HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04-16-2010
CITIZENS’ BUDGET COMMITTEE
Meeting Date: April 16, 2010
Conference Room 3
Meeting convened at 7:33 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carl Hensley, Chair
Craig Mundt
Dana McSweeney (7:35)
Randy Ezell (7:37)
Dan Kurek
Edith Hepburn
Edward Lounds
Ron Knaggs
Richard Pancoast
Ryan Strickland (7:59)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Patricia “Pat” Ferrick
Bill Casey
Jay L. McBee
John Culverhouse
Patti Tobin
OTHERS PRESENT: Faye Outlaw Lee Ann Lowery
Marie Gouin Jennifer Hill
Carl Holeva Mark Satterlee
Don West Erick Mershon
Bill Hoeffner Robert O’Sullivan
Bill Hammer Mark Godwin
Beth Ryder Sophia Holt
Audrey Jackson Karen Smith
Jack Southard Toby Long
Don West Jim David
Bill Hoeffner Mike Monahan
Shai Frances Tom Bakkedahl
Elizabeth Mackenzie Patricia Armold
Gayle McMahon Harriette Rowe Hill
Phill Brodeur Lydia Cason
Roger Mittleman Tom Genung
Steven Levin
CALL TO ORDER
Mr. Hensley called the meeting to order at 7:33 a.m.
Citizens’ Budget Committee
March 19, 2010
Page 2
JUDICIAL/STATE AGENCIES
Mr. Hensley asked Court Administration to start the presentations.
Chief Judge Steve Levin introduced himself and Trial Court Administrator, Tom Genung.
They handed out copies of their budget (see attached). Chief Judge Levin explained how
some issues are funded by the State and some by the County, such as facilities, electricity,
telephone systems and computer networks. Court and recording fees help fund the
system. The largest issue is courier service. They expect to have savings from the Voice-
Over IP telephone system during the next year. It should save $20,000 per year.
Mr. Hensley asked how they were able to reduce their numbers. Mr. Genung answered
that it was because of reduced spending on the local and State level. He personally
reviews every dollar that is spent. Mr. Hensley asked if there would be any reduced
services. Mr. Genung said there had not been any other staff reductions. The
presumption is that there would not be reduced services, but the level of service is
impacted by case files. Case filings related to the economic decline have been way up.
There is a backlog. The House and Senate have put money in the budgets to address
those cases. Assuming the budget passes, there should be more resources available July
st
1. It also depends on there being Senior Judges available.
Mr. Lounds asked if there is an increased need for Judges on the criminal side. Chief
Judge Levin said there is always a need for more Judges. He tries to adjust schedules. It
is a juggling act. They are doing the best they can with the number of Judges they have.
Mr. Lounds said that the civil defendants do not go to jail. The faster the criminal
defendants are processed correctly, the less the burden is on the County for jail space.
Mr. Genung agreed and told one thing they have done the past year is add more
resources. Former Chief Judge Roby is spending more than half of his time addressing
criminal dockets in this County. Chief Judge Levin has made a commitment to more judicial
resources. The area was certified for three additional Circuit Judges and one additional
County Judge. But Mr. Genung doubts that we will see those resources in the next few
years. The needs grow with time. Mr. Lounds asked if the money comes from the State for
Judges. It does.
Chief Judge Levin followed up by explaining the way he was able to have a Judge spend
more time in St. Lucie County was by decreasing the time he spent in Martin County. As
Chief Judge, he has taken part of an assignment to help out. He is handling cases in
addition to administrative duties. Hearing Violation of Probation (VOP) cases first,
sometimes helps the Jail move the inmate in or out and move the case along faster. Mr.
Lounds reported that Mr. Godwin and his group had started a program to lower the
population of the Jail by using a monitoring system. He asked if more of that could be
done. Chief Judge Levin answered that certain criteria must be met. They have been able
to use that program a great deal, thanks to the County, Mr. Godwin and Ms. Savage. Mr.
