PSL Looking For A Few Good People

[Lil B]

Port St. Lucie Looking For A Few Good People With Financial Sense

By Alexi Howk
March 9, 2010

PORT ST. LUCIE — If you’ve got good common sense and run your family budget well, you’re the kind of person City Hall is looking for, Vice Mayor Jack Kelly said.

That is, to serve on a seven-member citizens budget advisory committee.

“I don’t care if he’s a manager at McDonald’s or does a bread route,” Kelly said. “If he has good common sense, knows how to put together a good family budget, and can read a profit and loss statement, as far as I’m concerned, (he’s) qualified to be on this budget committee.”

Kelly proposed the council form the committee during last week’s winter budget retreat and got its full support.

He and Councilwoman Michelle Berger initiated the idea a few years ago, but it failed for reasons it would be too cumbersome, too late in the year, would fall under Florida’s Government-in-the-Sunshine law and would consume city staff time, Kelly said.

“It was a good time to do it three years ago,” he said. “I think it’s almost mandatory now. When you do a budget you’ve got to be responsible to the people who elected you, and to make the people involved in the budget process just seems reasonable, Two heads are better than one while three is better than two.”

Kelly said his main reason for wanting to form the committee is to have an extra set of eyes reviewing and making recommendations on the city’s budget, contract structure, bonds, and other financial matters, especially in this ailing economy. Council members would each appoint five of the seven applicants and the remaining two would be appointed by the council as a whole, Kelly said.

Berger said last week the committee would be a support system for the council and management.

“It gives us an opportunity to share information and gain insight,” she said.

St. Lucie County and Fort Pierce already have citizens budget advisory committees in place.

Kelly said over the next 30 days the city would start advertising and accepting applications for volunteers to serve on the committee. The committee would be formalized through the adoption of a resolution. He said he expects to have an active committee within six to eight weeks, just in time for St. Lucie County Property Appraiser Jeff Furst’s June 1 property tax devaluation predictions and the council’s July budget workshops.

Kelly said he’s hoping to get a good mix of applicants that would include attorneys, accountants, business owners and the “average Joe.” Residents must reside in Port St. Lucie and have lived here for at least one year, he said.

“I will be less inclined to select somebody who’s running for office,” Berger said. “The purpose of this advisory committee would be simply that we’re looking at the information from an unbiased, objective point of view.”

Mayor Patricia Christensen said although she supports the concept, “It’s an unbudgeted item, so we’re going to have to make some adjustments to the budget,” to compensate for staff time and the cost to put reports together.

“It’s not just as simple as naming seven people and having them have at it. It took almost a year just for the arts advisory committee to actually get up and running properly.”

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2010/mar/09/port-st-lucie-looking-for-a-few-good-people-with/

[PatOmalley]

This is where I think Mr. Edge would be fantastic...

[Lil B]

This is where I think Mr. Edge would be fantastic...

Maybe so, it appears he would fall under the exclusion category

“I will be less inclined to select somebody who’s running for office,” Berger said. “The purpose of this advisory committee would be simply that we’re looking at the information from an unbiased, objective point of view.”

They seem to have their minds zeroed in on a selected group of people.

Kelly said he’s hoping to get a good mix of applicants that would include attorneys, accountants, business owners and the “average Joe"

What criteria was used to decide the number of members? What criteria do they intend to use to select the appointed members?

[Kerry]

Berger said last week the committee would be a support system for the council and management.

Yup, "support" for their spending.  What reasonable person would agree to indebt us to a rapidly approaching $2 BILLION in debt?  Would this committee approve of the $100,000,000 additional debt they approved last monday?

[Carl]

I hereby volunteer Kessler International of New York City.

They could take an objective look at this mess.
Hell, I approve of my tax dollars being used to pay for it!

[Rod Bender]

What criteria was used to decide the number of members? What criteria do they intend to use to select the appointed members?

The council should have nothing to do with the selection of these people.

[Kerry]

Makes no difference, they won't listen to anyone who doesn't see their vision and they'll keep spending until they're fired.

[Carl]

Let me see if I have this right. They've waited until we are
so far in debt the only possible outcome is insolvency, and
now they want to know what the common folk think about it.

[Rod Bender]

What will this advisory committee be called ?
The IVF ?     Or the IV7 ? 

[Carl Iken]

Let me see if I have this right. They've waited until we are
so far in debt the only possible outcome is insolvency, and
now they want to know what the common folk think about it.

they still don't care what the folks think.  They just want us to think they do. 

[Carl]

Every time I get my balloon called delusion half blown up,
you come along with that pin called reality.


Rats.

[Carl Iken]

Every time I get my balloon called delusion half blown up,
you come along with that pin called reality.


Rats.

Your Welcome.

[Lil B]

Editorial: Budget Advisory Committee Should Be Welcomed in Port St. Lucie

editorial board
March 16, 2010

The Port St. Lucie Council is looking for public input — and maybe some sharing of pain — in creating a citizens budget advisory committee.

“It was a good time to do it three years ago,” said Vice Mayor Jack Kelly. “I think it’s almost mandatory now. When you do a budget, you’ve got to be responsible to the people who elected you, and to make the people involved in the budget process just seems reasonable. Two heads are better than one, while three is better than two.”

Residents often complain that their elected leaders in City Hall don’t listen enough to their concerns. But an effort by the city to seek that input has been pooh-poohed by those commenting online at TCPalm.com.

Some of their skepticism may be warranted. The advisory committee will be almost useless if it only rubber-stamps what the council wants to do and serves only as a political cover for council actions. Likewise, it will have little effect if its recommendations are ignored by the council.

So, the council takes some risk in how the public will perceive council’s budget decisions in contrast to those made by the committee. And, those budget decisions may be more difficult in the coming two years than anyone is willing to admit.

Few communities in the nation have been as hard hit by the recession, particularly by home foreclosures, as Port St. Lucie. Many of the city’s plans for the future focused on growth through annexation. Scuttled growth wasn’t in the mix. Regardless, the budget advisory committee is warranted and overdue. It can provide a barometer of public sentiment on budget priorities and how painful decisions should be made.

Fort Pierce and St. Lucie County have had generally good experiences with their budget advisory committees, which also have, perhaps unintentionally, trained potential candidates for public office.

As proposed, there would be seven members on the budget advisory committee. Each council member would appoint one member and the council as a whole would appoint two. Three would serve one-year terms and four would serve two-year terms. Later, members will all serve staggered two-year terms.

The city clerk’s office is taking applications for the voluntary positions.

Some of those who complain loudest about the city’s spending should consider seeking appointment. They might learn whether their complaints are valid or not. If valid, they can make recommendations for changes.

Most of all, it’s imperative that if the council proceeds with establishing a committee that council members treat as true partners in the budgeting process.

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2010/mar/16/editorial-budget-advisory-committee-should-be-in/

[Carl]

“It was a good time to do it three years ago,” said Vice Mayor Jack Kelly

But you didn't, you ignored the requests.


Likewise, it will have little effect if its recommendations are ignored by the council.

I rest my case.

[Steve60]

Its doubtful that any of our council members will pay attention to the comittee. They have never listen in the past instead they have just blown us off. I don't see that changing. They are the ones that got us into this mess now all of sudden they want to create a budget comittee how convenient. It seems to me that Jack is just trying to cover his butt.

[Carl]

The real reason Jack thinks he should have done it three
years ago is he'd have a semi-mature committee to blame.

If you think any of these five is seriously going to accept
responsibility for their past actions, you are smoking
something we haven't taxed here yet.

[Steve60]

Now there is a great idea. Fire It Up

[Carl]

Personally, I think smoking anything is a very bad idea,
but it's up to your Mom and Pop to tell you that, not
the government, or me.

That's just one reason I oppose government run health
care. Because, as a taxpayer funding your health bills,
now it IS my business.

You could stand to lose a few pounds, too.

[Lil B]

Port St. Lucie Picks Budget Committee Members

By Susan Burgess
April 24, 2010

PORT ST. LUCIE — City council members completed their search for people to serve on a new citizens’ budget committee this week with the appointment of seven city residents.

Their first meeting is to be May 6.

“We want them to look at this from a taxpayer’s perspective,” said Vice Mayor Jack Kelly. “I chose someone whom I think has good common sense and who originally suggested a budget advisory committee several years ago.”

He picked Charles D’Agata, a 19-year resident who is co-owner of Staffing Solutions of the Treasure Coast.

To qualify, residents had to have lived in the city for at least a year.

“I think we have a very good cross section of our community represented on the committee,” said Mayor Pat Christensen. “I made my selection last because I wanted to see who the other council members chose and I wanted to make sure that we had that good cross section. I think the person I selected has a well balanced viewpoint, is very intelligent, and is a good team player.”

Her selection was Ralph Rettig, a 13-year resident with a strong background in budgeting who worked for Memorial Health Care System from 1978 to 1997. He was a volunteer on the city’s planning and zoning board and site plan review committee, and served on an advisory board for the disabled in Broward County.

Dan Kurek, a 14-year Port St. Lucie resident who has lived in St. Lucie County since 1972 and serves on St. Lucie County’s budget advisory committee was nominated by Councilwoman Linda Bartz as an at-large member of the committee.

“I think someone like Dan who understands the budget process will do an excellent job on the advisory committee,” Bartz said.

Kurek, owner of Daniel J. Kurek Financial Services, was an assistant county administrator for St. Lucie with an emphasis on budgeting.

“I think that because I worked both in the private sector, for the PBC Credit Union for 11 years and in the government sector for 16 years, I can understand things from both sides,” he said. “I learned a lot about what people want as a loan officer for the credit union.”

He expects the council to ask the committee to come up with alternatives for cuts and reductions that reflect what city residents want, he said.

Terissa Aronson, director of business services for the St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce, is a six-year resident of the city.

“I think I can bring some creative ideas and views to the table,” she said. “The economic climate is very difficult and I want to see what I can do to help.

BUDGET COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Terissa Aronson (District 1)

Director of Business Services, St. Lucie County Chamber of Commerce

6-year resident

Tanya McCutcheon (District 2)

Internal Revenue Service Agent

1-year resident

John Reichner (District 3)

Former National Sales Manager, Synthetic Environment Corp. in Orlando

28-year resident

Charles D’Agata (District 4)

Staffing Solutions of the Treasure Coast, co-owner

19-year resident

Ralph Rettig (appointed by mayor)

Former compensation and benefits manager, Memorial Health Care System

13-year resident

Daniel Kurek (at-large)

Daniel J. Kurek Financial Services, owner

14-year PSL resident; 38-year county resident

Jack Doughney (at-large)

City of Palm Beach Gardens, assistant city manager of operations

14-year resident

IF YOU GO:

Organizational Meeting, 1 hour: May 6, 8 a.m., Room 188, city hall.

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2010/apr/24/port-st-lucie-picks-budget-committee-members/

[Carl]

If anyone of the people can hold a mirror up to the city
council and show then the utter absurdity of the spending
over the last few years, I applaud them.

Our "leaders" remind me of the proverbial lottery winner who
spends it all as it comes in and then laments the "bad times"
once it's all gone. Absolutely NO plans, no clues.

[Lil B]

Port St. Lucie council member criticized citizens committee over police-sheriff merger talk, records show

By Alexi Howk
TCPalm
March 2, 2011

PORT ST. LUCIE — A few hours before the Citizens Budget Advisory Committee was expected to ask the City Council to look into evaluating the cost of consolidating the Police Department with the Sheriff's Office, Councilman Jack Kelly told the committee it was overstepping its boundaries, according to the meeting minutes of the 10 a.m. Feb. 22 committee meeting.

That's also the same day Police Chief Brian Reuther was later to be sworn into office during the City Council's 2 p.m. meeting. However, Reuther told the budget committee he wasn't going to be sworn in until the issue of consolidation was resolved.

"I'm not getting sworn in today because I'm not going to be captain of the Titanic," Reuther said according to the meeting minutes. "I'm not going to rearrange the deck chairs for the next 15 months. This issue has to be dealt with. It has to be addressed right now, before we move on."

Reuther has adamantly opposed consolidation saying there wouldn't be a significant cost savings; the city would lose control and also its identity and would have to cut the level of service because 84 percent of the police budget is personnel costs.

Reuther said Wednesday he wasn't implying at the meeting that he wasn't going to take the chief job. He said there wasn't any point in moving forward if the organization might be disbanded.

At the budget committee's Feb. 4 meeting, the committee unanimously agreed it would make a slide presentation during the Feb. 22 council meeting suggesting ways the city might cut costs and save money. Part of that presentation included asking the council to evaluate the cost savings of consolidating the Police Department with the Sheriff's Office. Committee Chairman Dan Kurek stressed the committee was not advocating consolidation but rather just asking the council to at least look into whether there was a cost savings because citizens were pressing for it.

However, after Scripps Treasure Coast Newspapers reported the committee's consideration, Kurek said council members put pressure on the committee to remove the discussion of a public safety merger from its presentation. The board unanimously agreed at its Feb. 22 meeting that it would not discuss the matter after Kelly and Councilwoman Shannon Martin urged board members to drop the issue. Martin's husband, Aaron, is a detective at the Port St. Lucie Police Department and a union representative.

"If I had it my way I wouldn't have changed it," Kurek said in a telephone interview Wednesday. "I don't agree with the consolidation, but I didn't agree with taking out the slide. I had (Councilman) Kelly talk to me. I had the mayor talk to me, and I just listened. There was a lot of pressure put on us. There was no question about that."

Kelly told the committee what they were doing was bordering on setting policy.

"If you want to set policy, run for City Council," Kelly said according to the meeting minutes. "I don't mean to be a wise guy, but stay with advising. My intention was never that you would go beyond that scope and look at these kinds of mergers..."

Kelly also said, "The social aspect overwhelms that financial aspect on this issue. It overwhelms it greatly. I don't know how you're going to save one dime. If you saved $1 million it wouldn't be worth it."

Kelly couldn't be reached for comment Wednesday.

Kelly said at the meeting the committee's actions were hurting employee morale. This comes at a time when the department has had layoffs, including the loss of 24 police officers, and changed police chiefs.

"You folks are an advisory committee," Kelly said. "I initiated putting this committee together. It's my fault and city council's fault for not giving you better direction. I thought the advisory committee was going to look at internal budgets."

Kelly criticized the committee for talking with the press. Mayor JoAnn Faiella also has publicly accused the committee of "leaking" its discussions to the media, even though the committee's discussions are open to the public and can be obtained through public records requests.

"I am disappointed that someone on the committee took it upon themselves to talk to the newspapers," Kelly said in the Feb. 22 committee meeting. "I'm really disappointed. I thought this would be an advisory committee and you did not meet with the council."

Committee member Ralph Rettig said at the meeting the Police Department accounts for half of the city's overall budget.

"It would have been negligent on our part not to look at it. When I look at the budget report, yes, you lost a lot of people, and you had the most people," Rettig said. "You can't deal just with numbers. Everybody lost people. I'll bet the parks and recreation people are just as upset about being unemployed as your officers. I don't think we can just say that we're not doing anything. I would like to be able to say that our future chief will continue discussions with Fort Pierce and the county on areas where monies can be saved."

Rettig noted that council members weren't critical of the committee recommending outsourcing certain operations at the golf course that could cost jobs.

Kelly and Martin told Rettig he was making an "apples to oranges" comparison to the outsourcing of the golf course and consolidating the Police Department with the Sheriff's Office.

"It's not," Rettig said. "They're city employees."

According to the minutes, Martin responded: "It is apples and oranges. You're talking about public safety versus people maintaining the golf course. Public safety is and should be the No. 1 priority to leaders in this city. We have to make sure the people in this city are protected. That doesn't come from somebody who cleans the golf course. It comes from a sworn law enforcement officer."

Martin said Wednesday she is not in favor of consolidating the Police Department with the Sheriff's Office. She said with the city's population at more than 150,000, "we absolutely need our own Police Department."

"There are no cities of our size that I know of that are comparable to the city of Port St. Lucie that are giving their police services over to the sheriff," she said. "I don't have an influx of citizens calling me saying they want this. There's nothing wrong with our Police Department as far as providing services to our citizens."

After Reuther said consolidation was not in the best interest of the city and that he wasn't going to be sworn in until the issue was resolved, Rettig said he didn't like having limits set on what the committee could look at.

"I don't like being held hostage by you, by a union, by anybody," Rettig said according to the minutes. "What you're doing now really upsets me because you're trying to hold people hostage."

Reuther responded: "I'm not trying to hold anyone hostage. The fact is that this is a significant issue that needs to be addressed. I've been hearing this my entire career. It is unsettling to the organization and to the community. If the community gives up the Police Department they give up part of their identity."
http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2011/mar/02/port-st-lucie-council-member-criticized-citizens/

[Lil B]

CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE
BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
FEBRUARY 22, 2011
A Special Meeting of the BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE of the City of Port St. Lucie was called to order by Chairman Kurek on February 22, 2011, at 10:00 a.m., at Port St. Lucie City Hall, Room 188, 121 Port St. Lucie Boulevard, Port St. Lucie, Florida.

1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL

Members Present:
Daniel Kurek, Chairman
Charles D’Agata, Vice Chairman
Terissa Aronson
George Comins
Stephanie Morgan
Ralph E. Rettig

Others Present:
Jerry A. Bentrott, City Manager
Marcia Dedert, Finance Director/Treasurer
Natalie Cabrera, Human Resources
Milton Collins, Assistant City Attorney
Councilman Jack Kelly
Councilwoman Shannon M. Martin
Roger G. Orr, City Attorney
Karen A. Phillips, City Clerk
David K. Pollard, OMB Director

Brian E. Reuther, Acting Police Chief
Margie L. Wilson, Deputy City Clerk
Residents

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – February 4, 2011
There being no corrections, the minutes were unanimously approved.

4. DISCUSS DRAFT POWERPOINT TO BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CHAIRMAN KUREK/VICE CHAIRMAN D’AGATA

Chair Kurek stated, “We need to get ready for the meeting at 2 o’clock. Needless to say we have gotten a lot of publicity out of this. In spite of the fact that we’re an advisory committee and have no voting power, we have had a lot of interesting comments about our recommendations. I have met with staff and gone over what we have on our PowerPoint. I want to make sure as we go through this that we recognize the things that are in progress or things that staff agrees with, but because of certain groups of organized labor, it will take some doing to get to. I met with the City Manager, the City Attorney, Acting Chief Reuther, and Susan Williams. That was mostly on the Human Resources things I was concerned about.”

Chair Kurek said, “We had talked about developing maximums and minimums, a base salary based on the FLC Survey and the local government and private sectors. I don’t think anyone objects to any of this, but it has to be negotiated. I think our recommendation is that they need to go this direction, so there is a defined salary plan that can be used across the City.” Mr. Rettig said, “I disagree that it has to be negotiated. If the City adopts a salary plan, then there is no negotiation as to what that is.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “It’s part of management rights. Didn’t we discuss this?” Mr. Collins said, “I had stated that it still has to be negotiated, but Mr. Rettig is correct. If it is a policy, I guess I won’t have any authority to deviate from it, and that would be my proposal. Legally, we still have to sit with them and propose.” Mr. Rettig asked, “Don’t you want policies that dictate an outcome? Doesn’t it make it easier when you are negotiating? If everybody knows what is expected beforehand, I would think it would make it easier for the unions as well as the City.” Chair Kurek said, “Maybe I need to word it as ‘The Council needs to work toward a salary plan as a matter of policy.’ I’ll take the negotiation part out. Provisions: The cost of living raise should be based on an index. They just need to choose the one they want to use. Pay rates cannot exceed the maximum. Education advancement is rewarded with one time bonuses based on necessity as determined by the City. This one is actually in progress. I believe a policy is being developed for this item. I might highlight that. Continuing: Employee contribution should be based on a percentage of the premium. I think staff wants to move in this direction, but it will have to go a step at a time. This is fair to everybody. If the premium goes up, they pay more; if it goes down, they pay less. Increases to co-pays are being proposed in what is out to bid now. Increased deductibles are in progress. A flex plan is being investigated. Health savings accounts are being investigated, but they will probably not go that route until they get the health plan set up. This is more to the future. Those keep changing.” Mr. Rettig noted, “You have to be careful with saying increased deductibles and co-pays. Some plans may not have increased deductibles and co-pays, and still be less expensive. They are looking at controlling costs by implementing new plans.” Chair Kurek said, “We have to establish plan tiers, which is in negotiations.” Mr. Rettig asked if they can talk about simplifying the tiers to employee only, employee plus one and family. Ms. Morgan said, “With the family coverage you can have six kids or one kid and you pay the same dependent price. Spouse is a different category.” Chair Kurek said, “This is common. The companies think employee and spouse will have a different level of care than an employee, even with six kids. Kids are typically healthier than adults.” Ms. Morgan said, “If I have one kid and she has six, we both pay the same thing.” Vice Chair D'Agata explained that the insurance companies offer it that way. Mr. Rettig said, “The City is self-insured. And look at the dependent costs under the insurance plan.” Chair Kurek noted, “Before they sent out the RFP they had to do a census to show how many families, singles, families with children, etc., there are. They will rate it based on the census.”

Chair Kurek continued, “The choices of plans we list are all in the RFP. We talked about having a higher deductible plan that some younger employees may want. Other considerations include monthly reports from the health plan administrator, including the clinic operations and contractual agreements. It’s part of the RFP. We noted to consider and compare a fully insured plan, and that is in the RFP. Encourage employees to use the clinic for non-emergency care. That will come about as a result of changes in the health plan. They also will need to promote the clinic more. We suggest co-pay increases for routine care at the ER. That’s part of the RFP. Establish a health benefit committee consisting of employees and management. They are working on that. We want to say that all groups should have a standardized contribution.”

Chair Kurek said, “There should be quality control provisions for the clinic, and feedback should be promoted more. There should be an employee newsletter. Ms. Williams said there was one called The Insider, which they are trying to get back to doing monthly. We suggest surveys. One has been done.” Ms. Cabrera indicated that the survey was done in January. Mr. Comins asked what the survey consisted of. Ms. Cabrera answered, “It found out from the employees what areas they would like to see improved. It asked about communication with Human Resources and within their departments.” Mr. Rettig asked if the results would be published. Ms. Cabrera replied that the results would be presented to each department and to the administration.

