BCC Minutes 05/28/2013 R BCC
REGULAR
MEETING
MINUTES
MAY 28, 2013
May 28, 2013
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, May 28, 2013
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION
in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida,
with the following members present:
Acting -Chairman: Tom Henning
Georgia Hiller (absent)
Fred Coyle (telephonically)
Donna Fiala
Tim Nance
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager
Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Clerk's Finance Director
Mike Sheffield, Business Operations — CMO
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
r a� =,
(j1 .�.
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples FL 34112
May 28, 2013
9:00 AM
Georgia Hiller - BCC Chairwoman; BCC Commissioner, District 2
Tom Henning - BCC Vice-Chairman; BCC Commissioner, District 3
Donna Fiala - BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Vice- Chairman
Fred W. Coyle - BCC Commissioner, District 4
Tim Nance - BCC Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Chairman
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH
THE EXECUTIVE MANAGER TO THE BCC PRIOR TO PRESENTATION
OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED
SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE
TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
Page 1
May 28,2013
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor Bob Scudieri - Faith Lutheran Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's consent agenda as amended (Ex Parte Disclosure
provided by Commission members for consent agenda.)
B. Approval of today's summary agenda as amended (Ex Parte Disclosure
provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
C. Approval of today's regular agenda as amended.
Page 2
May 28,2013
D. April 23, 2013 - BCC/Regular Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating June 2-8, 2013 as Community Emergency
Response Team (C.E.R.T.) week in Collier County in honor of the
volunteers who participate in this effort. To be accepted by Jerry Sanford,
North Naples Fire Rescue C.E.R.T.; Russ Rainey, Fiddlers Creek/Marco
Island C.E.R.T.; and Barry Gerenstein, Verona Walk (East Naples Fire)
C.E.R.T. Sponsored by Commissioner Fiala.
B. Proclamation recognizing the 40th Anniversary of Flotilla 96, the North
Naples operating unit of the United States Coast Guard. To be accepted by
Jim Mayer, Flotilla Commander, Flotilla 96. Sponsored by Commissioner
Hiller.
C. Proclamation designating May 2013 as Foster Parent Appreciation Month in
Collier County. To be accepted by Brad and Tammy Weaver, Foster Parent
Liaisons for Children's Network of Southwest Florida. Sponsored by the
Board of County Commissioners.
D. Proclamation recognizing May 2013 as Motorcycle Safety Awareness
Month. To be accepted by Ruth Kalvin, President, Gator Alley, ABATE of
Florida, Inc.; Fred Coor, State Delegate, Gator Alley, ABATE of Florida,
Inc.; and Dennis Draffen, PR/Communications, Gator Alley, ABATE of
Florida, Inc. Sponsored by Commissioner Nance.
E. Proclamation recognizing May 2013 as Internal Audit Awareness Month in
Collier County. To be accepted by Megan Gaillard, Pat Blaney, Ron Dortch
and Bruce Brister, Internal Audit Staff, Clerk's Office. Sponsored by
Commissioner Henning.
5. PRESENTATIONS
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
Page 3
May 28,2013
Item 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Item 9 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to approve plans for a Grant Management pilot program
with selected Victim Advocacy Organizations. (Kim Grant, Housing,
Human and Veteran Services Interim Director)
B. Recommendation to bring back an amendment, providing for a five percent
reduction, to the Collier County Administrative Code Fee Schedule of
building permit processing, review and inspection set fees as provided for in
The Code of Laws and Ordinances, Section 2-11. (Nick Casalanguida,
Growth Management Administrator)
C. Recommendation to review a presentation on impact fees prepared in
accordance with direction provided by the Board. (Amy Patterson, Impact
Fee Manager and Mark Isackson, Corporate Finance Director)
D. Recommendation to review the attached draft proposed changes to the
Collier County Economic Development Ordinances and direct the County
Manager to present those options to the community for input and additional
recommendation. Proposed drafts of conceptual changes include replacing
and consolidating all existing economic development incentive program
ordinances with the exception of the Innovation Zones Ordinance into three
simplified incentive programs as Collier County Policy based on adoption
by formal motion or resolution rather than adopted ordinance. (Bruce
Register, Office of Business and Economic Development Director)
Page 4
May 28,2013
E. Recommendation to accept a status report on operational management of the
Isles of Capri Fire District. (Len Price, Administrative Services
Administrator)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
A. This item to be heard at 9:30 a.m. Presentation by the Clerk of the Circuit
Court's Office regarding Audit Report 2011-3 Freedom Memorial.
