We created Ask S2! to address those concerns. If you have a question about something -- anything – that affects our community, Ask S2. We will take your question directly to the most authoritative source possible to get an answer or an explanation, which we will then print right here. Unless you request otherwise, your identity will be completely hidden and protected by S2 at all times, both with the source and online. We will be relentless on your behalf.

As always, S2 reserves the right to edit or reject any reader question for any reason without notice. S2 will likely never print or pursue questions that are arguably defamatory, needlessly accusatory or obscene, rhetorical in nature or otherwise inappropriate – and S2 reserves full discretion to determine the appropriateness of every question.

The Sarasota School Millage Referendum

S2 received numerous questions about the Sarasota County School District referendum to continue the millage rate. These are two representative questions:

Q: I have been reading with interest the debate over the school referendum millage. On one side of the debate, proponents say a full mill is barely enough to generate the funds needed to support Next Generation Learning and the ambitious reform initiative our high schools despeately need. They say relying on non-recurring funds is the only solution legally available to schools. On the other hand, opponents say that while the reform is an imperative, overdue investment, we should be developing a more fiscally responsible, sustainable source of revenue to fund these much needed programs which will not sunset when the tax expires but may need significant additional revenue. They see these as recurring/ongoing expenditures. How can we resolve this quandry?

Q: I understand why there was a need for the one mil tax before, however, is it still needed when the assessed values have increased 15-20% and the tax revenues will be much higher this year? Dr. Gary Norris explains where the money is going, however I have not seen an explanation of the actual budget of this year to compare to last year. Nor have I seen what the tax revenues will be without the increased mil. So how do we know whether or not the one mil tax is necessary to cover the expected budget?

Answer: Provided by Dr. Gary Norris, Superintendent, Sarasota County Public School District, 10/17/05:

1. What is the school district requesting in the referendum?
The district is requesting a continuation of the same millage rate that is now in effect. This is not a tax increase but the approval to continue the current millage rate.

2. The district has too many administrators. Wouldn’t the district have more money if it cut administrators?
The taxpayers of Sarasota County have demanded that the school district keep a tight rein on administrative overhead. In the 2004-2005 school year, the Principal/Asst. Principal student ratio was 430 students to one. On the district level the pupil to district administrator ratio was 898 students to one. That ranks Sarasota County as the 63rd lowest of the 67 counties.

3. How much will the one mill extension cost?
The actual millage the state requires the district to levy is decreasing for the 2005/06 by approximately .4 mills. Thus, if a resident has a homestead exemption, their school taxes will remain the same or go down. One mill=$100 for a $100,000 house. With a $25,000 homestead exemption, a house valued at $300,000 would pay $275, or approximately 75 cents per day, less than a cup of coffee.

4. How much will the one mill extension raise from 2006-2010?
Depending upon the growth of the county’s tax roll, this could raise between $215 and $260 million in the four years.

5. Why is the district requesting a continuation of one mill?
The state ranks 4th in student population in the US, but 42nd in per student spending (according to the National Education Association), enough to provide a mediocre education. The people of Sarasota County take great pride in their schools and demand a better education for their children. The continuation will provide education programs, technology and the modern classrooms that will better prepare our students for the technological world they face.

6. What has the district done with the 2002 referendum dollars?
Prior to the referendum, the district cut more than $30 million dollars from its operating budget. The first two years after the passage of the referendum the district used those funds to reinstate or maintain existing programs, maintain reasonable class sizes and prevent further cuts. The third and fourth year of the referendum, the district hired additional teachers to reduce class sizes, add more guidance and mental health professionals, and enhance programs such as the arts, science, and drop-out prevention.