Chair Kurek said, “We talked about the golf course maintenance. I believe they’re working on an RFP for that and the pro shop. They have some volunteer rangers. The cost will determine whether they go that route. For considerations we listed outsource park maintenance. There is concern about the level of maintenance that would be required.” Ms. Aronson noted that Public Works has outsourced a great deal of maintenance and that has gone well. Chair Kurek continued, “We list review of fees for parks usage, especially the ballparks. The little leagues pay something for lights and use of the refreshment stands. I think it’s a matter of looking at the fees and talking to the users. The City can seek park sponsors, like the Adopt-A-Street program. As the economy gets better, this could be a way to raise money. We list to consider consolidating City and county park programs and maintenance.” Ms. Morgan asked whether there are ways to cut instead of doing consolidation. Chair Kurek said, “Parks and Recreation has lost a lot of staff, like every department. My impression is that they’re doing as good a job as they can. If you go to outsourcing, the private company may not be paying the benefits and wages that the City does. Whether they would perform the same level of service remains to be seen. The problem is that the county has cut back their maintenance much harder than the City. They have closed some parks and some of their restrooms. If they consolidate the two, I’m not sure what would be accomplished. We can just say that it may be worth looking at. It’s not a recommendation.” Mr. Rettig said, “We’re recommending they consider it. The amount of money the City pays to the county and the few benefits we derive from it concern me. I don’t care if it puts a greater burden on the county.” Chair Kurek noted, “The opposite of that is that the people who live in Port St. Lucie also use the beach accesses that are maintained by the county.”

Chair Kurek said, “The next topic is to investigate consolidation of the Police Department and the Sheriff’s Office and to research the pro’s and con’s.” Ms. Morgan asked if the Police Department’s budget has been reviewed by the committee. Chair Kurek replied in the affirmative. Ms. Aronson said, “The concern I raised the last time is still my concern. This is the second time I heard the lead-in on the news that the Budget Advisory Committee was going to recommend the consolidation. This is overshadowing the really good recommendations we’re making. And we are not recommending; we are asking them to consider considering it. I think we have lost focus on really good things that we have vetted. This is all they’re talking about. And when it goes to Council, this is all they’re going to talk about. Then everything we considered is going to get lost and not talked about at the Council meeting.” Chair Kurek noted that he doesn’t plan to spend a lot of time on the topic. Ms. Aronson asked, “What is the chance that you are going to lead that conversation? I recommend visiting this separately at a different time.” Ms. Morgan said that she agrees.

Councilman Kelly said, “I would ask you to grant me a few minutes to talk about this. I have some information that you haven’t had. Before I do, I would be uncomfortable with Councilwoman Martin in the room while I talk about this, because of the vote.” Councilwoman Martin stated, “I’ll step out and come back when you’re done.” (Clerk’s note: Councilwoman Martin stepped out of the room at 10:30 a.m.) Councilman Kelly continued, “The only way I can do this is by analogy. When the State was looking at the bridge over the river, they looked at financial aspect. People said we should get the permits first, but you can’t. You have to show that you can pay for the bridge before you can get the permits. There is an environmental aspect, which is what the news went on about. There is a social aspect: How many people will be displaced, and is it fair to them? The people around the West Virginia Corridor knew for 30 years that it was planning to go that way. They only talked about the environmental aspects, but the financial and social aspects carry the same weight. When you talk about the merger of the Police Department with the Sheriff’s Office, you’re looking at it like it’s new. This has come up almost every election. We have looked at it many times. You’re the Budget Committee, so you’re looking at the financial aspect. The social aspect overwhelms that financial aspect on this issue. It overwhelms it greatly. I don’t know how you’re going to save one dime. If you saved $1 million it wouldn’t be worth it. We closed the western and eastern stations. We laid off 24 police officers. We laid off 70+ people in the Police Department. With all of that we were still the safest City in Florida seven out of nine years, and that all goes to the social aspect. Anybody in the Chamber or in real estate will know that is one of our greatest assets when we’re trying to sell the City. We have a great Police Department. The stats were in the paper today that we’re down almost 10% in serious crime. The article says that only Cape Coral and Coral Springs showed better in the rankings. We still may be the safest City this year, despite losing 40% of our detective bureau. I don’t know how you will save a dime and give the same quality of service. The other aspect is that the morale of our Police Department couldn’t be lower. Acting Chief Reuther is not going to be sworn in today.” Acting Chief Reuther commented, “This issue has to be dealt with now.” Councilman Kelly continued, “I agree with him. He will not be sworn in until this is rectified. I don’t blame him. This is not a good decision to put this on the agenda for the Council to look at today. I want you to consider the social aspects and what you’re doing to the morale of the police. You hurt it. When you guys brought up the Civic Center you made things happen at the Retreat. Mr. Oravec said that last year we couldn’t even tell you any numbers. Your input into that helped quite a bit. You coined the phrase about our Cadillac health plan. There are things you did that helped, but this is not one of them. You folks are an advisory committee. I initiated putting this committee together. Ralph, I’m looking at you. You know we had a meeting once with the Planning and Zoning Board. There were two people on the board who were bordering on policy. We banged heads and everything worked out okay. This is bordering on setting policy. If you want to set policy, run for City Council. I don’t mean to be a wise guy, but stay with advising. My intention was never that you would go beyond that scope and look at these kinds of mergers, or the Parks Department. Look at the county parks and look at our parks. Our park system is arguably the best in the State of Florida, just like our Police Department. I don’t want to mess with that. That’s a policy change, a huge change. Leave it to the City Council. It’s my fault and City Council’s fault for not giving you better direction. I thought the advisory committee was going to look at internal budgets. If you looked at the police budget, I think you missed things. I talked to some of you about something that the Vice Mayor came up with at a meeting that nobody looked at. It’s a huge savings. I don’t know if it can be done. The Chief would have to go over it; maybe it’s not a good thing. There are ways to save money. I think it’s a bad decision to put this in front of the City Council and say, ‘We’re your advisory committee. Everything is up for grabs.’ It’s our fault for not giving you better direction to stay within the internal budget. Someone said that everything is on the table. Everything is always on the table, but a lot of it is policy. Where that line is, I don’t know. It’s a gray area. This will be all that is talked about. We have other things to do. I want the Police Department to move on. A new Chief, move on, get the morale back up, and let’s stay the safest City in Florida. We have checked the savings. If you say we should just talk to the Sheriff, that will be a biased point of view. Other cities are going back to their own departments. In the beginning you get a lowball figure and then it goes up every year. It would be all we would talk about and it would be the headline.”

Councilman Kelly said, “Lastly, I am disappointed that someone on the committee took it upon themselves to talk to the newspapers. I’m really disappointed. I thought this would be an advisory committee and you did not meet with the Council. If you’re going to come up with drastic changes I think someone on the committee should meet with every Council person about it.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “We’ve invited the Council members here.” Councilman Kelly clarified, “I mean to meet with them individually where you can talk freely. I know I may have offended some of you, but as an elected official I am giving you my point of view. You have impacted us in many good ways. This is not one. I would ask that you have a vote as to whether you are going to put this on the meeting today.”

Mr. Rettig said, “I would ask future Chief Reuther if he would be amendable to talking with the Sheriff to see if there are any areas where you could conserve funds.” Acting Chief Reuther said, “We meet with the Sheriff every month. Chair Kurek had talked about the SWAT team. There may be misinformation or a lack of information. The SWAT team is not a fulltime unit. If I had 15 people sitting in a room waiting for a call out, I could understand that. We train on duty. We are subject to our own call outs. There is no duplication of efforts. The things that should be consolidated in this county have been. That is the crime lab, the police academy, and 911 dispatch. When you look at the services we provide in the City, we are the ones who are responding to calls for service. As I said the last time, if you put ten deputies on the street and 15 police officers, the cost is going to be the same.” Mr. Rettig asked, “Can we say that you will continue ongoing conversations with the Sheriff to see where tax dollars can be saved?” Acting Chief Reuther answered, “Absolutely. As Mr. Kelly mentioned, in our own organization we have cut $5.5 million from our budget. We cut 56 police officer positions. Some of the cuts, like closing the Rosser Station to walk-in traffic, are reductions in levels of service. There is 84% of the budget in salary and benefits. It doesn’t take a lot of cutting before you’re into people. The only vehicles we got last year came with federal stimulus money. We talk with Ft. Pierce. We do a lot of things jointly like training to keep costs down. As far as duplication of effort, those things that should be consolidated are.” Mr. Rettig said, “And because of the fact that you’re half the budget for the City of Port St. Lucie, it would have been negligent on our part not to look at it. When I look at the budget report, yes, you lost a lot of people, and you had the most people. You can’t deal just with numbers. Everybody lost people. I’ll bet the Parks and Recreation people are just as upset about being unemployed as your officers. I don’t think we can just say that we’re not doing anything. I would like us to be able to say that our future Chief will continue discussions with Ft. Pierce and the county on areas where moneys can be saved.” Councilman Kelly said, “I wouldn’t have any trouble accepting that.”

Ms. Aronson said, “I’m not sure how much of what Councilman Kelly just said I agree with, especially when it comes to what we’re supposed to be doing here. But he did prove my point that it will be the only thing discussed if we bring it up at this Council meeting. The misconception is that we are recommending that they merge. It’s not a recommendation. He doesn’t even want to get sworn in, because he thinks we might recommend it.” Ms. Morgan said, “That’s frightening. He’s not going to be sworn in if we don’t take this off? (Clerk’s note: Councilwoman Martin came back to the meeting at 10:45 a.m.) Another question: Is it right for two Council members to be in a meeting on something they are going to vote on later?” Ms. Aronson said, “I didn’t think it was. We don’t do it at EDC. We only invite one at a time.” Councilman Kelly noted, “She wasn’t here while I spoke, and now I’m done speaking.” The City Attorney advised, “The Sunshine Law prohibits people who sit on the same board or commission from discussing a matter that may come before that board or commission for a vote. This is a public meeting. Anyone from the public is welcome and invited, including Council members. They can sit in on this meeting. What they cannot do is engage in a discussion with each other. They can discuss or make presentations to you as a board. So it’s fine for both of them to be here. It is fine for either one of them to address this committee in the course of this meeting. It’s a little fuzzy. I give the example of political forums. If they couldn’t be together, how could they run against each other and debate the public? I think this committee wants the input from Council members, and this is the only place you can get it.”

Acting Chief Reuther said, “In a leadership position you have to look beyond the next year or two. You have to look at the forest beyond the trees. At some point this recession is going to be over. At some point this City will start to grow again. There will be more demands placed on the City for services. We will not have any control over those primary services if you go to contract. I have talked to people about it. I have researched it. Councilman Kelly is correct. Look to Sheriff Cochran in Broward County. Lowball figures come in. People don’t clearly understand what they’re getting. After a 23% increase in the contract they go back to their own Police Department after 13 years. They couldn’t afford it. I’ve been a resident of this City for 32 years. This is beyond the Chief of Police. It is not in the best interests of the City. I have 34 year of experience; I know a little bit about this. You’re not going to save a significant amount of money. You’re going to lose control over your services. On Friday the City Council set the service level for the Police Department. You won’t have control over that. I have to muster the resources to do the job with the service level the City has set. I’m not getting sworn in today because I’m not going to be captain of the Titanic. I’m not going to rearrange the deck chairs for the next 15 months. This issue has to be dealt with. It has to be addressed right now, before we move on. This is not about the Chief of Police. This is about what is in the best interests of the City. As a 32-year resident taxpayer in the City I say it is not in the best interests of the City. Certainly we always look to cut our budget. Certainly we will always discuss it. It is not in the best interests of the City.” Mr. Rettig said, “Is our tax base going to continue to decline over the next few years?” Mr. Pollard answered, “The long-range model we used at the Retreat projects one more year of decline of maybe 10%. The final number will be determined in June.” Mr. Rettig said, “Even when property values begin to recover, the 3% cap will preclude you from increasing tax bases in conjunction with property value increases.” Mr. Pollard noted, “For homesteaded properties. It doesn’t impact rentals, commercial, or vacant properties.” Mr. Rettig said that the majority of tax dollars in the City are derived from residential properties. Mr. Pollard stated that he would have to look at that. Mr. Rettig said, “In your budget it says that. Acting Chief Reuther, those things are there. I don’t like being held hostage by you, by a union, by anybody. What you’re doing now really upsets me, because you’re trying to hold people hostage.” Acting Chief Reuther said, “I’m not trying to hold anyone hostage. The fact is that this is a significant issue that needs to be addressed. I’ve been hearing this my entire career. It is unsettling to the organization and to the community. If the community gives up the Police Department they give up part of their identity. We have cut the budget by $5.5 million. We will continue to look at cutting the budget. I’m not holding anybody hostage. It’s beyond me as Chief. I’m Acting Chief. I will continue to be Acting Chief. I am not going to be wrestling with this issue and have to be concerned that every other month this is going to come up and I have to address it with my organization. An organization is about people. I’m trying to keep people focused on doing the job, but it’s very difficult if in fact they don’t know where the organization is going.”

Ms. Aronson said, “I feel like they are asking us for a decision on something that we had no intention of making a decision on anyway. They are arguing against merging. We’re not even considering making a decision on merging at this point. That’s where the confusion comes in as to what we are asking for at City Council. That is going to get misconstrued, no matter how hard the Chair explains it. We can’t even convince two people who have been part of this process the entire time. This conversation is going to overshadow all the good work we did. They’re never going to talk about the health-care plan, the parks, and the stuff that can make a difference now and in the near future. We’re going to be haggling over this conversation ten years from now. You know as well as I do that the chances of this happening are slim to none. Why are we taking all of our valuable time and having the media make it very salacious when we’re not getting anywhere?” Mr. Rettig asked, “Can we at least amend it, then, to say that the City of Port St. Lucie will continue to work with the county and other municipalities to save costs where possible?” Ms. Aronson said, “If you mention it, that’s all they’re going to grab.” Councilman Kelly said, “What he just said is absolutely reasonable and should be done every month.” Ms. Aronson asked, “Are you giving me your word that you will say, ‘Okay. Great,’ and move on?” Councilman Kelly said, “If I knew you were going to say these things I wouldn’t have been here today, because you’re just reinforcing my point. I’m telling you that the City Council should have given better direction to this group as to what we were expecting. I was expecting looking at internal budgets. This is going beyond. There’s a gray area where it gets into setting policy.” Mr. Rettig noted, “We’re talking about outsourcing the golf course and those people losing their jobs. Nobody is saying they won’t be the Director of Parks and Recreation because you’re taking away the people.” Councilman Kelly said that it’s apples and oranges. Mr. Rettig said, “It’s not. They’re City employees.” Councilwoman Martin stated, “It is apples and oranges. You’re talking about public safety versus people maintaining a golf course. Public safety is and should be the Number 1 priority to leaders in this City. We have to make sure the people in this City are protected. That doesn’t come from somebody who cleans the golf course. It comes from a sworn law enforcement officer. It’s not apples to apples. That’s never a consideration, as far as I’m concerned. Public safety and maintenance of a golf course are two different things.”

Ms. Morgan said, “When we discussed this the last time the recommendation was for the Council to investigate the possibility. We have no say. We are just an advisory committee. We were not recommending that they go to the Sheriff’s Office and say they need to take over.” Acting Chief Reuther said, “I understand. I understand what your role is and what your charge is. Please don’t misinterpret that I am upset that you’re going through the budget. I’m saying that as far as a policy decision is concerned as it specifically related to the Police Department, we as a City have to decide whether or not we want a Police Department. I’ve seen people leave the organization. I’ve had people tell me they didn’t want to come here because they hear all the time we’re going to the Sheriff’s Office. We are a big City now. We will probably be in the top ten in the state. We need to provide services to our residents. We need to control the services and setting the level of service. You would give that up. You can make whatever recommendation you want. I have no authority here. I’m saying that the issue in and of itself of consolidation needs to be dealt with.” Ms. Morgan said, “You have to understand that the press got a hold on this. I hear it on the news. You can see how it all got misconstrued. I agree that we should delete it and concentrate on other issues.” Ms. Aronson said, “I’m not saying we don’t recommend looking into it at some point. I just don’t think it’s now with this presentation.” Councilwoman Martin stated, “This doesn’t need to keep coming up time and time again, over and over for months. As Chief Reuther said, we have an organization to run. We can’t have the City in constant turmoil and people continually going to the press to make things their own political agenda. Those people are not the leaders of this City and don’t make policy. Whatever is decided by your board is done today, as far as I’m concerned, with regard to the Police Department and the Sheriff.”

Vice Chair D'Agata said, “What you brought up earlier, Brian, is that it is not going to be a cost saving. We heard that in an editorial by a former mayor. We heard it from Councilman Kelly. When the Police Department brought these things to us to look at the numbers, we asked if there was a consolidation possibility and if there was a number. People talked from $1 million and $11 million. If we are an advisory committee and somebody says there is the possibility of $1 million or $11 million, wouldn’t that get you asking what the number is? We’ve looked at it before. What was the number?” Councilman Kelly answered, “We’ve never had a secure number. The number I heard eight years ago was $1 million.” Vice Chair D'Agata continued, “There’s the low side eight years ago. Things have changed. Somebody brought up $11 in this room. That’s as ridiculous a $1 million. I realize the safety, social, and organizational concerns. That impact can be severe and detrimental to the City’s operation. I can see your point. There is a middle somewhere. I don’t agree that we never bring this up again, unless you say, ‘Budget advisory people, do not bring up anything to do with the Police Department’s budget.’ You have the right to say that. By the way, I don’t remember anyone here using the word policy. We advise. To start with we had very poor direction. Secondly, it is very unclear as to what kind of money we’re talking about. Third, Councilman Kelly brought up environmental, social and financial concerns in regard to the bridge. In this case we add safety. We are saying to recommend somebody look at it. If you don’t want us to do that, tell us. You can tell us this afternoon. Then we would not do it.” Chair Kurek advised, “I think there is a more subtle way of doing that.” Vice Chair D'Agata continued, “I realize you’ve been with the Police Department for a long time. Every business worries whether they’re going to be in business next year. It is disturbing to the people who work for that business. However, with the proper leadership, and I know you have it, you can dispel that. Whether the Police Department is in business next year or not has to do only with the way you run it.” Acting Chief Reuther said, “That’s why I’m here, because they want me to dispel this. I have been meeting with people and focusing on things we have control over. People expect those in leadership positions to support them and to go to bat for them. Quite honestly, as far as I’m concerned this gets back to what is the right thing to do and what is not the right thing to do here. That’s what it’s about here. If I didn’t believe it, I wouldn’t be here and I wouldn’t be saying this. I can tell you there are not going to be any savings. Pompano Beach spent almost $50,000 on a study. They were looking to go back to their own department. The study said they could save money by going back to their own department. The Sheriff cut his contract to what the consultant said in his report.” Vice Chair D'Agata noted, “We didn’t get that definitive understanding when we were talking about this before. We didn’t get the understanding that there would be no savings or savings so minute that it would be detrimental to the safety of the citizens. We didn’t get that information.” Ms. Aronson said that they got nothing definitive. Acting Chief Reuther stated, “Whether for politics or whatever it may be, people are pulling out numbers from where the sun doesn’t shine. I can tell you that you can save $34 million by doing away with the police and telling the county we’re not giving them a dime more, but we expect the same level of service. You know that will never happen. The county is now coming to us to subsidize the SRO deputy program to bail them out of a problem. That has been the history here. I have talked to people in contract cities. I can throw out any kind of number. When you press people to show you, they’re not sure. The only way you can cut budgets in policing is with people. When you cut people, you cut level of service. A total of 84% of our budget is salary and benefits. We have lost 56 officer positions since 2008. We laid off 24. We have cut the level of service. We closed Rosser and the eastern station. We have nine fewer detectives. I have citizens calling Councilman Kelly because there is a delay in when we can investigate their crime.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “What we’re hearing is something similar to what we heard without the definitive ways you have said it. You have brought your department down to lean and you’re still getting safety. We want to continue that. If we were to say that the information we received to date does not give us enough to recommend or investigate regarding a situation between the Police Department and the Sheriff’s Office, that is something we can say with an open heart. I haven’t heard a lot of this information before today. I don’t agree with never unless the Council tells us definitively that you don’t want us to talk about it.” Councilwoman Martin advised, “I believe the resolution is very vague and it does need to be amended. That is something I will look at.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “That’s fine. At that point we have the right to say whether we want to be part of something that is going to be moot. That would also cause uproar.”

Mr. Rettig said, “I’m going to rely on the Finance Department expertise. Your example was a $150,000 house with $50,000 in homestead exemption. The taxes for Port St. Lucie were a little over $340. So even if you saved half of the taxes, that would be $170. So is it worth $170 at a maximum for the residents of Port St. Lucie to get rid of a Police Department? My answer is no, as a resident. I would be more than willing to pay that to keep our Police Department. But I’m not going to flush this. I would like us to say that the Police Department will continue to look at ways of saving costs by working with the county and other municipalities.” Ms. Morgan said that goes for every department. Ms. Aronson said, “I agree. We’re not dropping this unless it is dictated by the Council. But I don’t want it to overshadow everything else we did. I move to strike it from today’s presentation and revisit at another time.” Ms. Morgan seconded the motion. Chair Kurek stated, “I’ve listened to all of you, and I’m trying to figure out the best way to make this go away in one form or another. The Council has the ultimate responsibility to create, change, and enforce policy. They also have to enforce and believe in the philosophy of a City. It is also their responsibility to make sure that what they’re doing is fiscally sound, so that the citizens aren’t paying more than they should for the services provided. Having said all that, if we take this off and make it go away, the issue is going to sit out there like a black cloud, and people will be waiting for it to burst. However we present this, the Council has the responsibility to say they aren’t interested. If they want to justify it, they can, but they really don’t have to say a lot. They can say that the department has been cut and they will stay with what they’re doing. End of discussion. It goes away. We don’t talk about it again, because it’s over with.” Ms. Aronson commented, “I disagree that it will happen as smoothly as you say. Everything else is not on the radar. They’ll spend the whole meeting talking about this.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “I agree with Dan. If we have a direction from Council not to do stuff, that’s fine. We looked through the budget and hemmed and hawed over some line items. Look at the minutes. They’re public. We looked at the Police Department. When Donald Shinnamon was here he said we’re cutting this and that. We nodded. There was no reason why we wouldn’t think the cutting would go on. However, that thing will sit out there, unless somebody says we’ve done enough in the Police Department, and we’re not going to look at it at the Budget Advisory Committee any longer.” Ms. Aronson stated, “City Council can be trusted to do that at a later date.” Vice Chair D'Agata stated, “If you don’t address it now, you’re going to have a problem.” Ms. Aronson asked, “Who are you disappointing? The press?” Vice Chair D'Agata answered, “It will be in the papers that somebody said not to put it in there. That’s not the case; we’re all talking about this. We’re talking about what’s best for the City.” Ms. Aronson said, “We say that we refrain from talking about it at this point, because we don’t want to overshadow everything else we worked on.” Chair Kurek stated, “I think we need to kill it. The Council has the ultimate responsibility to make the philosophical decision on what they’re going to do, and that they will make sure their Police Department is the meanest, leanest, bluest we’ve got. ‘We appreciate your help.’ End of discussion.” Councilman Kelly said, “I want to reiterate that language proposed for the Powerpoint is fine with me.” Chair Kurek advised, “I can say that we had another meeting and talked at length about this. I am going to say very little. We recommend that they continue their monthly meetings to coordinate the best ways to provide a safe environment for all citizens of St. Lucie County in all ways.” Councilman Kelly noted, “I told you that the social aspects overwhelm the financial savings. This is the worst possible time to get with the Sheriff to look at the level of service or to hire someone for $300,000, because we have closed Rosser and the eastern station, we have laid off 24 officers, and we have done everything we can to make it lean. If the Sheriff came in now and said he could provide that level of service, the level of service we have now is unacceptable to me. We’re at 1.3 officers per 1,000. The national average is 2.6. We’re at half. This is a bad time to do this.” Mr. Rettig said, “That’s why I modified it. We’ve had staffing levels in the past that have not been enforced.”

