Showing posts with label Victor Tobin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Victor Tobin. Show all posts

Friday, February 18, 2011

“We cannot imagine any level of incompetence that would explain what we have seen." - FL State Grand Jury calls for ABOLISHING Broward School Board

dynamite stick Pictures, Images and Photos

“We cannot imagine any level of incompetence that would explain what we have seen..."
- Florida State Grand Jury calls for abolishing Broward School Board due to rampant corruption and mismanagement.

That was the subject header for an email I sent out earlier this evening upon hearing the amazing but welcome news in an out-of-the-blue blog email from Broward Clean Sweep, http://browardcleansweep.wordpress.com/ that the FL statewide Grand Jury under Broward Judge Victor Tobin, and established by former FL governor Charlie Crist, has issued a scathing 51-page report that damns with cold-hard facts the incompetent people and corrupt culture running the Broward School system into the ground.

It levels its cannons right at current Superintendent
James Notter, and explicitly calls for the abolition of the elected School Board. To which I can only add, "Huzzah! Huzzah!"

Clearly, the shoe that I and many other South Florida civic activists and bloggers -and some reporters- have been waiting for for what seems like forever has dropped.

I haven't heard the final thump yet, so the shoe is still falling at terminal velocity, and is likely to have more collisions on the way down, but it's clearly only a matter of time before familiar names in Broward County and beyond are being asked hard questions they have heretofore avoided answering publicly to anyone's satisfaction.


Soon, the public will fall back upon
Sen. Howard Baker's simple but elastic question of questions during the Senate Watergate hearings: "What did they know and when did they know it?"

-----
http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/02/18/2074314/state-report-abolish-broward-school.html
Miami Herald
State report blasts Broward School Board
By Mary Ellen Klas


In a scathing report released Friday night, the Florida Grand Jury blasted the Broward County School Board for a culture of corruption and reckless spending of taxpayer money.

The board is so riddled with problems, the 51-page report begins, that if the grand jury had the power, it would recomend it be abolished.

“We cannot imagine any level of incompetence that would explain what we have seen,’’ reads a report compiled by the Grand Jury. “Therefore we are reluctantly compelled to conclude that at least some of this behavior can best be explained by corruption of our officials by contractors, vendors and their lobbyists.’’

“But for the Constitutional mandate that requires an elected School Board for each District, our first and foremost recommendation would have been to abolish the Broward County School Board altogether.”

The report also criticized Superintendent Jim Notter, saying he was not strong enough in leading the nation’s sixth largest school district.

The report concludes:

"The corruptive influence here is most often campaign contributions from individuals with a financial stake in how Board members vote. Long ago the Board should have recognized the risk that putting themselves in the center of handing out hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars would inevitably drawn attention and undue influence from moneyed interests...Only now, years later and with pressure from all sides, have they begun to take steps to resolve this and other issues.

"Unfortunately based on the history of this Board as an institution, we have no confidence in their ability to make meaningful changes and to adhere to them. The solutions we see, at least short term, are to remove as much power and influence from the Board as possible and to have an independent outside authority monitor their dealings closely.’’

The report blasts the board for "an appalling lack of both leadership and awareness. Rather than focusing on the big picture and looking to the challenges of the future, they have mired themselves in the day to day running of the District, a task for which they are singularly unqualified.’’

Among the criticisms, the report says the school board ’"seems to be more comfortable with opening unfinished schools than angering the contractors that fund their campaigns through political contributions and fundraisers."

The list of findings is extensive: incomplete and inadequate construction records, untrained inspectors, "wasteful and dubious spending on ill conceived ideas," and board members who "direct that spending towards friends, acquaintances or supporters of Board members without any accountability."

The jurors conclude with 21 recommendations, in addition to calling for an outside monitor to oversee every move until the district and its oversight board roots out corruption and gets into shape. Among them:

Refuse campaign contributions from contractors, vendors and others doing business with the Board.

Require mandatory ethics training and testing by an outside agency.

All late additions to the Board’s agenda must be discussed at a public meeting.

Add more detail to agenda items or provide a link to where more information concerning the item can be found.

Reduce the threshold on spending items on the consent agenda.

Remove retainage reductions from consent agenda.

Require recommendation of the Superintendent or the Deputy Superintendent for reduction in retainage to be in writing and under their signature.