Lounds said the program has gone up dramatically and asked if that means it is
Citizens’ Budget Committee
March 19, 2010
Page 3
successful. Mr. Genung said Jail population was over 1600 three to four years ago. He
does not think it can be attributed to a single cause, but it is now about 1200-1300. There
has been a sustained, substantial decline in Jail population due to the efforts of many
people. It has been a combined effort. Many have worked hard and well together. Chief
Judge Levin said that unlike many Counties, this County works well together. He travels to
other Counties where you would never see representatives of the different agencies in a
room together. Mr. Lounds said it was like that here at one time.
Mr. Lounds asked about communication between the Clerk’s office, the Jail, the Sheriff’s
office and the Judges. Mr. Genung answered that over the last six to nine months, they
have been having meetings with the Information Technology (IT) folks to increase those
efforts. It is not a simple task. It is improving. This County is the only one in this circuit
that has strongly moved forward in that area. Sharing the information is essential. It has
been mandated that the court system go to electronic filing of cases. When the
information comes in electronically, it can be easily shared and should expedite processes.
Mr. Lounds asked the Chief Judge and Ms. Outlaw to work with the Public Safety
Coordinating Council to make sure the technology is moving ahead. The more information
they have, the more efficient the Judges can be. That means savings to the County. Chief
Judge Levin said they are following that avenue. Mr. Genung spends hours every week
trying to move it faster. Mr. Lounds said the longer a person, who has been processed,
sits in Jail the more it costs the County.
Mr. Mundt asked for clarification on Court Innovations. The cost on the Planning Session
line more than doubled. Mr. Genung responded that it is training for staff. Last year they
had to come back mid-year and ask for more money.
Mr. Mundt asked about the Civil Citation dropping to zero. Mr. Genung explained that last
year it was a grant program that ended abruptly. He had to come in and ask for access to
the Court Innovation money to continue the program. He transferred it to the Juvenile
Alternatives and Diversion monies.
Mr. Mundt asked about Judicial Assistants. Mr. Genung answered that it is for temporary
assistance. He gave an example of an assistant that had to be out of the office. Judges
cannot operate without someone there to operate their office, taking the telephone calls.
There is no way around the ethical consideration. Judges cannot talk to the people that
call in. Mr. Genung reminded the group that it is not Ad Valorum dollars. It is money
derived from court fees, not from tax dollars. Mr. Long added that most of the reduction of
the Jail population is because of the reduction of VOP cases. That is an initiative that has
paid great dividends. Chief Judge Levin said that was the intent. Mr. Long said it worked.
Elizabeth Mackenzie of Guardian ad Litem (GAL) was the next speaker. She distributed
their budget (see attached). Ms. Gouin said she had asked the agencies to come and give
Citizens’ Budget Committee
March 19, 2010
Page 4
an overview for the Committee so they would know how each agency serves the
community. Not all of the groups will have their budgets. GAL is a State program that
utilizes volunteers to represent children who have been abused, abandoned or neglected
in Dependency Court. The State covers staff salaries. The other expenses are divided
between the four counties. They are tight, but try to decrease their budget every year.
The program gives the child a voice. There are attorneys assigned to everybody but the
child. They are responsible to be sure the child gets needed care and their voice is heard
in court. GAL has 369 volunteers in the four-county area. There are 160 in St. Lucie
County representing 353 children. They just completed a class for 17 new guardians.
There are 400 children waiting because they do not have the resources. Some are in
foster homes, some residential facilities, some with family members or other places. The
goal state-wide is to have a guardian for every child, to give them a voice and let them
know somebody is going to watch out for them. She also handed out brochures (see
attached). This year they decreased their technology expenses. If they divided their total
budget by the 907 children they currently represent, that would come out to $377 a year
per child. That is $31 a month to protect a child. The Guardians do phenomenal work.