7. How will the continued funds be used?
• Recruit and retain quality teachers by paying competitive salaries. The average teacher salary in US is $46,752, compared to $44,860 in Sarasota.
• Close the achievement gap and increase the number of minority students in Honors and Advanced Placement classes by 50%.
• Add safety measures at schools and on school buses.
• Raise all children’s academic achievement so 100% of our regular schools will meet the federal No Child Left Behind program.
• Keep relatively small class sizes in all courses.
• Provide every classroom with equal state-of-the-art technology.
• Extend the school day by 30 minutes so each child has an equivalent of 15 more days of instruction.
• Maintain quality programs in art, music, physical education, Honors and exceptional student education, and expand the International Baccalaureate program to elementary and middle school students.
• Continue summer school options.
• Double the number of high school career and technical offerings so students graduate with 21st century skills.
• Create a new career/technical high school with two campuses, offering a special certificate for those completing a technical training program.
• All high school students will be enrolled in small learning communities in which students will have rigorous and relevant experiences around their career interest.
• All 9th grade students will develop an education plan that includes a career pathway they can follow from high school through post-secondary education.
• All schools will add an online portion to their website to enable parents to keep better informed about their children’s education, including attendance, discipline and achievement.
• Build and equip quality schools and accommodate student population growth.

8. The 2002 referendum brought in more dollars than initially projected. How much extra and what has the district done with that money?
It was anticipated that the district would raise $100 million dollars in four years. Because property values have increased at record levels, it is estimated the district will raise an extra $40 million. Of that extra money, approximately $10 million was used to open a special school for at-risk students, create a south campus for the increasing number of severely disabled students, improve high school guidance and counseling ratios (from 700:1 to 300:1), enhance fine arts courses, add science instructors for elementary school science labs, and place reading coaches in all middle and high schools. The other $30 million was placed into the reserve fund.

9. Why was $30 million placed in the reserve fund?
Prior to the passage of the referendum three years ago, the district used its reserve funds to keep some programs such as art, music and guidance counselors in place. It is only prudent that the district rebuild those reserve funds. Based on the size of the district’s budget, $30 million dollars will run the District for approximately one month.

10. How can citizens be sure the district will continue to spend the money wisely?
The Financial Oversight Committee, consisting of community business leaders, regularly reviews expenditures and has reported the District spends our money exactly as promised. Additionally, two independent firms have rated Sarasota County Public Schools at the top of the state and nation in terms of sound financial management. The district has received the highest bond ratings of any school district in the state of Florida, and continues exemplary audits conducted by independent CPA firms and the State Auditor General’s office.

11. What will happen if the continuation referendum fails?
The district will do its best to protect the classroom; however, all of the excellent programs that exceed minimum state requirements will be in jeopardy. This may include:
• Cutting courses and specialized programs, such as music, art, dual enrollment and advanced placement courses, summer school and dropout prevention programs.
• Instituting fees or reducing or eliminating extracurricular activities such as athletics, band and clubs.
• Setting back efforts to recruit and retain high quality teachers as a result of noncompetitive salaries.
• Eliminating or reducing instructional materials and technology purchases.
• Jeopardizing the small learning communities in our large high schools.
• Inhibiting the funding of new schools and the refurbishing of old ones.

12. The state increased the education budget the last four years. Isn’t that enough to cover the district’s needs?
The state funds only 21% of the costs for our schools through sales taxes. The rest of school funding must come from local revenue. The state’s goal is to provide a mediocre education in a state, that according to the National Education Association ranks 44th in funding. If the people of Sarasota County want better than an average Florida education, in a state that already ranks below average, we must pay for it ourselves.

13. Since property values in the county have increased, why doesn’t our School District receive more funds from the state?
Florida’s constitution requires the Legislature to “equalize” the distribution of education dollars. That means the property-rich counties, like Sarasota, receive less money from the state because tax dollars collected here are distributed to poor counties. The state sets the millage rate that school districts are required to levy for the operation of the schools. In the past four years, that rate has decreased in Sarasota County from 5.906 in 2000-01 to 4.254 in 2005-2006. In addition, the district has grown by 6,000 new students in the last four years, so, of course, the budget has increased to accommodate that growth.

14. I have no children in Sarasota County public schools. Why should I vote for the referendum?
The children who sit in class today are the very people who will some day handle your medications, bank deposits and car repairs. The quality of their education will directly affect your quality of life. Someone chose to invest in education for each of us. We now have that obligation to the next generation. Additionally, property values are directly related to the quality of our schools.

15. Where has the lottery money for schools gone?
Lottery funds have gone from a high of $342 per student in 1989-19990 to a low of $114 per student in 2004-2005. The funding shift occurred as education money was moved to support other programs such as college scholarships, state universities, community colleges, and other legislative priorities. The money that comes to Sarasota County is primarily used for the Bright Futures scholarship program and for schools that either show significant improvement on FCAT or who receive an A from the State because of their FCAT scores.