Chair Kurek stated, “The motion on the floor is to strike anything to do with merging, talking about. . . .” Mr. Rettig interjected, “It’s to remove that slide.” Ms. Morgan said, “Which has already been done.” Chair Kurek continued, “Are we talking about removing the other slide, or are we talking about replacing with this?” Ms. Aronson said, “Removing the other one. We haven’t talked about replacing this.” Chair Kurek said, “The motion and second are to remove the other slide that says to research the pro’s and con’s of consolidating the Sheriff’s Office and the Police Department.” The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. Mr. Rettig moved to replace the removed slide with the slide being shown. Chair Kurek clarified, “It says to continue monthly meetings to coordinate the best ways to provide a safe environment to St. Lucie County.” Mr. Rettig said that he would like it changed to the City of Port St. Lucie. Chair Kurek said, “There is a bill in Tallahassee that would disband FHP. Acting Chief Reuther said, “There has been discussion about it. That will burden the cities and counties if they expect us to go out on the turnpike and I-95.” Chair Kurek continued, “The Sheriff will submit his budget on May 1. This is not the only bill of concern.” Vice Chair D'Agata seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. The City Attorney advised, “You’re going to have to flesh out what you mean by monthly meetings in your presentation.”

Vice Chair D'Agata asked if they have a definition coming from the Council on what to do with it, and whether they will be involved with looking at it again. Councilwoman Martin said that she can’t speak for the Council. Councilman Kelly added, “She said she was going to check into the resolution.” Chair Kurek stated, “We may want to ask the Council what direction they want us to take from now. Do they have particular things they want us to look at? Do they want us to take a vacation until the budget is established?” Mr. Rettig asked, “Can we finish this?” Chair Kurek said, “How about: Continue meetings with county law enforcement agencies to coordinate best ways to provide safe environment for all citizens of Port St. Lucie.” Ms. Aronson moved to approve the presentation as formatted. Mr. Comins seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote.

Chair Kurek asked, “What’s next?” Mr. Rettig said, “I had thrown out some numbers with finance based on the budget to look at what it would be for a household if my previous numbers were correct, for the Police Department. Then I would like to look at paid time off for City employees. We learned at the last meeting that an exempt employee with five years of service gets 47 days off.” Chair Kurek said, “I’d like the Council to tell us where to go from here.” Vice Chair D'Agata commented, “Why don’t we say we won’t have more meetings until we get better direction?” Mr. Rettig asked, “What better direction do we need?” Vice Chair D'Agata asked, “Do we recommend, investigate. . . ? We never said anything about policy.” Mr. Rettig said, “We’ve had one or two Council people who were upset with our recommendations, and the Mayor. All of their votes are one vote. I understand where some of the allegiances lie. We need to continue what we’re doing, which is to look at stuff. I’m not sure people being upset is a bad thing if we’re trying to do the right thing. They still provide direction, whether or not they chew us out. I can handle that.” Ms. Aronson said, “I think we have made some recommendations to policy. I don’t feel bad about that. They asked us to advise. That’s what we’ve done. I agree with Ralph until I’m told differently. What’s the point of having us if we don’t ruffle feathers?” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “Councilwoman Martin said that she would look at the whole method of what we are supposed to be doing.” Councilwoman Martin said, “I looked at the resolution to see what the scope is, and I found that it was very vague and broad. I’ll talk to Roger and Jerry. I have no definitive answer right now, because I haven’t made any decisions on it.” Ms. Aronson observed, “We’re just making recommendations. Nothing is set in stone. If you don’t like it, vote against it. I don’t know why we need to be stifled in a certain manner. If you don’t like us looking at the Police Department or you don’t like our recommendations, vote against it. We don’t have any power. Why do we need stringent guidelines?” Mr. Rettig answered, “So people can control us; let’s cut to it.” Ms. Aronson said, “That’s sad.” Mr. Comins said, “They haven’t addressed the benefits since 1999. Nobody should argue against the fact that we brought it up.” Mr. Rettig said, “Look at the salary program.” Ms. Aronson said, “If they don’t like it, vote against it. We aren’t saying they have to make it policy.” Mr. Rettig said, “We put our recommendation together before Siver walked in the door, and they mirrored everything we said.” Councilman Kelly pointed out, “You talked about how things get misunderstood. That’s exactly what happened here. You made a recommendation that we look at it, and it came out in the press that you recommend we do it. You’re misunderstanding me, too. I’m saying that the Council gave bad direction. The reason it’s bad as far as I’m concerned is that when you say, ‘The Civic Center isn’t doing well. Get rid of it,’ that’s not looking at the budget. ‘The Police Department needs to cut more. Get rid of the Police Department.’ That’s not looking at it. I’m asking you to look at the budget. There are more places to cut in the Police Department. You don’t do that by saying to get rid of it.” (Clerk’s Note: A discussion ensued.) Ms. Aronson said, “That you think there are places we overlooked is great direction. Blanket statements about look at this, don’t look at that concerned me.” Ms. Morgan said, “We need to look at the Police Department and the other departments to see where they are now. Where do they stand? A lot of them are where they need to be.” Mr. Rettig said, “The problem is that we don’t understand the internal workings of those departments. To have a department head come in and justify what their department is doing. . . .” Ms. Morgan said, “As he said, meet with the Council individually. I’ve not heard from all of them, but I did call them all.” Chair Kurek said, “You need to talk to the Council member who appointed you to see what they want, rather than trying to meet with all of them. Find out what they want and bring that back to the committee. My suggestion would be to skip the March meeting and go to April. During that time talk to your Council member. At the April meeting we can go over that and put together a schedule.” Mr. Rettig said, “We found things by asking questions. There had been no employee survey. We found there were no limits on wage ranges. We found that exempt employees get an extra week for being exempt employees.” Chair Kurek noted, “But we found them, already. How many times are we going to talk about the same things? We went through them. Just like the health plan: Until we get the bid back, it’s done. We’ll look at it when we see what they accept. It’s up to the Council.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “Even the data that came up the last time with the hiring rates versus the actual rates today was eye-opening. One of our recommendations was to have a min/max. You’re the City Council. If you tell us not to look at the salary plan, we won’t. But it’s part of the budget.” Chair Kurek said, “But if we have made recommendations, and at some point we ask Susan on an update of the plan, she will give us an update.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “The next question is when.” Chair Kurek pointed out that you ask for updates. Mr. Rettig asked if impasse has been declared with all unions. Mr. Collins clarified, “With four out of the five we don’t have contracts with.” Mr. Rettig said, “If the impasse stays in force for a year, that gives the Council the time they need to do what they feel they need to do.” The City Attorney advised, “That’s not correct. Impasse starts a process by which ultimately the Council has an opportunity to impose a contract or portions of a contract that haven’t been resolved through negotiations. We’re in that process now. If it goes to its full extension, on Day 1 after the contract is imposed, negotiations start again. We’re going to be starting negotiations for 2011-12 the day after.” Mr. Rettig stated, “The more policies are in effect, the more they guide what you’re going to do in your negotiations. If they adopt a governmental number for cost of living increases, if they adopt a min/mid/max salary program. . . .” The City Attorney observed, “Maybe I have the wrong take on that. I agree that establishing policies at the Council level has some benefits, and they can ultimately be imposed if you end up in the impasse process. What it does is empower the negotiating team. It becomes a trust factor that the negotiating team is not deliberately misleading the other side as to what we do or do not have authority to represent. The policy says what the team’s authority is on the issue. If you don’t like that, then we’ll agree to go to impasse on the issue. Next. That’s the way I look at it.” Chair Kurek added, “You can’t change the rules, even though you go to impasse. I think you’d get beat up. You wanted x, y, z. They wanted a, b, c. If you change the plan at impasse, I can see that going badly.” The City Manager said, “It’s a problem to put an index in the contracts. Right now the contracts have expired. The way they’re written now, it’s a wage freeze, because there is nothing until you negotiate something. If you put an index in you have automatically included a bump. You have to be careful what you put in. It does jump up and bite you.” Mr. Rettig said, “But you’ve been giving 3 and 5% for many years. The cost of living has been much lower. It cuts both ways.”

Chair Kurek suggested April 1 for the next meeting. It was the consensus of the committee to set that as the next meeting date. Councilman Kelly observed, “The members should meet with their Council members more. No one is going to stifle investigations. I have a question. How come our Police Department is the only one on the Treasure Coast that doesn’t have a desk sergeant? Is our system better? Does it cost more? If you go in to report a crime, we have to call an officer off the street. That’s the kind of thing I’d like you to look at.”

5. OTHER ISSUES BY BOARD MEMBERS
There was nothing discussed under this item.

6. ADJOURN
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:40 a.m

Daniel Kurek, Chairman
Margie L. Wilson, Deputy City Clerk

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2011/mar/02/port-st-lucie-council-member-criticized-citizens/

[Lil B]

CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE
BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
MAY 6, 2011

A Regular Meeting of the BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE of the City of Port St. Lucie was called to order by Chairman Kurek on May 6, 2011, at 8:00 a.m., at Port St. Lucie City Hall, Room 188, 121 Port St. Lucie Boulevard, Port St. Lucie, Florida.

1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL

Members Present:   Daniel Kurek, Chairman
      Charles D’Agata, Vice Chairman
      Terissa Aronson
      Diane Bryant
      George Comins
      Stephanie Morgan (Left at 8:40 a.m.)
      Ralph E. Rettig

Others Present:   Jerry A. Bentrott, City Manager
      Mayor JoAnn M. Faiella (Left at 8:20 a.m.)
Councilwoman Shannon M. Martin (Arrived at 8:20 a.m. and left at 9:10 a.m.)
Karen A. Phillips, City Clerk
David K. Pollard, OMB Director
Lieutenant William Vega
Lieutenant Carmine Izzo
Sergeant Paul Grohowski
April C. Stoncius, Records Specialist         

3. OATH OF OFFICE – Daniel Kurek, Charles D’Agata, and Diane Bryant.

Ms. Stoncius administered the Oath of Office to Daniel Kurek, Charles D’Agata, and Diane Bryant.

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – February 22, And April 1, 2011
There being no corrections, the minutes were unanimously approved.

5.  REORGANIZATION – Elect Chairman and Vice Chairman

The City Manager said, “This is a new term, so we need to elect a Chairman and a Vice Chairman to run the committee. Are there any nominations for Chairman? You can self-nominate or you can nominate someone else.” Vice Chair D’Agata moved to nominate Daniel Kurek as the Chairman. Ms. Aronson seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote. Mr. Comins moved to nominate Vice Chair D’Agata for Vice Chairman. Ms. Aronson   seconded the motion. Vice Chair D’Agata moved to nominate Mr. Rettig. Ms. Aronson seconded the motion. Ms. Bryant asked, “Are you saying that you are not interested?” Vice Chair D’Agata replied, “I think Mr. Rettig would make a good vice chairman. Yes, I’m saying that I’m not interested.” Ms. Morgan clarified, “You are withdrawing if he is nominated.” Vice Chair D’Agata replied in the affirmative. Chair Kurek pointed out, “Vice Chair D’Agata has declined the nomination as Vice Chairman.” The motion passed unanimously by voice vote to elect Mr. Rettig as Vice Chairman.     

Ms. Morgan asked, “Can I interject before you get started?” Chair Kurek replied in the affirmative. Ms. Morgan said, “I did get a copy of the minutes from the February meeting, but it sounded like lollipop kids from munchkin land. I don’t know how they taped it or recorded it, but it didn’t play at the same speed on my machine, as it was on cassette tapes. I only have one cassette player left, and I was expecting a disc. It must be the speed that it was recorded at, because it was very fast. I didn’t get to listen to the minutes, so I just agreed to approve them. I do need to leave at 8:45 a.m., as I have an HR conference. I was wondering if you could move Item 12 up, because I’m very interested in being a part of that discussion before I have to leave.” 

Chair Kurek said, “Mr. Retting, do you have any comments on being Vice Chairman?” Vice Chair Rettig replied, “Thank you very much. I’m very honored.” Chair Kurek stated, “I appreciate being elected again, as the last year has been interesting and to some degree rather rewarding. I learned a lot about the City of Port St. Lucie, and got to know the elected officials a little better too. If there are no objections, we will move Item 12 before Item 6. There are some people here that I’d like to acknowledge so we know who they represent.” Lieutenant Vega said, “Lieutenant William Vega representing the lieutenants.” Lieutenant Izzo said, “Lieutenant Carmine Izzo also a representative for the lieutenants.” Sergeant Grohowski said, “Paul Grohowski. I’m a Sergeant from the Port St. Lucie Police Department.” The City Clerk said, “Karen Phillips, City Clerk.” Ms. Huggins stated, “Victoria Huggins, concerned citizen.” Ms. Zebrowski, said, “Bonnie Zebrowski, concerned citizen.”
 
Chair Kurek said, “When an issue is being discussed and I think that there has been enough discussion on the subject, we need to move on. We need to move forward when we kill something bad enough. We need to make sure that we have a little more concise order as we go forward.”

12. discussion REGARDING recommendING Council to get a number from the Sheriff

Ms. Morgan said, “Regarding the discussion back in January and February for the recommendation of this Board to the Council to consider looking at the possibility of a consolidation of the Police Department and the Sheriff’s Department, I would like to make a motion to move that we recommend that they need to talk to Sheriff Mascara to see what the numbers would be, and go from there.” Ms. Aronson seconded the motion.

Ms. Bryant asked, “Why is it necessary for us to even make a motion on this? The Council already knows what the Committee’s feelings are. It has been in the minutes and the press, and I think the issue has been beat up. To make the motion now is just to say back at you.” Ms. Morgan pointed out, “I don’t think that we have formally, as a Committee, recommended to them that they go ahead and proceed and at least talk to the Sheriff.” Ms. Bryant stated, “I wanted to thank the Clerk’s office for letting me know the meeting was available to watch on the website. At the meeting that was conducted on April 18, 2011, it came across very clearly that they know what the Committee believes. There were three Council members who indicated that this was a dead issue. To me, when they have said it is a dead issue, why resurrect it once again?” Mr. D'Agata said, “Everyone knows who has read the paper and listened to the news, but they also know that we never got to the point of formally recommending it. We also haven’t gotten to the point of the Council formally rejecting it. The recommendation is our duty, and the rejection is their duty if they want to reject it. We never got to that point, as we were stopped.” Ms. Bryant said, “I don’t know that we were stopped.” Ms. Morgan commented, “We were.” Ms. Bryant pointed out, “The Committee took a vote, and stopped it themselves.” Ms. Aronson explained, “I don’t think that we reversed our position. I think we reversed our position on presenting it then. We did not reverse how we felt about it. When we decided not to include it, we all agreed that it would be discussed and included at a later date. This may just be a formality, as we don’t expect it to go any further than the City Council. We stated that we would look at it and make a formal recommendation, and we need to stay true to our word.” Ms. Bryant questioned, “What is the basis for the recommendation? All that I hear so far is conjecture that it could be a cost savings. All of the other recommendations that I heard from the Committee had analyzed facts and data. I was really impressed with the Power Point presentation, as you made recommendations based on that analysis. For the merger, it was just conjecture and I think there should be more of an analysis in terms of why we are making this recommendation.” Ms. Aronson pointed out, “We have stated that we don’t want to debate the pros and cons, as we don’t know them with any certainty. We are not recommending that they should do it or not do it. We are recommending that they do the study to see what the figures would be.” Ms. Bryant said, “I feel it is a dead issue. We are beating a dead horse. The Council was very clear about their position at the April 18, 2011 meeting.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “The only reason that I’m in favor of this is so that they can say yes or no. This will put it to a formal vote, and it would be something that we wouldn’t have to deal with anymore and neither would they.” Ms. Morgan clarified, “If they do vote it down, I believe that they are not doing it for the right reasons. They need to think about the citizens of Port St. Lucie and get the number. If it can save money then let’s at least look at it, and it won’t cost the City a dime. They owe it to the citizens of Port St. Lucie, and I’m speaking as a citizen and not a member of this Committee.” Ms. Bryant pointed out, “It will cost staff time to prepare and analyze the request, so there will be a cost associated with it. In terms of representing the citizens of Port St. Lucie, Councilman Kelly did make the comment that the last election reflected the voice of the citizens.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “Mr. Chairman, we have a motion and second, and I call for a vote, please.”

Ms. Morgan moved to recommend to the City Council that they look at the possibility of consolidation of the Police Department with the Sheriff’s office. Ms. Aronson seconded the motion, which passed with Chair Kurek, Vice Chair Rettig, Mr. D'Agata, Ms. Aronson, Mr. Comins, and Ms. Morgan voting in favor, and Ms. Bryant voting against.     

Chair Kurek inquired, “Do we want to take comments from the public in attendance?” Ms. Aronson responded, “I don’t see any need for further discussion on this issue now or in the future. We are not debating the pros and cons and we have made that clear.” Chair Kurek said, “Lieutenant Vega, I understand what your concern is, but . . . .” Lieutenant Vega interjected, “Do you?” Chair Kurek asked, “Do you understand what we are recommending in terms of what the outcome will be?” Lieutenant Vega stated, “I’m clear.” Chair Kurek clarified, “As long as you are clear on what the recommendation is, and what the potential is.” Lieutenant Vega said, “I guess my concern is . . . .” Mr. Retting interjected, “We have never recognized anyone from the floor Chairman, and it would be a precedent that you will set. We will have to allow anyone who wishes to come here and speak from the public to do so.” Ms. Aronson remarked, “Our hope is that it will go to the Council, they will vote, and then the issue is moot after that. Whatever they decide is what they decide, as it is not up to us. We are not making a recommendation on actually going through with a merger.”

6. SUMMARIZED FINANCIAL STATEMENT DISCUSSION

Mr. Pollard said, “The March 31, 2011, Summarized Financial Statements that my office produces is six months of actual activity for this fiscal year. Often we find ourselves at this early stage of the current year projecting what we will spend, and rejecting what we will collect so we can determine the ending fund balances to roll into next year. We are actively building next year’s budget as we speak. We have collected from most of the departments their requests for next year, and we blend that in with the overall contracts that we know about. We know that there will be no pay rate increases next year and there will be increased health insurance contributions. We are blending all of that information. You can see the importance of the projections from this year rolling into next year, and we can compare them. It is a very important report. In the past, we used to do them monthly, but we are now doing them quarterly because of staff reductions in my office. My staff and I go over the complete financial statements detailed line item by line item every month. The report that goes out to management, the elected officials, and this committee are quarterly.” Mr. D'Agata asked, “Is there a variation report either monthly or quarterly based on a certain percentage?” Mr. Pollard replied, “Yes, there is. This is what most of us call the MUNIS Report, and it shows every line of revenue and expense line item. It shows the budget, the revised budget, the monthly figures and the available balance and percent used. We can see where we stand and what balance is available.” Mr. D'Agata said, “If you are over a certain percentage for a group of line items or a line item that is significant, then the manager would explain in writing what the situation was that brought you over the budget, and how long it would be before you got in line.” Ms. Aronson pointed out, “We did that at Scripps, too. We had to have a variance report.” Mr. Pollard advised, “There is not a narrative that goes with it unless something unusual occurs. I would then communicate via e-mail to the City Manager regarding my concerns. For example, the Electric Franchise Fee last year was right at $8 million and we may find ourselves running about 85% of last year’s number. We may only come in around $7 million and that has been communicated at the last committee meeting. I’m using the projected numbers, as the budget numbers no longer matter. It is what we are actually going to get.” Mr. D'Agata explained, “The item that you picked out happens to be under budget and it’s good to look at under budget items.” Chair Kurek interjected, “It is not good in revenue.” Mr. D’Agata said, “If you are over on the expense side, and it is not recoverable between now and the projected period, a narrative would be helpful indicating why we are over.” Vice Chair Rettig inquired, “Are you asking if there is a formal process?” Mr. D'Agata replied in the affirmative. Mr. Pollard advised, “There is not a normal reoccurring narrative that goes with this, but it is definitely reviewed and gone over. Anything that is unusual, I communicate it out to the department and look at what the issue is. For example, Human Resources is over 50% through six months on personnel services. I know that they have had one long term employee leave, and I know that was the payout of their final balance. That will come back in line, because now the new employee that has stepped in place of the long term employee is making less. That is over, but it is not a concern, because I know what the answer and the explanation behind it is. There is not a narrative report unless it is needed.”

Chair Kurek said, “Mr. Pollard, you mentioned that the Franchise Fee was going to be short $1 million, and I presume that you are looking at taking steps to take care of that. If you are not getting the money that we are expecting somewhere along the line we either have to go out and get more money or we have to cut something somewhere.” Mr. Pollard stated, “Those have been built into the long range models for the general fund. We are not prepared to make a cut this year, as we may not have as much of a contingency at the end of the year. The current year general fund budget was built with a 4% contingency and we also had $4.6 million for future years. It means that it is in jeopardy, and we won’t quite have the extra funds into future years. It makes future years fall into a deficit situation quicker.” Chair Kurek asked, “What is your level of collections on ad valorem taxes?” Mr. Pollard replied, “Eighty-seven percent, and that is just a slight tick better than prior years. We are doing okay on ad valorem collections, and the tax bills go out in November or December. If you are escrowed, the bank will pay the taxes, so we get a load of that along with the street lighting fees and stormwater fees that are on the tax bills. A lot of that comes in early in our fiscal year, so that is why we are already 87% collected; we are half way through the year. We are allowed by TRIM regulations to budget 95% of the full calculations. I budget 95.5% of that full amount, so there is a little margin for collection ratio, but we always hit our budget number.” Chair Kurek pointed out, “The tax collector traditionally makes the 95% to 98% depending on the year, and it rarely goes under 95%.” Mr. Pollard said, “That is one of our largest revenues, so it is great that I can count on collecting that.” Ms. Aronson asked, “Where do Franchise Fees come from and where are you finding the deficit?” Mr. Pollard replied, “Our Electric Franchise Fee is 6%, as every customer in the City has a line item that is charged to them, including the City. Florida Power and Light rates are down over a three year period, so the rates are lower now than they were a year ago. Our revenue stream reflects that, as it is simply 6% of all of the bills. We also pay bills on all of our buildings, so we save on that side. It is an interesting equation, as we are saving over here when we pay our electric bills, and then our revenue into the general fund is falling short. Overall, we benefit financially when the power bills go higher. Two years ago we were at $8.6 million, and we were at $8 million last year; this year it may fall to $7 million. I know that is an alarming concern when I make that statement, but we have other revenues that are fluctuating that might need budgeting a little bit. There will be some limited savings as we go through, but very limited. Sales tax is up a slight tick, and I’m hoping it is the economy coming around.”