End the influence of the Board over the Building department by turning over inspections to local building departments.

Reduce number of school board members to 5.

Place before the voters the issue of electing the Superintendent.

Create independent office of Inspector General to monitor the Board and District

Prohibit board members from being involved in the selection of contractors, vendors, or financial institutions.

No official business should be conducted between school board members and staff

All bids should be opened in public, with Auditor there to certify bids met minimums.

No decisions should be made anywhere other than a regularly scheduled board meeting.

No discussions should be had other than at Board meetings or workshops as per Sunshine Law requirements.

Prohibit gifts of any value to any Board member or District employee from anyone doing business with the District or lobbying the Board

Empower Department of Education to penalize districts that don’t file require paperwork by withholding any state funds until certificates of occupancy, inspections and other project documents are filed.

Grand Jury Report at:
http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/summaries/briefs/09/09-1910/Filed_02-18-2011_Final_Report.pdf

Whenever the State Grand Jury is ready to come visit Hallandale Beach and sit a spell and to hear from concerned citizens who've been paying close attention detail just what's been going on here for years under the Joy Cooper/Mike Good/Mark Antonio regime, we'll be ready and waiting.

There are dozens of people in this SE Broward County community, including yours truly, who have a mountain of facts and evidence to present to interested parties in a position to actually see that the spirit and letter of the law in this state is followed, NOT intentionally ignored. Not least of all, the state's Sunshine Laws, enshrined in the state constitution.

For years, Hallandale Beach City Hall has acted like those laws were merely suggestions!


This news about the Broward School Board finally getting their comeuppance could hardly come a day too soon for the beleaguered kids in this county, who for too long have been at the bottom of the School Board's pyramid, while lobbyists, contractors and cronies were up at the top, thanks to their $$$ and influence come election time.


Next Tuesday at 7 p.m. will be a public meeting of the Hollywood Democratic Club, featuring Broward School Board members Jennifer Gottlieb and Ann Murray, attempting to defend their dismal record of achievement.

And that was
BEFORE this positive news!

The meeting will be held at the Hollywood Community Center, 1301 S. Ocean Drive, Hollywood.

Let your voice be heard.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Hallandale Beach's pro-reform citizens ask FL Sen. George LeMieux to do a good turn and help end the 'culture of corruption' here: Call Victor Tobin!

Above, Miami Herald headline, November 26, 2009, page 3B:
Sen. LeMieux decries 'culture of corruption' in S. Florida


Oh
Senator LeMieux, if you only knew the half of it in the City of Hallandale Beach!

Before your term is up, can you please do your constituents here a favor and call
Judge Victor Tobin and tell him and his state-wide grand jury that like Norma Desmond at the end of Sunset Boulevard, Hallandale Beach is ready for its close up?

The concerned citizens of this beleaguered community are eager to talk to them and tell what they know.

Or as we say in the world of crime-fighting screenwriters everywhere, "drop a dime."


Sunset Boulevard (1950) -Final Scene, with Gloria Swanson as "Norma Desmond" descending the stairwell



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA9lFsiut2Q


Miami Herald
http://www.miamiherald.com/2009/11/25/v-fullstory/1350672_sen-lemieux-decries-culture-of.html

November 26, 2009

Sen. LeMieux decries `culture of corruption' in South Florida

By Marc Caputo and Beth Reinhard
Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau

A slew of South Florida political scandals have uncovered "a culture of corruption'' that must be stamped out, freshman Florida Sen. George LeMieux said Tuesday.

"I feel bad about my home town. This is another black eye on Fort Lauderdale,'' LeMieux said in response to a reporter's questions about accused Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein.

In the past decade, Rothstein -- a Broward lawyer who allegedly bilked investors over bogus legal settlements -- helped steer about $2 million in campaign contributions to political causes, committees and candidates, including Gov. Charlie Crist.

Rothstein's troubles surfaced after federal indictments this fall of other Broward figures: fundraiser Dr. Alan Mendelsohn, Broward County Commissioner Josephus Eggelletion, Broward School Board member Beverly Gallagher and former Miramar commissioner Fitzroy Salesman.

"We've got a culture of corruption in Southeast Florida. And we need to do something about it,'' LeMieux said. "It makes us look bad. It's bad for business and bad for our way of life.''