Mr. Lounds asked what they need if they had more money. Ms. Mackenzie answered that
they need more Guardians and more staff to take on the cases that have no
representatives. Mr. Lounds said St. Lucie County is almost 50% of the expenses and
50% of the load. Ms. Mackenzie said currently in Martin and Indian River Counties, they
are assigned to 100% of the kids. The 400 that are not covered are in St. Lucie County.
Mr. Mundt asked if they had potential Guardians waiting for funds. She answered that if a
Guardian volunteers, she figures out a way to manage them. If she had more staff, that
would be better. Now the focus is on Guardians. She has kids that need somebody. They
are constantly recruiting. Mr. Lounds asked if they have State mandates. Ms. Mackenzie
answered that there are policies and procedures from their State office as well as
representing the best interest of the children within the court system. They are not a
division of Department of Children and Families (DCF). DCF represents the family unit.
GAL’s primary goal is the child. They want them to go home if possible. If not, they look
for other places. They deserve to have a voice. Ms. McSweeney asked if GAL works with
Child Abuse Services, Training & Life Enrichment (CASTLE). Ms. Mackenzie said they
work closely with CASTLE and other agencies. CASTLE does the parenting classes for
them. It is a community network.
Mr. Hensley asked if they were expecting problems with State funds next year. Ms.
Mackenzie said the State is already talking about more decreases. She has lost nine
positions over the last two years. Each position lost affects 64 children. Chief Judge Levin
felt compelled to add that in his experience in the courtroom, the GAL program is the voice
they hear that is not an advocate for anyone but the child. It helps to steer the court. In
his 11 years, he has been amazed that the Guardians will give hours and hours of their
time without compensation.
Ms. McSweeney asked if there was an increase in the number of children entering the
program. Ms. Mackenzie said the number of children coming in was decreasing. There
are more diversion programs. Ninety-five percent of the time, the kids need to be home
Citizens’ Budget Committee
March 19, 2010
Page 5
with their moms and dads. If they can help the child while Mom and Dad are getting help,
they are making major strides.
Mr. Mundt asked how much staff they have. Ms. Mackenzie answered that they now have
21. They lost nine the last two years. Nine times 64 children each would make the 400
children that are waiting.
Mr. Mundt asked who the advocate is in Tallahassee. Ms. Mackenzie said Theresa Flurry
is the new Executive Director. She works in the State office. Mr. Hensley asked if the
County is providing appropriate support. She answered, “Absolutely.”
Ms. Mackenzie was asked how closely she works with DCF. They work very closely. She
was asked the difference. Ms. Mackenzie answered that DCF works for the whole family.
GAL works just for the child. In the older generation, children were to be seen and not
heard. That’s what happens in the system. Moms and Dads tell their issues. The children
are the victims. GAL’s job is to fracture the cycle and let children see there is more. It is
not okay for moms and dads to hit their children or do drugs. They try to help the kids see
it is not their fault. They try to override DCF if needed. They present recommendations to
the court. It is up to the court to decide.
Mr. Hensley thanked Ms. Mackenzie and announced the Medical Examiner would be next.
Dr. Mittleman had a PowerPoint presentation (see attached). He was appointed by the
Governor in 2001. They work for hundreds of thousands of dollars less than other
jurisdictions of similar size, partly because of the relationship with the college and because
they work very efficiently. Eventually, at least part-time help will be needed. They are
working above recommended guidelines.
Mr. Hensley asked where the money comes from. Dr. Mittleman answered that it comes
from each County and cremation fees. Mr. Hensley asked what the budget would be if
they were not with the college. Dr. Mittleman said they would have to have a building,
maintenance and computers. Recently, they have been allowed to use the entire building
where they are currently located.
Mr. Mundt asked about the increase in the Annual Workload slide. Dr. Mittleman was not
sure. It may have been the increase in population.
Mr. Lounds asked if the County pays the college or the Medical Examiner direct. Ms.
