Some advocates of the referendum, like Palm Bay City Manager Lee Feldman, explained that the program was based on the (Keynesian) premise that government spending on public works projects spurs economic activity, and believe that FDR and the New Deal are what got us out of the Great Depression.

Opponents of the program like Brevard Clerk of Courts Scott Ellis and other students of the Austrian school of economics like myself maintain the government was a major cause of the Great Depression,that the New Deal prolonged it, and that the Palm Bay Works referendum would have done nothing but misallocate resources.

Specific issues raised against the referendum were:
•Inclusion of $13 million in nebulous economic development programs
•Assumed growth of the City of Palm Bay when all state and local indicators show the state and the county are depopulating
•Failure to take into account the fact the property tax rolls in Brevard County will decline by more than eight percent in coming years, resulting in a higher per household cost to taxpayers than advertised

Of the $75.2 million Palm Bay Works 2009 bond referendum:
•$57.5 million would have gone toward road and drainage work.
•$13 million would have gone to economic-development programs.
•$4.7 million would go to capitalized interest and cost of issuance of bonds.

The State Senate and the Florida Supreme Court, with the acquiescence of the Florida House, moved to make major cuts in the funding of local Clerk’s Offices during the final days of the Legislative session. In late February, well after the normal filing of bills for the Legislative Session had been completed, certain Legislators in ‘leadership’ positions late filed bills designed to remove the Clerk’s courts employees from the Clerk of Courts to the Judiciary. Along with the employees, current court fees and fines which now fund the Clerks would be diverted to the State to fund the Judiciary and the State general fund.

While the full court press was on by theSupreme Courts and its administrative arm, OSCA, to peel off the employees, and more so, the funding, the Legislature went instead for the self-fulfilling prophecy plan of cutting the Clerks by enough to ensure they would fail this year to better set the stage for the take-over next year. For Brevard County, we will end with about the same revenue as we had back in 2005 when we had 25% fewer Judges and Hearing Officers, 10% of the current foreclosure work load, and less expense on insurance and wages. Yet the Clerk’s Office, the public’s true door into the courts system, is being slashed in the name of guaranteeing the public’s access to the courts.

The Clerks as a whole began the fiscal year with $539 million in allowable expenses, with all other collections of court fees and fines going to the State. In January the Legislature pulled more of the fees to the State and the economy was clearly taking a toll on revenues, so in Brevard County we began cutting back expenses to meet what we projected to be a $800,000 shortfall in our planned $17.3 million budget. In late February another $500,000 reduction was imposed on our office and we continued cutting expenses with two small layoffs and reduced working hours.

During the Legislative Session the State Senate working in conjunction with the Judiciary managed to pull over the House version of the bills (the final week of the planned sesion) and took control of the changes with SB 1718 and SB 2108. While in late April we were looking at reductions of $54 Million to $65 million of the prior $539 million for all Clerks, by the time Monday May 4th arrived the reduction had been changed to $88 million, a total of $451 million.

The last $23 million had nothing to do with the State budgets, by this final ‘extra’ week the State budget was completed with all of its associated new taxes, and in an overall budget of $66 billion the $23 million made no difference. The real reasonfor the $23 million final additional cut was the State Senate was to set up the Clerk’s Offices for failure. We received our first 8% cut retroactively in February, and now this second 8% comes in our 4th quarter just as retroactively. Thus in our office we have an overall permanant reduction in 70 personnel to meet next year’s appropriation, as well as approximately 80 furloughs for the remainder of the Summer to balance this year in light of the two retroactive reductions. This is a permanant loss of 1/6 of the courts employees and a summer loss of 1/6 more.

Most frustrating to me has been the complete lack of work analysis of these Senate bills. Our office is very busy, we are not a permitting office somewhere without work. No effort was made to evaluate the costs of the courts system as a whole, studying the Clerks, Judges, State Attorney, Public Defender, and Sheriff, as well as the Florida Statutes, to see how the Courts could be revamped for costs savings. Numerous cost savings ideas presented by our office to the local judiciary have fallen on deaf ears.

While the session was ongoing I sent numerous messages to our State delegation. The House members at least read what I sent and gave me some contact, yet I was never contacted by phone or e-mail by our two State Senators. Bills are moving in Tallahassee which severely impact the Clerk’s Office and the Clerk in their own home county was not worth an e-mail of questions or comments. The overall impression I was getting was that ‘leadership’ in the House and Senate was pushing the bills, but what the heck do we vote to send our own Legislators to Tallahassee for?

They campaign like lions and then vote like sheep.

The majority of the Legislature will shortly find they have crashed Clerk’s Offices and access to the courts all over the State by allowing their ‘leadership’, in conjunction with the Judiciary, to drive the Clerk’s over the cliff. That may not be what was explained to them by their ‘leadership’, but for our Legislators I sent them full information on the ramifiactions of the bills and the impact of the cuts, both retroactive and forthcoming.