Mr. Pollard continued, “Sales tax is up 4.4% over the same time period as last year, so the budget is $4.7 million and it might come in at about $4.9 million. That one may beat the budget, so there is a give and take. I’m very disappointed in the electric revenues, but then we are saving on the expense side of the equation and sales tax is up a little bit. We are tracking all of that, as it is built into the projections. It looks like the long range models that were presented to the Council at the winter retreat will hold fairly true.” Chair Kurek asked, “Has the state revenue sharing remained the same or has it changed in recent years?” Mr. Pollard replied, “It is down just a touch, but that is only $800,000, and it is not one of the biggest ones.” Chair Kurek said, “I know gas tax goes to the road department.” Mr. Pollard stated, “It is very close to budget, as it is up about 1.8% from last year. I budgeted a 2% growth factor. It is going to be just about on budget, and that is about $4.5 million or $4.6 million in revenue that goes into our Road and Bridge Fund for operating purposes. That is portions of Engineering and Public Works that deal with traffic signs, street lights, and school crossing lights.” Chair Kurek asked, “How about impact fees?” Mr. Pollard replied, “I don’t have that report, but they are down and are minimum revenue. There are no road projects on the books right now. We also supplement that fund with the ad valorem, but that has been falling. We also have the extra pennies, $.2 and $.3 for a total of $.5 of gas tax that goes into that fund. That is holding steady, but the impact fees are just minimum.”

7. REPORT ON INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENTS HOW THEY ARE DOING COMPARED TO THEIR BUDGETS

Chair Kurek questioned, “What about the golf course? How is it doing at mid-year?” Mr. Pollard answered, “They are right on target. We have tracked it seasonally, because they have their seasons. Their revenue is in fairly good shape, and it is included in your report on Page 42. We typically make money for six months and then lose money for six months. We are expected to have a balance, but that is with the subsidy coming over from the general fund of $210,000 this year. We actively are creating a budget for next year that will not have that subsidy. The Saints Golf Course fund is supposed to have a self-balancing financial statement next year.” Ms. Aronson said, “I assume that you are looking into some contract labor.” Mr. Pollard responded in the affirmative. Ms. Aronson questioned, “Is there a plan for any concessions at the Saints? I know that we may be losing our caterer there again.” Mr. Pollard clarified, “I understand that to be true. Yes. The current vendor is paying roughly half of the rent that past vendors used to pay. We now have a vendor in there, but the revenue is down for the Saints Golf Course. It is a line item that we count on. It might drop off to zero if we can’t get somebody else in there right away. We are actively in touch with the second ranked vendor from the RFP to see if they are interested. Previously when we were waiting for the next vendor to come in, the vendor that does food service at our Civic Center came in on a temporary basis. That is our backup plan, so we will have somebody in there. The new vendor would have to come in under the same terms and conditions that were offered before.” Ms. Aronson explained, “My concern is that it hasn’t proved viable at that amount of rent to the current vendor, and I don’t foresee any major changes that are going to make it viable for the next vendor. We might be getting into a vicious cycle, so we need to have a long term plan for concessions at the Saints.” Mr. Pollard clarified, “My office wondered about that. That falls under the Parks and Recreation Department that reports to the Assistant City Manager. They have been looking at different options and ideas. We have had a number of vendors, so it has been like a revolving door.” Ms. Aronson said, “I’m wondering what other options we could come up with to help them out at the Saints. We might have to reduce the rent by what revenues you might generate by running it yourself, especially if we have the expense of turnover consistently.” Mr. Pollard stated, “I’m sure the Assistant City Manager has been brainstorming with Mr. Proulx, as he is full of fresh ideas. If we run it ourselves, then we keep those revenues.” Vice Chair Rettig pointed out, “You will never run a restaurant with City employees with benefits.” Ms. Aronson commented, “It can be done, but not with the benefits package.” The City Manager advised, “We are looking at other options that might be available. Running it ourselves is at the very bottom of the list.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “I would think vending machines would be an option.”

Chair Kurek asked, “Is there any department that you have your eye on?” Mr. Pollard replied, “No. Everybody is within budget and where they are expected to be. With governmental accounting rules, what they have actually paid out to the vendors you would expect that to be 50% of their budget give or take. An annual contract is encumbered at the beginning of the year, and the financial statements will show that full annual amount as spent. When we do financial statements, it is how much was spent or paid to the vendor plus your encumbrances. I’m not concerned about any departments per se, but I wish I was seeing some savings. When I have minimum savings that means the budget is correct. The budget is tight, and the only area that we may be saving in is with electricity, because the rates are down. Animal Control’s largest expense other than staff is the contract with the Humane Society, which is a little over $300,000 a year. We may save $100,000, because we renegotiated that contract where we donated land, so for a five-year period we will save. Everything else is nickels and dimes, but I’m monitoring some major revenues that are one of my major areas of concern.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “As a caveat, having lived with a budget and knowing that if I saved money I would lose money the following year, I’m not sure that is a good assumption to think that there are potential savings that aren’t being utilized because you don’t want to lose money. That is part of the facts of life. If you give a kid an allowance, he won’t say he doesn’t need it. That will never happen, and with the departments, it is the same. They try to hide the big savings.” Chair Kurek stated, “I don’t agree to the greatest extent, but I think given the current situation the department heads are more aware of the fact that if they do save anything it could be there ability to continue to operate next year. I would like to think that they understand that. In the old days if you had a budget, you had to spend it all because you may not get it the next year. I think that mentality may be changing.” Ms. Bryant said, “I agree.” Vice Chair Rettig pointed out, “It is hard to reward people for excellent effort in saving money when salaries are frozen, and knowing that if they do save money, it could cost somebody a job that works for them. They are going to do what they can to protect their people.”

Mr. D’Agata asked, “Have any of the vendors come in with price increases that you have accepted on a long term basis?” Mr. Pollard replied, “We do have some revisions that have to be allowed for in the contract, and then it goes to the Council to amend the contract to allow the price increase. We currently had to sign off on an agenda item that will go to Council for janitorial services, as it was a 3% to 4% decrease. They came to us and said that if we would renew it for five years, then they would reduce it by 4%. He is hungry for business, and it is smart business move.” Mr. D’Agata inquired, “If somebody comes in and there is a 10% increase clause, what do you do?” Mr. Pollard responded, “If during the 12-month cycle, the contract comes up for renewal or consideration for a CPI index, the department would have to make that adjustment. They would have to move some money around or decrease the frequency. The Building Department had so much activity during the boom years that the public restrooms had to be cleaned twice a day. Now they do it once a day, so they have cut back because activity has cut back. We watch for opportunities like that, as that is money out of the vendor’s pocket. Our mindset is that we have to watch him to make sure that he is following his contract.”

Mr. Pollard continued, “We give the departments only certain spending areas that are discretionary. Gas and oil is what it is. There are contractual services, accounting fees for the CPA audit, and repairs to the fleet, so I don’t know how a department will determine what they want to spend more on, but there are a few areas. Maybe they load up on office supplies and computers, but I don’t worry about it because that is a capital purchase that comes through the City Council. We just dealt with the Police Department yesterday, as the Detective Bureau needs 25 laptops that are not budgeted. They are failing, so it is impacting their workload and their ability to do their job. We looked at what we could do; should we lease or buy, and what the cost was. They will push money around to make the purchase and then bring it to the Council. We look at that and it is certainly a concern. My department controls the budget transfers. If they have savings in salaries because they had vacancies, I do not allow that money to be moved unless it is a true legitimate need. Like the 25 laptops that are impacting their job; they can’t get their job done very well. Just because you have savings there, you can’t push it down here and spend it. You have to tell me what is going on, so I try to watch that.” Mr. D’Agata asked, “You can actually move a salary into an expense line?” Mr. Pollard replied, “I can allow it by signing off on it. For example, we may move money from salaries for the laptops.” Mr. D’Agata questioned, “How is the overtime budget doing on the salaries?” Mr. Pollard answered, “The Patrol Division has the biggest area of overtime, and they are right at $1.2 million. They have spent 48% of that number, which is $587,000 at six months through the year. We have had most of our holidays and have already generated a lot of overtime for them, so we have roughly half of the budget spent. We may have an ounce of savings there.” Mr. D’Agata inquired, “Do any of the other departments have overtime?” Mr. Pollard responded, “No. Not that I’m aware of. Reference was made to gas, because of fuel going up. The Police Department is the largest consumer of gasoline, and their budget is $800,000. They have spent $350,000, so they have used 43% of their budget. They are doing well, but as we know prices are going higher. I’m going to assume the second half of the year is going to be more costly than the first half of the year.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “Do you contract for gas?” Mr. Pollard replied, “Yes. We have a co-op, which consists of a number of local governments along the Treasure Coast. We collectively bid and get prices pegged to a certain indicator. The City pays substantially less, because there are a lot of taxes that are avoided rather than any of us paying retail.”

Mr. Comins asked, “When we compare this original document of the budget to the operating expenses through March, should the approved budget numbers match?” Mr. Pollard replied, “They wouldn’t match early in the year, but there is a chance that there has been a budget amendment or a transfer, so they should be close. In most cases they will match.” The City Manager advised, “We do three budget amendments during the year, so there could be changes. Also, at the end of each year there may be encumbrances that roll over for items that didn’t get purchases completed in the prior year. When that money comes over, then that increases the budget. If we have expenses that don’t get completed in one fiscal year, they roll into the next year increasing the numbers.” Mr. Pollard said, “I see some project numbers, which means that there were grants received. The budget is a moving number.” Chair Kurek asked, “On the grants, do you have to do a resolution before the Council?” Mr. Pollard replied, “I believe the department runs it through the City Manager to the Council to accept the grant, then we roll it into the budget and there is a budget amendment. If we are making a purchase that is over $25,000, then the purchase goes to Council. Sometimes there are three steps: approve the grant, amend the budget, and approve the purchase.” Chair Kurek pointed out, “There was a time when we had to have a public hearing to increase the budget.” Mr. Pollard advised, “Amending the budget is an ordinance, so that is two roll calls by Council, and the second one is a public hearing.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “Are there grants available for the laptops for the Police Department?” The City Manager replied, “Not for the replacement of existing items, but sometimes we can find them for new programs. Sometimes there is a little bit of money to replace normal wear and tear on existing systems, but not a lot. If we hired new police officers sometimes we can get equipment for them, but you couldn’t include a laptop. There are not a lot of grants out there to replace normal operational equipment.” Vice Chair Rettig questioned, “Are we doing an RFP for the 25 laptops?” Mr. Pollard replied, “We will be looking at the state contract. Sometimes the vendor can beat the state contract price, but that will be quoted and brought to the Council for approval.” Chair Kurek asked, “Could you use the Law Enforcement Trust Fund for this?” Mr. Pollard replied, “Forfeiture has to be for specialized equipment, and I don’t know that these qualify for that. They track and spend money, and it comes up through the budget amendment and approval process. It is for very specialized equipment that needs to be purchased. These are standard laptops.” Mr. D’Agata asked, “How much money is coming into the fund these days?” Chair Kurek pointed out, “If they grab a boat that belongs to a drug dealer, they can turn around and sell it. The money goes into a special fund that they can use.” The City Manager advised, “We actually have a couple of pretty nice vehicles out to auction right now. They can generate some money, but with a lot of the vehicles that get sold at auction, we are happy that someone is taking them off of our hands.” Mr. Pollard said, “We just had the online bidding close on the large offshore fishing boat and it was a $42,000 receipt. A lot of times the department will use the cars if they have a need for them. Thus far, for six months of the year their revenue in the forfeiture fund is $9,101.”

Mr. Comins inquired, “Regarding Ravenswood, all of that money can go back into a fund, as I think there was a big allocation for electricity?” Mr. Pollard replied, “No. I don’t believe we have hardly any money allocated for Ravenswood.” Mr. Comins said, “I thought there was $35,000 for electricity.” Mr. Pollard stated, “That building has been demolished, but if we had budgeted it in, because at one time there was a building and we had to keep security going and electric on, that could show a savings. We will show savings there and the Botanical Gardens have not spent their operating funds yet.” Mr. Comins remarked, “The budget for last year was $34,000 for Ravenswood.” Mr. D’Agata asked, “Where does it go?” Mr. Pollard replied, “Any and all savings and funds roll into the fund balance. We close it all out with one single number and carry it forward. It is another funding source. Like in the current year when we built the general fund, we projected a $9.6 million ending balance from last year to carry into this year. This year the general fund is $69 million, so the $9.6 million is one line item or one revenue. We have the electric franchise and property tax, which is a blend, as there are very few revenues that we specifically have for one department. The general fund by nature has to use property taxes and franchise fees. There is not a single department that truly has their own revenue that is sufficient. There is not any department that can survive off their own revenues. I don’t believe that there is a single one. Some of the Parks and Recreation areas will earn 25% to 30% of their budget. The deficit has to be made up of property taxes and franchise fees, so it is a blend of revenues for any department.” The City Manager explained, “The Planning and Zoning Department is trying to run on what they generate, and some years they do and some they don’t.” Mr. Pollard advised, “On paper they show that they balance. The $9 million was a project that is under contract, and that money would get carried forward. The $9.6 million that I made reference to is what we call cash carry forward, as it is not encumbered, it is not designated, and it is at 4% contingency. Any budgeted contingency or revenue savings rolls into the $9.6 million and goes forward. Once it is encumbered, I don’t count any unspent balance. As long as we sign the contract, it is spent. I no longer budget a single penny of that.” Mr. Comins asked, “Can you use that money to pay a debt?” Mr. Pollard replied, “I don’t think of it as extra. It carried over to this year’s budget, and every bit of it was earmarked. We did have not only the 4% contingency, but the $4 million that was above and beyond the 4%; we carry that minimum contingency. As we all know, the Council saw the need to use it in future years. In the long range model, without that amount carrying into future years, we would have even more drastic projections in the future.”                                                                             

continued....                                               

[Lil B]

8. overview of major budget challenges for 2011-2012 & 2012-2013

The City Manager said, “I have broken this into three sections: One is revenue issues, Two is expense issues, and Three is some of the things that we are doing to address it. On the revenue side, obviously, our ad valorem values continue to fall. At this point, we are not going to be given our preliminary estimate until June 1, 2011. For budgeting purposes, we are planning on a 10% reduction. We hope that it won’t be that bad, but it could be even worse. We just don’t know and the appraiser has not given us any hints. He will not until June 1, 2011. We are building the budget assuming a 10% decrease, and we won’t get the final number until July 1, 2011. That is what drives when we can release the preliminary budget, because we won’t get our actual ad valorem numbers until July 1, 2011. Then we can determine what the recommendation for the millage is going to be, and what kind of revenue we will have from ad valorem taxes. The rates fell the last couple of years in utility taxes and the electric franchise; usage has been down. When rates are down, that helps our expenditure side of our budget. For the communications tax, the usage seems to be down because a lot of people are starting to eliminate landlines in their homes. I’m sure some of them are reducing cable services, etc. As people pull back from those services, our communications taxes are down, and I think those are estimated to be down about $1 million, as well. Aren’t they Mr. Pollard?” Mr. Pollard replied, “No, not quite. I’m projecting that it may miss budget by $300,000. It is about a $6.3 million budgeted revenue in the general fund.” The City Manager pointed out, “From when we doubled it, it is down.” Mr. Pollard advised, “Two years ago, it was a $3 million revenue, and now we expect it to be in the $6 million range. We jumped that rate up to help ourselves.” The City Manager stated, “There is not a lot of activity going on, so we are not generating much of anything in impact fees. The impact fees for the Police Department are to buy equipment, but that revenue service has dried up. That is what we build roads from, but we have no new road projects. We have some that are in various stages of design, but we really have insufficient funds to start on any of them. We are trying to finish up a couple of projects right now that we have funding for. Unless we get grants or money through the federal government, any new projects are not in the cards right now.”

Mr. D’Agata asked, “Have you retired any of the equipment from the road projects or have you purchased any new equipment in light of the impact fees going down?” The City Manager replied, “We bought a couple of pieces of equipment this year for drainage, but very little. We have gotten rid of a little bit, but road and bridge is not part of the general fund. For the most part, we still have to maintain the roads. One of the areas that we have cut back on is overlay and that is going to be a real big problem. We have a lot of roads that are reaching the end of their useful life. There are roads all over the City with cracks and potholes in them. We are trying to catch them, but a lot them need work, and that is going to be an issue. Probably not in the next couple of years, but within the next five years that will become a really big issue to the tune of $50 million worth of work that is needed on our roads.” Mr. Comins asked, “I just noticed an overlay in the Tesoro area, and they paved up one street and down the other. Is that part of the plan to do overlays?” The City Manager replied, “They will usually concentrate on arterials and connectors that get the most traffic, but then they go into the neighborhoods. We have a program that analyzes roads to let us know which ones are in the worst shape.” Mr. Comins inquired, “Is that a visual inspection?” The City Manager replied in the affirmative. Mr. D’Agata pointed, “Like you had the Westmoreland project.” The City Manager advised, “That was a grant or federal funds. We try to incorporate it into the project when the main road gets done, then we go back and do the detour streets. They will overlay in sections.” Mr. Comins questioned, “Are you saying that even that kind of work is slowing down?” The City Manager answered, “There is a gap between the streets that need that kind of work and the amount of money that we have to do it on an annual basis. That gap is going to catch up with us one of these days. It has been over 20 years since many of the streets received overlay.”

The City Manager continued, “Other revenues are for the most part static, as a few of them are up a little bit and a few of them are down a little bit. We do have a couple revenue issues that we need to address. Expenditures will start becoming an issue more with replacement capital, and computers especially. Last year we had to take computers out of service in the departments or get them replaced. We had some that were so old that they couldn’t run the security and our network was vulnerable. We had to take them out because it was putting our entire network in jeopardy. We have computers that are six, seven, and eight years old, and a lot of them don’t run the current software. They are not powerful enough to run the current software programs. Every few years Microsoft comes out with new operating systems and we will have to start replacing them. The Police Department especially, as their ruggedized ones in their cars are getting very old and the downtime is a lot. It’s the same with some of the Utility Department computers; they have to be replaced. It’s the same with the vehicles. Our fleet was in excellent shape and as we reduced staffing it allowed us to get rid of the bottom end of our fleet. Right now our fleet is not in real bad shape, but we can replace some specialized piece of equipment annually if we have to. Within the next couple of years, I suspect we are going to be faced with having to replace some of our fleet vehicles. We have vehicles now that are ten years old and we can only run them so long. Otherwise, the maintenance cost actually becomes higher than the replacement.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “At the current level of revenue, that won’t be possible, correct?” The City Manager replied, “Not on any kind of a systematic cycle, but we will have to look at individual vehicles. If they don’t run anymore, then we will have to address it. Right now our fleet is not the highest priority issue that we have, but it is an issue that we are going to have to come to grips with in the next few years. We should be replacing so much every year. We have a luxury in that our fleet was in pretty good shape, and then we went into the recession. We can only push them for so long, so it is something that we will have to deal with.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “We are pushing the problem out to the future.” The City Manager advised, “It is an issue that we are aware of and we know we are going to have to address. We are replacing a few here and there, but we have had to pull back from a systematic replacement.” Vice Chair Rettig questioned, “What will save us?” The City Manager answered, “Hopefully, the economy turns around.” Vice Chair Rettig stated, “The bottom line is if the economy doesn’t turn around fairly soon, then the City will drift further and further into problems with the infrastructure, older vehicles, etc. It is not a sunny day.” The City Manager remarked, “No one is making that claim.” Mr. Comins asked, “Are there methods that a mechanic can give us so we could prolong a car? Like my car has 125,000 miles and is ten years old. Are there any suggestions that the mechanics can make regarding longevity, like synthetics or turning it off so the diesels don’t idle the whole time the employee is out of the truck?” The City Manager responded, “We have that in place already. We went through a program where we looked at rebuilding them. We found out that in the long run it looks really good on paper, because we put in an immediate amount of money to fix parts on the vehicle, but the rest of it was still an old vehicle. A lot of the other things started falling apart on the vehicle. When a vehicle’s useful life is over with, it is usually over. Heavy equipment is a little bit different. You can rebuild heavy equipment a few times to get some useful life out of it.” Mr. Comins suggested, “The operators can make a difference in longevity; they can abuse it or use it. There should be some general discussion about this is what they will use for five years or more. If they take care of it, it might last five more years.” Vice Chair Rettig pointed out, “The Police Department vehicles have so much greater mileage because of the idle time.” The City Manager said, “They have to in order to keep the battery charged.”

The City Manager continued, “Regarding capital maintenance, our buildings are fairly new and in good shape, but it is a long term issue. We are doing normal maintenance on them, but capital maintenance would be deferred at this point. It is not a real big issue right now, but several years out it will become an issue. We have really good luck getting grants for our drainage system. We have a bond issue for the east side, but we also have several grants we are working on for the E-8 System, which runs south of the C-24 canal. We are going as far out as the interstate this year. We have had to do some matching, but we have gotten several million dollars worth of grants over the last few years to clean it out. We got a couple of CDBG grants through the county to do work on Hough Pen Slough, which is north of the Civic Center. It is a drainage area that runs on the north side of Walton Road that will be started soon. We have grant funds that will allow us to clean another major ditch running in the central part of the City. We are also working on grants to do the 100 Series Grants on the north side that runs between St. Lucie West and Midway Road.” Mr. D’Agata asked, “Do each of the department heads get into requesting these grants, or do you have a grant administrator?” The City Manager replied, “The Community Service staff formulate some of the grants, but most departments have their own people that work on them. The Police Department has staff that generates grants. Public Works has a couple of people that put the grants together. Those grants are helping us to keep our drainage structure in shape. We just dredged some of the canals off of the river, which was grant-funded.” Vice Chair Rettig stated, “They really did a brilliant job, as I was stunned at the volume of material that came out of those drainage canals. It was unimaginable how much vegetation was in there, and they tapered the banks, put sod in, and it is beautiful. They have improved property values in the area since they have done that.” The City Manager said, “We have taken advantage of a lot of grants over the last few years for our drainage system.” Chair Kurek said, “The grant department in St. Lucie County has been offering services to other non-profits because there are less grants now than there have been in a while. If you have a grant that you would like to get and your people don’t feel comfortable going after it, then you might want to contact Ms. Outlaw. They want to make sure that we get as much money into the county as we can.” The City Manager advised, “Our people are constantly looking for grants, because they know that is how they survive and get a lot of their work done.” Chair Kurek pointed out, “There could be grants that could be cooperative between the City and county.” The City Manager explained, “They do have Safe Routes to School Grants, which is done through the TPO. The City, Fort Pierce, and the county all put in grants, but it all comes out of one funding pool. The CDBG are monies that went to the county, and the county is actually administering those funds. We have worked with them to get those projects done. We do quite a bit of cooperation with them.”