B. This item to be heard immediately followinji Item 13A. Presentation by the
Clerk of the Circuit Court of audit report 2012-6 Housing, Human and
Veteran Services-Disaster Recovery Initiative Grant.
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
1) Presentation by Airport Authority's Executive Director in response to
March 26, 2013 Agenda Item #14A1 directing the Airport Director to
bring back pro forma financial statements supporting the Director's
plan to reduce or eliminate the annual general fund transfer, and pay
back the County loan.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC),
acting in its capacity as the Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA), approve the relocation of the Immokalee CRA Office,
authorize giving notice to the CRA's current landlord of its intent not
to renew the existing lease agreement, approve entering into a lease
agreement for office space with the Southwest Florida Workforce
Development Board, Inc., and authorize the CRA Chair to sign the
attached lease agreement with an annual CRA rent expenditure of not-
to-exceed $21,766.32. (750 South Fifth Street, Immokalee).
Page 5
May 28,2013
2) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), as
the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), to approve the
Immokalee's CRA's attached proposed Exit Strategy for the
Immokalee Business Development Center (IBDC) and authorize the
County Attorney to prepare the necessary documents for future CRA
Board consideration.
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Current BCC Workshop Schedule.
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
1) Recommendation to award a construction contract in the amount of
$877,157, which includes an allowance of$100,000, to C.W. Roberts
Contracting, Inc., for ITB #13-6077 "Naples Manor Sidewalk
Improvements (Phase II)" for construction of sidewalk improvements
(Project # 69081).
2) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve an amended and restated Encroachment Agreement for Lot
17, Grey Oaks Unit Nineteen which was approved by the Board of
County Commissioners on December 14, 2010 as Item #16Al2.
3) Recommendation to ratify and approve a stipulated Final Judgment as
to Parcel 106FEE, et al, as part of the US-41 / Collier Boulevard
Intersection Improvement project (Project No. 60116) Fiscal Impact:
$5,455.
Page 6
May 28,2013
4) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to adopt
a Resolution to hold a public hearing to consider vacating a portion of
the Drainage Canal Easement, recorded in Official Record Book
4385, page 3675 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida,
also being a part of Section 19, Township 50 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida. Part of the Sabal Bay PUD. Application No.
VAC-PL20130000413.
5) This item continued from the May 14, 2013 BCC Meeting.
Recommendation to increase the collective annual limit for multiple
contracts resulting from RFP No. 12-5892, "Fixed Term Landscape
Architectural Services."
6) Recommendation to agree to accept donations from the Community
Foundation of Collier County for the Artificial Reef program and to
place these donations into a restricted fund and to consider naming
County reefs in accordance with suggestions to be made by the
Foundation.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (BCC), as the Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA), approve an amendment to the previously approved Disaster
Recovery Initiative (DRI)/ Disaster Recovery Enhancement Funds
(DREF) grant agreement between the BCC and the CRA.
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners acting in
its capacity as the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA) approve contract #13-5988 Immokalee Stormwater
Improvements—Phase II and authorize the Chairman to sign the grant
funded contract with CDM Smith, Inc. (CDM).
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC)
acting in its capacity as the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) reject the proposals received in
response to grant-funded solicitation No. 12-5855 - Immokalee
Page 7
May 28,2013
Crosswalk Improvements and approve the attached budget
amendment which will allow staff to issue a work order to AIM
Engineering & Surveying under County-Wide Engineering Services
Agreement #09-5262 in the amount of$73,070.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (ITB) #13-6069 Sludge
Truck(s) Replacement for the purchase of three sludge hauling trucks
to Lift One, LLC.