Cason answered that the college does the bookkeeping for them. Dr. Mittleman added
that it saves an enormous amount of money for the County. The Medical Examiner rents
the building for $1. Ms. Gouin said the college does not charge for the fiscal services they
provide. It is a tradeoff for class work.
Mr. Lounds asked Ms. Outlaw if it was working well. She said it has.
Citizens’ Budget Committee
March 19, 2010
Page 6
Mr. Hensley asked the State Attorney’s office to go next.
Mr. Bakkedahl introduced himself as the Chief Assistant State Attorney, filling in for Mr.
Colton who has been under the weather. Financial Director Gayle McMahon, Harriet
Rowe, the Victim Services Director, and Executive Director Phill Brodeur were with him.
He began his portion with a quote from John Foster Dulles, “The primary function of
government is the protection of its citizens from violence.” The State Attorney is the chief
law enforcement officer in the circuit. Fort Pierce is the hub where the most attorneys are
located. They are responsible for the criminal prosecution of every violation of criminal
law. They are located in a four-story building on Second Street. With the assistance of the
County, they have done an amazing job of packing people in the office.
Last year, they processed over 6,000 felony cases through the St. Lucie County office.
They run from grand theft auto to murder. They also processed 11,000 misdemeanor
cases such as Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and petty theft with six attorneys. There
are approximately 12 attorneys handling the felony cases.
The good news is that the crime trend has been downward since mid to early 90s.
Everybody likes to give law enforcement credit, but he likes to think that they helped. He
thinks tougher sentencing laws have removed the people from society. There are 20
th
judicial circuits in the State of Florida. In calendar year 2008, the 19 Circuit was number
three in the State in terms of number of cases taken to trial, behind only Jacksonville and
Miami-Dade County. They are number one in the State in total number of cases taken to
trial. Budget-wise, their right arm is the Victim Services program. He wanted to strongly
express how important they are. Most of the 175 to 250 cases assigned to an attorney in
their office have a victim. The first response of most victims is anger. They have been
violated. They need someone to spend time with them to hold their hand and get them
through the system. The victim advocates free the attorneys to carry on their mission.
Most of the State Attorney’s money for salaries comes from the State. They are getting
wacked like everybody else. They have eliminated five trial level positions the last three
years. He is hiring attorneys out of law school with seven years of higher education and
$150,000 of student loans. They get paid $48,000 per year and have not had a raise in
over three years. The State Attorney’s office has consistently worked with the County in
terms of the budget. They realize they all have to share the pain. But if you go back to the
quote, the primary function of the government is the protection of the people and that’s the
business of their office. The County keeps them cool in the summer, warm in the winter,
keeps the lights and computers on and allows them to communicate with people, very
important functions.
In terms of the good will between the offices, there are provisions that would authorize
them to enter into a contract and charge the County for prosecution of County ordinance
violations, such as alcohol in the park. Historically, they have provided that service free to
the County because of the good working relationship.
Mr. Lounds asked if the communications side of their office is working well. Mr. Bakkedahl
Citizens’ Budget Committee
March 19, 2010
Page 7
answered that it is not perfect, but they are getting there. They have been working on it. It
did not happen overnight. Mr. Lounds said there was an effort to make that happen. Mr.
Bakkedahl said it is ongoing, consistent, and continuous. Mr. Lounds added that it is
dynamic, always changing. He asked if the County could help. Mr. Genung is trying to
fast-track the project. He is the guy on the State level that is identifying data elements for
e-filing. There is a huge tie-in to get things rocking locally. The Clerk’s office and Sheriff’s
office have put it in high gear and are sharing data now. The next e-filing arena is
criminal. Mr. Bakkedahl agrees that speeding up the process saves the County money at
the Jail. Mr. Lounds added that it has to be done correctly. His questions on how to
relieve the burden at the Jail is because of the potential of putting federal inmates in there.