16. Can the state reduce the funding to Sarasota County schools if the citizens continue the millage?
No. By law the amount the district receives from the state cannot be reduced. All the money collected through this referendum remains in Sarasota County for our schools.

17. This referendum is a continuation for another four years. What will happen in year five?
Four years ago, the school district told the voters that if the state continues to under fund education, it will be necessary to request a continuation of the one mill. That statement is as true today as it was four years ago. If the state does not drastically increase its financial support of public schools, the district will have no option but to turn to the voters to ensure continued excellence of Sarasota County schools.

18. Are there other ways the School Board can raise additional operating dollars?
No. By law the only option available for the school district to raise money is through a millage referendum.

19. Can impact fees be used for operating expenses?
No. By law, impact fees cannot be used for operating schools; they only be used for capital construction of new schools in the areas where the impact fees are generated.

20. How much will the District’s Next Generation plan cost to implement?
The NeXt Generation Strategic Plan is based on community input and economic demands that recognize young people today are wired differently and that their future jobs will require highly competent technical skills. The vision incorporates a wide range of strategies that move the district forward to the next level, close the achievement gap and put ALL children on a path to succeed. The cost the first year will be $26,030,083, $28,645,593 in year two, $31,203,000 year three and $32,131,000 in year four.

For more information and more detailed facts and figures, Dr. Norris directs readers to www.sarasotacountyschools.net -- click on Next Generation Learning. [NOTE: This site was not up yet when S2 tried to access it on Oct. 18, 2005, but according to Dr. Norris, it should be up soon.]

The Elected Mayor Debate

Q: One of the most frequently-submitted topics to Ask S2! relates to the issue of elected mayors, an issue that has raised its head in the City of Sarasota several times in the last decade. The reader submissions we have received on this topics can be summarized in these three questions:

1) As a starting point, how does the City of Bradenton Charter define the role and powers of their mayor?

2) What other cities have an elected mayor and also have a city manager, and if such exist, how do the two share responsibilities?

3) At a recent Tiger Bay forum, Supervisor of Elections Kathy Dent mentioned that some cities trying to implement an elected mayor system are being challenged under the Voting Rights Act. Is this really happening and why?

Answer: Drafted by Kendall Jones, Managing Editor, The S2 Report, 9/30/05:

Background

The City of Sarasota does not have a specifically elected mayor. Rather, city voters elect five commissioners from the city’s three voting districts; they are paid on a part-time basis. Three city commissioners come from “single-member districts” – one from each district and only voters in each respective district can vote for their district commissioner – and two are elected on an “at-large” basis, meaning all city voters cast a vote for those offices, regardless of their district. The five elected commissioners take turns holding the title of “mayor,” which has little more than a ceremonial purpose. The City of Sarasota also has an unelected City Manager, a full-time charter city employee who handles all administrative functions of the city government – he serves at the pleasure of the city commissioners.

By contrast, the City of Bradenton has one person – right now, that person is Wayne Poston – who is specifically elected by all city voters as the Mayor. In addition to the Mayor, Bradenton voters elect five city councilmembers, all six of whom are elected by the city at-large.

In 2002, voters in the city of Sarasota were presented with a referendum – they could choose to change the city government structure to one with a “strong mayor,” a term defined below. The most vocal proponents of the strong mayor referendum were developers and businesspeople; the most vocal opponents were neighborhoods and a movement called “No Boss Mayor.” Voters rejected the referendum by a convincing majority.

The issue is coming up again in Sarasota, but this time, it is backed by the neighborhoods and many of the previous referendum’s opponents. The difference? This time, the talk is about an “elected” mayor, not a “strong” mayor, though proponents of the “elected" mayor initiative has not yet defined the difference between a "strong" mayor, an "elected" mayor, and a ceremonial mayor.

The Bradenton Model

Municipal and county governments are typically structured using at least two (sometimes all three) of the following government elements:

1) A Council or Commission: Elected officials who manage the legislative functions of the local government – they make and pass the laws and regulations. In a weak or ceremonial mayor system, the titular “mayor” is one of the councilmembers, most often selected to hold that title for a short period of time by his fellow councilmembers. Other than the ceremonial elements of the title, this mayor holds no special powers different from his fellow councilmembers.