As an office we can adapt to declining economy and Judges waiving fines, even though our workload has not been reduced, but we cannot adapt to a willful and punitive reduction made without analysis or study whose underlying purpose is to set up the Clerks for failure. Next year the Legislature will convene and the Judges will come roaring in about the Clerk’s ‘inability’ to get the job done, completely ignoring said ‘inability’ is not by accident, but by design, of the bills passed this session by the State Senate and House.

It seems the City of Palm Bay wasn’t content to have the Greater Palm Bay Chamber of Commerce lead the charge in promoting the referendum. Nope, they actually spent taxpayer dollars and paid staff to put out signs to promote the referendum.

By my calculations, they spent a combined total of $9,269.49 on materials and staff time. I am not a lawyer, but it sure seems like spending taxpayer money to promote a referendum for higher taxes is a questionable practice. And don’t forget the cost of the special election – somewhere between $60,000 and $70,000 according to Brevard Supervisor of Elections Lori Scott.

Welcome to the City of Palm Bay – a great place to… tax?

“Truth, crushed to earth, shall rise again;
Th’ eternal years of God are hers;
But Error, wounded, writhes in pain,
And dies among his worshippers.”

The School Board has claimed consistently there has been a $100 million revenue cut over the last two years. My great sin was to ask for the state revenue numbers for the monies received by the BPS from the State over those two years. The property tax information was easily available from the Tax Collector as well as the School Board’s legal advertisement in July, and property tax revenue is up.

One will note in the exchanges, as well as the information sent by Ms. Preston, as well as the ‘memo’ from Dr. DiPatri (which I was deliberately not copied in its original two sendings so I would be unable to reply to all who received it) NEVER are the simple tax revenue numbers given from the State of Florida for FY 2006/07, FY 2007/08, and FY 2008/09. Never.

My belief now after the fire and brimstone answers from Amy Kneesy, Judy Preston, and Richard DiPatri is the $100 million in revenue already cut is a deliberate distortion. In Ms. Preston’s own memo she states the revenue was cut $445 per student, which is about $30 million. With this year’s property tax revenue increase of $9 million, that’s about a $21 million drop out of over $600 million received. The $600 million in State and Local revenue is about a $200 million increase over the last five years with a declining enrollment.

Dr. DiPatri claims I stated the reduction was $7 million (which would be 1%) when I had included the analysis of Ms. Preston’s numbers at a decline of $30 million (with an extra $9 million in property tax coming in). Dr. DiPatri was sure to laughingly criticize the straw man $7 million yet AGAIN fails to provide the real number of the State revenue reductions for the last three years. Note below the question is never answered in Dr. DiPatri’s comment below and then determine who is distorting comments and ignoring facts. $10 million is not $100 million by a long shot.

“Does he actually believe that we have only been reduced by $7 million during the past two years rather than almost $100 million? In Ms. Preston’s e-mail of 4/2/09, she provided Mr. Ellis with the revised third calculation as one of the sources which alone reduced Brevard’s 2008-2009 funding by $10.1 million. Yet, he persists in stating that you didn’t provide the information and that we were only cut a total of $7 million during the past two years. This is just another example of how Mr. Ellis distorts or ignores the facts presented to him.”

Total School Board revenue (including Federal) rose from $487 million in 2003 to $715 million in 2008. I am trying to get the State side of FY 2006/07 – FY 2008/09. Clearly whatever reductions have occurred in 2008/09 pale in comparison to the large gains made in the years prior.

The School Board and Dr. DiPatri do not wish to be questioned as the real culprit behind the current problems, debt service, will come to light. The hundreds of millions of dollars in COPs issued to build all the new facilities, rebuild many existing facilities, build new stadiums, gymnasiums, and performing arts centers, as well as additions to schools now alleged to be on ‘closure’ lists, is eating into the monies normally used for maintenance and facilities. The monies borrowed short term (RANs), which are similar to payday loans, now are also eating into the monies available for the school system.

The Brevard Public Schools went into debt based on a model of ever increasing revenues to cover the ever increasing debt service. When monies went flat their model fell apart. Many homeowners are unfortunately going through foreclosure based on the same model as they heavily borrowed off their houses.

If the school will not recognize how they got into the hole they’ll never recognize how to get out.
Again, one need not be an expert to read simple revenue numbers.

No one need believe anything I say, ask for yourself.

Ask for the total State revenue to the School Board for FY 2006/07, 2007/08, and 2008/09 as well as the total property tax revenue for the same years.

Then ask for the annual debt service for RANs (short term) and COPs (long term).

If you can get the data I could not (without being labeled Public Education Enemy Number One) please send it to me.

