Commissioners agreed a day earlier to remove planned new Records Center from 2025 fiscal year Capital Improvement Program list of projects
During their June 20 budget workshop, the Sarasota County commissioners took a formal vote that directed staff to eliminate from the proposed 2025 fiscal year Capital Improvements Program (CIP) list a new records storage facility for the Office of the Clerk of Circuit Court and County Comptroller.
The project was estimated at $18 million a couple of years ago, but inflation and rising construction expenses had boosted the figure to $25 million.
On June 21, when Clerk of Court Karen Rushing presented her proposed 2025 fiscal year budget to the commissioners, she noted their action the previous day. Nonetheless, she underscored the need for a new facility to replace the one in the Northgate Center Business Park in the northern part of the county.
In lieu of a new structure — or the county’s purchase of a building that could be renovated to meet her needs — Rushing said that the addition of five people to her staff, to try to keep up with the destruction of old records as new materials come in, should help her deal with her storage needs.
After conferring with her chief operations officer, Janet Cantees — who was present, as well, for the budget presentation — Rushing said the estimate of those additional employees would be in the range of $240,000.
Rushing’s proposed 2025 fiscal year budget, as presented that day, totaled $13,166,091. She noted that the amount marked a 2.3% increase over her 2024 fiscal year budget. Further, Rushing pointed out that personnel expenses comprise $8,595,602 of the FY 2025 budget, with operating expenses adding up to $3,074,004. Rushing added that she had not included any new capital expenses for the next fiscal year, which will begin on Oct. 1.
While the commissioners indicated support for the new hires, County Administrator Jonathan Lewis explained that he needed direction from them that day on how to proceed with finalizing the proposed county budget for the 2025 fiscal year. Since the board members voted on June 20 to direct him to reduce recurring county expenses to achieve a millage rate of 3.30 for the 2025 fiscal year, Lewis asked them whether he should take the funds needed for the new employees for the Clerk of Court’s Office from the budgets of departments that the commission controls, or if they wanted him to make the necessary adjustment in the FY 2025 millage rate to account for the extra expense.
Chair Michael Moran wrapped up the discussion with Rushing without asking his colleagues for a motion to provide the direction that Lewis had sought.
Modifying the Surtax 4 plans
During the June 20 discussion, Deputy County Administrator and Chief Financial Management Officer Steve Botelho pointed out that the clerk’s new records facility had been included among the county’s projects to be funded — or partly funded — through the Surtax 4 program. The money for that program comes from an extra penny of sales tax that voters participating in the 2022 November General Election approved to be in effect from Jan. 1 2025 through Dec. 31, 2039.
A page in the Surtax 4 program documents explains the rationale for the “roughly 30,000 [square foot] records facility”: “The Sarasota County Clerk’s Office manages, processes and maintains records and court evidence for Sarasota County and the 12th Circuit Court. This includes several categories of records and evidence, including Official County Board records, land records, court records and departmental records of the Board of County Commissioners, etc. The current facility does not meet the physical space needs nor does it adequately protect records with permanent retention regulations. The maintenance, security, protection, access to and proper disposition of these records within all applicable statutes and regulations requires a suitable facility to secure and preserve them.”
The annual expense associated with the facility was estimated at $158,000, including the funds for personnel working there.
A critical need
As Rushing noted on June 21, the total capacity of her current records facility is 26,292 cubic feet. Referencing the latter figure, she said that the state requires that measurement instead of square feet.
A slide she showed the board members pointed out that 24,002 cubic feet of the building are being utilized.
Rushing underscored the latter detail: “We are at 95% of the use of the capacity …”
She went to the Records Center the previous day, she continued, “so [she] could speak specifically to the activities going on at this moment.”
She has five employees there, Rushing noted; they work every day to destroy records that can be destroyed, in accord with state law.
“From ceiling to floor,” she said, “the facility is filled with records.”
Their age is not grounds for their being gathered up and thrown out, she told the commissioners. They must undergo review, so any evidence within them can be removed.
Her staff then has to send notices to the affected attorneys about that evidence and wait for those attorneys to respond “before we can dispose of that component of the file.”
A third-party vendor actually handles the destruction of the materials, Rushing continued. Big tractor-trailer rigs arrive on the premises, with the documents shredded on-site, she said.