Crist appointed LeMieux, his former chief of staff, to the Senate seat for which the governor is now a candidate in an increasingly competitive Republican primary. Rothstein attended LeMieux's swearing-in ceremony in September.

While lawyers in Broward's legal community whispered about Rothstein's source of seemingly inexhaustible funds, politicians and charities tooks loads of his money.

"You don't look at someone who's generous and just criticize,'' said LeMieux, who also ran Crist's governor's campaign before taking the job with Crist. LeMieux then joined a law firm until he was appointed to the Senate.

LeMieux acknowledged he "didn't understand how he [Rothstein] made all his money.''

All of Crist's chiefs of staff have hailed from Broward: LeMieux, current campaign manager Eric Eikenberg and current chief Shane Strum.

Crist has downplayed his relationship with Rothstein, though each attended the other's wedding reception. Crist appointed Rothstein to a judicial nominating panel in Broward prior to removing him from the post Tuesday.

Crist has called for a statewide grand jury to examine political corruption. LeMieux supports the effort.

Marc Caputo can be reached at mcaputo@MiamiHerald.com


Reader comments, in chron order, are at
http://www.miamiherald.com/2009/11/25/v-fullstory/1350672_sen-lemieux-decries-culture-of.html?commentSort=TimeStampAscending&pageNum=1

Monday, May 17, 2010

re South Florida's elected officials and law enforcement continually acting ignorant of First Amendment rights -feigned ignorance or real stupidity?

Below is a copy of an email that went out to a few dozen pretty well-informed people around the State of Florida late Monday afternoon as a bcc.

The email also went out as a CC to the following individuals:
Katie Fisher of the First Amendement Foundation in Tallahassee, http://www.floridafaf.org/; Dominic Calabro of Florida Taxwatch, http://www.floridataxwatch.org/, someone who has proven himself to be a person who won't put up with alibis or nonsense from govt. bureaucrats abusing their authority or failing to give proper accountability; Doug Lyons of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, and Anders Gyllenhaal and Edward Schumacher-Matos of the Miami Herald.

In the near future, there will be much more context and details to the story below about legal, ethical and bureaucratic excess in -surprise- Tamarac, the city that along with Deerfield Beach and Pompano Beach continually fights Hallandale Beach for the title of most venal and corrupt.

Those helpful details and context will include some particulars on the continuing pathetic performance of Broward County Sheriff
Al Lamberti, someone who needs one of his many apologists or minions throughout the county to tell him to wake the hell up and stop sleepwalking his way thru his job, and in particular, STOP disrespecting the very citizen taxpayers who pay his salary.
We are not amused!

This isn't Sparta, Mississippi, comprende, and he doesn't get to pick and choose which laws he want to follow.
What doesn't he understand about that?


Message to the South Florida news media: Al Lamberti's 'hall pass' has expired, so please stop treating him like he's some frigging old-line royal, okay?
It's very uncomfortable to read and watch and only makes you reporters who walk on eggshells in your stories about him seem even more like sycophants than you are.

And now to the email:

In case you missed it the first time, last month, please consider the following material below as predicates for today's email from Broward community activist Bett Willett to myself, and ask yourself, where-oh-where is Michael Satz and the Broward State Attorney's Office or Judge Victor Tobin's free-floating anti-corruption crew to make examples of all the miscreant pols and LEOs in South Florida?
MISSING IN ACTION!

And are things really so bad in South Florida's media community in the year 2010 that the news media willingly ignores example after example of South Florida city attorneys pretending they DON'T know what's permitted at public meetings under the State and Federal Constitution?
Really?

Once upon a time in South Florida media, Hallandale Beach's reflexively anti-democratic city attorney David Jove's continual winking at self-evident violations of the state's Sunshine Laws by the City Manager, Mayor and City Commission would've gotten a reporter's attention and resulted in an utterly devastating front page story, along with a handy chronology graph
of all the curious things that had transpired while he was present but looking away, all while drawing a taxpayer-funded paycheck.

Alternately, I would've come home tired from practice after school and would've seen a devastating Ike Seamans or Susan Candiotti story -with very long legs!- that would've literally caused his family to cry after it aired, and it would've been thoroughly sourced and 100% accurate.