And as for that label, if someone had told you in 1912 not to get on the Titanic as its design was faulty, would they have been considered Public Steamship Enemy Number One?

The BCC meeting was a show, not a dialog. Dr. DiPatri guaranteed such by his taking the microphone, leaving a discussion, and initiating the broadside.

It was a rally and as such is fine, but labeling it a discussion or exchange of information is a misnomer,
BCC was packed because the upper School Board Administration ran out dozens of scare stories to parents to get them to the meeting, as well as having the students told to tell their parents to come to the meeting to ‘save’ education. I have coached for years, my players and parents were being told 9th grade and JV sports were dead if the Legislative cuts were made. Numerous local schools were to be closed, including my niece’s school at Croton.

The parents were told ‘another’ $100 million cut was coming, when in fact there had been nothing near a reduction of that magnitude so far and certainly NOTHING near that number was proposed by the Legislature.

A $100 million cut by the State would be equal a little over ONE THIRD of the State appropriation. Never was any cut of this magnitude proposed. This is what I mean by the School Board and Richard DiPatri running massive scare stories driven by exaggeration to push the parents to this meeting, then running it into anything but a rational dialogue and discussion.

Nothing was mentioned of the School Board’s demographic planning in the building and expansion of schools, to the point many on the alleged closure lists, such as Croton, had received millions in additions and upgrades. Titusville High School took in about $50 million, yet when the shuttle is history in a few years one the three high schools in North Brevard may very well be surplus. The new western Palm Bay High School was not needed, a push to the north of boundary lines, particularly to Satellite and Melbourne, could have relieved Bayside. Oddly enough it is ignored that numerous high school teachers are being shifted to the new school because there are not enough students to justify them in the surrounding high schools.

The hundreds of millions spent on the new schools and the renovations and additions elsewhere have created the debt service now hammering the School Board. I am not sure if Dr. Dipatri included everything in his missive, because back in 2005 I warned the School Board members NOT to start their planned $700 billion bonded expansion plan. I tried to show them house prices were grossly irrational and if their 10% annual growth were correct the MEDIAN house price in Brevard County would be over $350,000 in five years, a stratoshperic number where people with children would flee, and certainly not come in. From a median price of $250,000 in 2005 we are now at $115,000, not $350,000 – and falling.

At the peak of the Housing Bubble they were assuming the 10% annual growth rate in the tax base for five years would cover all the new debt service. Well, since 2005 the tax roll has gone backwards, and in the next two years will fall even further. The School Board’s 2 mill capital tax will drop in revenue by tens of millions of dollars, creating more havoc with their finances. The School Board did exactly what many homeowners did, borrowed off ‘equity’ and ‘future equity’ in the tax roll and set up a system where they HAD to have increasing revenue to constantly cover the rising debts. Their situation will get worse now as capital millage revenue shrinks but debt service continues to rise.

The School Board is not addressing their own culpability in their reckless financing of short and long term debt and the crippling effect of their own self inflicted fiscal policies. Now again I may be labeled Public Education Enemy Number One by the School Superintendant, but the real fact is while I have no true influence over School Board spending policies (as certainly evidenced by the massive COP borrowing) the current Superintendant has left a legacy of debt that future Boards and the next Superintendant will struggle with for a decade.

As for my alleged nastiness with Ms. Kneesy, I hope Dr. DiPatri sent everyone the entire e-mail exchange. To not so so is a disservice to the true debate. Ms. Kneesy initially e-mailed me with her less than courteous (in fact, extremely condescending and sarcastic) comments on the School Board revenue numbers. She made sure in her comments to copy Dr. DiPatri and the press. If you read the entire exchange you will see I continually ask for the state revenue numbers and the source of the $100 million cut alleged to already have happened and you will see she never responded with math, simply fire and brimstone. This was in the INITIAL e-mail to me, copied to the press, so clearly no private e-mail exchange was ever intended. Below I have copied Ms. Kneesy’s initial e-mail, my initial response, and a copy of Dr. DiPatri’s e-mail identifying my status in life as Public Education Enemy Number ONE!

Take the time to analyze the tax revenue streams and where the money has been spent and the debts accumulated. School spending has not been endangered by the incoming revenue but by the massive debts accumulated during a period of windfall revenue.

<--begin e-mail-->
Subject: Public Education Enemy Number ONE!