2) Recommendation to waive competition and authorize the extension of
two existing sole-source agreements; one with Allen-
Bradley/Rockwell Automation for variable frequency drives and
related components, and one with Data Flow Systems, Inc., for
telemetry systems, both for a period of five years.
3) Recommendation to approve a work order for $469,520 to Mitchell &
Stark Construction Company, Inc., under Request for Quotation #08-
5011-83 for Underground Utility Contracting Services for the
Woodcrest Drive Utility Extension Phase 2 Project, Project Numbers
70044 and 70071; and, authorize the necessary budget amendments.
4) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment in the amount of
$700,000 to fund future wastewater projects along Vanderbilt Beach
Road, Logan Boulevard, Santa Barbara Boulevard, and East Tamiami
Trail under "Wastewater Force Main Technical Support," Project No.
70044.
5) Recommendation to approve a work order under Request for
Quotation #08-5011-82 in the amount of$337,275 to Kyle
Construction for Underground Utility Contracting Services for the
Wastewater Pump Station 312.25 Rehabilitation Project Numbers
70046 and 70051.
6) Recommendation to advertise an ordinance amending Ordinance No.
2001-73, the Collier County Water-Sewer District Uniform Billing,
Operating, and Regulatory Standards Ordinance, to provide
clarifications, administrative changes, and codification of existing
Page 8
May 28,2013
county ordinances.
7) This item continued from the May 14, 2013 BCC Meetinji.
Recommendation to authorize the purchase of a new Case 580N
Backhoe from Trekker Tractor LLC, in the amount of$65,050.07,
utilizing the Florida Sheriffs Association State Contract #12-10-0905.
8) Recommendation to advertise a public hearing to consider the
adoption of an Ordinance repealing and replacing the Collier County
Reclaimed Water System Ordinance, Ordinance No. 98-37, as
amended.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve modification #2 to Disaster Recovery
Enhancement Fund (DREF) Grant Agreement #1 2DB-P5-09-21-01-
K39 between the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity
(DEO) and Collier County to approve the termination of a
subrecipient agreement, facilitate reprogramming of available funds,
approve a new subrecipient agreement and two subrecipient
agreement amendments.
2) Recommendation to approve Contract Amendment #1 with each of
the thirteen vendors herein awarded Contract #12-5856 "Services for
Seniors", which incorporates grantor required subcontractor language
into the Agreements, thereby ensuring full compliance with grant
requirements.
3) Recommendation to approve the Parks and Recreation Department's
participation in the Immokalee Out-Of-School Time Initiative
(IOSTP); authorize the Chairwoman to sign a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with the Southwest Florida Workforce
Development Board, Inc. which will provide funds to allow up to 80
children to receive free recreational and tutoring opportunities during
the summer.
4) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment recognizing the
respective amounts of$83,203.21 in program income revenue
generated by properties acquired under the Neighborhood
Page 9
May 28,2013
Stabilization Program (NSP1).
5) Recommendation to approve an amendment to three (3) Subrecipient
agreements with Catholic Charities of Collier County, Diocese of
Venice, The Shelter for Abused Women and Children and St.
Matthews House for the FY2012-2013 U.S. Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) to clarify
requirements.
6) Recommendation to waive competition and approve a Memorandum
of Understanding between Collier County and the Gulf Coast Adult
Soccer League, Inc. to provide amateur soccer league programs at
Collier County Park facilities
7) Recommendation to approve after-the-fact amendments between
Collier County Commissioners and the Area Agency on Aging for
Southwest Florida, Inc. d/b/a Senior Choices of Southwest Florida,
which reflects funding changes; and approve budget amendments
accordingly for the FY 12-13 State General Revenue Seniors
Program. (Fiscal impact $68,019)
8) Recommendation to approve the first extension of the Interim
Management Plan for the Conservation Collier Red Maple Swamp
(aka NGGE Unit 53) multi-parcel project.