Which would make it powerful as hell and a warning to others like him to shape-up and fly right -or else!

A story that would've been updated often as more and more people told what they knew and had seen, with video showing Jove's nonchalant attitude towards the law being bent, broken and ignored with him just sitting there.
And we'd have literally gulped at his sheer stupidity.
But now?

Outside of a handful of reporters, these stories just sit there, limp, waiting for a better-late-than-
never arrest to suddenly give some news editor or TV news director's the idea to give the story some well-needed oxygen.

If public corruption is a 24/7 effort by public officials in South Florida, and it is, is it too much to ask that in the year 2010, a local Miami TV station or newspaper actually have a few reporters whose only job is reporting on and investigating municipal, county and state chicanery, who promptly return emails and phone calls.

While I lived in the Washington, D.C. area for 15 years, I was fortunate enough to come to know more than a fair amount of people who'd won Pulitzer Prizes, and even more people who should've but didn't, if you believed what they told me at Oriole ballgames at Camden Yards.

The one characteristic they all shared is a genuine willingness to reach out to people who actually know something of value and to try their best to be approachable, since they never knew when or how a compelling story would make itself known to them.
You know, our old friend serendipity?

In South Florida, it's not exactly Breaking News that there are far too many reporters and editors who are NEITHER.

They practically have to receive invitations to be convinced to show-up for some government meeting or public policy matter.
(Question: When did that become the job of the citizen, to convince the reporter to actually show-up and do THEIR job?)

And everyone knows who they are, regardless of what city or county you live in, because they are the same names that always come up in private conversations.

That's fine, after all, I'm not a publisher or a TV station general manager, but then they shouldn't expect me to care when they are the next one thrown overboard because of either the economy or a station management shake-up or "creative differences."

And trust me, that's the opinion of the majority of people I know down here who follow local government and politics VERY CLOSELY.

They're the same discerning folks who agree with me that South Florida NOT currently having a dynamic Cable TV station with a local hard-news focus is a deep embarrassment that belies the area's claims to sophistication.

------------------------

1.) From: Bett's G-Mail
Date: Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 2:22 PM
Subject: Tamarac

I went to the Tamarac Commission meeting after being asked by the Colony West folks to speak to the commission about Amendment 4 and golf course conversions, read below from my blog about what happened:

Friday, April 16, 2010
-
Civil Rights Trampled in Tamarac

http://blogbybett.blogspot.com

Monday, February 1, 2010

South Florida news media ignores Broward Courthouse Taskforce shenanigans planned for Tuesday by Usual Suspects, not taxpayers; Judge Victor Tobin enlists legal eagles to come to rescue

So, did you hear about the Broward County Commission meeting on Tuesday morning at 10 a.m. where the future of the Broward Courthouse will be discussed?
Hundreds of millions of dollars are involved.

If not, don't worry, that's the way the Broward County Commission wants it.
In that regard, they rely heavily on the apathetic South Florida news media, who'll no doubt make
excuses, after-the-fact, for why they haven't mentioned this topic AT ALL before the meeting
actually happens.

Meet the New Media, Same as the Old Media!

Here's how it looks on tomorrow's agenda, but I have it printed out in full at the bottom.


15.






Attachments

Exhibit 1 - Final Report 2009

Exhibit 2 - Master Plan Phases 1 - 3

Exhibit 3 - New Courthouse - Conceptual Footprint

Exhibit 4 - Summary of Borrowing Options

Exhibit 5 - Comparison of Voted & Non-Voted Debt


Consider this.
This is what Comm. Ken Keechl said exactly a year ago about the Courthouse.
Sounds pretty realistic.
http://www.broward.org/kenkeechl/02_09_newsletter.pdf

But that was before the rigged Broward Courthouse Task Force, under Comm. Ilene Lieberman,
had time to really work in earnest to figure-out some way that they could legally evade the referendum that would be required if the Commission voted to make this a bond issue, with voters getting the ultimate thumbs up or down.
And we know that would be a heavy thumbs down, don't we?

Broward County Judicial Complex
Broward County Courthouse, with jail north of it, to the left. With delightful river-views!

You can be excused for wondering why you haven't heard anything about Tuesday morning's Commission meeting that will discuss the Courthouse.
It's not your fault.
Really.

