SR 50 was a perfect example of one of those arterials
where suburban development styles overloaded it too quickly, from 24,000 cars a
day to 55,000 cars a day currently, and it was one of the only corridors right
now in Lake County where they were seeing any development interests.
TRANSPORTATION TASK FORCE
RECOMMENDATIONS
Mr. Krueger explained that the
Transportation Task Force made a recommendation that contained a number of
different options, including Option 2, which was to dedicate a percentage of
General Fund Revenues for road maintenance and gradually phase that in from 2
percent up to 8 percent. He stated that
the schedule in the handout basically was designed to show what it would have
been generating over the last five years if they had been doing that. He noted that in 2007/08 they had $136
million in current revenues, which would have generated $2.7 million at 2
percent and almost $11 million at 8 percent.
He pointed out, however, that if they currently could not come up with
$3 million in debt service, they certainly would have a difficult time actually
transferring money from the general fund to the road program under Option
2. He then explained that Option 4B was
to dedicate tax revenues associated with improved commercial and industrial
development towards road maintenance, and presented a handout showing the tax
base over the last five or six years just related to commercial and industrial development
and that increase from year to year. He reported that in the current year of
2008/09, the growth in commercial/industrial development was $211 billion,
which at their current tax rate of 4.6 mils, would have generated about
$900,000 that could have gone towards the road maintenance budget.
Commr. Conner asked Mr. Stivender
what the overall conditions of the County roads at this time were and about the
grading scale that they use.
Mr. Stivender responded that there
were about 1280 miles of paved road, and 90 miles of them need paving
immediately. He continued to explain
that they grade roads from 1 being full of potholes to 10 being a brand new
road, and that a road that was rated 4 substantially had a lot of potholes on
it and would need to be paved. He added
that there were sections of SR 44 that they were getting ready to work on in
the general area west of the fairgrounds that were a 4. He related that roads that were sixes were
worn and decayed, but they could put a small service of sealant to micro
resurface it, which would make them an 8.
He also mentioned that all the roads that had been worse than a 4 had
already been repaired.
Commr. Conner inquired how much
revenue they had this year to resurface roads and where that revenue came from.
Mr. Stivender reported that they had
a little over $3 million from sales tax, which was down 10 percent.
Commr. Conner asked about the 5 cent
gas tax and commented that he has seen the importance of maintaining their
infrastructure. He expressed a desire to
carefully examine the condition of the roads.
Mr. Stivender stated that he asked
his staff to come back and give him a list of exactly how many roads in the
next five years would become a need that was rated from 4 to 6, and their goal
would be to micro surface the fives and sixes so that they did not become
fours. They had 629 miles of roads over
the next five years that fell under that category, were in the aging process,
and were in need of work, which made up 50 percent of the road system. He then showed a map regarding the five cent
gas tax, showing the locally imposed motor fuel taxes throughout the State of
Florida and pointed out the counties whose gas tax was higher, equal, and less
than Lake County. He commented that five
years ago the map would have shown much fewer counties with gas taxes above 12
cents, and that showed a trend toward moving forward with that tax, with Marion
County also considering using the tax.
He then presented a chart showing counties with the lowest gasoline
prices to compare with those that charge the tax, and commented that it was
hard to make a consistent comparison, because it was market driven and changed
with location. He concluded that the tax
might play a role on the price of gas, but definitely not the only role.
Commr. Stewart commented that it was
important to keep the condition of their roads up, but she thought it was bad
timing to catch up on road maintenance with the economy in as bad a shape as it
was in. She opined that she would feel
differently possibly three years from now when the economy was back up.
Commr. Renick thought that there
currently was not support for this tax.
Commr. Cadwell commented that there
was a nickel going somewhere, but it was not to the County.
Commr. Conner commented that the
budget presentations given that day would be a reason to support the gas tax,
because they would not have the available funds from their sales tax to meet
their needs, and the market today resulted in favorable construction costs. He suggested that they could possibly do a
gas tax with a corresponding commitment to reduce millage by a small portion,
which he thought would increase public support for it. He pointed out, however, that he was not
saying he would support the tax, but that he was just arguing the other side
and did not think a discussion would hurt.
Commr. Hill commented that they were
already currently behind in their ad valorem millage, and she did not see them
dropping that any further. She also
indicated she was not in favor of the gas tax.
UPDATE ON EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLAN
Ms. Sharon Wall, Employee Services
Director, recapped that on October 1, 2006, the County changed health plans to
Blue Cross/Blue Shield as their TPA. She
explained that as a self-funded plan, they were responsible for all the costs,
and they kept reserves for that. She
included in the packet the actuary report so that they could see how well
everything has been going and that last year starting on October 1, 2008, their
costs dropped from $10,000 down to $8,600.
She noted that they still had very good reserves above the 25 percent
needed. She commented that they had a
better TPA with better technological processing and they have had some low
claim years, even though this year was not quite as low. She related that they could give money back
to the County, and she showed a chart which illustrated how much money they
could save by suspending employer contributions for specific increments of time
and another chart specifying the various funds that money could go into and how
much could go into each fund. She stated
that they recommend suspending the employer contributions for six months, which
would still keep very healthy reserves in the plan.
Ms. Hall asked the Board for
direction as to whether to proceed with that proposal.
Commr. Conner clarified that they
would still have a projected fund balance in that of $6.8 million, and he asked
what the actuary told them they needed to have in that fund.