Making it more efficient at the Jail helps everybody. Mr. Bakkedahl said the attorneys in
Drug Court and Mental Health Courts also have regular case loads. They are doing
double-time duty. He recognizes how important it is to St. Lucie County from a fiscal
perspective. They will not save money at the expense of public safety. Chief Judge Levin
added that ten years ago they did not have the special courts. They are taking the same
number of Judges and Prosecutors and putting them into different groups so they can
more efficiently put people in the right place. Judge Cox is handling about 175 people in
Mental Health Court to help them get where they need to be, so they do not abuse
themselves or society. He has 75-80 in Adult Drug Court and 30-40 in Juvenile Drug Court
that he hopes will not victimize others again. The key point he is hearing and seeing is the
State Attorney and Public Defender with fewer attorneys are covering more courtrooms so
the Judges can do better. They are strapping themselves. It is remarkable when you think
about how much has changed the last ten years.
Mr. Lounds asked if Mr. Bakkendahl knows of any mandates coming that will fall on the
County to perform. Mr. Bakkendahl answered that they have altered the sentencing
guidelines. It is now more difficult to send people to prison. If the State Attorney is not
allowed to send the inmate to prison and feels the need to give the person the most jail
time possible, he must keep him locally which means one more bed the County is paying
for. He was not aware of any others at the time.
Mr. Lounds asked who makes the decision if a VOP goes back before the Judge or to Jail.
Mr. Bakkedahl said 95% result in an arrest by warrant that has been reviewed by a Judge.
They do not have to make any filing decisions. Next, they appear at the defendant’s first
appearance before a Judge. If they think it is un-provable, they would dismiss it.
Otherwise, it would be fast tracked in Judge Roby’s court. There is not much discretion at
the front end. There could be a bond hearing.
Mr. Lounds asked them to continue with the groups. They are unique in the State in being
able to work things out.
Mr. Mundt asked if they had requested anything from the County that they had not
received. Mr. Bakkedahl said he made his pitch for Victim Services. He can’t tell how
important they are to his office. The County has always supported it. He thinks they
recognize that it is a necessary, vital function. It is constitutionally mandated under
Citizens’ Budget Committee
March 19, 2010
Page 8
victim’s rights.
Mr. Mundt asked for clarification of number one in cases taken to trial. Mr. Bakkedahl
explained they do try more cases here by sheer volume, circuit-wide they are number one
in the percentage of all cases taken to trial and they are number three in the total number.
Mr. Mundt asked if the reason is because they do not accept plea bargains as readily and
want to go to trial. Mr. Bakkedahl thinks the mentality is that our community is still blessed
to be able to seek justice. A quick example was that a guy came from Miami who had nine
prior grand theft autos. The worst sentence there was a withhold adjudication, meaning he
was not a convicted felon. He came here and got ten years in prison as a habitual
offender.
Mr. Hensley asked the Public Defender’s office to be next.
Ms. Pat Armold introduced herself as the Administrative Director from the Public
Defender’s office. She does all the budget work. She may not know some information
regarding the day-to-day handling of cases. She is representing Diamond Litty. Their
office is mostly State funded. Less than 5% of their budget comes from St. Lucie County.
Their State budget is $5.3 million now. They have been cut the last several years. They
have managed to reduce some staff through attrition.
Ms. Armold said the Public Defender is a constitutional office created by Chapter 27.50
and represents persons declared indigent under 27.52. It is the Clerk’s job to screen the
defendants. They represent a charged person if there is jail time involved. They do not
select their clients. Their mission is to protect the constitutional rights of all citizens. The
main focus is to make sure everyone gets a fair trial. In the County’s FY 2008-2009, they
handled 13,867 cases. That is near the number the State Attorney handled. This year
st
from October 1 to the present, they have handled almost 6,600 cases. They take a
holistic approach to their clients. They have a Client Services program that works with the
Mental Health Court program office to safely divert non-violent offenders out of Jail and
into community settings with wrap-around services. This has been very successful. St.