Neither the Herald or the Sun-Sentinel have mentioned this subject in print or online since last September, when the Guest Op-Ed below, purported to have been written by Comm. Stacy Ritter, was published in the Sun-Sentinel.
Whether she actually wrote this or just signed it is not the point.
The real point is that once again, on something very important, South Florida's news media has shown they were sleeping on the job.

Not that anyone in local TV has anything to brag about in this.
Are you kidding?

Did you EVER see anything last year on TV about the ties that the members of the Lieberman-led Taskforce had to the Broward legal establishment here, who desperately want a brand new pony?
Preferably, with a brand-new barn and a lifetime supply of feed.
On your dime.

Nope.
There never was one

Did you ever read in the newspaper or see anything on local TV about how Comm. Lieberman put herself on the committee, and thus ends up with two votes on this matter?

Ever read or hear anything about why Comm. Stacy Ritter appointed Bruce Rogow to the Courthouse Task Force after she'd earlier appointed him to the Charter Review Commission, which
just ended in 2008?

Is there really such a complete lack of qualified people in Broward County -or genuine fear of diversity of opinions?- that the same old faces have to appear, over-and-over?

Bruce Rogow, really?
The same guy who continually made ridiculous alibis and excuses for Broward's elected officials, over-and-over, in the Charter Review Committee meetings?

The same Bruce Rogow who was recently making $375 an hour off of Hallandale Beach taxpayers for reasons that most of the HB City Commission still can't logically explain?
Yes.

In case you forgot, that's the same Lieberman I continually wrote about last year on my blog
that didn't follow basic aspects of the state's Sunshine Laws, and instead, tried to fool
the public by arranging for the agenda and assorted public docs for the last meeting, which should've been online days before, to be placed online HOURS AFTER the
last meeting was over.
http://hallandalebeachblog.blogspot.com/search?q=Ilene+Lieberman

Really.
Not that they actually had the final public meeting listed online days before the meeting, since they didn't, and which I wrote about at the time.
And Lieberman was the one in charge -the Chair.

The answer to that long-winded question is also a big fat NOPE.
There never was one story about any of those aspects of the Task Force
Now you know the truth.

There you have it, a snapshot of South Florida's not so gung-ho news media, circa February 2010
-asleep at the wheel.

The Jordana Mishory article from the Daily Business Review last week that I link to below features one of the most gallingquotes you'll ever see.

In case you've been under a rock, Judge Victor Tobin is the genius in charge of the statewide task force investigating corruption.

Mishory
writes: "He also encouraged the lawyers to run for state Legislature, saying nonlawyers in Tallahassee don’t understand the justice system and the separation
of powers."


So now you know what citizen taxpayers are really up against.

I'll be at the meeting tomorrow afternoon for the public session that starts ar 2 p.m., filming the drama surrounding Agenda item 15.
Should be pretty interesting to watch the Broward Commissioners engage in verbal gymnastics to do
what they always wanted to do, despite Broward citizens being unalterably opposed by large margins.

But the reality is this -the Commissioners have contributor friends who need the contracting work,
so don't be surprised to hear some pretty crazy news emerge from Andrews Avenue tomorrow.


South Florida Sun-Sentinel
BROWARD COURTHOUSE NEEDS REPLACING NOW

September 30, 2009

When I became Broward County's mayor almost a year ago, I made rebuilding our courthouse a priority.

We are one hurricane away from not having a courthouse. Engineers say that the roof could blow off in a moderate hurricane, leaving us with no place to handle trials. In that case, we would be forced to replace the courthouse during an emergency at whatever cost is charged.

Almost everybody who steps into the aging building, from witnesses to the Sun-Sentinel Editorial Board, has repeatedly said a new courthouse is needed.

Why? The courthouse is the lynchpin of Broward's public safety, where everything from divorces to traffic tickets is decided. If you get robbed, or are hurt in a traffic accident, justice is found at the courthouse. The problems with the 60-year-old building are myriad and threaten public safety.

Because of overcrowding, criminal defendants are in close contact with the public. There are rats, roaches and corroding pipes, which leak sewer water. Bathrooms are often out of order. The aging elevators sometimes require two dozen service calls a week. The overloaded electrical system dates back to the 1950s.