Amy,

I am writing to you after just having read the most recent e-mail from our esteemed Clerk of the Court, Scott Ellis. I am amazed and astonished by his one-sided, negative of course, assertions about our budget and spending. This from a man who maintains the second highest budget deficit (more than $3 million) of 67 counties in Florida and a public official who criticizes every other public official, local and county, yet refuses to share his financial information and audits with the public (see Judy Preston’s e-mail of 4/2/09)! Does he actually believe that we have only been reduced by $7 million during the past two years rather than almost $100 million? In Ms. Preston’s e-mail of 4/2/09, she provided Mr. Ellis with the revised third calculation as one of the sources which alone reduced Brevard’s 2008-2009 funding by $10.1 million. Yet, he persists in stating that you didn’t provide the information and that we were only cut a total of $7 million during the past two years. This is just another example of how Mr. Ellis distorts or ignores the facts presented to him. Another example is when he questions your veracity on data published by the State Department of Education; data showing that Brevard is 66th of 67 districts in district administrative spending and 2nd in classroom spending (Note: For the fifth consecutive year).

Notwithstanding the information above, I am really writing to thank you for your willingness to confront and challenge the never-ending false statements and accusations of Mr. Ellis, clearly public education enemy number ONE. You have shown great courage in taking him on publicly because it is always risky and hurtful to debate a person who relies on false information and innuendo and distorts or ignores facts that don’t support his arguments. In effect, he is nothing but a school yard BULLY surrounded by like-minded peers who cheer him on.

I am still waiting to hear a response to his $3.4 million deficit on a $17.4 million budget. Does he deny it? No! He just gave you a bunch of excuses such as he can’t borrow money, therefore he can’t balance his budget. If he worked for the School Board and carried deficits for six years, he would be fired immediately. In a recent Florida Today article in which he was ordered by Chief Judge Clayton Simmons to provide services to the courts, his response was; “They don’t really understand the financial situation.” This is from a public official who has run a deficit for six consecutive years. The judge who oversees the Clerk of the Court “doesn’t understand the financial situation.” How ludicrous! He accuses you of not providing data yet it is clear that he either refuses to or cannot provide information about his own budget in response to the judge’s order. On that same issue Judge Simmons told Ellis he would not lift the order until Ellis can, “definitively demonstrate with meaningful data why it would be a material cost savings to the clerk’s office to suspend clerk services during the court sessions outlined in his undated memo.” Apparently, the only one who “doesn’t understand the financial situation” is Scott Ellis.

But wait, it gets worse! As stated earlier, the Clerk of the Court has a current deficit of $3.4 million on a $17.4 million budget, the second highest deficit in the State of Florida. This is the 6th consecutive deficit submitted by Mr. Ellis and this year’s deficit is $1.4 million more than he submitted with his original budget. In effect, he continues to spend significantly more than he has.

BRAVO to you again for your courageous public stand in defense of the School Board and education in Brevard County. Your courage does not go unnoticed to the people in Brevard who support public education and who provide the children of Brevard a first rate education at a reasonable cost.

Dr. DiPatri
<--end e-mail-->

Here are the e-mails to which he was referring from newest to oldest (Editor’s note: clicking on the link to the original pdf in the upper left corner of the viewer improves readability dramatically):

From April 9th:

From April 2nd:

From March 5th:

From March 3rd:

I have been accused of unilaterally implementing changes and failing to meet with the Judiciary. This is also false. We met with our lead Brevard County Judge on the proposed changes SIX WEEKS ago. if we met six weeks ago on this issue, and I was going to implement the changes unilaterally, we would have implemented them over a month ago. The Brevard County Judges requested a full month to meet and discuss this ‘critical’ issue, and we waited. The meeting occurred and I was told NOTHING of any results. Not Wednesday the day of, not Thursday. I was to meet with our lead Brevard County Judge Friday but he had to cancel due to trial (no problem, he is one of our workhorse Judges) and we rescheduled to Tuesday. After hours Friday, before I had even met with our Brevard County Judge, I recieved the e-mail below from the Chief Judge in Seminole County.

By the end of last week we were forced to lay off 15 more employees due to declining revenues, some because of the economy, some due to Legislative changes in the last few years raising fines and fees for the State and the Judiciary as well as the January emergency session which moved certain fines and fees directly from the Clerks to the State and the Judiciary. Based on the Judicial power play in February, aided and abetted by the Office of State Courts Administration (OSCA) I now see why so much of our funding has been moved. OSCA has been advocating a complete take-over of the Clerk’s Courts employees and claiming such a move would save $200 million (out of $500 million), telling the Legislature the Clerks are sandbagging and squandering a few hundred million dollars a year. Speaking from a County where we have gone without pay raises for three years, did away with sick leave, and have hung on each year by the skin of our teeth in the courts area I was more than a little angered by the false accusations.

The Clerk’s Office has made suggestions for many years to save expenses on courts operations. Our perpetual plea for centralizing criminal courts in the most modern and safest courthouse, centralizing jury pools and trials in the courthouse with the largest number of courtrooms and jury areas, and providing a full time County Judge in the jail to moderate the pace of the jail proceedings and allow for more pleas to be taken in the jail, has fallen on deaf ears. When asked to sum up the cost savings of these proposals just for the Clerk, we estimated over $500,000 annually (14 or so positions). Our numbers and ideas were once again ridiculed by a few who have no experience or history with any of our suggested changes.