Vice Chair Rettig remarked, “It seems as if what you are talking about is an exceptionally important part of the City now. How formal is the process? How do they learn about grants? How do you know which grants they are applying for? Is there a grant review?” The City Manager clarified, “There are some publications that put out a list of grants that are available. A lot of newsletters and publications that come out notify us that they are available.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “What if they are not aware?” Mr. D’Agata responded, “I’m involved with two non-profit organizations, and one of them actually hired a person who has taken in about 12 to 15 times their salary in grants.” The City Manager stated, “We have publications that are nothing but summaries of grants that are available. There are 100’s of grants and we get the publications every year.” Mr. D’Agata inquired, “I understand that, but is there a formal process for recognizing what grants you want to go after to make sure that we are deriving the revenue that we can from the grants that are available?” Ms. Bryant asked, “What do you mean by a formal process?” Vice Chair Rettig replied, “Like a grant review committee or something from the City Manager’s Office that dictates what grants to go after instead of relying on the departments.” The City Manager clarified, “If I see things that have a potential grant that I know fits in with one of our operations, I will definitely send it to the department. In most cases, they already have the grant half written, because they are well aware of it before I even see it. We have applied for some that we felt that we had a 5% chance of getting, but we went after it anyway.” Ms. Aronson said, “There are some departments that might warrant some sort of employee dedication to grants.” The City Manager advised, “The big departments that have grants have one or two employees that a good portion of their job is to write grants and administer grants. Once you get the grant, there is also reporting requirements that go a long with it.” Ms. Aronson said, “It is a long term process that is why there needs to be some sort of dedication.” The City Manager explained, “Once we put the application in, we have to stay on top of it, and sometimes we have to make presentations.” Chair Kurek said, “I will attest to the fact that the reporting for the DOE grant that the solar energy fund has is huge. We had to have copies of every invoice that we spent. Even when we turned a loan down, we have to report that we turned it down and why. I’m sure there is a grant that you received for the Civic Center, and there is probably a whole series of things that you will have to report on.” The City Manager advised, “There was two years of work that went into that to get it. The actual construction was the easy part.” Chair Kurek said, “I’m guessing you will have to report how much savings there is, along with other things.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “How much money did you receive in your grant?” Mr. Pollard replied, “It was $2.9 million.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “For $2.9 million, you are going to do some work to get it.”

Ms. Aronson said, “In my experience, if you have a decent grant writer they always far exceed their salary. I’m wondering if Parks and Recreation has some sort of grant writing, because I think there are grants available for Parks and Recreation.” The City Manager said, “We have some.” Mr. Pollard said, “They have FRDAP for structures, boat ramps, and docks.” Ms. Aronson questioned, “Do they have some sort of employee dedication to grant writing?” The City Manager answered, “We have some people who are responsible for developing the projects and seeing what grants are available to look at becomes part of their job.” Mr. D’Agata asked, “If you went to a department, could you not ask to speak to the grant writer?” The City Manager replied in the negative and said, “We don’t have that kind of luxury, as they have their other duties as assigned. If they can find grant opportunities, then in most cases 100% of their time is spent on developing them. There are timelines on grants as well.” Mr. D’Agata said, “The fun part of the grants is that if you take a grant in education, a portion of that is administrative. You relieve some of your administrative budget, but then you have to allocate those portions. It does save a lot way beyond what is expected.” Ms. Aronson stated, “It may behoove them to consider having an employee dedicated to grant writing. If they find a grant for a project and they have to do all of their other work, plus tracking down the grant money, it is probably not as efficient as it could be. You might be missing out on some opportunities by not having a designated grant writer in certain departments.” The City Manager advised, “Our employees are really on top of it, as we have received $50 million in grants.” Mr. Pollard explained, “There is a comprehensive check list and overall report that comes out of Community Services about once a year at the Retreat. The person in Public Works that does the grant writing is Larry Nadeau, Parks and Recreation has Brad Keen, and the Police Department has Abe Alvarez or Michael Byrd. It is not their job title and it is not 100% of their job by any means, but I know who to go to if I hear of something. They are pretty accurate.” The City Manager said, “There is a lot on the administrative end even during the construction portion. Grants do take a lot of time an effort, but they are well worth it.”

The City Manager continued, “Fuel costs could go even higher, although yesterday they were up and down, but for the long term trend it has been going up. Not only can that be an issue as we buy fuel for our vehicles, but it probably is going to start affecting our contracted services. We contract the lawn and mowing, so there is going to be pressure on those contracts. The cost of deliveries will be going up for materials, so fuel is something that will run through everything. That is something that we need to keep our eye on, as it will potentially lead to some inflation. As we start adding that and the cost of all of the other commodities, we are starting to see some pressure there, and it will affect wages. If inflation takes off again in the next year or two, then it will be an issue that we will have to deal with.” Mr. Pollard pointed out, “The gas tax is based on volume gallons, not the price. As the price goes up, people will conserve.” The City Manager said, “Regarding staffing, except for some minor tweaks that we are looking at, our departments are basically down to bare bones staffs. Unless we totally eliminate services or reduce service levels, for the most part all of our departments are about as bare bones as they can be. And they still provide the levels of service that they have been. We are looking at a couple of departments, but all in all that effort is done. If we have to reduce staffing more, then we will be looking at eliminating certain services or reducing levels of service. Maybe people won’t get the drainage ditches mowed as often as they would like. We will be looking at lowering levels of service or eliminating services. That is going to be the next thing. We really can’t tighten the belt anymore and have operations continue normally. They are down to where they need to be.”

11. report on CRA coverING deficit 2 yEArs out

The City Manager said, “The CRA valuation has fallen, as the taxing is how it generates revenue. We have already reduced costs like annual audits and reports that are paid out of that. All staffing and other operating costs would be removed from the CRA and debt service. Those are the only things that the CRA money is being used for, as we are not going to generate enough revenue this year. It will start affecting us next year. The City has a covenant budget appropriate behind those bonds, so the City will probably have to step forward and intercede to work on that debt.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “Is it based on the numbers that we are looking at? Isn’t this one of the worst things that is coming down the pike as far as exposure for the City?” The City Manager replied in the affirmative. Vice Chair Rettig said, “If we are looking at saving a million here and a million there, then we are talking $7 million that the City will have to cover.” The City Manager commented, “It is not quite that much.” Mr. Pollard advised, “It is a $3.5 million impact to the general fund annually.” Vice Chair Rettig questioned, “So in four years if nothing changes, what would the cumulative affect be? How many millions of dollars would it be?” Mr. Pollard answered, “It is zero next year, about $700,000 the year beyond, and $3.5 million every year thereafter.” The City Manager pointed out, “One of the issues that we have been trying to work with is PNC Bank who is the bank that has City Center, as De Guardiola has defaulted. He owes the City $500,000 under his agreement, so he is in default with us. He is also not paying his taxes, although the certificates were bought last year. This year the SAD debt will go on it and it will be interesting to see whether those are sold. We have been trying to get PNC Bank to foreclose, but they are refusing.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “Are they refusing to foreclose because the loss would be too great to write off?” The City Manager replied, “No. They are writing a loss down anyway, but I think they are refusing to foreclose because they don’t want to take title to it. If they took title to it, then they would be responsible for the taxes and the assessments. We have been trying to get them to do something with it, and my assumption is that they are refusing to do it because they do not want to take ownership of it. Then they would be responsible for the ongoing expenses.” Vice Chair Rettig stated, “So it is a business decision, and it is a smart business decision on their part.” The City Manager explained, “We are working on trying to get them to do something, and we are working to find people that may be interested in taking over the development. There have been a couple of offers, but the bank is not being realistic as to what they are going to need to do. They are just writing down so much every year, and after another year or so it will get down to where it really needs to be. At that point, somebody will take it over and move forward.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “From a budget standpoint with that looming, what are you predicting to cover debt-wise?” Mr. D’Agata commented, “When you can abide by the residual of it.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “You are going to have to because two years from now you are $4 million in the hole, and that is a lot of money.”

The City Manager clarified, “We are looking at two or three different things that we think have some possibilities to cover it without having to go into the general fund. It is real preliminary, and we need to do some more due diligence in reviewing those.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “Can you give us an idea of the types of things that you are going to look at? I’m not trying to back you into a corner, Mr. Bentrott, but what I’m trying to do is get an understanding.” The City Manager replied, “We are looking at refinancing some issues, and we are looking at a couple of sources of revenue to see whether those can be used to meet some of these obligations. We are in the preliminary stages of doing those, and some of it is legal background research that we have to do. Others, we have to determine what kind of balances in those accounts might be there.” Mr. D’Agata questioned, “What about selling a portion of it?” The City Manager answered, “That is obviously something that . . .” Mr. D’Agata interjected, “If you get to this point that it is going down in value, and there is somebody out there looking, then you can bet that somebody within PNC Bank who is privy to these numbers knows that the bottom number over there is coming.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “Selling a portion of what?” Mr. D’Agata replied, “Of the opportunity.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “If you are going to sell something, then you have to have something to sell. I don’t think that there is anything over there that the City can sell.” The City Manager advised, “The City doesn’t own a lot of it, but if they could get De Guardiola out of the picture and somebody else buys it and starts developing it, then the valuation of the area starts increasing, which starts generating tax money.” Vice Chair Rettig pointed out, “That is seven years from now, so it won’t do the City any good because of the cumulative debt that they are going to be burdened with in the interim. I think the City will recover, but it won’t happen overnight. It is a reality that is going to have to be dealt with. This is the bomb that is waiting to drop.” The City Manager said, “There are people that are willing to step in, but the gap is too large. At some point, the gap will close and somebody will jump on it.” Mr. D’Agata stated, “The optimist is saying two or three years, but the pessimist is saying seven or eight years.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “Okay, two or three years, and then two to five years to get it out of the ground and completed.” Mr. D’Agata explained, “No. You start taxing right away, because you end up with value on the property.” Vice Chair Rettig pointed out, “The tax increase will be incremental, and off of what they bought it at until it gets developed. Look at when they bought the land at Tradition, and kept it Agriculture for three years. They had a couple of cows roaming around on it, so they didn’t have to pay for it. That is smart business. Someone will do the same thing here.” The City Manager clarified, “City Center is a little different, as the infrastructure is in place. You could literally buy it and be under construction within months because the land use is there.” Mr. D’Agata said, “Ralph, with all due respect, I love you, but the thing is that US 1 is right there, so it is a different issue. There is going to be a smart developer that will think it is a deal.” The City Manager stated, “A new developer I’m sure will want their own buildings, but there are actually building designs for some of those parcels. They literally went through Site Plan and everything, so they were ready to start.”

The City Manager continued, “The other steps that have been taken are that we have been negotiating changes to the health insurance plan. We increased the employee contributions. We have made some changes to the definition of what retired employees are, and the requirements for them to receive contributions. We have eliminated the vehicle allowance and moved to reimbursements. We are negotiating some changes in certification pay, and we have minimized travel and training. We are offering a Voluntary Separation Program. We have had a couple of people already take it and we are hoping that we get a few more.” Mr. D’Agata asked, “Is anybody looking at the impact of that, because that is a quick payout?” The City Manager replied, “One of the people taking it is the Parks and Recreation Director, Chuck Proulx. The assistant director will take over, and that position will not be replaced. That will be a management position that will disappear. In other cases, we have 20-year employees that are at the top range above the salary who will go. If we hire somebody new, they will start at a lower rate.” Vice Chair Rettig inquired, “Was there an incentive?” The City Manager responded, “For every so many years that you have worked, we have offered a severance pay, and they would stay on the health insurance plan.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “Would there be a bump on pension for years or length of service?” Mr. Pollard replied, “Zero through nine years they would get one month, and so forth. It is prorated and you max out if you are a 30-year employee. The offer is if you leave, then you would get four months continued on your salary. That means the pension contribution goes into your fund, and health insurance is also covered for four months. Also, keep in mind that is just a contribution to your 401 or 457 Plans, as we do not have a defined benefit plan for employee contribution. It is your savings account if you want to think of it that way.” The City Manager said, “If an employee leaves, the first thing that we will do is decide if we are going to replace the position. If not, then the position goes away. If we do, ultimately somebody in a lower grade is going to be hired.” Mr. D’Agata asked, “Are they all in unions?” The City Manager replied, “In this case, the department head is not in the union.” Mr. D’Agata questioned, “Do they transfer the responsibility to the assistant who might be in the union?” The City Manager answered, “In this case the assistant is also not in the union.” Mr. D’Agata commented, “You have to watch that kind of thing.”

The City Manager continued, “We are reviewing some privatization, and we are looking at the golf course and a couple of other areas. We are least looking at some privatization options like selective staff reduction. We have a couple of units that I think we may be able to pull a couple of people out of yet. Most operating units are down as low as we can get them, and still maintain operations. We will look at services and service levels to see if we can cut back on anything there. We do have at least a tentative agreement with the lieutenants. Their contract goes to Council on Monday night. The contracts for civilian supervisors and civilian professionals should go to Council on the May 16, 2011. The lieutenants and sergeants, do you guys have both set yet or not?” Lieutenant Izzo responded, “Tentative agreements.” The City Manager said, “For officers and sergeants, we don’t have votes yet, but we have at least tentative agreements with everybody, which would be a pay freeze for this year and next year. We will be okay this year, as we will be able to get our budget balanced. We will be able to keep our contingency in our funds, but one area of concern is the bonding capacity. For long term fiscal stability, we have a 20% reserve and we have been able to maintain that, but we are down 20% this year; we can’t get any lower. This year I think we will be okay, but next year will be difficult. As we get out three to four years, there are still some real problems on the horizon. Hopefully, by that time the economy will turn around, although you never know. I talked to someone who had been down to Miami and they indicated that there isn’t a recession in Miami. The malls were packed. The recession seems to be over down there and hopefully that will start moving north. We do have some construction that we will be looking at the end of this year and the start of next year. Martin Memorial Hospital will be a big construction project, and Mann Institute is going to build an adjoining office building for sure. There are a couple of manufacturer groups that want to move here because of what is being created out there. We will keep our fingers crossed on those and if that all comes to fruition, then within 24 months you could see some new construction and development happening out there, which creates jobs. The hospital is talking about 300 or 400 jobs.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “Is part of the package for most of those companies a reduction on taxes long term? Do we benefit greatly from Digital Domain?” Mr. Pollard replied, “I don’t recall what the package was.” The City Manager advised, “I don’t think Digital Domain has tax abatement. They may from the county, but not from the City.”

9. UPDATE/REPORT ON THE PROGRESS ON THE HEALTH INSURANCE BIDS
(Clerk’s Note: This item was tabled to the next meeting.)

10. survey information on other cities & health care claims reductions

The City Clerk advised, “Ms. Cabrera was scheduled to be here to discuss these two items, as Ms. Williams is out today, but she got involved in something else. Do you want to table those to the next meeting?” Chair Kurek responded, “Yes, I think that they should be because it is a big item.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “Do we know what is happening with the health insurance? Have you gotten through all of the proposals and selected someone?” Chair Kurek replied, “I’m on the committee.” Mr. Pollard pointed out, “I can give you the quick overview on that. There is a committee of eight folks that are reviewing the RFP. We had seven proposals, and two of them are essentially identical just by two different agents, so there are six different plans. They have had two meetings and those meetings had minutes taken, as they were public meetings. The next scheduled meeting appears to be May 17, 2011. They are working through them, but it is a very complex equation. There is fully insured or self-insured, like we are. There are different proposals and different plans, and the meetings are tentatively scheduled to run all the way through to June 1, 2011 if needed. Sometime after that, the ranking of the firms and the plans will go to the City Council for their approval.”

Chair Kurek said, “The first meeting consisted of what insurance is. The second meeting we caught the Assistant City Manager up to date as to what was in front of us. We ended up with at least four or five issues that have been asked back to the bidders for more information on certain items. At this point, the three main bidders are Cigna, AETNA, and Blue Cross and Blue Shield. They are all very close together as far as the end result. Two of them give rebates back on prescriptions and one doesn’t, but there are administrative charges that reflect the fact that they are going to keep the rebates. A couple of them have $225,000 stop losses and one has $125,000 stop loss. It is not like apples to apples. It is like apples, grapes, and oranges. We had six areas to rate them on and we went through four of them were we graded what we thought was the best. At the next meeting we will talk about cost, service and benefits. Those will obviously take some time. After it is recommended to the Council, the Council takes the recommendation or not, and then staff will negotiate with them as to whether to offer different plans. Two of them offered full insurance and three have offered self-insurance. They have all offered what we have now, full insurance. Afterwards, they pick someone they can negotiate with whether they want to split it up and have an HMO or a PSO, or whatever it is that makes sense. Then staff can determine what the cost would be if we were to split it up into different areas. The process is very formal. Everyone has a grading sheet and at the end of each meeting we have to grade them as to what we think and where we are going.” Mr. Pollard advised, “We do that to make it as objective as possible instead of just what do you think. We try to put numbers and scores to it to analyze it.”       

12.  discussion REGARDING recommendING Council to get a number from the Sheriff
(Clerk’s Note: This item was discussed at the beginning of the meeting.)

13.  OTHER ISSUES BY BOARD MEMBERS

Vice Chair Rettig inquired, “If we are going to look at human resources issues, how limited are we by what has been agreed to with the contracts? If we wanted to look at paid time off, are we going to get into the contracts with the various unions? Isn’t that pretty much locked?” Mr. Pollard responded, “It is for this time period, but remember we are half way through the first year of a two-year contract, and these things take a while.” The City Manager advised, “The Police contracts are two-year contracts and the civilian contracts are three-year contracts.” Mr. Pollard said, “It is not too early to have an idea and start pushing that forward and negotiating it.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “Then I would like to look at the City’s paid time off program.” Mr. D’Agata commented, “And the pay brackets; minimum and maximum. We were going to look into that, too.” Vice Chair Rettig said, “We have already recommended it and nothing has happened with it.” Chair Kurek asked, “Mr. Bentrott, have you worked on anything to do with a salary plan or having minimum/maximum?” The City Manager replied, “The salary plans are part of the union contracts.” Ms. Aronson remarked, “I feel like it is a dead horse.” The City Manager advised, “That is what is going on in Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Ohio and Indiana as those states are indicating that compensation plans and benefit plans are set by government, and not subject to union negotiations. In Florida, they are still subject to union negotiations. As long as that is the law, we can make recommendations and if the unions are in agreement, then we can change their compensation plan. Florida is not one of those states right now, so all of those items are subject to negotiations. The City does not have the authority to unilaterally go in and dictate how it will be. We can come up with new plans and we can put them on the table and negotiate. If the unions agree, then we can implement them.” Chair Kurek questioned, “Don’t you get an estimate from Mr. Pruitt on June 1, 2011?” Mr. Pollard answered, “That is correct on taxable value. It would be the estimate in June and the certified final is in July.” Chair Kurek said, “Our next meeting will be on June 3, 2011. Mr. Pollard, if you get the estimate on June 1st could you give us any ideas on June 3, 2011, as to where that will set us at? Is that enough time?” Mr. Pollard replied, “Sure, it takes minutes.” Chair Kurek stated, “If it comes in at 20% less, then we can have a lot of conversation. If it comes in at 10% more than last year, then our conversations are going to be a lot less. I think that would be something that we need to have on the agenda so we can keep up with where we are going. I want to really monitor where we are going and try to target anything that looks like we need to have further discussions. Mr. Pollard, if there is any department that you think that we should look at, I would appreciate if you would bring it to us. Our purpose here is to help you.” Vice Chair Rettig pointed out, “That is a responsibility that you are putting on Mr. Pollard that maybe he doesn’t deserve.” Chair Kurek said, “Unless the City Manager has a problem with it, as I don’t.” The City Manager replied in the negative.

Ms. Aronson said, “I want to follow up on something that Vice Mayor Bartz brought up at the last City Council meeting, and maybe look at where the revenue streams are within the City and finding alternative ways to increase those revenue streams. That was something that she asked we look into. I would like to request that we be presented with some of the revenue stream areas to see if there is anything that we can increase in revenue or decrease in cost.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “And you will bring back the health insurance?” Chair Kurek replied in the affirmative and said, “The last meeting is in June, presuming that it goes that long. If we do as good as we did at the last meeting then we might be done.”

The City Clerk said, “Mr. Chairman, in regards to the motion and recommendation that was made at the beginning of the meeting, are you looking to come back to the City Council at one of their next meetings or are you looking to send it to them as part of the report prior to the Retreat in July?” Ms. Bryant stated, “That was the question that I had, because I know we had to have a report to them two weeks before the Retreat.” Vice Chair Rettig commented, “I believe that at the last City Council meeting they requested we only report to them two weeks prior to the Retreat.” The City Clerk clarified, “As far as a report, yes.” Vice Chair Rettig inquired, “For clarification, are you asking if we are going to do this in a memo form to them to see if they wish to act on it or should we ask them if they wish us to wait until the Retreat?” The City Clerk advised, “If you are going to do it prior to the Retreat, the proper procedure would be in a memo form from the Chairman. It would be making a recommendation to the City Council, and that memo would go the City Manager and he would place it on an agenda. If you are going to do it with your Retreat report, then it will all be together and you would not have to do the memo at this time to get it on a Council meeting.” Vice Chair Rettig asked, “Do you know if there is a preference?” The City Clerk replied, “No, I don’t.” Vice Chair Rettig questioned, “Mr. Bentrott, do you know if there is a preference from the City Council as to when they would like our recommendation?” The City Manager replied in the negative. Ms. Bryant asked, “When is the Retreat?” The City Clerk responded, “The third week of July.” Ms. Aronson said, “We anticipate it being moot, so just send the memo and let them vote on it.” Chair Kurek stated, “I’ll compose a memo, and I will send it to the City Clerk who will circulate it to get comments back. It won’t be very long. I will need the language of the motions from the minutes in order to make sure that it is accurate.” Vice Chair Rettig commented, “Then we will have direction.”                     

14. ADJOURN
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:10 a.m.

[Huggs]

Thanks for posting the meeting minutes. A couple of sentences stand out!  TOTALLY.