In 2006, voters turned down a $500 million-plus courthouse plan. Voters believed it was too big and too expensive. Since then, the courthouse has gotten worse - closed at least three times because of burst pipes. The flooding caused ceilings to collapse, electrical equipment to fail and required extra deputies to transport prisoners to makeshift courtrooms.

To keep patching the building together is costly and wasteful. With this in mind, I appointed a task force under County Commissioner Ilene Lieberman to tackle this decades-long problem. To insure the public that those on the task force would not benefit financially, no one doing business with the county was a member. After multiple public hearings and hours of expert testimony, the task force developed a sensible plan:

Smaller and less expensive than the 2006 rejected proposal, it would cost $328 million, down from more than $500 million. It will be 17 stories rather than 25 stories, and 675,000 square feet, rather than 893,000 square feet.

It is doable. The County Commission approved the plan in early August. We already have $120 million set aside to pay for the building. As time passes, the need for a new courthouse only increases, and will just get more expensive the longer we wait. We need it now.

Stacy Ritter is mayor of Broward County.

---------
FYI: Jordana Mishory is a Medill grad.
Daily Business Review

Broward Courthouse
Chief judge considers legal remedies if county rejects bond

By Jordana Mishory
January 22, 2010

Broward Chief Circuit Judge Victor Tobin is recruiting lawyers to attend a Broward County Commission meeting on a bond issue for courthouse construction and is considering legal remedies to ensure the county provides a safe and adequate building, he said Thursday in his state of the circuit speech.

Tobin said drastic matters may be needed to deal with the decrepit wing of the downtown Fort Lauderdale courthouse, but he stopped short of threatening a lawsuit.

Read the rest of the story at:
http://www.dailybusinessreview.com/news.html?news_id=60007

See other DBR stories on the Broward Courthouse at:
http://www.dailybusinessreview.com/related_news.html?cluster_id=980


http://205.166.161.204/agenda_publish.cfm?mt=ALL&get_month=2&get_year=2010&dsp=agm&seq=4651&rev=0&ag=165&ln=27918&nseq=&nrev=&pseq=4696&prev=0#ReturnTo27918

AI-4651 Item #: 15.
Broward County Commission Regular Meeting
Date: 02/02/2010
Director's Name: Pete Corwin
Department: County Administration

Information
Requested Action
MOTION TO DISCUSS and determine the method of financing for the new courthouse complex.
Why Action is Necessary
Board direction is required to determine how to fund the new courthouse complex.
What Action Accomplishes
Provides staff direction to take the necessary steps to finance a new courthouse.
Is this Action Goal Related

Previous Action Taken

Summary Explanation/ Background
Background

On August 5th, the Board approved the Courthouse Task Force’s final report (Exhibit 1). The Board agreed that a new courthouse should be constructed on County owned land at the corner of SE 6th Street and SE 1st Avenue; which is the site of the 400 space Judicial Garage. The Board also amended the agreement with Spillis Candela, Heery, Cartaya Joint Venture to design the new courthouse. The Board discussed the Task Force recommendation to fund the courthouse utilizing non-voted debt and discussed the advantages and disadvantages of voted and non-voted debt; however, the Board postponed a decision on financing the courthouse. The Mayor directed staff to bring the issue to the Board for determination.

Project Status

The consultant team has completed the architectural program totaling 674,000 sq ft to meet the space needs of the courthouse agencies plus one shell floor (34,000 sq ft) to provide for future expansion. The team also developed a master plan (Exhibit 2), consistent with the recommendations of the Task Force. The master plan provides for a judicial campus on County owned property that will meet the space needs of the courts for well over thirty years. The consultant team also developed over 30 design schemes for the courthouse footprint, which were reviewed by County staff with input from the courts. After detailed analysis using selection criteria which included site constraints, building and functional efficiency, natural lighting, way-finding, best practices, and cost , the team selected an “L” shape footprint (Exhibit 3) as the preferred conceptual configuration for the building. The 20 story structure will include 74 litigation spaces for judges and general masters; provide secure separation of the public, judges, inmates and juvenile detainees; centralize Court Administrator functions; include space for Clerk of Court and State Attorney functions; and will be an environmentally friendly and energy efficient building designed to achieve LEED certification.