9) Recommendation to approve the first extension of the Interim
Management Plan for the Conservation Collier Winchester Head
multi-parcel project.
10) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (ITB) #13-6073 for
Purchase and Deliveries of Non-Bulk Chemicals and Pool Supplies to
Pool Court SCP Distributors, Leslie's Pool Mart, Commercial Energy
Specialists, Davis Supply, and Chem-Rite. The estimated annual
spend is $150,000.
11) Recommendation to authorize the chairwoman to sign an amendment
to the Ecological Consulting Solutions, Inc. Gopher Tortoise
Recipient Site Agreement to receive up to an additional 10 gopher
tortoises relocated from the Gordon River Greenway Park Project Site
Page 10
May 28,2013
to the NW Hackletrap Long Term Protected Gopher Tortoise
Recipient site in Hendry County for the estimated amount up to but
not exceeding $8,000 and to approve the payment of an additional
$3,000 mitigation contribution to the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWC).
12) Recommendation that Collier County no longer pursue wetland
mitigation credits at Pepper Ranch Preserve, but continue to pursue
grants for wetland restoration and panther habitat mitigation credits on
the property.
13) Recommendation to approve an after-the-fact amendment between
Collier County Board of County Commissioners and Area Agency on
Aging of Southwest Florida d/b/a Senior Choices of Southwest
Florida (Senior Choices) and approve budget amendments to reflect a
decrease of$65,520 in the Older Americans Act programs, and
$7,280 in the matching funds.
14) Recommendation to appropriate a budget amendment to allow
continuous operation of the Community Care for the Elderly,
Alzheimer's Disease Initiative, and Home Care for the Elderly grants
for the Collier County Services for Seniors program from the Area
Agency on Aging of Southwest Florida dba Senior Choices of
Southwest Florida prior to the execution of funding award (Fiscal
Impact $853,290).
15) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (ITB) #13-6082 "Radio
Road MSTU Devonshire Boulevard Roadway Landscape
Maintenance" to Florida Land Maintenance, Inc. d/b/a Commercial
Land Maintenance Inc.
16) Recommendation to authorize a $44,297.28 budget amendment using
Boater Improvement money in the Parks and Recreation Capital Fund
306 for the Port of the Islands Boat Ramp Repair Project.
17) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairwoman to
execute a Second Partial Release of Conservation Easement with the
South Florida Water Management District on County owned property
at the Vanderbilt Beach Parking Garage for the Vanderbilt Beach
Page 11
May 28,2013
Restroom Facility, and make a finding that the expenditure set forth
herein promotes tourism; Project No. 90046.
18) Recommendation to approve and execute the document necessary to
convey an easement to Florida Power & Light Company on County
property at the Gordon River Greenway Park; Project No. 80065.1.
19) Recommendation to provide additional evaluation points for
Economic Development projects in Immokalee for the FY2013-2014
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program grant
application cycle.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve agreements for the Request for Proposals
(RFP) #13-6046 Appraiser Special Magistrate(s) for Value
Adjustment Board (VAB) and #13-6047 Attorney Special
Magistrate(s) for Value Adjustment Board (VAB) and authorize the
Board of County Commissioner's Chairwoman, and the VAB
Chairman to execute the contracts with Armalavage Valuation, LLC.
and The Coastal Consulting Group, Inc. for Contract #13-6046 and
The Law Office of Ellen T. Chadwell, PL and Davia Mazur, Esq. for
Contract #13-6047.
2) Recommendation to award ITB #13-6018, "Fasteners and Wheel
Weights for Fleet", to Lawson Products, Inc.
3) Recommendation to approve the Employment Agreement for the
Chief Hearing Examiner with an effective date of May 29, 2013.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Adopted Budget.