Ms. Bryant questioned, “What is the basis for the recommendation? All that I hear so far is conjecture that it could be a cost savings. All of the other recommendations that I heard from the Committee had analyzed facts and data. I was really impressed with the Power Point presentation, as you made recommendations based on that analysis. For the merger, it was just conjecture and I think there should be more of an analysis in terms of why we are making this recommendation.”

Kudos Ms. Bryant!  SHE GETS IT!

It is all conjecture about a cost savings.  The BAC has no solid analysis, facts and/or data to back-up their suggestion of consolidation.

So WHAT is this committee basing their recommendation on?  A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE that THEY, the BAC Chairman, instigated!

[Lil B]

CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE
BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
FEBRUARY 4, 2011

A Regular Meeting of the BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE of the City of Port St. Lucie was called to order by Chairman Kurek on February 4, 2011, at 8:00 a.m., at Port St. Lucie City Hall, Room 188, 121 Port St. Lucie Boulevard, Port St. Lucie, Florida.

1. CALL TO ORDER

2.ROLL CALL

Members Present:   Daniel Kurek, Chairman
                Charles D’Agata, Vice Chairman
      Terissa Aronson
      Stephanie Morgan
      Ralph E. Rettig

Members Not
Present:      George Comins (Excused)

Others Present:   Mayor JoAnn M. Faiella
      Councilwoman Shannon M. Martin
      (Arrived 8:55 a.m.)
Jerry A. Bentrott, City Manager
Diane Bryant, Citizen
Marcia Dedert, Finance Director/Treasurer
Milton Collins, Assistant City Attorney
Claudia McCaskill, Benefits Coordinator,
Human Resources
Karen A. Phillips, City Clerk
David K. Pollard, OMB Director
Brian E. Reuther, Acting Police Chief
Susan Williams, Human Resources Director
Margie L. Wilson, Deputy City Clerk

(Clerk’s Note: Previous to the meeting the Deputy City Clerk administered the Oath of Office to Stephanie Morgan.)

Chair Kurek read an e-mail from Mr. Reichner resigning his membership in the committee.

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – January 10, 2011

There being no corrections, the minutes were unanimously approved.
Chair Kurek advised that he has to leave at 9:00 and Ms. Morgan has to leave at 9:30.

4. DISCUSS DRAFT POWERPOINT TO BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL, Chairman Kurek/Vice Chairman D’Agata

Chair Kurek stated, “I felt the best thing is to work on the PowerPoint here. For the first slide, we talked about a salary plan and developing a minimum and maximum, based on the FLC survey, and about surveying the private sector and local governments. Is there anything else? Let’s go to the provisions. The cost of living raises – I just put index, because the City has to pick one; it’s up to them. Pay rate cannot exceed the maximum. We talked about education. Just because someone gets another certification that shouldn’t automatically give him a raise. It is reasonable to give a reward. The policy should be that the Council or the City Manager has to approve whatever they’re going for before they do it. The employee needs to make the supervisor aware of what he would like to do. He can still go for the education, but he may not get the reward. On the other hand, if the City feels they need that level of education because they may need to have the employee ready to go if something comes up, they can reward him with a one-time payment. The Council and the administration would have to decide on what that is.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “That verbiage should be expanded. We also talked about the necessity for the particular job or department. When you do your budgets you figure out your staffing. You could base it on that.” Mr. Rettig said that he agrees.

Chair Kurek said, “For the health plan slide, employee contribution based on percentage of the premium. Increase the copays. Increase the deductibles. Establish a flex plan. Consider offering health savings accounts.” Mr. Rettig noted, “They have really tightened up the regulations on them; they’re not what they used to be.” Chair Kurek continued, “It’s worth looking at. Plan design has multiple tiers: employee; employee and spouse; employee and dependents; employee, spouse and dependents. Choice of plans: PPO, HMO, PPC. Consider a high deductible plan. I think those are the options that Siver will present. The problem is trying to put it all together for one plan for the City. I think the committee wants to suggest as much stuff as the City needs to look at, even if they don’t do all of them. There are certain things they need to consider. It’s probably least likely that the City would do high deductibles and HSA’s, but they need to pay attention to them.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “We talked about auditing and whether the City could look at. . . .” Chair Kurek said, “Require quarterly reports from health plan administrator.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “That’s kind of broad.” Mr. Rettig said, “I think the plan probably needs to be monitored on a month-by-month basis as opposed to quarterly. If you’re looking for something in depth, you may want to do something on a quarterly basis, more than just cost runs and those kinds of things. What I don’t want to do is. . . . Siver is going to make a presentation to the Council on what they’re going to recommend. They replicated what we said. It was encouraging to know that we’re on the right track. A lot of these things will come out in depth when Siver does their presentation.” Chair Kurek continued, “Consider and compare a fully insured plan. Establish incentives for employees to use the clinic. We talked all over the place for this. I think we all believe that if the copays on the regular plan will encourage people to go there. . . . Let’s say it’s high so it’s advantageous for people to go to the clinic, as compared to the Emergency Room.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “We talked about the clinic the last time in depth: reports from the clinic and how they’re handled. We need to have the City look at these reports and the contract, and ask what they are contractually obligated to do, and secondarily, look at the reports and do something about it. I don’t know how you put that in the PowerPoint. Are we going to be presenting this with discussion?” Chair Kurek replied in the affirmative and said, “I think we go as a committee and have a conversation, more than just a presentation.” Ms. Morgan asked what types of incentives would be established to use the clinic. Mr. Rettig replied, “They’re really disincentives. If you use an ER for an illness other than an accident, you have a $500 copay. You can call it disincentives for using outside facilities. Or the incentive for using the clinic is a higher deductible for Emergency Room use for primary health care.” Chair Kurek asked if the clinic gives free flu shots. Ms. Williams replied in the affirmative. Ms. Morgan stated, “I would say to encourage employees to use the clinic.” Ms. Aronson said that it is important to have a higher ER deductible. Ms. Morgan suggested, “Encourage employees to use the clinic for non-emergency care.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “For routine medical services.” Mr. Rettig said, “Copay increases for routine care in the Emergency Room.”

Chair Kurek said, “Next is establish a health benefit committee consisting of representatives of employees.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “There would be a mixture of employees and management.” Mr. Rettig said to take out the word representatives.

Chair Kurek said, “Initiate negotiations to standardize contributions for all employees.” Mr. Rettig suggested, “All employees would pay the same rates.” Chair Kurek said, “It has to be negotiated, so we have to get all the unions to agree.” Mr. Rettig noted that you can’t treat employees differently and suggested, “Standardize contribution for all employees.”Chair Kurek said, “This slide is Human Resources. Update the employee handbook, set up quality control provisions for the clinic, establish a quarterly newsletter, and conduct employee surveys.” Vice Chair D'Agata stated, “This isn’t Human Resources; it’s communication. There are so many things that have to be done on the employee relations side. You should consider looking at a consultant for the whole business. I’m not trying to attack anybody, but this has been neglected, maybe because of the sequence of events that happened in that area. Human Resources should have a larger say. They often become members of the staff, and they are considered the people who take care of benefits. But they also should have a say in strategic planning for the City. This is a big fault that happens in corporations today, too. The Human Resources guys end up with all the problems later. Maybe we can get them to become part of the strategic team. The City needs a strategic management team.” Mr. Rettig said, “I agree. Every rock we turn over we find more problems. It’s amazing the number of things we have come across in general conversation.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “We end up working on all of these tactics. We start fixing, but we have to prevent. Prevention is easier and more important. We shouldn’t be fixing; we should be strategically planning. I want to get into what you brought up about the salaries. I was floored. This is another rock we just turned over. Why should we be turning over rocks? These things should have been done years ago. We have to take the first step. That would be suggesting that we have strategic planning and making sure we include the Human Resources people. Make sure they have a pretty loud voice. And probably include some consultants.” The City Manager commented, “That already exists.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “I realize it exists, but I think the power in the last two or three years was negated because of the Human Resources situation.” The City Manager advised, “I’ve only been here for a year. We established that in the last year.” Mr. Rettig asked, “When are you looking at redoing your salary program?” The City Manager answered, “We’ve started looking at what the issues are, but it all has to be negotiated. The City cannot just impose these things. We know there are issues. We’re starting with job descriptions and the basic stuff that needs to be done. It’s a long process. It’s not just something you plop in.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “I don’t agree.” Ms. Williams said, “I have started contacting municipalities and private sectors regarding information on their compensation plans, so I have information to bring to the Friday committee we have.” Mr. Collins added, “Also understand that we have a two year freeze on the table. We have some time to develop a compensation structure. We understand it needs to be done sooner rather than later.” Mr. Rettig asked, “Did you look at the salary data that was forwarded?” Mr. Collins replied in the affirmative. Mr. Rettig asked, “Did you see that some of the people were making 100% or higher over hiring range?” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “Management has the right to establish your minimums and maximums. I think we have abdicated our management positions.” Mr. Rettig said, “I don’t want to see employees get beat up for this. If somebody handed me that money, I’d take it.” Chair Kurek said, “As a result of conversations we had at the last meeting, I added finding out what the end user thinks. The clinic could have survey cards.” Ms. Williams pointed out, “Because we’re in the middle of the RFP for the clinic, it is one of the areas we specified that we want.”

Chair Kurek said, “The next slide is the Saints. The restaurant is already leased. Course maintenance is done by staff. Is the pro shop sublet?” The City Manager said, “City staff.” Chair Kurek continued, “Do you have paid or volunteer rangers?” The City Manager replied, “Both.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “Putting privatization is more difficult because of what has been established. You may be able to outsource some things. You’ve outsourced the restaurant. Look at the other two things to see if they can be outsourced. Is there any reason unionwise we can’t do that?” Mr. Collins answered, “No. We can do it.” Mayor Faiella advised that it isbeing looked at, and that they are looking at cost benefit. Chair Kurek said, “We may want to strike this, because we had a lot of conversation on park maintenance. We decided that parks are a necessary expense in order to keep the City attractive. Could it be done cheaper by an outside source? Who knows the answer? The problem would be whether you would get the level of quality from an outside source. We talked about reviewing the fees for park usage, particularly ballparks. I know Little League is doing everything with volunteers and contributions. Do you charge them anything to use the parks?” Ms. Dedert said that they pay electricity. Mr. Rettig asked, “Isn’t it part of the rules that you can’t charge them? I thought that City Council established that you weren’t going to charge. I don’t think leagues pay. I said that they should pay, but I was told it was part of an edict from City Council.” Ms. Morgan asked if consolidation of park maintenance with the county has been discussed. Chair Kurek said that they talked about it, but he didn’t put it in the presentation. Ms. Morgan said she would rather see consolidation than privatization. Mr. Rettig suggested outsourcing park maintenance or consolidation.

Vice Chair D'Agata asked, “What about suggesting working with individual corporations?” Chair Kurek observed, “The county has passed on some of the parks to the City of Ft. Pierce that are located in the city. Back in the late 70’s there was a countywide parks organization that maintained all the county parks. It was funded by the county. That was done away with and the county took it over. The county continued that until about ten years ago when they gave the parks located in Ft. Pierce to them.  The bullet point for park sponsors in straightforward. AT&T may give you money to put up banners in the park.” Vice Chair D'Agata noted that PGA is getting into something with kids that will be huge.

Chair Kurek continued, “The next slide is on law enforcement consolidation.” Vice Chair D'Agata said that they need to know the money. Acting Chief Reuther asked what duplication and operation the slide refers to. Chair Kurek asked, “Do you have a SWAT team? Acting Chief Reuther replied in the affirmative. Chair Kurek said that the county has a SWAT team and asked if there is a marine patrol. Acting Chief Reuther replied in the negative. Chair Kurek said, “Certain levels of detectives, records, fingerprinting. . . . There wouldn’t be a Chief, because the Sheriff would be the Chief. It would be mostly administrative, but there are some duplications. I’m not advocating this. I’m just saying there are some.” Acting Chief Reuther said, “My point to you is for the same or a similar level of service you are going to be charged the same amount of money. If the citizens of Port St. Lucie decided to go with the contract, what would you get in return? You would lose a considerable amount of control. That’s significant. If you put ten deputies out on the street and 10 police officers on the street, I submit to you that the costs would be the same.” Vice Chair D'Agata noted, “That may not be true. That’s what we’re saying. We really haven’t looked at the dollars. We don’t know what the dollars are.” Acting Chief Reuther suggested, “Look at some of the contracts. Broward County is a great example. Broward County auditors are criticizing the Sheriff because he is not charging the cities enough; he’s not charging purchasing and all the administrative costs. Sheriff Mascara is a great guy; he’s a friend of mine. But the contract is only as good as the Sheriff.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “It’s the other way around, too. The whole deal is only as good as the contract. We talked about the clinic earlier. We have a contract, and we find out the clinic isn’t doing what the contract says, or that the negotiated contract should have had more teeth in it. If you do a contract correctly you can cut out 90% of the problems.”

Mr. Rettig said, “Our mandate is to look at potential cost savings for the City. Do I hear that one third of our tax dollars go to the police force? We’re talking about duplication of services. We can’t not look at the Police Department. If you want to create a political firestorm, let’s ignore the Police Department and have people ask why we did that.” Acting Chief Reuther said, “I understand what you’re saying and I recognize what you’re talking about. But unless you have somebody who can go into both organizations and compare what you’re getting, you don’t really know what you’re getting in services. When I submit a contract to you, I’m going to submit it in my best interest, unless you have a third party that would dig in and ask objectively what I’m getting for the money.” Chair Kurek said, “That’s exactly what we’ve been saying. It’s a discovery process.” Mr. Rettig asked, “Are you concerned that we even bring it up?” Acting Chief Reuther answered, “I’m been a resident and taxpayer of Port St. Lucie for 32 years. I worked for the Ft. Pierce Police Department. Early on in my career this came up every six months. It’s very unsettling for the organization. We have difficulty recruiting and retaining people when these things go on. I’ve been doing this for 34 years. I have two Master’s degrees. I can save the City a lot of time and effort. The City is not going to save any significant dollars. What you run the risk of is losing control. The three things local government provides are accessibility, personal service, and localized control. If we don’t provide those, why does the City need to exist?” Chair Kurek said, “Here’s the problem I have. I’m a former budget officer. If I understand the way it’s going to work. . . . Right now the Sheriff provides law enforcement coverage for the entire county, including the cities. However, within the cities he has less coverage because we have police officers. When you consolidate a city into the Sheriff’s Office, he would increase his coverage to a city to meet what the county is doing. But the county does not have as intensive coverage as a city does, because it’s rural versus urban. Thus the difference between what the City wants and what the Sheriff will deliver; that price would be paid by the City, if we can figure it out. However, that increased cost for the level of coverage would impact the Sheriff’s budget, which would then impact the county’s millage, which is not that far from ten mills. From an election standpoint, the County Commission is going to say, ‘Time out.’ I’m looking at this strictly from a financial standpoint. I will be blunt: It ain’t gonna happen. At this time from a budgetary standpoint, the County Commission and the Sheriff would have to show millions in savings before this happens, because it would put the County Commission in an adverse position. It will put the sheriff in an adverse position. I have to agree with Acting Chief Reuther. It will cause a rift, in general.” Mr. Rettig asked, “Do you think the Parks and Recreation Department is going to be thrilled? Do you think anybody is going to be thrilled? This is not a nice job we’re doing. People came in here begging for their lives. It’s not comfortable. But it’s what we’re here for.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “It should be part of the regular management practices to look at the costs inside and outside.” Mayor Faiella asked, “If we outsource the Police Department and Parks and Recreation, and so on, what position would the City Manager have then? Do we need a City Manager then?” Vice Chair D'Agata answered, “I don’t know.” The City Manager asked, “Do we need a City if everything is going to be done by the county?” Mr. Rettig commented, “Let’s not get carried away.” Mayor Faiella said, “That’s the question I’ve been asked.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “Whoever is asking that question must not have a lot of brains to start with.” Mayor Faiella said, “I’m throwing it on the table. People have heard that the Budget Committee is looking into this. They asked me why we need a City Manager.” Vice Chair D'Agata stated, “We’re not talking about a fait accompli. We’re looking into it. We can’t make things happen. We are an advisory group.” Mr. Rettig stated that theoretically you could eliminate the City of Port St. Lucie. Ms. Aronson remarked, “I think we’re a long way from recommending that.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “It’s not recommendation; it’s investigation. In order to go forward you have to look at all aspects of business. No one is saying you have to do things. There are many reasons why you wouldn’t do it. That’s why the pro’s and con’s come out. What is the scope in money?” Mr. Rettig answered, “I have no idea. I have not been able to get. . . . We were told preliminary negotiations would have to take place for us to even get an idea of what the money is. I know that one third of our money goes to the police, and that we also pay for the Sheriff’s Office. So there has to be something in there.” Acting Chief Reuther advised, “When you talk about duplication, the SWAT Team, and detectives, in the City of Port St. Lucie you have property crimes and person crimes. Somebody has to investigate those. Whether it is a deputy or a Port St. Lucie officer, I submit to you that the costs will be the same. In any contract the City would be charged for purchasing. . . . The county will say, ‘Wait a minute. You’re not charging for risk management. You’re not charging for logistics.’ I’ve looked at contracts. You’re not going to save significant dollars. Policing is labor intensive.” Mr. Rettig interjected, “Due diligence is to look at it; to say it’s the same cost and we’re not going to save money. Therefore we are going to keep the Police Department.”

[Lil B]

continued....

Budget Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes - February 4, 2011

Ms. Aronson pointed out, “Since we’re talking about a PowerPoint presentation of recommendations, and we are so far from a recommendation on this subject. . . . All we’re saying is to do our due diligence. Is this something that we have to make public record at this point?” Vice Chair D'Agata asked, “Why even be there?” Ms. Aronson said, “I’m not saying to not do it. I’m asking why we should make this big statement that we’re doing it. We’re drawing attention to it. What’s the point? We’re not making any recommendations.”  Mr. Rettig said, “Investigate consolidation. It doesn’t say to consolidate.” Ms. Aronson stated, “No, it doesn’t. But the rest of the presentation is recommendations.” Mr. Rettig pointed out, “The Parks and Recreation was just to take a look at it.” Ms. Dedert advised, “What you’re asking for is a major expenditure for the City.” Vice Chair D'Agata asked, “Is that part of the savings? We could say it saves $3 million. The cost of the investigation is $500,000. That means $2.5 million in the savings. We don’t know what the scope is to start with. We are just saying to investigate to see if there is a savings.” Chair Kurek asked, “Excluding Belle Glade, how many other cities have consolidated with the Sheriff?” Acting Chief Reuther answered, “There have been several in Palm Beach County and Broward. Some were very small organizations. In recent years there was Ft. Meade with about 12 officers on the west coast. Conversely, in Broward County, Lauderhill went contract with the Sheriff’s Office. After a couple of years they decided to re-form their police. I believe Pompano Beach is talking about going back to their own law enforcement and what the costs would be to start it up. I understand your position. You need to investigate it properly. Unfortunately, if somebody says we should get a contract with x, you will start to have problems with the contract later on.” Chair Kurek said, “In my opinion, the first step would be to get something from other areas before we start running down this road, to see why they went one way and then back.” Acting Chief Reuther said, “Lauderhill is probably the best example.” Chair Kurek suggested, “Find out whether it was political, financial, service. . . . Rather than talk about pro’s and con’s, we can say to investigate the consolidation. Find out what other people have done.” Mr. Rettig said that there are still pro’s and con’s. Chair Kurek noted that this is the last slide in the PowerPoint. Acting Chief Reuther said, “The significant con is that you enter into a contract with me, and what are you getting? Four years later, I say, ‘By the way, your contract is going up $2 million.’ What do you do?” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “That’s lack of control. That’s a con. We understand that. I think we are remiss if we don’t investigate.” Ms. Aronson said, “I think we are, too. But this is an empty statement right now. We don’t have facts or money. Let’s just rile everybody up. Why are we saying it?” Mr. Rettig asked, “How do we get the information?” Ms. Aronson answered, “We here at the committee need to get that information. Why go before the press and say we’re looking for it? We’re so early in the process.” Councilwoman Martin said, “I agree.” Mayor Faiella noted, “It’s out there already. People are calling and asking what’s going on.” Ms. Aronson said, “We’ve talked about this since we started. I’ve never seen one piece of pro, con, discovery, anything.” Mr. Rettig stated, “We’ve asked for it.” Ms. Aronson agreed, “We have.” Ms. Dedert pointed out, “It’s a major expenditure for the City to do that.” Mr. Rettig said, “Then the City can decide they don’t want to. We are a recommending board. If the City says we don’t want to do it because it costs too much, that’s the answer.” Ms. Aronson said, “That might be where we need to get. Otherwise, this subject will come up time and time again.” Mr. Rettig said, “It may be one of those things where when we do the presentation, when they vote it will not be something they wish to consider at this time.” Vice Chair D'Agata stated, “We’re not doing our duty as a budget group if we don’t bring it up.” Chair Kurek said, “Let’s get down to the slide. Do we want to have pro’s and con’s there, or just put ‘investigate consolidation of police and Sheriff,’ and talk about getting information to see whether it’s a good idea?” Vice Chair D'Agata said that they could have possible pro’s and con’s. Ms. Morgan suggested, “Get rid of them and say we would like to do the investigation.” Chair Kurek asked, “Do I hear a motion to have the slide say, ‘Investigate consolidation of Police Department and Sheriff’s Office,’ and eliminate the pro’s and con’s?” Ms. Aronson said, “So move.” Ms. Morgan seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote, with Ms. Aronson, Ms. Morgan, and Chair Kurek voting in favor, and Vice Chair D'Agata and Mr. Rettig voting against. Ms. Aronson added, “We can’t get into the pro’s and con’s yet, because we don’t know them.” Chair Kurek said, “I need a motion to go ahead with what we have for the Retreat PowerPoint.” Ms. Aronson said, “So move.” Ms. Morgan seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote. Chair Kurek advised, “I’ll get this cleaned up and get it back to the City Clerk.” The City Manager indicated that on Wednesday, February 16, there will be a dry run at 2 p.m. at the Community Center. Mr. Pollard added that if Chair Kurek e-mails the final version to Daniel Hakim of MIS, that is exactly what will be on the screen.

Chair Kurek left at 9:00 a.m. and passed the gavel to Vice Chair D'Agata for the rest of the meeting.

5.   DISCUSSION ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES PRESENTATION, VICE CHAIRMAN D’AGATA

Vice Chair D'Agata advised that he would like to skip Item 5.