2) A Mayor: When a mayor is elected specially and separately from the other commissioners or councilmembers, he is an elected or strong mayor, paid on a full-time basis, compared to the non-mayors, who are part-time only. In most of these cases, the mayor presides over council meetings, but he does not vote in them except in event of a tie. However, the mayor can veto any decision of the council – that veto can be overcome by a percentage of the council. An elected mayor often has other responsibilities as well – from signing contracts on behalf of the local government to hiring and firing the city manager, with a wide range in between.

3) A Manager or Chief Administrative Officer: While the elected officials handle the legislative elements of the government, the unelected, full-time manager handles the administrative side, implementing the policies and rules created by the legislative officers.

According to its charter, the City of Bradenton has a Mayor-Council form of government. The Mayor has authority to appoint the police chief and similar positions, and he supervises all city employees and officers. The Mayor presides over city council meetings, but may only vote on matters in event of a tie. The Bradenton Mayor has the right to approve or veto all ordinances passed by the city council – his veto can be overridden by a vote of four councilmembers. (See Bradenton charter provisions)

Interestingly, Section 7A of the Bradenton charter does include the possibility that the city may shift to a Mayor- Council- City Manager form of government. The city council can define the city manager’s role, then submit the proposal to the voters for a referendum vote.

Cities with Elected Mayors and City Managers

There are quite a few cities in America with both an elected/ strong mayor AND a city manager. Some local proponents of the elected/ strong mayor system claim that an elected mayor would, by definition, replace the city manager completely – often because they don’t happen to care for the current city manager. They argue that a city cannot function with both. But the truth is that many very successful cities do have both an elected mayor and a city manager:

The City of Cincinnati, Ohio, for example, has all three structural elements – an elected/ strong mayor presides over council meetings, but he is not a member of the council. He has veto power over legislation passed by the council and can appoint and remove council committee chairs.

In Cincinnati, only the Mayor can appoint and remove a city manager, but he must do so with consent (by majority vote) of the city council. The unelected City Manager is the chief executive and administrative officer of the city; he also prepares the budget for the city. To read more about the Cincinnati officials and their roles, click here

Examples of other cities of various sizes with similar mayor-council-manager forms of government include:

Englewood, New Jersey

Shawnee, Kansas

Topeka, Kansas

For an overview of the typical forms of city government, go to the Florida League of Cities’ Web site.

The Voting Rights Act

The U.S. Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 primarily to ensure that minorities had equal access to the vote and equal rights in the voting process – it is often hailed as perhaps the most successful piece of civil rights legislation ever passed.

The parts of the Voting Rights Act that are most relevant to the elected mayor issue are Sections 2 and 5. The Supreme Court of the United States has consistently held since the early 1970s that any election scheme, including an at-large election system, that acts to effectively and/or deliberately dilute the vote of a minority group is unconstitutional.

For example, if a vast majority of minority voters are located in one city district, and all other districts have a majority of non-minority voters, the minority vote will likely be diluted and minorities will effectively be outvoted in any at-large election by the non-minorities who control the other districts. If minority-heavy districts cannot separately elect their own district-specific representation, the system may be illegal and unconstitutional. (This issue even came up in (new) Chief Justice John Roberts’ confirmation hearings)

These issues impact elected mayor initiatives because elected mayors are elected by an at-large vote of all city voters. The argument is that minorities in minority-heavy districts will always be discriminated against in such elections, because their vote will always be diluted by the non-minority majorities in the other districts.

In 1980, in a case entitled Mobile v. Bolden, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a claim of minority vote dilution must be backed by proof that the at-large election system had a racially discriminatory purpose. However, Congress later amended the Voting Rights Act in 1982 to allow a plaintiff to bring a claim without having to prove that a discriminatory purpose motivated the structure of the at-large system.

The U.S. Department of Justice (and sometimes private interest groups as well) continually file lawsuits against counties and cities that have an at-large election system that allegedly violates the Voting Rights Act. For example, earlier this year, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Osceola County, Florida, claiming that the at-large election system operates to dilute Hispanic voting strength, as evidenced by the fact that the county has never elected a Hispanic candidate to the County Board, even though Hispanics make up one-third of the county’s electorate. For more on this and other DOJ lawsuits filed relating to Voting Rights Act violations, click here

For a comprehensive explanation of the Voting Rights Act and its enforcement efforts, click here.