The consultant team has initiated the schematic design phase of the project during which they will complete architectural massing and elevation studies to represent the preferred design solution for the building. Conceptual floor plans will be developed for each level during this phase, responding to the architectural program requirements. Preliminary project descriptions, with a narrative of engineering systems and material selections, will be provided so that a more detailed project cost can be prepared.

Schematic design will be completed in mid-March and will be followed by the design development and construction document phase to produce the design drawings used to bid the project. Since these drawings must conform to the most current building codes, staff does not recommend proceeding with design development until a financing plan is in place. If the project is delayed pending financing, the design development drawings would likely require significant and potentially costly modifications.

Project Costs
The following provides a summary of the $328 million projected project costs:

• Courthouse, Demolition, Landscaping, Connectors and 120 Secure Parking Spaces
($281.5 million)

• 1,380 Parking Spaces ($34.5 million)

• Remodel Midrise ($4 million)

• Additional North Regional Parking ($8 million)

Staff and the consultant team is committed to designing the project within the project budget including the prospect of bidding the project next year at a time when the construction market is expected to remain “soft”. In addition, the project estimate does not include a separate allocation for public art since the consultant team will integrate art into the design of the new courthouse. The cost to add parking to the North Regional Courthouse may be less than projected if we can add capacity within the existing structure.

As the project has taken shape over the past several months, several items have been indentified that will have to be taken into consideration when designing the courthouse and developing the detailed project budget. The initial project budget did not contemplate any remodeling in the East or North Wings. As the consultant completed the space program, it became clear that several State Attorney units that support judges in the North Wing (felony courts) should be located in the East or North Wings. By consolidating Court Administration and the administrative functions of the Clerk of Courts in the new courthouse, space can be freed up in the East and North Wings for the State Attorney. The team also identified additional work necessary to make the East Wing functional after the old courthouse is demolished. With the assistance of our construction project manager (Weitz), staff and the consultant team will design the courthouse so that the project is completed at or under the project budget.

Financing the New Courthouse

The County has $60 million in the budget for courthouse capital projects plus $60 million for a new jail which is not needed due to reductions in the inmate population. If additional jail capacity is needed in the future, the 700 bed Stockade can be reopened. By utilizing $120 million in cash, the County can reduce the amount of borrowed funds needed for the projects to approximately $208 million.

The key policy questions for the Board to address are:

• What is the best time and method to borrow the $208 million to finance the project?

• What funds will be used to pay the annual debt service on the bonds?

• What is the impact of the annual debt service payments on the millage rate and
taxpayers?

The County’s Financial Advisor prepared a summary of several borrowing options (Exhibit 4). While there are several options available to the County for financing the courthouse project, the fundamental choice is between voted and non-voted debt. There are pros and cons of each method.

Voted debt (General Obligation bonds) has several advantages. Debt service is paid with property taxes that are not included in the County’s General Fund and operating millage rate; interest rates are lower than non voted debt; and no debt service reserve is required.

The key advantage to non-voted debt is that financing can proceed immediately allowing the County to take advantage of a very soft construction market; take advantage of historically low interest rates; and utilize Build America Bonds before they expire December 31, 2010. Non-voted debt service payments are paid with general revenues and the millage required to fund debt service is included in the General Fund under the 10 mill cap limitation.

The total debt service on $208 million ranges from $12 to $14 million per year. The Court Facilities Fee can be used to pay $5 million per year of the debt service on the bonds ($1million/year from rent savings plus $4 million/year from increase in the fee). Therefore, by utilizing $5 million/year in courthouse facilities fees, the amount of property taxes needed to support the bonds is reduced to approximately $7 to $9 million per year.

A key variable in the annual debt service payments is whether the County issues Recovery Zone and Build America Bonds (BABs), which can significantly lower borrowing costs, but must be issued by December 31, 2010. The County has been allocated $40 million in Recovery Zone Bonds which provide a 45% credit towards interest payments. There is no limit on the amount of Build America Bonds that can be issued and they provide a 35% credit towards interest payments. The reduction in interest payments are based upon the Federal Government providing “rebates” and carry the risk that the Federal Government will suspend or eliminate the “rebates”. As shown in Exhibit 5, the annual rebate averages approximately $3 million per year. The Federal program is available for both voted and non-voted debt; the bonds are taxable; and bonds must be issued no later than December 31, 2010 unless the program is extended by Congress.