Sharon Hall responded that they
looked at 25 percent, including the incurred but not spent yet funds as well as
their claims that were already there that had been paid, which was about $1.8
million. She stated that would leave
them flexibility for high claims and about a 10.4 percent increase in costs.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he thought
they ought to do that, and there was consensus from the Board to suspend
employer contributions from the general fund to the health plan insurance fund
for six months.
Ms. Hall further explained that the concept
would be that the amount of money that was suspended from going into the
insurance fund and was going into each individual fund would remain with that
fund to assist with carry forward money for next year. She commented that it was a tool that would
at least give them some assistance.
DISCUSSION OF COUNTY MANAGER
EVALUATION FORMS
Commr. Cadwell stated that he did not
know if they needed to come up with ten performance objectives for the
evaluation and that four or five of them would be sufficient.
Commr. Renick commented that she was
comfortable with the form presented in the backup, because it was similar to
the way teachers graded. She mentioned
that there were a lot of performance objectives that just had three
expectations of low, medium, and high (unsatisfactory, satisfactory, and
superior), and she asked if the Board wanted to use the five given on the form,
or if they wanted to change those to three.
She also thought that the integrity category needed to be a category in
itself or at least listed first under the performance dimensions.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney,
pointed out that the scale from 1 through 5 was already used for other
employees.
Commr. Renick also thought it was
important to have a comment box for any rating other than satisfactory so that
there was something to justify a superior or an unsatisfactory rating.
Ms. Hall noted that they were already
doing that same thing with other employees, since they have recently changed
their evaluation procedures.
Commr. Conner asked where personnel
management would be addressed on the form, which he felt was a key component of
the evaluation.
Commr. Renick suggested that Mr.
Minkoff could possibly add another bullet under the Service Delivery Management
performance dimension for personnel management.
Commr. Cadwell stated that they could
change the title of that dimension to Service Delivery and Personnel Management
as well as adding the third bullet. He
also suggested that on Page 4, regarding Performance Objectives, that they
could give the whole list of the Board’s suggested objectives or a
narrowed-down list of five to Ms. Hall and let her look at it and come back to
them with her suggestions.
Commr. Renick commented that one of
the things she would like to address was regarding follow up, because she felt
that when she gave a Board directive, she never knew when she would hear back
about what they asked staff to do. She
thought that they should specify a time they need an issue readdressed, and
asked how they could write that.
Commr. Cadwell thought they should
throw some of their ideas out on the table and then have Ms. Hall bring it back
for their approval.
Mr. Minkoff stated that they did this
in their previous evaluation form with their employees, and they described it
as a negotiation.
Commr. Cadwell directed that all the
Commissioners have their list of comments to Ms. Hall by next Tuesday, and
depending on the length of the list at the meeting at that time, they would
talk about when they actually would bring the list back.
FY 2006-09 LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE
PLAN AMENDMENT RESOLUTION
Mr. Fletcher Smith, Community
Services Director, stated that this was to adopt the Foreclosure Prevention
Program, which was originally discussed back in late August and brought back to
the Board on September 2 for approval.
He explained that this was a refinement initially of a Foreclosure
Prevention Program that they had for the Hurricane Housing Recovery Project and
that they sent the LHAP (Local Housing Assistance Plan) Amendment to the Florida
Housing Finance Corporation (FHFC), which reviewed and approved it in
October. However, after further
reviewing it after the first of the year, the FHFC determined the County needed
to adopt this by resolution, since it was a little bit different than the
strategy they had for the Foreclosure Prevention Strategy.
On a motion by Commr. Conner,
seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board
moved to place this item on the Agenda.
On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded
by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board approved
Resolution No. 2009-15 approving amendments to the FY 2006-09 Local Housing
Assistance Plan and authorizing the submission of the amendments to the Florida
Housing Finance Corporation.
FEDERAL FUNDING REVISED PROJECT LIST
Ms. Hall stated that their initial
understanding was that it would be best to submit only transportation projects
for the federal funding project list, and the Board approved five different
transportation projects to be included on this list. However, during consultation with their
lobbyists, they were told that they should diversity the items on the list so
that it would not comprise just transportation projects, and the lobbyists’
suggestion was to pick a couple of projects that they had submitted last year
and proceed with those. She gave the
Board a list of six items that comprised a revised project list, including
three transportation programs as they were originally presented to the Board,
two items for the Emergency Operations Center, and one regarding law
enforcement and asked for approval of those six items to move forward to get
those to the lobbyists and the legislators in Washington.
On a motion by Commr. Conner,
seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board
moved to put this item regarding the federal funding project list on the
Agenda.
On a motion by Commr. Conner,
seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a vote of 5-0, the Board
approved the revised project list of six items to submit to their Washington
delegation for earmarked federal funding, which were the South Lake Sheriff’s
Command Center (renamed Lake County Sheriff’s Office South Lake District),
Picciola Bridge Project, Lakeshore Drive/Palatlakaha Bridge, Emergency
Operations Center Technology, Lake County Emergency Operations Center
construction, and South Lake/Minneola Trail Phase III and IV.
REQUEST FOR CLOSED SESSION
Mr.
Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, requested that they have a closed session at
the next Board Meeting of February 17, at about 10:30 or 11:00 a.m.
On
a motion by Commr. Renick, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a
vote of 5-0, the Board moved to place that request on the Agenda.
On
a motion by Commr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a
vote of 5-0, the Board approved the County Attorney’s request to have a closed
session on February 17, 2009, at 10:30 a.m.
ADJOURNMENT
There
being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the
meeting was adjourned at 11:43 a.m.
__________________________________
WELTON CADWELL, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
__________________________
NEIL
KELLY, CLERK