It is hard to say where this shall go. One thing is certain, as the Clerk of Courts I cannot legally order employees to come to work for free. Our revenue is on a daily basis, not a beginning of year appropriation, and if we do not have the money we cannot pay all of our employees – and must reduce. I have told our employees not to worry about maintaining the State’s performance standards for everything under such conditions, but instead we must focus on the highest priorities within the courts. In my book, Criminal Courts must take precedence over Civil Courts, but evidently based on last week we are to be ordered to carry two gallons of water in a one gallon bucket. Just as King Canute could not order the waves to roll backwards, the Brevard County Clerk’s Office cannot lose the equivalent of over 50 people (now) and perhaps another 50 in May (Summer furloughs and layoffs) and still do everything for everybody as we did at the beginning of the fiscal year.

I never claimed to be a lawyer, but as an engineer I can tell you quite plainly one cannot overrule the rules of mathematics.

Below are Judge Simmons’ e-mail to me and my response.

—–Original Message—–
From: Scott Ellis [mailto:Scott.Ellis@brevardclerk.us]
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 10:47 PM
To: Clayton Simmons; Scott Ellis
Cc: 18thCircuit Judges
Subject: RE: Order
Dear Judge Simmons,

I would like to know where you get the facts for the comments in your letter.

Evidently this letter is meant to be a let all tell all letter, so let us tell all.

I advised Judge Dugan well over one month ago of the revenue situation and of the proposed changes. I offered to meet with you, you did not return my phone call and did not offer to meet after the investiture, You claimed you called me multiple times, you called once and I returned the call the day of the investiture. You did not call the following week but instead chose to send me a letter with various legal citings.

I met with the Brevard County Judges. They were advised of the changes as well as briefed on the financial situation. They asked me to wait another month until they could meet this week, I did wait while in the meantime had to plan for another 15 layoffs. The Judges met Wednesday, I received no input from the meeting, none, thus we plan on moving ahead with the changes in transition next week and fully the week after.

You say I failed to produce meaningful financial data concerning changes, that is outright untrue. I submitted all the data I was requested to submit on central criminal, central jury, and a full time judge in the jail. I was not asked to submit financial data for the Civil Court Clerk data, but that would be easy – FIVE full-time court clerks at about $200,000 annual savings. I find it odd you claim I had unilaterally implemented changes when they had yet to occur and claim I failed to submit requested financial data when I clearly did. I would think the Brevard County Judges, all of whom received the data, would have copied you with it. It is one thing to dispute the data, which to date you have not, and another to accuse me of failing to submit the data. It was submitted and done so IN DETAIL.

I do not have to cast the courts as a contributing source to our financial woes, they are a contributing source. While we had hoped for the Legislature to review the various fee and fine structures and money movement made during the last two sessions to address funding issues, OSCA and the Judges chose to go on a final weeks power play to wipe out the Clerk’s Offices. Surely you cannot deny this, nor can you deny you traveled to Tallahassee to vote to take over the Clerk’s Office and did not have the courtesy or courage to inform me of what you had done. I found out from Tallahassee about ten days after the vote. Judge Silvernail was in Tallahassee earlier this week to speak in favor of the bill moving the Clerk’s funding even though the Judiciary was not involved. The Brevard County Staff Attorney, Ashley Hardee, has been surreptuosly getting hardcopies of e-mails I sent our employees and distributing them to the local Brevard County Bar, and I assume from your comments, yourself. So, yes, Judge Simmons, I clearly state the Judiciary is a contributing factor to our financial woes.

The cost savings from pulling back the Civil Court Clerks comes from the obvious, they are to be re-assigned to other duties NOT in Court Clerks to take the places of those lost due to layoffs. I am not sure what kind of mixed hearings you mean, but clearly if we reduced the numbers of Civil Court Clerks we would not be covering every action of the courts. It is not simply being in court but also the work-up for court.

Today I went to Viera to meet with Judge Dugan, but due to the constraints of his trial he could not make the meeting. In fact I have been available to meet with anyone at any time over the last few months.

The cost savings we seek are not a matter of convenience as has been stated by one of your Judges, but a matter of financial survival. You may speak all you desire of your definition of statutory requirements, but the facts are if we lay off 20 people now, 30 people in another month, and furlough 30 more a month later (out of the original 350) it is impossible for us to do everything then we did in the past. I have offered other ideas for cost savings, some taken, some ridiculed without a basis in fact or math.

I spoke to those in attendance at our quarterly meeting, which included a Judge, Court Administration, the SAO, the PD, the Sheriff, and State and County probation, to request they lay out the most important tasks we perform for them as we will not be able to do everything as timely as before.