The County’s Financial Advisor compared four borrowing scenarios based upon current market conditions:

• Voted Debt with Build America Bonds

• Non-Voted Debt with Build America Bonds

• Voted Debt without Build America Bonds

• Non-Voted Debt without Build America Bonds

Based on current market conditions, Exhibit 5 calculates the total amount borrowed (including issuance, underwriters costs, and revenues); total average annual debt service; tax supported annual debt service (netting out the Courthouse Facility Fee and Federal interest “rebate”); the “all in” interest rate (TIC); and total debt service. The following chart summarizes the annual debt service and “all in” interest rate for each alternative:


OPTION ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE TIC
• Voted Debt with BAB’s $6.9 million 3.85%

• Non Voted Debt with BAB’s $7.5 million 4.11%

• Voted Debt w/o BAB’s $8.1 million 4.68%

• Non Voted Debt w/o BAB’s $9.3 million 5.34%



Based on current market conditions, the lowest cost option would be voted debt utilizing Build America Bonds; however, a non-voted issue utilizing Build America Bonds is more attractive than a GO issue without Build America Bonds.

Policy Questions
Given the information presented above:

1. What is the best time and method to borrow the $208 million to finance the project? Voted debt offers lower borrowing costs, but if the Board elects to finance the project with voted debt and voters do not approve the bond issue, the County could miss historically low interest rates, BAB rebates from the Federal Government and a soft construction market.

2. What funds will be used to pay the annual debt service on the bonds? The total debt service payments on $208 million will be approximately $12 to $14 million per year. Courthouse Facilities Fees will provide approximately $5 million per year. If voted debt is utilized, the difference will come directly from property taxes. If non-voted debt is utilized, general revenues will be pledged to make up the difference which ultimately impacts the general fund tax rate.

If the debt is incurred in the next 3 years, the increase in debt service payments can be offset by a $36.4 million per year decrease in voted debt service payments. In FY 10, total annual debt service taxes are $74.4 million and in FY 14 they will decrease to $38 million. These scheduled decreases in payments will occur as follows:

• FY11 $17.3 million

• FY12 $11.3 million

• FY13 $7.8 million

Total $36.4 million

3. What is the impact of the annual debt service payments on the millage rate and taxpayers? No matter which method of borrowing (voted or non-voted debt) is used, there will be an increase in debt service payments. If the debt is “voted”, the additional $7 to $9 million will be offset by the programmed $36.4 million decrease in existing voted debt service payments and likely result in a decrease in the “voted” millage rate depending on the tax roll for that year. If the debt is “non-voted”, the impact on the County operating budget and millage rate cannot be determined at this time, given the number of variables such as the tax roll, other increases/decreases in revenues and expenses, and the Board’s tax policy. The impact of the additional $7 to $9 million on the budget by itself would not require a supermajority vote since the County has developed ample capacity under the State-mandated maximum millage calculation by significantly reducing the County’s ad valorem tax levy each year for three years.

The following summarizes the impact on the average taxpayer based on the current combined millage rate (voted and non-voted) and current average taxable values:

• Current millage rate 5.3889 (4.889 operating plus .5 mills debt service)

• Less .25 mills decrease in voted debt service payments ($36.4 million/year)

• Plus .05 to .06 mills for new courthouse debt service payments ($7 to $9
million/year)

• Total millage rate – 5.1889 to 5.0789 (3.5% to 3.7% decrease)

• The impact of the $7 to $9 million debt service payment on the average
homeowner would be $8 per year, which would be offset by the reduction
of $37 per year in voted debt service payments over three fiscal years.

The Courthouse Task Force met on January 22nd and voted to reaffirm their recommendation that the Board utilize non-voted debt.

Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Impact/Cost Summary:
Total cost of courthouse projects is $328 million. There is $120 million available in the Capital Program in the courthouse and jail projects. The balance ($208 million) will be financed and supported by revenues generated in the Courthouse Facilities Fund and general operating revenues.

Attachments
Exhibit 1 - Final Report 2009
Exhibit 2 - Master Plan Phases 1 - 3
Exhibit 3 - New Courthouse - Conceptual Footprint
Exhibit 4 - Summary of Borrowing Options
Exhibit 5 - Comparison of Voted & Non-Voted Debt