6.   DISCUSS COMP TIME – TRUE NUMBERS – ADDITIONAL PAY VS DEFERRED PAY, MR. RETTIG/HUMAN RESOURCES/FINANCE

Mr. Rettig said, “I was exceptionally surprised to find out that there was comp time, particularly for people who are exempt, salaried employees. It’s a de facto 2% annual bonus. It’s astounding to me. If in the negotiations one of the sticking points was not allowing an extra week’s vacation accrual, the comp time for hourly employees is an extra week’s vacation time. How could you say you can’t afford it when it is already being allowed?” Vice Chair D'Agata said that it is a negotiable item. Mr. Collins explained, “Exempt employees are split between union and non-union. It is the Council and the City Manager’s direction to treat employees relatively the same. There will be some differences. But for exempt people not in the union, you can take away the comp time tomorrow.” Mr. Rettig asked, “Is it part of the negotiated contract that they will have 40 hours of comp time?” Mr. Collins answered, “Not necessarily. That’s up for discussion. Right now we proposed no comp time, and they proposed the comp time they earn. They want to earn, instead of receiving it. The downside of that is that they get to cash it out if they don’t use it.” Mr. Rettig said, “So you have exempt employees who want to be treated like hourly employees and get the benefits of being exempt employees. Are your exempt employees generally speaking your higher salaried employees? So it’s, ‘I want my cake and I want to eat it, too.’ I don’t think any exempt employee should receive comp time.” Ms. Morgan said that she agrees. Ms. Aronson said, “I do, too.” Vice Chair D'Agata asked, “Are we going to cause another situation with another union?” Mr. Rettig replied in the affirmative. Vice Chair D'Agata said, “Because of differences in treatment.” Mr. Collins said, “No one else can unionize.” Mr. Rettig stated, “City Council can establish a policy that says they will no longer pay exempt employees comp time.” Mr. Collins said, “They can make that recommendation, but it still has to be negotiated. But that would be my marching orders, I guess.” Ms. Aronson noted, “I don’t think this committee would recommend anything other than doing away with comp time for exempt employees.”

Mr. Rettig asked, “As an exempt employee, can I use my comp time for a holiday?” Ms. Williams replied that they are paid for holidays. Mr. Rettig asked, “Don’t you have accrued paid time off?” Ms. Williams replied that they have vacation time. Mr. Rettig said, “So when they have vacation time and the City doesn’t do business on a holiday, does it come out of vacation time or is it additional pay?” Ms. Williams answered, “They are paid for the holiday and only 32 hours for that vacation week.” Mr. Rettig said, “So I could use my comp time to make it up.” Ms. Williams said, “No. They can’t take the holiday and get comp.” Mr. Rettig said, “Now it’s going to get worse. The paid vacation time that I accrue at x hours per pay equates to x number of days a year. On top of that I get paid holidays. So I don’t have to use my bank at all. What is the maximum accrual rate for a full-time employee who has been here ten years for vacation time?” Ms. Dedert answered, “The maximum rate is 7 per pay period.” Mr. Pollard said, “It’s five weeks at 20 years of employment. That’s where it caps out.” Mr. Rettig said, “So I don’t even have to tap that five weeks for holidays.” Ms. Dedert noted, “Neither does an hourly employee.” Mr. Rettig said, “That’s amazing. An employee gets five weeks of paid vacation maximum at 20 years. What about somebody who has been here five years?” Ms. Dedert replied, “Three weeks.” Mr. Rettig said, “So she gets three weeks’ vacation, all paid holidays, and she gets comp time.” Ms. Williams added, “And personal time. Three days.” Mr. Rettig stated, “The program is ludicrous. The Fishkind report said we should pity the public employees because they don’t make as much money. You guys have got it made. This is ridiculous. It’s all extra cost.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “If you have a high level, and you have masses of people, everybody wants to get to that level. You have a target that people can start negotiating to at all levels. How do we stop it? Maybe we stop it here. It’s a conceptual problem.” Mr. Rettig noted, “We’re not even going to get to address this.” Ms. Morgan asked, “What is the accrual for sick days?” Mr. Collins said, “We get 96 hours a year.” The City Manager said, “It’s a day a month.” Ms. Morgan said, “In all they get 82 days a year.” Mr. Rettig said, “There was a time when these benefits made up for low pay. But that day is not here anymore.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “It could be that we make a motion that we will recommend to vote at the next meeting to send this to the City Council as a recommendation.” Mr. Rettig said, “We need to review the paid time off for the City. So moved.” Ms. Aronson seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote.

Mr. Rettig said, “On the salaries of the positions I asked for, I wanted to make sure we weren’t making a mountain out of a mole hill. For normal minimum mid-range max, I’m going to use $10 an hour as a mid-point. You would do 80% of that mid-point for the minimum and 120% for the maximum. It would be $8 for the low end and $12 for the high end. That would allow a person with no experience from their date of hire to receive up to a 50% increase in salary, from $8 to $12. That’s a fairly rich plan, and it would usually take from five to seven years, depending on markets. Now the salary market is flat, so you can contract that range. But we’ll use the 80% and 120%. If you look at the positions we received, starting with the Accounting Clerk, look at the people who are over 50%. You have one person who is making 58% of the higher end rate. Under Administrative Assistant, there is a person making 93% above hiring rate. Having the average of all the incumbents dilutes the number. You have people way above what would be normal.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “Everybody is 25% higher all the time.” Mr. Rettig continued, “When you get above 50% you have real problems. Look at the Crew Leader who is 86% over the hiring rate.” Ms. Aronson said, “The Administrative Assistant at $61,000 in Port St. Lucie is. . . . I understand it’s longevity, but that’s why you have to have a cap.” Mr. Rettig said, “The lieutenants came in as good numbers. A Maintenance Worker is making $42,000 a year. That’s almost 100% over hiring rate. They doubled their salary.” Vice Chair D'Agata added, “That’s not counting overtime.” Mr. Rettig said, “Their pension and everything else; it just astounds me. I don’t know how to make these things public without getting people in trouble. That Maintenance Worker doesn’t deserve any flak. He’s taking what they’re giving him. Look at a Traffic Safety Technician. The bottom one is 100% over, so they more than doubled the hiring rate. Someone is making $48,000. That’s what happens if you don’t have a cap.” Ms. Aronson said, “There’s nothing you can do about these people here now. It doesn’t mean you let it continue.” Mr. Rettig continued, “Two people in meter reading are making 70% above higher end. Police officers: a ton are 59% above hiring.” Vice Chair D'Agata asked if the Council has been brought up to this kind of detail. Ms. Aronson noted, “Two fifths of the Council is new.” Councilwoman Martin replied in the negative. Ms. Aronson said, “Jerry has to look into this and make recommendations to the Council.” The City Manager said, “For Meter Readers and Maintenance Workers, for instance, part of it is that people bumped when we did the layoffs. You can only reduce salaries by 5 or 10%. We have people bumping down a level or two that are throwing things totally out of whack. We’re trying to negotiate that if you get bumped down, you get into that salary range. People bumped to Meter Reader from tech jobs, so they were pulling big salaries.” Ms. Williams noted, “The rate for Accounting Clerk, for instance, on the survey, at $13.14, is the last time the City went to the FLC. It was 2008. That was their minimum. We haven’t brought those rates up. Some of the pay rates include any training they were getting and certifications for their job. A lot goes into that. Jerry is right about the bumping. The officers are based on a step program.” Councilwoman Martin added, “Let’s take the old vs. the new PEA contract. Many certifications were given as incentives with a certain percentage. The new contract is scaled down in that. But you have to bargain that, so you won’t get rid of all of it at one time. I have seen a change with regard to that.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “We need to have a salary structure plan. That was one of the recommendations. When we talk about that at the Retreat, we will say that it should have minimums and maximums and caps. The federal government gives you 50% of your increase for two years when you get above your maximum. After that, you get nothing. Having no plan is the biggest sin we have here now. That would involve the bumping. People could go down in pay and keep their job, or they can go on the street.” Councilwoman Martin said, “That is also part of the negotiation process. Bumping is in the contracts. It gets worked out in negotiations.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “This is not a tactical plan.” Councilwoman Martin said, “It really doesn’t work that way. There are negotiations, and both parties have to come to an agreement.” Mr. Rettig said, “I will respectfully disagree. You can institute a salary program on a Citywide basis and make it non-negotiable.” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “A program having minimums and maximums. You could grandfather people in for what they have now. A management right is to have a minimum, mid, and maximum for a position.”

Vice Chair D'Agata advised, “Since people have to leave we will lose our quorum, so we should stop.” Ms. Morgan advised that the days are 47 days, not 82.

ADJOURN

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 a.m.

[Lil B]

Chair Kurek asked, “Excluding Belle Glade, how many other cities have consolidated with the Sheriff?” Acting Chief Reuther answered, “There have been several in Palm Beach County and Broward. Some were very small organizations. In recent years there was Ft. Meade with about 12 officers on the west coast. Conversely, in Broward County, Lauderhill went contract with the Sheriff’s Office. After a couple of years they decided to re-form their police. I believe Pompano Beach is talking about going back to their own law enforcement and what the costs would be to start it up. I understand your position. You need to investigate it properly. Unfortunately, if somebody says we should get a contract with x, you will start to have problems with the contract later on.” Chair Kurek said, “In my opinion, the first step would be to get something from other areas before we start running down this road, to see why they went one way and then back.” Acting Chief Reuther said, “Lauderhill is probably the best example.” Chair Kurek suggested, “Find out whether it was political, financial, service. . . . Rather than talk about pro’s and con’s, we can say to investigate the consolidation.

Lauderhill Considers Police Service Options

May 24, 1985
By Alan Cherry
Sunsentinel

Eventually Lauderhill will have to resurrect its own police department, according to city officials, but for now the drive continues to keep the Broward Sheriff`s Office for the next year or two.

The city`s $3.05 million police services contract with BSO expires in September. Mayor David Kaminsky has backed a plan to renegotiate the contract for about $3.1 million, but other options include extending the existing contract or dropping BSO and returning to a city police force.

``We might be looking two years from now to returning to our own police department,`` Kaminsky said.

Tentative figures show it would cost about $3.6 million to return to a city department. That figure could escalate if Lauderhill chooses to add a new $632,000 dispatcher and emergency communication system, as well as an undetermined amount to construct new facilities to repair a fleet of police cruisers and for storage, according to the preliminary report prepared by Kaminsky.

``It`s inevitable that we will have to return to our own police department,`` said City Council President Buddy Clark.

Lauderhill began to contract with BSO in 1979 as one method to reduce the cost of providing residents with police services, Clark said.

``It`s getting as costly to contract with BSO as run our own department,`` he said.

Clark said the cost to return to a city police department could be less than the amount estimated by Kaminsky, especially if attempts are made to economize on patrol cars and other expenses.

``Even if there is a chance to return to our own police department, I wouldn`t want to mess with it now,`` Clark said.

The majority of the council members expressed interest in Kaminsky`s proposal to renegotiate the contract with BSO.

The $3.1 million deal would shuffle personnel and eliminate six existing positions.

Part of the shuffle would increase police protection in the city south of Oakland Park Boulevard where there are higher incidents of burglaries and armed robberies as compared to other sections of Lauderhill, said Capt. George Slinkman, the commander of BSO`s Lauderhill district.

The plan would add a new patrol zone of five deputies south of Oakland Park Boulevard, Slinkman said.

``I am very happy to have a new zone,`` Council member Ben Dantzker said. ``One of the most important facets (of Kaminsky`s proposal) is the new zone.``

Council member Ilene Lieberman also seemed supportive of the new zone as long as the other areas of Lauderhill continue to receive quality police protection.

City officials may make the new contract a two-year deal that could increase the second year depending on how much the county pays deputies next year.

If Lauderhill chooses to extend its existing contract without changes in the service, it would cost about $3.3 million, according to Assistant to the Mayor Bob Lee.

Clark said he was going to inquire into other methods to cut down the cost of next year`s contract by changing the way BSO charges Lauderhill for personnel costs.

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1985-05-24/news/8501210335_1_million-police-council-member-contract

[Lil B]

Lauderhill starts from scratch: fresh faces, new ideas fuel force

If the city of Lauderhill, Fla. were to claim a New Year's resolution it would probably be "Out with the old, in the new." With the creation of its own police department just over one year ago, Lauderhill embarked upon a new venture that not only saves the city money but improves the city's community policing image.

Since 1981, the Broward County Sheriff Department (BSO) provided police service through a contract with Lauderhill. With a change in leadership after the 1992 Sheriff election, Lauderhill faced contract increases.

So in light of fiscal uncertainly and along with concerns about efficiency and responsiveness, Lauderhill elected to terminate its contractual arrangement and create the Lauderhill Police Department.

In May 1994, Michael Scott became Lauderhill's first police chief. Scott immediately began putting together the nuts and bolts of a department -- personnel, finances and administration. After laying the foundation, Scott pursued a major goal of Lauderhill's Mayor Ilene Lieberrnan and members of the city council.

A selling point Mayor nene Lieberman and the other elected officials used to convince the residents that creating a police department was a good thing was implementation of community policing. Scott prefers to call the concept problem-oriented policing.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-17817851.html

[Lil B]

From Budget Advisory Committee - February 4, 2011 meeting: Ms. Aronson pointed out, “Since we’re talking about a PowerPoint presentation of recommendations, and we are so far from a recommendation on this subject. . . . All we’re saying is to do our due diligence. Is this something that we have to make public record at this point?” Vice Chair D'Agata asked, “Why even be there?” Ms. Aronson said, “I’m not saying to not do it. I’m asking why we should make this big statement that we’re doing it. We’re drawing attention to it. What’s the point? We’re not making any recommendations.”  Mr. Rettig said, “Investigate consolidation. It doesn’t say to consolidate.” Ms. Aronson stated, “No, it doesn’t. But the rest of the presentation is recommendations.” Mr. Rettig pointed out, “The Parks and Recreation was just to take a look at it.” Ms. Dedert advised, “What you’re asking for is a major expenditure for the City.” Vice Chair D'Agata asked, “Is that part of the savings? We could say it saves $3 million. The cost of the investigation is $500,000. That means $2.5 million in the savings. We don’t know what the scope is to start with. We are just saying to investigate to see if there is a savings.” Chair Kurek asked, “Excluding Belle Glade, how many other cities have consolidated with the Sheriff?” Acting Chief Reuther answered, “There have been several in Palm Beach County and Broward. Some were very small organizations. In recent years there was Ft. Meade with about 12 officers on the west coast. Conversely, in Broward County, Lauderhill went contract with the Sheriff’s Office. After a couple of years they decided to re-form their police. I believe Pompano Beach is talking about going back to their own law enforcement and what the costs would be to start it up. I understand your position. You need to investigate it properly. Unfortunately, if somebody says we should get a contract with x, you will start to have problems with the contract later on.” Chair Kurek said, “In my opinion, the first step would be to get something from other areas before we start running down this road, to see why they went one way and then back.” Acting Chief Reuther said, “Lauderhill is probably the best example.” Chair Kurek suggested, “Find out whether it was political, financial, service. . . . Rather than talk about pro’s and con’s, we can say to investigate the consolidation. Find out what other people have done.” Mr. Rettig said that there are still pro’s and con’s. Chair Kurek noted that this is the last slide in the PowerPoint. Acting Chief Reuther said, “The significant con is that you enter into a contract with me, and what are you getting? Four years later, I say, ‘By the way, your contract is going up $2 million.’ What do you do?” Vice Chair D'Agata said, “That’s lack of control. That’s a con. We understand that. I think we are remiss if we don’t investigate.” Ms. Aronson said, “I think we are, too. But this is an empty statement right now. We don’t have facts or money. Let’s just rile everybody up. Why are we saying it?” Mr. Rettig asked, “How do we get the information?” Ms. Aronson answered, “We here at the committee need to get that information. Why go before the press and say we’re looking for it? We’re so early in the process.” Councilwoman Martin said, “I agree.” Mayor Faiella noted, “It’s out there already. People are calling and asking what’s going on.” Ms. Aronson said, “We’ve talked about this since we started. I’ve never seen one piece of pro, con, discovery, anything.” Mr. Rettig stated, “We’ve asked for it.” Ms. Aronson agreed, “We have.” Ms. Dedert pointed out, “It’s a major expenditure for the City to do that.” Mr. Rettig said, “Then the City can decide they don’t want to. We are a recommending board. If the City says we don’t want to do it because it costs too much, that’s the answer.” Ms. Aronson said, “That might be where we need to get.

What exactly is the Budget Advisory Committee looking for, the city staff to do the research and come up with the answers? It's clearly stated "How do we get that information?" It appears that they are expecting the city staff to come up with the answers. It's not the city staffs responsibility to do the BAC research and come up with the answers. The BAC are suppose to be the advising committee. What's the point of having the BAC if they are expecting the city to essentially do the task for them?

[Lil B]

Anthony Westbury: PSL, please grasp this political hot potato

By Anthony Westbury
TCPalm
June 4, 2011

It's enough to make you wonder why the Port St. Lucie Council is so afraid of looking into the future of its police department.

In a time of still-dropping property values and ad valorem taxes, wouldn't you think the city would want to examine all avenues to cut costs?

Offering a laundry list of other cost-cutting measures, the city's volunteer budget advisory committee had the temerity to suggest looking at contracting out the city's policing duties to the sheriff.

Yet that simple request has met with more indignation, bluster and sheer anger from a former mayor, some citizen activists and some members of the City Council than anything I can recall.

The budget committee, a group of intelligent and concerned citizens who do this complicated, technical work for free, has been accused of disloyalty, of exceeding its advisory powers, of verging on gross impertinence.

Apparently there are some sacred cows in the city for all ages.

It was then-Councilman Chris Cooper who first broached the idea of looking into consolidation.

The PSL Police Department consumes $35.18 million a year, Cooper wanted to see if that number could be reduced by contracting out police duties.

Cooper's question was also partly prompted by ugly relations between some police unions and City Hall. Take the negotiations out of the city and maybe relationships could heal.

Since then, of course, we have a new police chief and a new mayor, who comes from within the ranks of the PD. Could this explain the reluctance to even discuss the idea?

Even though I suspect the city would eventually decide to keep things as they are, I'd really like to see that hunch confirmed by some facts.

On a broader scale, South Florida seems to be moving away from consolidation.

In Broward County, where a number of small cities disbanded their police departments, there's a move to go back to the way it was.

That's mostly for economic reasons. The city of Lauderdale Lakes, for instance, fired its city manager last week. She had failed to reduce the city's $9 million deficit, caused in large part by the $1.2 million a month the city is supposed to pay the Broward County sheriff.

Closer to home, Lake Worth will be going back to its own police force, too.

The city believes it can run its own show for around $10 million a year, rather than the $13 million Sheriff Ric Bradshaw is charging.

The trend is for cities to act independently again, to control their own purse strings rather than face the demands of the sheriff.

This week, St. Lucie County Sheriff Ken Mascara released his 2011-2012 budget. At $61.2 million, the numbers show a reduction of $1.25 million over this year's figures — a 1.2 percent reduction. Yet most of that drop — around $1 million — came not from internal economies made by the sheriff, but because of a new state requirement that employees contribute to their own retirement and pension funds.

Mascara says his budget is the lowest since 2006-2007. Yet aside from one big drop in 2008, the budget has steadily increased over the years. Requests from successive county commissions for cuts have largely fallen on deaf ears. In fact, Mascara and other Treasure Coast sheriffs have in the past threatened to go straight to the Legislature to get their way.

Port St. Lucie would do well to remember that should they ever look at the feasibility of scrapping their own force. Aside from the money, doing so might seriously undermine the city's ability to run its own affairs, to determine how big or small its law enforcement presence should be, to say how long it should take for a patrol car to reach your front door in an emergency.

It may well be those are the very reasons that are driving City Council reluctance to address the issue. And that's fine as long as the City Council has armed itself with enough information to make a properly informed decision.

So far, I don't think that's the case. So do your due diligence, City Council, and let's get just the facts, ma'am.

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2011/jun/04/anthony-westbury-psl-please-grasp-this-political/

[Huggs]

My first comment to the article:

The bigger question is, can this city stand to pay $42 million+ just for the "notion of looking at the merger?"

We are already in deep doo-doo with the CRA and you want to possibly jeopardize another $42 million+?

This "talk" has serious effects IF a merger even began. Why the push? Read your own words Anthony and then try to understand them.

"Requests from successive county commissions for cuts have largely fallen on deaf ears. In fact, Mascara and other Treasure Coast sheriffs have in the past threatened to go straight to the Legislature to get their way.

Port St. Lucie would do well to remember that should they ever look at the feasibility of scrapping their own force. Aside from the money, doing so might seriously undermine the city's ability to run its own affairs, to determine how big or small its law enforcement presence should be, to say how long it should take for a patrol car to reach your front door in an emergency."

Would you be ready and willing to risk your constituents health and safety by moving to a sheriff office control for a city of our size?

There is not one city the size of our population, much less the size of our land mass, which has contracted with the local Sheriff Office to provide public safety within the State of Florida.

Our city was just honored, once again, for being the SAFEST CITY over 100,000 population within the State of Florida. And you want to risk that?

Everything comes at a cost. And for the $35.1 million a year for a force of 206 officers and all of the support personnel that drives our police station, we are getting those services pretty damn cheap in comparison to the city's south of us, with less population and less land mass, and what they are being charged for their LESA with the respective Sheriff's Office.

Based upon the average cost that the Sheriff LESA is charging city's they service to the south of us, our potential bill a year could come in at $70 MILLION to provide services at the same ratio and level of service we are receiving now.

[Huggs]

And my final comment on the article as of this evening:

While this discussion is taking place, many of you know that I approached council during the “Public to be Heard” on this matter. 

The fact of the matter is, every governmental entity is doing the same exact thing the City of PSL is doing.  They are looking for cheaper alternatives.  I began looking at old articles, new articles and what the city's are doing about the rising cost of Sheriff LESAs', how they consolidated their department with the sheriff and what the actual costs are now.

It is not a pretty picture.  In Lauderhill Lakes, their City Manger was fired this past week for “failure to negotiate” with the Sheriff of Broward County.  She was tasked with bringing the cost down to something their city could live with.  Unfortunately, the Sheriff was not willing to reduce his LESA.  Lauderhill Lakes Budget is in the deficit by $9 million and oddly enough, they owe the Sheriff $9 million in back payments for services rendered.

What did the Sheriff of Broward do when the city told him they could not pay the $9 million?  He went running to the Capital telling the powers that be that Lauderhill Lakes was on the brink of insolvency.

I have always done my homework.  I turn over each and every rock along the way when I feel adamant about a topic which will have an effect upon on our city.

This consolidation is an avenue I feel that our city should not take. 

These are the cities that I have studied in-depth for the past 4 weeks.  Population numbers where taken from the FDLE Crime Statistics, land area from the city's own CAFR, as well as the LESA amount from the city's audited CAFR for YE 2010.