If it were the continued decision of the commission to put a pause on plans for a new records facility, Rushing pointed out, then the commission could pay for more employees “to move these records out at a faster pace so that we can take advantage of the delay.”
However, she cautioned, the Northgate Center Business Park structure has not been hardened to protect it against weather events. “It could blow away in a hurricane. … We have a risk …”
If the commissioners elected to buy an existing building to serve as the new records facility, Rushing continued, that structure would have to have air conditioning and humidity control. A fire suppression system also would be necessary, she noted.
On the other hand, Rushing added, “There isn’t a need for large office spaces.”
When Commissioner Mark Smith asked for clarification about the new employees she had proposed, Rushing explained the need for them. “It’s very difficult to have temporary people because they don’t necessarily stay for a specific duration of time … and they would have to be taught what evidence is” and how to determine whether materials constitute evidence. No evidence in a case that is in the appeals process can be destroyed, she emphasized.
Then Smith noted Commissioner Neil Rainford’s comments the previous day, about having found on LoopNet.com a building in North Port that Rainford thought would be a potential solution for Rushing’s facility needs.
On June 20, Rainford reported having located that structure within about 30 seconds after the start of his online research. The structure was approximately 30,000 square feet, he added, and its price was around $7 million, compared to the anticipated $25 million for the county to construct a new facility for Rushing.
Commissioner Ron Cutsinger responded that day that the cost of that North Port building was about $213 per square foot, compared to approximately $800 per square foot for the facility county staff had proposed for Rushing. He also pointed out, “Commercial buildings and offices are out of favor,” while construction costs “are soaring.”
Cutsinger did say that he had asked Deputy County Administrator Botelho to send the other commissioners a link to the structure Rainford had mentioned.
During the June 21 discussion, Smith asked Rushing, “Logistically, the way your office is run, would that [North Port building] work?” Would she need something closer to North County, he added.
“I really need a facility in proximity of the main courthouse,” Rushing responded. The Northgate structure is only about 3 miles from her office, she added.
When Commissioner Joe Neunder asked her how long she has to keep records, in accord with state law, Rushing told him, “Different files have different retention periods.” Juvenile records must be kept for 75 years, she continued, for example; wills have to be stored for 25 years.
Then Neunder asked her whether the files could be digitally scanned and uploaded to the cloud. “Any concerns with security?”
“I am an appointee of the Supreme Court [of Florida],” she said, “serving on the Florida Court Technology Commission.” Rushing added, “Since 2002, our office has digitized court records. We have been in the forefront [of that statewide initiative].”
Moreover, she told Neunder, “The Court has concerns about the cloud and security and confidentiality.”
Chair Moran told Rushing he understood the concerns about use of the cloud, “but there’s others that deal with incredibly sensitive personal information all over the world, including medical information.”
He added that 20- and 30-year-olds these days “don’t touch paper. … We are fiduciary folks for the taxpayer,” Moran continued. “The technology is an answer to this.”
Rushing noted that since 2014, the state has required attorneys to file documents electronically.
Further, she told Moran that she has not had the funds in her budgets to put historic records on microfilm. “We cannot keep up with the records that are there because we’re always trying to be frugal with our budget.”
Neunder also noted his concern about high construction costs and high inflation. Perhaps adding personnel to her staff would be what he characterized as a “band-aid” solution for the short-term.
“I recognize the board’s concern with pricing,” Rushing replied, “and I want to work with the board to do something that’s reasonable. I don’t want to be misunderstood,” she stressed more than once.
“I don’t want anyone leaving here thinking we don’t need a building,” Rushing continued. “We do.” Nonetheless, she added, she wanted to work with the board “to do the right thing for the community.”
When Commissioner Cutsinger asked whether extra staff would enable her to be able to destroy enough files in a timely manner to forestall the need for the new facility, Rushing responded, “You’re not going to reduce the need, but you can postpone the need.”
She added, “We have a whole floor of the historic courthouse [in downtown Sarasota] that is filled with records right now.” In fact, Rushing noted, she and her staff figuratively perform a juggling act in determining where to put more records in that space.
“We shouldn’t be using Main Street for storage,” she said, referring to that courthouse.
“We understand your position,” Commissioner Smith told Rushing, “and we’re going to work on it.”