2) Recommendation to approve a refund of an Affordable Housing
Contribution to Regal Point Developers Inc. totaling $56,000, due to
Page 12
May 28, 2013
the removal of an Affordable Housing Contribution commitment from
the Pine Ridge Mixed Use Planned Unit Development.
3) Recommendation to award a Financial Advisory Services contract to
Public Financial Management, Inc. (PFM) under RFP #12-5957.
4) Recommendation to accept the Summary Report on the 2013
Legislative Session.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting in
its capacity as the Collier County Airport Authority, approve the
attached Second Amendment to a Sub-Lease Agreement with Raven
Air LLC, d/b/a Island Hoppers Aerial Adventures for facilities and
specialized aviation service operations at the Marco Island Executive
Airport.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Hiller requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a valid public purpose.
Attended the Legal Aid Service Barrister's Bash Event on April 25,
2013. The sum of$33.60 to be paid from Commissioner Hiller's travel
budget.
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous correspondence to file with action as directed.
Document(s) are available for review in the BCC Office until
approval.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of April
25, 2013 through May 1, 2013 and for submission into the official
records of the Board
Page 13
May 28,2013
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of May 2,
2013 through May 8, 2013 and for submission into the official records
of the Board.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of May 9,
2013 through May 15, 2013 and for submission into the official
records of the Board.
4) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment recognizing
$1,470,000 in revenues and expenditures in the Sheriffs FY2013
General Fund budget.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to file a lawsuit on
behalf of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners against
N Campos Construction Corp and Edel Campo Morejon in the Circuit
Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County,
Florida, to recover damages incurred by the County for the repair of a
section of guardrail in the amount of$11,862.18, plus costs of
litigation.
2) Recommendation by the Collier County Educational Facilities
Authority for approval of a resolution authorizing the Authority to
issue revenue bonds to be used to refund bonds previously issued for
educational facilities at Ave Maria University.
3) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners acting as
the Airport Authority to approve and authorize the County Attorney's
Office to retain consulting and expert witness services for the lawsuit
captioned Quality Enterprises, USA, Inc. v Collier County Airport
Authority (Case No. 12-4345-CA) in compliance with Section VII H
of the Purchasing Policy. The estimated fiscal impact is
approximately $38,105.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
Page 14
May 28,2013
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
Fiscal Year 2012-13 Adopted Budget.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA
SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-
8383.
Page 15
May 28,2013
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Call the meeting to order of the
Board of Commissioners, Collier County, today, May 28th, 2013.
Announcements: Anybody who has cell phones, please put those
cell phones on vibrate.
The Board's rules are on the front of today's index, if you want to
review those.
Commissioner Hiller had an emergency -- family emergency, had
to fly out of town. Commissioner Coyle will be participating by
phone.
Today's invocation will be given by Pastor Bob Scudieri of Faith
Lutheran Church. And then after that, we'll have the Pledge of
Allegiance.
Would you all rise, please.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
PASTOR SCUDIERI: Let us pray.
Lord God, we thank you this day for community emergency
response teams, for Flotilla 96 of the United States Coast Guard, for
those who serve as foster parents and those who work for motorcycle
safety and for those who do internal audits. We thank and praise you
for those people.
We especially today pray for Commissioner Hiller and her
family. Keep Georgia safe as she travels. And we place her father in
your hands, asking for your healing mercies.
We pray for the common good, that through our honest
deliberations today the lives of the people of our county would prosper
and that through our constant desire to serve all the people, many of
the least and the greatest would see your loving hand providing for the
improvement of their lives. We ask this in your holy name, amen.
Page 2
May 28, 2013
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I feel blessed this
morning. It's been quite a long time that I had the privilege of sitting
next to Commissioner Fiala. Usually we're at opposite ends, but not
today.
Is Commissioner Coyle on the phone?
MR. MILLER: The phone bridge is activated, I've yet to hear
anyone join yet.