Lucie County currently funds two positions in the Client Services program in their office.
The money is a grant match. St. Lucie County also provides a person at the Jail to help
expedite cases and alleviate overcrowding.
The Client Services program has handled over 981 mental health cases to date with 264
graduates. They have a 7% recidivism rate within that program. The normal recidivism
rate is 85%. The Mental Health Court is working to keep people out of Jail and in the
community safely.
Ms. Armold said their office won the 2009 Davis Productivity award. She thinks it is tied to
a tax watch group. The award was for their participation in the Mental Health Advocacy
Team. The two people St. Lucie County provides for the Mental Health Court program
represents less than 2% of the total budget. They normally have about 200 clients, which
is more than all the Drug Courts in the entire circuit. She gave the details: Tuesdays at
Citizens’ Budget Committee
March 19, 2010
Page 9
2:00 p.m., in the St. Lucie County Courthouse with Judge Cox presiding, and invited
anyone interested to attend.
Ms. Armold said their reentry program that helps prepare offenders in the County Jail to
transition back into the Community reduces recidivism while increasing public safety. They
assisted 570 inmates in calendar year 2009 and 149 this year. This program is funded by
DCF and their office. They do not receive funds from the County for that program.
They did reduce their budget to St. Lucie County by $5,000 this year. She wishes it could
be more. The County provides housing, utilities, maintenance and janitorial services.
None of that is presented in her budget. Mainly, what she presents is telephone expenses,
a small amount of utilities, a little administrative rent that is shared by the four Counties,
and IT expenses. They share lines with the State Attorney’s office. They try to share costs
with the State Attorney and Court Administration where possible. They constantly look for
savings. They were scheduled to replace work stations, but they decided to continue to
use half of them.
Mr. Mundt asked the dollar figure of the 5% the County provides. Ms. Armold answered
that last year their budget request was just under $274,000 for the current year. The
FY2010-2011 budget request is approximately $269,000.
Mr. Hensley asked if she thinks the County is doing the best they can. Ms. Armold replied
that they have done an excellent job, and her office is grateful. The building downtown was
a godsend. They are fortunate that the County has been a good partner. They do not
have a lot to offer on the transfer of information, but it is critical that they receive the
information. They cannot open a case until it has been recorded by the Clerk. People call
before they have a record. It is vital that they participate. Their IT Director is attending the
meetings.
Mr. Mundt asked about the clients being decided by the Clerk’s office. He asked if a Judge
supervises. Ms. Armold explained the task of determining indigence fell to the Clerks.
When a person is arrested and wants a Public Defender, there is a financial affidavit to
complete. The Clerk must follow guidelines. The Judge can override the Clerk’s decision.
Chief Judge Levin said they verify the situation if it is brought to them.
Mr. Mundt asked for clarification about the program the County does not support. Ms.
Armold answered the reentry program works with DCF. Ms. Outlaw added that one of the
attorneys at the Jail is funded out of the County Attorney’s budget.
Mr. Hensley thanked Ms. Armold. Ms. Outlaw thanked Chief Judge Levin.
Mr. Hensley welcomed the new member, Ryan Strickland.
TH
APPROVAL OF MINUTES – MARCH 19 MEETING
Citizens’ Budget Committee
March 19, 2010
Page 10
th
Mr. Mundt made a motion to approve the March 19 minutes. The motion was seconded
and it was unanimously approved.
OTHER ISSUES
Mr. Hensley told the Committee that Ms. Ferrick was not able to attend the meeting. She
had submitted information about millage rates (see attached). Mr. Hensley asked for
feedback. Mr. Mundt asked if Ms. Ferrick was in favor of an increase. Mr. Hensley gets
the impression the Committee thinks they should make some kind of recommendation. Mr.