I do not know what more you want, but I can guarantee you if we try to run for the next few months with full budget as planned for 2008/09 we will be be broke and closed before the fiscal year ends.

We have to take appropriate action to deal with the large losses in people and revenue, and I expect you as well will take whatever action you deem necessary based on your understanding of the law.

I too regret it has come to this, but the Judiciary’s decision to claim to the Legislature the Clerks had large amounts of money just waiting to be saved by placing Clerk’s employees under Court Administration has clearly fractured any trust between the Clerks and the Judges as well as left a great many counties, such as Brevard, which were already in tough financial condition and have been so since the beginning of Article V, even worse off than before. It will be quite apparent as our office shrinks dramatically that the end result of the final week actions in Tallahassee successfully harmed all of us in the courts system.

Scott Ellis
________________________________________
From: Clayton Simmons
Sent: Fri 3/20/2009 5:28 PM
To: Scott Ellis
Cc: 18thCircuit Judges
Subject: Order

Dear Mr. Ellis:

I regret that you have chosen to unilaterally implement changes in clerk support of the court without speaking to me first and in contravention of clear statutory requirements that you clear any changes in support with the Chief Judge in advance.

I wrote you on February 18, 2009, in response to your undated memo circulated on or about February 3, 2009, and advised you that the court did not approve of your proposed unilateral changes in clerk services.

The Brevard Judges met with you February 23, 2009, and voiced their concerns about these proposed changes and challenged you to produce meaningful financial information that would justify these changes. To date you have not chosen to honor the court with that data.

I realize that your office, along with every other county and state office in Florida is experiencing serious financial difficulty, but that does not justify ignoring well established law. I further realize that you are attempting to cast the courts as the cause of your financial woes, however, you have not yet shown why having clerks at some types of hearing and not having them at others (when most of the time different types of hearings are mixed together on the same judge’s docket in the same court room) would result in any material savings.

Accordingly, at the request of the Brevard Judges, after careful consideration by the Judges of what hearings require clerk support for the efficient delivery of justice, I am issuing the attached order. I have signed the original and will email you a scanned copy on Monday and mail you a copy of the original by U.S. mail. The order is effective immediately.

You will note, in recognition of your financial issues, that the Court is authorizing you to implement some of the changes in support that you unilaterally announced, however the other changes you unilaterally announced are not acceptable and may not be implemented.

I regret that it has come to this, but the court remains open to working with you in any reasonable way to optimize the efficient use of your personnel for necessary court functions.

Respectfully

Clayton D. Simmons
Chief Judge
Florida’s 18th Judical Circuit
Brevard and Seminole Counties

Total Clerk Revenue (all functions) 2003/04: $22,214,701
Total Clerk Revenue (projected) 2008/09: $21,136,587

I’ll also repeat the obvious to anyone but the money hungry at OSCA. Court Administration in the 18th Circuit (Brevard-Seminole) manages about 20 people. The JAs and Staff Attorneys manage themselves. The two Clerk’s Offices manage 550. It would be interesting to see how they could handle the additional 550 after ‘shedding’ duplication. If any ‘duplication’ should be eliminated it should be Court Administration. When I was on the County Commission, Court Administration was three people plus the JAs and Staff Attorneys.

There has not been any release of any financial data outlining where all the savings are supposed to come from – it is “give us the job and trust us to save the money.”

As for Judge’s budgets up only 13% in five years, that is an outright fraud. In five years we have added five Judges and two Hearing Officers, an increase of 30%. As for “how much cash the courts are generating”, we are preparing charts of fines assessed, fines not assessed, and fines converted to community service. We are also looking to get community service not served. I would never say the Brevard County Clerk’s Office is perfect, but I will put our work ethic up against the courts any day of the week, even Friday afternoon.

If the Judiciary/OSCA position were sound they’d not have waited until the final month before the Legislative Session to launch it. It is just like a lot of people run political campaigns, throw out the dirt at the very end and hope a decision is made before you can get it all cleaned off.

“Florida ranked 17 percent below the national average in per-student education funding”. Based on Ms. Preston’s own numbers that a reduction per student of $445 equals a 6% loss, then the other 94% still left means Brevard County gets from State and Local taxes about $7,000 per year, per student. A classroom of 20 students gets $140,000 per year, every year. Considering the teacher’s pay and benefits run about $60,000, that leaves $80,000 per classroom for Administration, Maintenance, and Supplies. If the National Average per student is $8,400, how was the $8,400 derived? Ms. Preston states Florida ranks 42nd in the nation in per student expenditures, and I find it mathematically odd that one could be 17% below the average, have only 8 states below us, yet be spending well over $100,000 per classroom and building hundreds of millions of dollars in new facilities.