Item #1B
MOTION ALLOWING COMMISSIONERS COYLE AND HILLER
TO PARTICIPATE TELEPHONICALLY DUE TO
EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES — APPROVED
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll entertain a motion, due to
extraordinary circumstances, to allow Commissioner Coyle and
Commissioner Hiller, if she's on the phone today, to participate in
today's proceedings.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I agree.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Any opposed?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
County Manager, would you walk us through today's changes?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members
of the Board. These are your proposed agenda changes for the Board
of County Commissioners' meeting of May 28th, 2013.
Page 3
May 28, 2013
The first proposed change is to withdraw Item 16.B.1 from your
CRA consent agenda. That withdrawal is at staffs request.
The next proposed change is to move Item 16.D.12 to the County
Manager's regular agenda to become Item 11.F. It's a discussion on
mitigation credits at the Pepper Ranch Preserve. That item is moved
at Commissioner Nance's request.
The next proposed change is to withdraw Item 16.x.3 from the
County Attorney consent agenda. There is some momentum there to
work that dispute out and we would like to wait to see how that
potentially resolves itself before we move forward with this item.
That is removed at staffs request.
And we have a few time certain items, Mr. Chairman. Item 13.A
is to be heard at 9:30 a.m., immediately followed by Item 13.B. Those
are two internal audit reports from the Clerk of Courts office.
Item 11 .A is to be heard at 10:30 a.m. That's a progress report on
the pilot program initiated at the Board's direction for victim advocacy
organizations as county grant sub-recipients.
And your final time certain is Item 11.E, and that will be heard at
1 :00 p.m., and that is a status report from the staff on the proposals
that were received by the Isle of Capri Fire and Rescue District by
East Naples Fire and Control Rescue District.
Those are all the changes that I have, Mr. Chairman.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, do you
have any ex parte communication on today's consent or summary
agenda?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No ex parte, no changes, no
corrections, no additions.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I have no ex parte communications
Page 4
May 28, 2013
on either the consent agenda or the summary or any changes above
and beyond what were mentioned by the County Manager.
Item #2A, #2B #2C — APPROVED/ADOPTED WITH ONE
MOTION
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED
(EX PARTE DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION
MEMBERS FOR CONSENT AGENDA) — APPROVED AND/OR
ADOPTED W/CHANGES
Item #2B
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED
(EX PARTE DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION
MEMBERS FOR SUMMARY AGENDA) — ADOPTED
Item #2C
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S REGULAR AGENDA AS AMENDED
— APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I can ditto that. So I'll
entertain a motion to approve 2.A, 2.B and 2.C.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve 2.A, 2.B, 2.C.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: And I will second them as well.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
Page 5
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Any opposed?
(No response.)
Page 6
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
May 28,2013
Withdraw Item 16B1: Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
(BCC),as the Community Redevelopment Agency(CRA),approve an amendment to the previously
approved Disaster Recovery Initiative (DRI)/Disaster Recovery Enhancement Funds(DREF)grant
agreement between the BCC and the CRA. (Staff's request)
Move Item 16D12 to 11F: Recommendation that Collier County no longer pursue wetland
mitigation credits at Pepper Ranch Preserve, but continue to pursue grants for wetland restoration
and panther habitat mitigation credits on the property. (Commissioner Nance's request)
Withdraw Item 16K3: Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners acting as the
Airport Authority to approve and authorize the County Attorney's Office to retain consulting and
expert witness services for the lawsuit captioned Quality Enterprises, USA, Inc.v Collier County
Airport Authority(Case No. 12-4345-CA) in compliance with Section VII H of the Purchasing Policy.
The estimated fiscal impact is approximately$38,105. (Staff's request)
Time Certain Items:
Item 13A to be heard at 9:30 a.m., immediately followed by Item 13B
Item 11A to be heard at 10:30 a.m.
Item 11E to be heard at 1:00 p.m.