Mundt asked if Ms. Outlaw had looked at the pages. She is looking at millage rates on at
least a weekly basis. Mr. Mundt asked what the impact would be. Ms. Outlaw answered
that she is not in a position to walk through the impact of a millage increase and how it
would help with the budget, primarily because what the Committee does, needs to be
independent of input from her because of the Board’s directive to her to not include a
millage increase. She cannot go against their instructions. She did point out that this is a
matter that Ms. Ferrick brought forward, and she thinks Ms. Ferrick would want to be there
when it was discussed. Ms. Outlaw would excuse herself from the discussion. The
Board’s Strategic Planning session will not be until after the Committee’s May meeting.
The Board’s budget reviews are scheduled for July. At their June meeting, the Committee
could discuss the information from Strategic Planning before the July budget reviews. She
thinks June would be the time to decide if they want to make a recommendation. They will
know the Board’s position on services. Mr. Hensley asked if an opinion now would be
better than after Strategic Planning. Won’t they be set on what they are going to do? Ms.
Outlaw answered they are not necessarily set. She does not think it would be better now
because the person who has taken the leadership position is not there. They have another
meeting before Strategic Planning. They could still make a recommendation.
Mr. Mundt asked if the Committee would have an opportunity to look at her proposals for
the department budgets. She answered that they certainly would before the July meeting.
At the June meeting, the Committee will have her recommendations on all budgets before
the Board’s budget reviews. Mr. Knaggs summarized that the May meeting will be millage,
the June meeting will be the County Administrator’s recommendations and in July the
Board meets.
Mr. Kurek asked the status of the changes or layoffs. Ms. Outlaw said the schedule for
implementation of the realignment is being done in three phases. They are still in the
process of implementing the phase that started in April. They have realigned Planning and
Development. There have been some layoffs in the Building Operation which is an
rd
Enterprise Fund. Eight employees were laid off on April 3. At the peak of the
development, there were 53 employees. Enterprise means the revenues generated from
the fees have to cover the expenditures in that operation. Because of the downturn in the
economy, there have been two prior layoffs. There are now 12 employees. If it goes
further, her recommendation will be to outsource it. They are at a bare bone minimum.
Some of the other departments have been consolidated, but there have not been layoffs.
She is behind schedule. But her philosophy is to do it for the right reason and in the right
Citizens’ Budget Committee
March 19, 2010
Page 11
manner. If she is not ready, she is pushing it back a week or two. At the May meeting, she
will have a full report on the first phase of the realignment. Mr. Knaggs suggested it be a
permanent part of the agenda until the program is completely implemented. He does not
want the Committee to be caught short like they were at the meeting a few weeks earlier
when it was asked if the Citizen’s Budget Committee had made a recommendation. He
feels they are obligated to stay behind her but without monthly reports they would not be
able to do that. Ms. Outlaw agreed. She is trying to keep the Committee and her Board
informed. She will try to do monthly updates. There may be months where there is
nothing that she is in a position to report. Going back to the question of the Committee
having input, you would have heard wrath from the Board if she had brought the
realignment proposal to the Committee before the Board heard it. Even though one
Commissioner asked the question, she was not in a position to bring it to the Committee,
and she believes the Commissioner rethought the question and realized that. When she
can, she will bring things to the Committee first. She knows he understands. Mr. Knaggs
does understand and was making the point that there have been two meetings, and he
thinks it should be on the agenda so they do not have to ask. It is probably the biggest
single project in the County at the moment. Mr. Kurek agreed that it should be on the
agenda every month. Ms. Outlaw has no problem with it being a standing item on the
agenda.
Mr. Hensley asked if there were any other issues.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Hensley adjourned the meeting at 9:10 a.m.
Respectfully submitted by: Brenda Marlin
The next CBC regular meeting will be held on Friday, May 21, 2010, at 7:30 a.m., in
Conference Room #3, at the St. Lucie County Roger Poitras Administration Annex.