The ‘drastic reductions’ mentioned are reductions in the Housing Bubble induced great increases the School Board has received. Looking over the July 26th, 2008, published charts of financial data, by the School Board itself, Operating Revenue from 2003 to 2008 rose from $437 million to $601 million, an increase of about 40% in five years. Student population rose during these same five years a total of 2,000, roughly 3%.

Clearly revenue has been more than adequate to maintain service, yet the skunk in the woodpile has yet to be identified. The Schools often decry the costs of the classroom size amendment without noting Brevard County had always proclaimed the smaller class size here BEFORE the amendment had even passed. While money has been used to expand certain campuses, much of the construction had little to do with additional classrooms but with accessory facilities, such as new football stadiums, performing arts centers, gymnasiums, and often school and school additions built without demographic study or regard.

I had been told a few years back the Brevard School had 10,000 empty seats, and based on the school closure list, evidently there are many. However, with so many empty seats and a downward demographic trend in students, school expansion was performed with borrowed cash from Certificates of Participation (COPs). Even worse than the COPs financed with the School Capital Millage, the School Board began issuing RANs (Revenue Anticipation Notes) to BORROW money to spend this year from the subsequent year. These RANs continue to be used as a substitute for the reserves which should have accrued during the windfall days of the Housing Bubble, but were not.

I had debated with School Board members and the Director of Finance back in 205 when the School Board announced it could borrow and spend $700 million on facilties, for FREE. Pressed for the assumptions of the free money, the Schools responded, both to me and in an op-ed Florida Today piece, the free money was based on the assumption the tax base of Brevard County would grow by 10% a year EVERY year for the next five years. Well, pop, pop, pop, the ‘new’ money is not going to come in, the money has been borrowed and spent, and the Chief detects the first of a few financial problems are about to hit the fan as the tax roll goes BACKWARDS and money to pay a fixed debt service shrinks. RAN borrowing and excessive capital COP borrowing now eat into the monies for operating and maintenance on a recurring basis, compounding financial shortfalls.

Demographics were not a School Board strong suit. Titusville High School, with the shuttle shutdown looming, spent about $50 million on a refurbishment which included a new Performing Arts Center and a new Football Stadium. Rather than share a stadium with Astronaut High, another new stadium was built for AHS. A new elementary school was built below Palm Bay, probably to try to choke out the charter school built by the city, and now a new $80 million high school will be opened which, given demographic trends, will most likely be superfluous. Numerous classroom and specialty addtions were made to schools on the closure list. Numerous performing arts centers and gymnasiums were built as well. It is not all about the classroom size amendment.

The show at the King Center was indeed contrived by a multitude of scare tactics sent home via backpack brigades. We are to believe 9th grade sports are on the rocks after tens of millions were just spent on gymnasiums and football stadiums. Math and Science teachers were allegedly on the block when in fact, due to the union rules, any layoffs will be based on seniority, not merit (lack of) or subect taught. A hit list of school closures came up with schools less populated. Oddly enough, it was never suggested these low population schools could perhaps stay in business with the reduction of Administrative Staff, but it is doubtful the King Center would be packed with threats of laying off a multitude of Administrators and staff.

Many on the School Board decried ‘State Mandates’, yet rather than identify the costs of the mandates and the savings achievable with their demise, the call was simply more money. I have no idea why Legislators expected anything less than a show trial, but had the mandates and funding been discussed rationally it is likely the schools could have worked to be able to handle education with tradeoffs of both fluff and mandates. No such discussion was possible in the highly partisan atmosphere (by design) at the King Center.

Given the propensity of the School Board to have sunken their Housing Bubble Windfall into recurring costs of salaries and debts it is unlikely they will soon escape their financial issues. It is often a ratchet effect with many governments, when times are good recurring expenses are increased, when times are bad taxes are raised rather than trim the recurring expenses created.

Keep in mind when Ms. Preston speaks of Education Funding being ‘gutted’ the school revenues are well ahead of where they were just a few shorts years ago, even with some reductions now factored in.

In the Old Testament, all debts are forgiven during the Year of Jubilee.

The Federal Government, in its blind rush to keep people in houses they either overbought or over-re-financed-for cash, will begin making the deal so sweet for those in default that those not in default question why in the world they are working hard to make their payments. As the deal for default sweetens, many will begin to stop paying on houses they really could pay for.

It all makes perfect sense. Most people are not really that smitten by their credit score. If a mortgage defualt could result in a new mortgage with $100,000 shaved of the principal of the contract and a new 4% government subsidized interest rate, why not default now? After all, if default is coming eventually due to worsening economic conditions, better to default with government assistance than not, and the credit hit on a hard foreclosure would be even worse.

Whether anyone likes it or not, the repo man serves a purpose in society. As houses, vehicles, boats, and other items are repossessed, the flag goes up to all other holders of debt to make their payments else the repo man visit them. From the lender point of view, the ability to take back the collateral of the loan is the biggest selling point of making a secured loan.