Belle Glade – PBSO
Population: 16,848
Land area – 4.6 square miles
Sworn Personnel: 30
2010 LESA: $3,364,618
$199.70 per @ citizen or
$731,438.70 per square mile

Deltona – VSO
Population: 84,264
Land area – 32.6 square miles
2010 LESA: $18,442,646
$218.87 per @ citizen or
$565,724.34 per square mile

Indian Rocks Beach – PSO
Population: 64,577
Land area – 7.3 square miles
2010 LESA: $981,519
$15.20 per @ citizen or
$134,454.66 per square mile

Lake Park – PBSO
Population – 9,028
Land area – 2.5 square miles
Sworn Personnel:  26
2010 LESA:  $2,765,090
$306.27 per @ citizen or
$1,106,036 per square mile

Lake Worth – PBSO
Population: 35,853
Land area – 5.5 square miles
Sworn Personnel: 123
2010 LESA: $14,267,016
(2009 AUDITED LESA $15,200,353)
$397.93 per @ citizen or
$2,594,002.91 per square mile

Lauderdale Lakes – BSO
Population: 31,571
Land area – 3.69 square miles
Sworn Personnel: 65
2009 LESA: $15,114,137
$478.73 per @ citizen or
$4,095,972.09 per square mile

Mangonia Park – PBSO
Population: 2,240
Land area – 1 square mile
Sworn Personnel: 6
2010 LESA: $1,364,993
$609.37 per @ citizen or
$1,364,993 per square mile

Pahokee – PBSO
Population: 6,250
Land area – 5.4 square miles
2010 LESA: $614,525
$98.32 per @ citizen or
$113,800.93 per square mile

Parkland – BSO
Population: 23,795
Land area – 10.2 square miles
2010 LESA: $5,258,696
$221.42 per @ citizen or
$516,538.82 per square mile

Pompano Beach – BSO
Population: 98,711
Land area – 24.2 square miles
Sworn Personnel:  300
2010 LESA: $37,250,000 +
Retirement Fund: $3,238,921
$40,488,921 per year total
$410.18 per @ citizen or
$1,673,095.91 per square mile

Royal Palm Beach – PBSO
Population: 31,078
Land area – 11 square miles
Sworn Personnel:
2010 LESA: $9,494,479
$305.50 per @ citizen or
$863,134.45 per square mile

South Bay – PBSO
Population: 4,590
Land area: 2.7 square miles
2010 LESA: $165,575
$36.07 per @ citizen or
$61,324.07 per square mile

Tamarac – BSO
Population: 59,309
Land area: 11.39 square miles
2010 LESA: $12,562,154
$211.81 per @ citizen or
$1,102,910.80 per square mile

Wellington – PBSO
Population: 55,443
Land area – 45 square miles
Sworn Personnel: 59
2010 LESA: $7,488,278
$135.06 per @ citizen or
$166,406.18 per square mile

When all of the data is added, then divided it gives you averages charged by the various sheriff departments. (Pinellas, Volusia, Palm Beach and Broward County Sheriff Departments.) 

Per @ Citizen: $3,644.43 / 14 cities = $260.32 average per @ citizen

Per square mile: $15,089,832.86 / 14 = $1,077,845.20 per square mile average

Taking a close look at the City of PSL based on these averages charged by the various Sheriffs Department for law enforcement services, our city would look like this, based upon 2010 figures:

Population: 156,392
Land area: 115 square miles
Sworn Personnel: 206 + 42 support staff
156,392 citizens x $260.32 avg = $40,711,965.44
115 x $1,077,845.20 =  $123,952,198.00 (at build-out)
LESA per year: $40,711,965.44

Actually, the budget for our Police Department ending 9/30/2010 fell right in line with the “projected” average LESA.  The audited amount for fiscal year ending 9/30/2010 was $40,090,435.

What should we do with the $621,530.44 your Police Department saved you last year? 

Maybe we should do like our Sheriff and divvy up the left-overs amongst the sworn personnel.

Victoria Huggins, Concerned Citizen

[Huggs]

There are items that are not factored within my "average" LESA for the City of PSL. 

Buy-outs of personnel.
Retirement benefit payouts for all 3 pension plans - the state match ceases upon consolidation and the city is responsible for the entire amount.
Retirement benefits picked up for the Sheriff Office within the LESA.
The amount we currently pay for the lease of all of the police buildings yearly - for the next 30 years. (That may come due the moment a consolidation takes place!)
All of the assets we lose - cars, motorcycles, radio equipment, furniture, boat, etc. (The list is very long.)
Shared services that we pay for now, we will still be paying for in addition to picking up what the Sheriff also charges. Marshall Service, Crime Lab, etc. (They do not end.)
Administration fees that the sheriff charges for all other services.

[Lil B]

2010/11 St Lucie County Sheriff's Office Proposed Expenditures

Salary of the Sheriff ------------------------------------------------ $136,746

Salaries of deputies and assistants (incl. Benefits) --------- $53,627,416
Reduction in SRD Program ------------------------------------ ($1,620,000)

Expenses, other than salaries ---------------------------------- $14,050,139
Equipment ---------------------------------------------------------------- $0

Investigations --------------------------------------------------------- $85,000

Reserve for Contigencies ----------------------------------------------- $0
_______________________________________ __________________

TOTAL: ----------------------------------------------------------- $65,279,301

Expenditures budgeted in Special Revenue Fund --------------$4,100,000
(grants, joint venture etc..)
==========================================

Law Enforcement ---------------- Approved 2009/2010 ------------------ Proposed 2010/2011
Executive Salary: Sheriff ------------------------ $136,746 -------------------------------- $136,746
Salaries ------------------------------------------ $17,046912 ---------------------------- $17,199,828
Other (L/S,Sick, Holiday, Incentive) ----------- $891,183 -------------------------------- $784,302
Overtime ------------------------------------------- $516,000 -------------------------------- $516,000
FICA --------------------------------------------- $1,152,803 ------------------------------ $1,155,486
FICA Medicare ----------------------------------- $269,620 -------------------------------- $270,,235
Retirement -------------------------------------- $3,571,971 ------------------------------ $3,562,868
Required Actuarial Funding ---------------------- $0 --------------------------------------- $236,566
Life Insurance ------------------------------------ $109,339 --------------------------------- $105,763
Group Health ----------------------------------- $4,165,694 ------------------------------- $4,472,691
Workers Compensation ----------------------- $1,148,642 ------------------------------- $1,054,882
Unemployment ------------------------------------- $1,500 ------------------------------------- $7,500
Professional Services ----------------------------- $50,000 ----------------------------------- $75,000
Attorney Fees -------------------------------------- $50,000 ----------------------------------- $75,000
Accrediation ---------------------------------------- $0 ------------------------------------------ $3,000
Contractual Services ------------------------------ $95,000 ----------------------------------- $95,000
Investigations -------------------------------------- $85,000 ----------------------------------- $85,000
Travel ------------------------------------------------ $2,500 ------------------------------------- $2,500
Meals – Per Diem -------------------------------- $10,000 ------------------------------------ $10,000
Private Vehicle Allowance ----------------------- $2,000 -------------------------------------- $2,000
Lodging ------------------------------------------- $15,000 ------------------------------------- $15,000
Data Communications ------------------------- $216,000 ----------------------------------- $216,000
Telephone ----------------------------------------- $75,000 ------------------------------------- $70,000
Cellular Phones ---------------------------------- $75,000 ------------------------------------- $70,000
Postage -------------------------------------------- $25,000 ------------------------------------- $25,000
Utilities ------------------------------------------ $200,000 ------------------------------------ $230,000
Rentals ------------------------------------------- $205,000 ------------------------------------ $220,000
Leased Vehicles --------------------------------- $100,000 ------------------------------------- $85,000
Auto Insurance ---------------------------------- $353,174 ----------------------------------- $306,148
Bonding, Liability, Property Insurance ------ $509,815 ----------------------------------- $434,137
Technical Maintenance Contracts ------------ $390,443 ----------------------------------- $420,443
Auto Repairs ------------------------------------ $350,000 ----------------------------------- $350,000
Radio Repair Contract -------------------------- $42,000 ------------------------------------- $15,000
Printing ------------------------------------------- $20,000 ------------------------------------- $20,000
Copier Supplies --------------------------------- $12,000 ------------------------------------- $20,000
Advertising --------------------------------------- $8,000 ----------------------------------------- $8,000
Auto: Other ------------------------------------- $55,000 ---------------------------------------- $55,000
Towing -------------------------------------------- $2,500 ----------------------------------------- $2,500
Lettering ---------------------------------------- $15,000 ---------------------------------------- $15,000
Computer Supplies, Accessories ------------ $45,000 ---------------------------------------- $45,000
Polygraph Supplies ----------------------------- $3,000 ----------------------------------------- $3,000
Crime Lab ------------------------------------- $173,434 ------------------------------------- $174,434
Weapons ----------------------------------------- $5,000 ------------------------------------------ $5,000
Repairs, Maintenance ------------------------ $47,000 ----------------------------------------- $47,000
Physicals ----------------------------------------- $5,000 ------------------------------------------ $5,000
Aviation --------------------------------------- $320,000 --------------------------------------- $350,000
Marine ------------------------------------------ $81,040 ----------------------------------------- $81,040
Office Supplies -------------------------------- $55,000 ----------------------------------------- $55,000
Operating Supplies -------------------------- $115,000 ---------------------------------------- $115,000
Batteries ---------------------------------------- $15,000 ----------------------------------------- $15,000
Fuel, Lubricants --------------------------- $1,260,000 -------------------------------------- $1,206,000
Ammunition ---------------------------------- $100,000 ---------------------------------------- $140,000
Photo Supplies --------------------------------- $3,000 -------------------------------------------- $3,000
Other Investigative Equipment -------------- $2,000 -------------------------------------------- $2,000
Equipment under $1000 ------------------- $130,000 ----------------------------------------- $130,000
Photo Equipment ------------------------------ $3,000 -------------------------------------------- $3,000
Food --------------------------------------------- $4,000 -------------------------------------------- $4,000
Rentware --------------------------------------- $6,000 --------------------------------------------- $6,000
Uniforms -------------------------------------- $85,000 ------------------------------------------- $85,000
Uniform Accessories ------------------------ $35,000 ------------------------------------------- $35,000
Books, Publications ------------------------- $15,000 ------------------------------------------- $15,000
Education, Seminars ----------------------------- $0 -------------------------------------------------- $0
Tuition, Reimbursement ------------------------ $0 -------------------------------------------------- $0
Memberships ---------------------------------- $9,500 --------------------------------------------- $9,500
Newspapers -------------------------------------- $600 ----------------------------------------------- $600
Debt Service -------------------------------- $165,000 ------------------------------------------ $188,353
Interfund Transfer ------------------------- $109,462 -------------------------------------------- $75,285
Capital Outlay: Vehicles ----------------------- $0 ---------------------------------------------------- $0
Capital Outlay: Other -------------------------- $0 ---------------------------------------------------- $0
Contigency -------------------------------------- $0 ---------------------------------------------------- $0
Personnel Services, Law Enforcement – $29,008,910 ----------------------------------- $29,495,367
Operating, Law Enforcement ----------- $5,755,468 --------------------------------------- $5,730,440
Capital Outlay, Law Enforcement ----------- $0 ---------------------------------------------------- $0
Contigency, Law Enforcement --------------- $0 ---------------------------------------------------- $0

TOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ------- $34,764,378 ------------------------------------ $35,225,807

[Lil B]

The Sheriff's Office budget posted within only includes the law enforcement portion. The figures posted exclude the following portion of the Sheriff's full proposed budget:

JUDICIAL Total Budget .. $3,456,241
Proposed 2010/2011 .. $3,421,705

DETENTION Total Budget .. $28,835,837
Proposed 2010/2011 .. $28,251,789

PERSONNEL SERVICES - Sheriff's Office .. $53,460,469
Proposed 2010/2011 .. $53,764,162

OPERATING - Sheriff's Office .. $13,596,387
Proposed 2010/2011 .. $13,135,139

TOTAL SHERIFF'S BUDGET REQUEST .. $67,056,456
Proposed 2010/2011 .. $66,899,301

REDUCTION in SRO .. $0
Proposed 2010/2011 .. ($1,620,000)

Minus Miscellaneous Revenue .. $300,000
Proposed 2010/2011 .. $1,800,000

TOTAL SHERIFF'S OFFICE BUDGET REQUEST .. $66,756,456
Proposed 2010/2011 .. $63,479,301

===
Interesting, how can Mascara claim a reduction in the proposed budget for SRO's of $1,620,000 for FY 2010/2011 when the item was not budgeted for FY 2009/2010?

[Lil B]

Excerpt from the St Lucie County School Board 2009/2010 Proposed Budget:

Strategy Cost Savings

Transfer SRO responsibility to county/city govt @ 100%  --- $2,723,701
http://www.wpbf.com/download/2009/0319/18969933.pdf
(page 32)

What are we payig all of these exorbitant school taxes for?

[Lil B]

Excerpt from the St Lucie County School Board 2009/2010 Proposed Budget:

Strategy Cost Savings

Transfer SRO responsibility to county/city govt @ 100%  --- $2,723,701
http://www.wpbf.com/download/2009/0319/18969933.pdf
(page 32)

What are we paying all of these exorbitant school taxes for?

After seeing the School Board proposed budget a lot of questions arise.

A perfect example of how not to consolidate. Look at the budget cutting technique that the school board is trying to pass along.

Apparently the school board is responsible for providing SRO's within the schools, the cost has been covered by that department.

So what do they decide to do to trim their budget? They decide to cut the SRO's from their budget and put 100% of the responsibility onto another government entity - the Sheriff's Office.

Nothing like the passing the buck.

They expect the taxpayers to pay the SAME exorbitant cost of the School taxes all the while taking a huge chunk of the cost and placing it within another department.

Which leaves the SAME high millage rate for the school taxes, BUT adds an additional tax burden for the same service in another portion of the government - the Sheriff's Department.

SAME high millage rate or higher for school taxes, with LESS service (minus the SRO's). Talk about double taxation, this is a prime example, if any.

The only way the Sheriff could cover the cost of the SRO's is to raise the millage rate.

Is the School going to lower their millage rate to compensate for the SRO's being passed over to another government agency? A whopping $2,723,701 for SRO's being passed to the County/City Government.

Or are the taxpaying citizens going to get double slammed? Just another way of falsely generating more revenue, double taxation at its best!

[Huggs]

Thank you to the City Council for taking time last evening listening to my concerns during the Public to be Heard and then discussing the consolidation issue.

I asked for a vote of confidence for our police department and it was confirmed and acknowledged last evening.

One of the council members, Michelle Berger I believe, asked why this issue keeps coming up.  Jack Kelly asked nearly the same question.

The reason is because the newspaper keeps harping on this subject, yet when they do get a response from council, they never write about it.

For those that still do not understand why a consolidation would not be beneficial to our city, there is whole laundry list of concerns.

Top for me is the $42 million bond which hinges on our police department and the assets of the police department.  That bond could effectively be recalled in an instant should a consolidation take place.

With a consolidation, our city would also lose the revenue streams generated by the police department.  It is these revenue streams which pay the bond. 

It is also these revenue streams which pay portions of the retirement plans. Once a consolidation would take place, the city would be responsible for paying ALL of the retirement benefits within a 2 year period.  The state would stop "matching funds" immediately and the city would have to pay the entire amount itself.

This doesn't even take into consideration the negotiations that would take place if current PD employees were not picked up for employment with the consolidation of the SO.  I didn't even address the rules of OPEB.

Time and time again I read in the newspaper "it would be a cost savings." 

Really?  A cost savings?  I don't look at it as a cost savings when the city could potentially have to pay out $42 million+++ at instant consolidation.

Didn't the Budget Advisory Committee consider the immediate financial impact consolidation would have on the city?

Thank you City Council for taking a stand last evening and giving Mr. Bentrott direction.

It is appreciated!

Victoria Huggins

PS to the newspaper:  Will we hear about this side of the equation in the paper?  Probably not - you like to stir the pot. 

[Rod Bender]

you like to stir the pot

Makes them appear intellectual.   

[straightfwd]

Citing concerns about union talks, Port St. Lucie Council suspends Budget Advisory Committee meetings
 
By Christin Erazo
November 17, 2011

PORT ST. LUCIE — The City Council has suspended Budget Advisory Committee meetings indefinitely for fear board discussions on cutting vacation pay and health benefits for city employees would hinder future union contract negotiations.

The suspension didn't surprise some budget committee members who felt their ideas often fell on deaf ears and recall past tensions with council members.

Councilwoman Michelle Berger, who brought up the topic at Monday's council meeting, said the purpose of the committee is to give the council advice during the budget planning stages. Berger said once the budget is approved there is no need for the advisory committee to continue to meet and rehash "what if" conversations affecting union bids.

The City Council voted to reconvene the committee at a later date and said it would provide members with better direction in budget discussions.

"(Their conversations) instill fear during presentations at (budget committee) meetings," Berger said. "It affects the process when we're negotiating with bargaining units and not in a positive way."

Budget advisory committee Vice Chairman Ralph Rettig said he felt the committee's recommendations to help cut costs were ignored.

"I thought the committee was a very good idea, but I think we were in the camp of the enemy," he said. "There was only a purpose for the committee if the ideas were going to be listened to.

"I think a lot of our proposals would not be well-received by employees because it dealt with controlling costs for the city. Since the city can't ramp up production and produce a product, the only thing they can do is control cost and some of the greatest cost is the employees."

Rettig said the board was looking at vacation time, salary structures and other cost-cutting measures before contract negotiations revved up again next year. He said the city needs to establish policies to bring down employee benefit costs.

"I know they have to negotiate with unions, but the city also has the prerogative to set policy as any other employer, and I didn't see the will to do some of things that were necessary," Rettig said.

Rettig said he didn't believe the board's talks would jeopardize negotiations.

"I think some of the politics got in the way," Rettig said. "There are a number of committees that wind up being sounding boards for the council and that's what we were. We had no power, authority, other than review and recommend and that's what we did."

Councilman Jack Kelly said he formed the board four years ago with the intent the committee would look solely at budget line items and see where to cut miscellaneous costs, not to discuss policy or union contracts.

Kelly said the city and the unions each have negotiators, and adding the committee's opinions would be unnecessary and could hurt union talks.

"There would be too many cooks in the kitchen," Kelly said.

Kelly said the City Council has strongly considered many of the committee's proposals, but that there's no need for it to meet year round.

In past years, the advisory committee has recommended the city look into privatizing services in the Parks and Recreation Department, leasing or shutting down the $30 million Civic Center and possibly combining the city's Police Department with the St. Lucie County Sheriff's Office all in an effort to save taxpayer money.

However, the committee came under fire by the City Council as a result of these recommendations.

In February, Kelly told the board it was overstepping boundaries by asking council to evaluate the cost of consolidating the Police Department with the Sheriff's Office. According to meeting minutes, Kelly told the committee its actions were bordering on setting policy.

Kelly said he and Councilwoman Shannon Martin, whose husband is a Port St. Lucie police detective, urged board members three times to drop the issue.

Kelly said the committee's past discussions were hurting employee morale then and could've made matters worse now if they continued.

"They were really getting into policy," Kelly said. "Go run for my job. It's not your job. Your job is to recommend and if you recommend something and we say no, leave it alone. But they won't leave it alone."

Rettig said past issues with the Police Department were blown out of proportion, considering the advisory board had no authority to make those type of changes.

"I think all we were trying to do was looking to consolidate costs and it got turned around and made to look like we were trying to disband the Police Department, which is not the case," he said.

Rettig said the board was continuously looking at numbers provided by city Budget Director Dave Pollard; numbers that had Rettig concerned about the city's future economic troubles. Concerns included the possibility of developers defaulting on money used to subsidize development in Tradition and the city not evaluating the real costs of employee health expenses over the next couple of years.

He said city officials seem to have their heads buried in the sand.

If the committee is reconvened, Rettig said he would not request to be on the board because he feels his energy and effort have been wasted.

"(You) tell them to wake up and it's very discouraging," Rettig said. "I'm not surprised this has happened, not overly disappointed, because I don't really feel like we were doing anything. It was like pushing a big rock up a hill."

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2011/nov/17/citing-concerns-about-union-talks-port-st-lucie/

[Huggs]

Sorry Mr. Rettig for the council's decisions.  They have an AGENDA and the Budget Advisory Committee didn't offer them any way to 'skirt' their agenda!

"I think some of the politics got in the way," Rettig said. "There are a number of committees that wind up being sounding boards for the council and that's what we were. We had no power, authority, other than review and recommend and that's what we did."

He said city officials seem to have their heads buried in the sand.

If the committee is reconvened, Rettig said he would not request to be on the board because he feels his energy and effort have been wasted.

"(You) tell them to wake up and it's very discouraging," Rettig said. "I'm not surprised this has happened, not overly disappointed, because I don't really feel like we were doing anything. It was like pushing a big rock up a hill."

Personally, I don't think anyone in their right mind would be volunteering for any of the boards the city council appoints. 

Just take a quick look at Monday's City Council meeting and the whiplash that occurred with Jack Kelly "tweaking" the Redistricting Committee's suggestion.  The Council didn't even look at what was presented by the Committee.

There was an objective, AGENDA, and the redistricting committee didn't meet the objective nor the AGENDA. 

This is truly a shame and a sham committed upon the citizens of this city. 

Jack Kelly and Michelle Berger need to go.

[straightfwd]

Just take a quick look at Monday's City Council meeting and the whiplash that occurred with Jack Kelly "tweaking" the Redistricting Committee's suggestion.  The Council didn't even look at what was presented by the Committee.

Unfortunately, he CAN'T take a quick look at Monday's City Council meeting -- the City website has been down since shortly after the meeting was adjourned.

There is a CRA & SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL meeting this upcoming Monday, November 21, 2011 @ approximately 1:30PM - 2:00PM.
Unfortunately, we the public, are UNABLE to view the agenda online; for the website has been down since Monday, November 14, 2011 -- the site is STILL down!!!!

[Carl]

Roll the clock back about 40 years (and make us all 40 years
younger while you are at it) and this all starts to sound like a
High School Civics club in Smallville, Iowa.

Nothing like being full of yourself.

[Rod Bender]

Nothing like being full of yourself.

Not all their full of, then again, maybe it is.

[straightfwd]

Unfortunately, he CAN'T take a quick look at Monday's City Council meeting -- the City website has been down since shortly after the meeting was adjourned.

There is a CRA & SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL meeting this upcoming Monday, November 21, 2011 @ approximately 1:30PM - 2:00PM.
Unfortunately, we the public, are UNABLE to view the agenda online; for the website has been down since Monday, November 14, 2011 -- the site is STILL down!!!!

The City website is back up and running.

Link to the City Council Meeting of Monday, November 14, 2011
http://psl.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=6&clip_id=3052

It appears the CRA meeting has been scrapped, there is a Special City Council meeting on Monday, November 21, 2011 @2:10PM