S2 would love to receive your input on the elected mayor issue and the information in this article. If you have a comment you’d like to share on the topic, send us an email: feedback@S2Report.com.

(S2 received two answers to this question; both are printed here.)

Answer: Provided by Jim Ley, Sarasota County Administrator, 9/20/05

Anyone expecting a simple direct answer has no feel for the depth of this issue. That depth leads to the use of hyperbole to make points but does little to facilitate a broad understanding. I am going to try to look at it from 1000 feet, some will still disagree and I personally may not totally own this view but have found myself having to adapt to be able to move on.

Plans are like three legged stools. One leg is a map and associated set of rules that define the classification of a road, its width, its profile, etc. That is a start. The second leg is the funding leg. This is often the most difficult leg to address for several reason - it requires full engagement in the whole set of dynamics associated with taxation, and the conversation is further exacerbated by the growth management conversation of who pays. Commissioner Thaxton's comments (below) are on point. Then there are our not so forthcoming state and federal "partners." The third leg is the set of regulations that link development to the road map goals and attempt to bridge the funding and growth management issues. Concurrency, land development regulations that impact access for example and impact fees are part of this leg.

As far as east of 75 goes, with the adoption of 2050, the county put in place a road map and classification system and stated a policy of fiscal neutrality. Any village developer will have to develop a financing plan for the related roads and impacts to other roads in the county system. This will all be evaluated when any required large scale master planned community comes in for review and the only way we will know how effective this all is will be when we get into the process itself.

As far as west of 75, while there have long been plans (map and classification), the funding has not always been there. Following passage of the surtax (where half the county sales tax money was dedicated to transportation) the County Commission also adopted a robust local road funding program. The funding was linked to the plan to achieve four thrusts: 1) Connect the grid. Cattleman (a portion of which is completed), Bahia Vista, Webber and North Honore are all projects that will be underway within the next year or two. 2) Strengthening the North-South Connection. The preliminary design for Hone/Pinebrook has now been completed and construction planning is in the works. The Board is also looking to the future and addressing a variety of planning concerns that would link Jacaranda/Bee Ridge Extension/Knights Trail, Iona, etc as part of the 2050 defined east of 75 system. This is a long term discussion not intended to produce any near term results but to at least lay the foundation. And, the county Commission is actively involved in trying to expedite the US41 Bypass project that the state has not been able to fund. There are a variety of challenges with this project not the least of which are funding and the politics of the state priority setting system. 3) Transit. Over the last few years millions have been added to transit operations. The County took responsibility for the paratransit system and added a few routes. The final FY06 budget proposal has an additional $5M for transit or about a 35% increase over current budgets. 4) Alterative Mobility. Aside from making sure that things like bike paths are built into every road system, the County has built in excess of 40 miles of sidewalk in the last few years and has accelerated 22 more miles. The county bought the CSX corridor this year as part of a larger trail plan developed. The FY06 proposed budget contains $5M to accelerate the development of the CSX trail. The County has been a partner with VABI in the development of the trail along the intercoastal in Venice. And the County recently entered into an agreement with FDOT, Manatee county, Bradenton, and Sarasota to build a multi-county synchronized traffic control system that would link our separately operated systems

Our biggest deficits occur when you look at our federal interstate and state/federal highway system. We are an affluent county that sends far more gas tax to the Feds than we get back. We live in a state that has historically received 90% or less of its gas tax in return and an FDOT District that gets shorted even more so. These are systematic and political dynamics that we are constantly grappling with. We live in a state that is $30 Billion behind in its obligations statewide. A state that created a Strategic Intermodal System process to plan its roads, but failed to provide additional funds. The result is that scarce funds have (by nature of the process) been sucked into large urban areas leaving emergent and suburban counties in the lurch. A federal government, whose budget is driven by its debt, the result being that Congress historically budgets less tax dollars than it receives for roads. So at both levels we are paying for something and not getting a return. That is the nature of the politics at this level and we are constantly working them.