5/28/2013 8:30 AM
May 28, 2013
Item #2D
APRIL 23, 2013 BCC/REGULAR MEETING MINUTES —
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Motion to approve the minutes of April 23rd, 2013 BCC regular
meeting?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: And a second.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Motion carries unanimously.
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS — ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL
PROCLAMATIONS — ADOPTED
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JUNE 2-8, 2013 AS
COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM (C.E.R.T.)
WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY IN HONOR OF VOLUNTEERS
WHO PARTICIPATE IN THIS EFFORT. ACCEPTED BY JERRY
SANFORD, NORTH NAPLES FIRE RESCUE C.E.R.T.; RUSS
RAINEY, FIDDLERS CREEK/MARCO ISLAND C.E.R.T.; AND
BARRY GERENSTEIN, VERONA WALK (EAST NAPLES FIRE)
C.E.R.T. — ADOPTED
Page 7
May 28, 2013
Now we move to proclamation.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Item 4.A is a proclamation designating
June 2nd through June 8th, 2013 as Community Emergency Response
Team CERT Week in Collier County. In honor of the volunteers who
participated in this effort. To be accepted by Jerry Sanford, North
Naples Fire Rescue CERT, Jose Palumbo, III, also with North Naples
Fire Rescue CERT; Russ Rainey, Fiddler's Creek, Marco Island
CERT; Barry Gerenstein, Verona Walk, East Naples Fire CERT;
Robert Buck, Waterways, Big Corkscrew Island Fire Rescue CERT;
and Rick Harris, Immokalee Fire and Rescue District CERT.
This item is sponsored by Commissioner Fiala. If you would
please step forward and receive your proclamation.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Everyone with CERT, come on up,
let us see all of you.
Thanks for all you do for all of us. See, I knew there were a lot
of them sitting out there. They were just kind of hiding away.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Everybody's got to move today for
the picture.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: State your name for the record,
please.
MR. SANFORD: Jerry Sanford, Public Information Officer for
the North Naples Fire Department and CERT coordinator.
Thank you, Commissioners. On behalf of all the CERT teams of
Collier County, I am honored to accept this proclamation. CERT
training promotes a partnering effort between Emergency Services and
the people that they serve. The goal is for emergency personnel to
train concerned members of their communities in basic skills. CERT
members are then integrated into the emergency response capability
for their areas.
June 1st is the beginning of the hurricane season, so we must be
prepared. The federal government is predicting an above average
Page 8
May 28, 2013
hurricane season in the Atlantic this year with anywhere from seven to
11 hurricanes expected. Super Storm Sandy showed us what happens
when people think that disasters cannot affect them. Drowning was the
most common cause of death. Residents in the evacuation zones were
told the day before the storm to leave, but many remained in their
homes. 53 percent of those drowned were found in their homes. If the
evacuation order is issued in Collier County, get out, get ready and
stay safe. Thank you again for the recognition.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I say something?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Just this past week I wrote a
little column in one of the newspapers I write for and it was talking
about getting prepared for hurricanes and what to do in your home and
so forth. Somebody sent me a letter back and said you shouldn't be
frightening us this way.
That isn't it at all. You should be ready and we should all be
prepared for whatever. We can always recycle those things back into
our regular daily life after the hurricane season passes and we're fine.
But I just wanted to say thanks to all of you, you are prepared
and we really appreciate that. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation?
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE 40TH ANNIVERSARY
OF FLOTILLA 96, THE NORTH NAPLES OPERATING UNIT OF
THE UNITED STATES COAST GUARD. ACCEPTED BY JIM
MAYER, FLOTILLA COMMANDER, FLOTILLA 96 — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.B is a proclamation recognizing the 40th
anniversary of Flotilla 96, the North Naples operating unit of the
Page 9
May 28, 2013
United States Coast Guard Auxiliary. To be accepted by Jim Mayer,
Flotilla Commander, Flotilla 96. This proclamation is sponsored by
Commissioner Hiller.
Would you please step forward, if you're present, to accept the
proclamation.
(Applause.)