What is happening is the Federal, State, and Local intervention, along with greedy little cities tacking on tens of thousands of dollars of fees, is threatening to end the market for lending. It is the ultimate unintended consequence of government intervention in the loan markets. If a bank cannot foreclose, if a Judge can reduce the principal of a note by $100,000+, if local courts make it impossible to finish the Foreclosure case, and if the property is eventually returned with tens of thousands of bogus ‘fines’ attached, lenders will cease making the loans.

This may very well be an intended consequence of the government intervention. With the banks ability to loan and repossess stymied, the cry will become to ‘nationalize the mortgage industry’. After all, we are always told the Government must step in when the private sector cannot do the job, normally ignoring the fact the private sector could do the job until annihilated by the government.

The situation we are in only worsens and will continue to worsen. In just Brevard County 180,000 mortgages were recorded in 2004, 2005, and 2006 with an average value of about $150,000. I told people in 2005 my belief that at least 80% of the houses sold or borrowed against heavily (lots of ‘new’ money extracted) will end up in foreclosure. Given the fall off on either side of the peak and the fact some houses were getting a new ‘re-finance’ every year for extra cash, we could easily see up to 100,000 mortgages in default by the time this over, a staggering 40% of all privately owned single family units in Brevard County.

I tried for years to impress upon people the gravity of the situation as the Housing Bubble spiraled out of control, yet the smarmy rebuttals of “Bubbles are for Bath Tubs”, along with the Florida Today’s insane continued editorial screeds on the massive population growth we were having (we were not, thus the gross oversuppy now of housing units), drove the bubble to a full fever pitch until it broke in August of 2005.

Now comes the Federal Government to intervene, fundamentally extracting funds from those who bought within their means, or simply rented, to cover the losses of those who either grossly overbought, grossly overborrowed against their existing home for lots of ‘stuff’, speculated and flipped, and those who will now enjoy the Year of Jubilee by stopping payments when they can pay, just because defaulting makes great economic sense.

Do not expect an end to the intervention madness any time soon. Wall Street stole our money under President Bush, Squanderville is getting theirs under President Obama, and those who lived prudent financial lives on Main Street all get to pay.

Yes, and for all the idiot economists who first swore there was no bubble, then said the market would level without crashing, and now think the current ‘stimulus’ will help, please take the time to read a little Free Market Austrian Economics from the people who have written on this situation for over five years. Only government would hire the people who could not see the problem coming to fix the problem when those who saw it, predicted its outcome, and have the real economic cure, are still noted as being ‘outside the mainstream’. I guess sitting on the banks watching everyone else drowning in the flood tide.

Now that may be true in certain circumstances, but I highly doubt any secured loan had a clause for discontinuing payment when the payment created stress on the borrower. We are not seeing a rule of law, there is no dispute of the facts of the matter, we are simply seeing a delay because it feels good to do so.

The mediation maneuver is going to make things even worse for housing. There is little to mediate and those in default will have the ability to play the courts for more months of free living. If you are $15,000 in arrears and $50,000 upside down there is nothing to mediate, but the lender must pay for mediation costs and send someone who can ‘do’ something. The myth has been spread the Judges are clogged with foreclosures. Most foreclosure work takes place outside the courtroom in ensuring actions and files are complete. The final hearing takes a few minutes per house – you either can get the mortgage caught up or you cannot. Court Ordered Foreclosure Mediation at $250 a pop will be a windfall for certain attorneys.

There is no way we will ever dig out of this mess. The Courts have decided it is their job to keep people in their foreclosed homes, like a social welfare agency. How are lenders out of state supposed to have representatives here for every case? In the order is states that not only must the lender pay for the mediation, if the lender fails to make the meeting the entire Foreclosure case is thrown out and must be started anew. My experience is we already have numbers of professional rent cheats adept at prolonging the eviction system to squeeze out further free living, now we have an even more stringent system than the evictions which I guarantee will be played to the hilt by thousands of house owners.

If I were a bank given the rules in Brevard County and the Lien Police in some of the cities I would pull a State Farm and hit the road. If one cannot foreclose on the secured asset one will not make further loans on secured assets. The Courts are, like the Federal Government, assisting the improvident at the cost of the provident who will find it shortly even more impossible to get a bank loan or mortgage. If you think the banks are tight now, just wait.

Most bizarre is the requirement for the plaintiff (lender) to have someone at the mediation who can ‘cut a deal’. If these ‘deals’ are cut, particularly with debt being slashed, the Year of Mortgage Jubilee picks up further steam. Evidently disappointed only Federal Judges may get such authority during bankruptcies, the State now moves to gain itself the same powers through ‘persuasion’. This destructive maddening rush by Legislators and Judges to crush contracts will in the end eliminate private lenders such that only Nationalized Banks will be making house loans.