There are HUGE policy issues at play at the federal, state and local level. Changes in growth management law and the tangential but related discussion regarding whether the state legislature should create parameters for impact fees all serve to keep transportation planning VERY DYNAMIC. One "simple" local variable is annexation or large scale development in another county. When one sees Sarasota County react to an annexation the press often says it is about "power." I would suggest that it is about frustration, having worked on a system for years only to see the unilateral actions associated with an annexation (or even development in an adjacent county) drive a fundamental shift in priorities. There may be nothing that can be done but obligations to produce a growth management plan for the County and the following reality are the base of that frustration.

Road building is probably the most logistically complex thing that a local government can do. Aside from the normal challenges of design and engineering, as "developers" we have an obligation to comply with dozens of state, federal and local regulations and obtain many related permits, we have to coordinate through many public meetings and hearings and we have to buy dozens and even hundreds of small and large pieces of property. At best it can take 8 to 12 years to take a road form concept to construction.

So my perspective is that the County has been very aggressive in the arenas where it has control and is actively engaged at the state and federal level. But the entire discussion is a frustrating moving target. The "evolving" growth management discussion alone will continue to make this a dynamic issue from a political, funding and technical perspective.

Answer: Provided by Jon Thaxton, Sarasota County Commissioner, 9/14/05

The problem here is that development has been approved in our Comprehensive Plan without a cost feasible transportation plan capable of accommodating the Plan. Rather, the only financially feasible requirement for our long-term transportation plan is for the very short-term. Simply planning for east County roads as a solution will not work. This is exactly what Naples, Miami, Jacksonville or Ft. Lauderdale did.

Building a transportation network under the current scenario has created a disconnect where needs exceed available funding by about 100%. In other words, it will require over twice the funds presently being collected (gas tax, telecommunications tax, property tax, infrastructure sur-tax and impact fees) to build the roads needed to implement the Plan, and the gap is widening!

Answer: Provided by Virginia Haley, Executive Director, Sarasota Convention & Visitors Bureau, 9/15/05

Thanks for forwarding the questions from Ask S2 regarding the Film Commission. It is great to have the opportunity to spread the word. So much of the Film Commission work is behind the scenes that we will have a week with multiple crews in town and no one even knows. We obviously get great notice when the movie stars arrive but that is just a small part of film production.

The County Commission asked for a briefing on the Film Commission earlier this year with many of the same questions asked on As S2 so I am attaching that information which covers most of the questions (below). Here are a couple of additional points not covered in the briefing:
• Should a commissioner have experience in movie making – no. You do need someone who is quick witted, really knows the destination inside and out, has excellent relationships with other Florida Film Commissioners, Governor’s Office of Film and Entertainment and production location scouts. The person needs to understand the demands of a production unit and how to efficiently assist with those needs.
• Film Commissioner position in Sarasota is within the SCVB and is 50% FTE. Other administrative duties are assigned to the position, a structure followed in most of our size counties in Florida. There is no such thing as a typical day – perhaps the most appealing aspect of the position. It might be a 1 hour turn-around on a request from a location scout for a herd of long-horn cattle, a request from the Governor’s Office for some production economic development numbers, getting a camera crew permitted to take a vehicle onto a beach, meeting with a film editor who has just relocated to Sarasota etc. If the Commissioner is on vacation, SCVB staff provide back up. The Commissioner does not have a staff but can call on any SCVB staff member for assistance.
• Salary – According to the SCVB’s latest 990, total staff salary and wages are $242,109 (for 7 people). The only individual required to report salary is the SCVB Executive Director’s - full compensation at $71,800.
• Film Commission funding – explained in the briefing but let us expand on a couple of points. The operational budget comes from the SCVB’s marketing budget from TDT funds. Administrative overhead, salary and benefits are paid out of the SCVB administrative budget, which is funded by membership dues (hotels, restaurants, arts groups, attractions etc.) The Commission does not charge for its services and permits, and cannot charge under the Florida Department of Commerce guidelines. However, there can be fees levied by local governments for additional permits, rentals, police etc.
• Public reaction to film production is very positive. The Film Commissioner receives extraordinary cooperation from the local community.
• Several questions seem to be about the revenue from the productions and where does it go and who benefits. Based on a formula developed by the Governor’s Office of Film and Entertainment, the Film Commission is able to project the economic impact to Sarasota County from film production. Who benefits? Sarasota County residents who are hired by the production units along with a wide variety of local businesses and hotels.

In 2004, the Sarasota Convention & Visitors Board adopted a new tourism strategy for Sarasota County that included the following film goals:
Film Commission Goal One: Create alliances with compatible partners in an effort to leverage and share resources and create mutually beneficial opportunities to achieve results.

Film Commission Goal Two: Encourage incentives for on-location production in Sarasota County.

Film Commission Goal Three: Attract and promote film, television and print production to Sarasota County.

Film Commission Goal Four: Create a cottage industry in digital film

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

Note: The following is the SCVB's briefing on the Film Commission for the Sarasota County Commission:

The Sarasota County Film Commission was originally a part of the Sarasota Chamber of Commerce Committee of 100. That organization recognized the potential economic impact of the film industry when a production company inquired about filming a Coca Cola commercial on the beach. Guidelines for becoming a “camera-ready community” had been established by the Film Florida Bureau under the aegis of the Florida Department of Commerce and in 1989 the Sarasota Chamber of Commerce undertook the challenge and created a film office. Those offices were referred to as film commissions and the local liaisons to the Film Florida Bureau were known as “film commissioners”. Only commissions affiliated with county or city government, chambers of commerce or tourism bureaus were recognized as part of the Film Florida Bureau.

In 1993, the Committee of 100 turned over the film commission office to the Sarasota Convention & Visitors Bureau. Since tourism and production both bring “heads in beds” to the community and utilize many of the same services (car rentals, restaurants, etc.) it was, and is, a good match. The job of film liaison, or film commissioner, was assigned to Pam Kline.

The film commissioner is responsible for the promotion of Sarasota County as a location for the film, television, and print industry as well as growth and promotion of the local industry within Sarasota County. The duties include working closely with Film Florida to promote the film industry within Sarasota County and the State of Florida; responding to requests for information involving photographs and details of location sites in Sarasota County for television, film or print projects; obtaining information on room nights booked, locals hired, and local budget in order to determine economic impact; and producing and maintaining a current Sarasota County Resource Guide and website for use by the motion picture and film industry.

As a member of the Creative Services Cluster of the Economic Development Board, Ms. Kline works with other members of the film community to create a local production industry. She promotes local film festivals, participates in their panels and workshops when asked, and this year arranged for the Entertainment Industry Incubator Short Film Contest to come to Sarasota for the first time in its history. She assists local filmmakers with their projects, liaisons with MCC and Ringling School of Art and Design faculty and students, and participates in Film Florida meetings and workshops, among other activities. The success of this office depends on local cooperation and resources.

While films such as “Great Expectations”, “Palmetto” and “Out of Sight” are more visible and newsworthy, commercials and catalogues (Lands End, Eddie Bauer, LL Bean, etc.) provide a steady source of income year after year. Local productions are growing and contributing to the economy.

Economic impact over the last 5 years is more than $17.5 million. The $15,000 film office budget is allocated from TDC funds and is part of the promotions budget for the SCVB. The Sarasota film commissioner’s salary is paid for by SCVB membership dues.

The Film Commission website is www.filmsarasota.com

Answer: Provided by Kathy Baylis, President, Economic Development Corporation of Sarasota County, 9/29/05:

I had to laugh at the last question! I’d like to know the same thing! I might argue that we already have some fairly good Chinese restaurants, but a good Jewish deli would be awesome!

As to the other questions…We don’t really know for sure. Other than anecdotally the only way to track it is to look at population changes over time. Some developers (Lakewood Ranch for example) might be able to give you a profile of their buyers, but that would only provide a snap shot of one part of the population. We sense that most of the in-migration is from baby boomers. Our average age is increasing ever so slightly each year, but so is the average age in the US as baby boomers get older. And it still seems like most of the in-migration is from the midwest (Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, etc.), with the northeast a close second (Connecticut, NY, PA, etc.).

S2 is continuing to research this question and will supplement this answer with additional research as and if it becomes available.

Answer: Provided by ACCRA Cost of Living Index, May 2005:

COST OF LIVING IN TAMPA BAY REGION
First Quarter 2005

The national average in each category is 100.