MR. MAYER: Commissioners, thank you for recognition. My
name is Jim Mayer, I am the Flotilla Commander of Flotilla 96 of the
United States Coast Guard Auxiliary.
The Auxiliary is the non-law enforcement, all-volunteer civilian
component of the Coast Guard. Our objective is to teach boating
safety, keep boaters safe.
Unfortunately boating accidents are up. But we have the support
of Collier County, in particular the Commissioners, to remind the
public to watch the weather, wear your life jackets and make sure you
have safe boating equipment on your vessels. Thank you for the
recognition this morning, we appreciate it.
(Applause.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
And I believe you can still get a free inspection of your boat to
make sure that your safety -- your equipment -- safety equipment is up
to par. You get a little sticker; is that correct?
MR. MAYER: That is correct. Anybody interested, just go on
the Internet, United States Coast Guard Auxiliary, information.
There's information about safety --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So that is correct, you can get a
sticker on your vessel.
MR. MAYER: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Next proclamation?
Item #4C
Page 10
May 28, 2013
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY, 2013 AS FOSTER
PARENT APPRECIATION MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY.
ACCEPTED BY BRAD AND TAMMY WEAVER, FOSTER
PARENT LIAISONS FOR CHILDREN'S NETWORK OF
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.0 is a proclamation designating May, 2013
as Foster Parent Appreciation month in Collier County. To be
accepted by Brad and Tammy Weaver, foster parent liaisons for
Children's Network of Southwest Florida. This item is sponsored by
the entire Board of County Commissioners.
(Applause.)
MS. WEAVER: Board of Commissioners, thank you so much
for this honor and for the recognition.
My name is Tammy Weaver. I'm a foster parent liaison with
Children's Network of Southwest Florida. My husband could not be
here today. But we were foster parents for eight years and are
adoptive parents and now currently serve as liaison between the
agencies and the foster parents.
So on behalf of the Department of Children and Family and
Children's Network of Southwest Florida, Family Preservation here in
Collier County and the foster families of Collier County, we thank you
for the recognition.
I'd like to introduce Bob Madden, from one of our current foster
families, to say a few words.
MR. MADDEN: My name is Bob Madden and just became a
foster parent in January, and we are foster parents of three beautiful
children, helping them out through the hard times right now.
We just wanted to let you know that I did extensive research on
what the county does here, Collier County, and if it wasn't for all the
help that you guys do, we would not have, you know, gotten into the
foster parenting. We really appreciate everything you guys do for us.
Page 11
May 28, 2013
Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Thank you so much.
(Applause.)
MS. WEAVER: Let me close by saying that out of 262 foster
families that currently serve the five county area district, 33 of those
families are in Collier County. So we thank you for the support and
encouragement that you give those families. And our need is great, so
if you know of any families that have a heart for serving our most
vulnerable children, please encourage them to step forward and
become foster families. And again, thank you for the recognition
today.
(Applause.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation?
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING MAY, 2013 AS
MOTORCYCLE SAFETY AWARENESS MONTH. ACCEPTED
BY RUTH KALVIN, PRESIDENT, GATOR ALLEY, ABATE OF
FLORIDA, INC.; FRED COOR, STATE DELEGATE, GATOR
ALLEY, ABATE OF FLORIDA, INC.; AND DENNIS DRAFFEN,
PR/COMMUNICATIONS, GATOR ALLEY, ABATE OF
FLORIDA, INC. — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4.D is a proclamation recognizing May, 2013
as Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month. To be accepted by Ruth
Calvin, President, Gator Alley, ABATE of Florida, Incorporated; Fred
Coor, State Delegate, Gator Alley, ABATE of Florida, Incorporated;
and Dennis Draffen, PR/communications, Gator Alley ABATE of
Florida, Incorporated. This is sponsored by Commissioner Nance.
(Applause.)
Page 12
May 28, 2013
MR. COOR: Thank you very much. My name is Fred Coor with
the Gator Alley chapter of ABATE of Florida.
If you never heard of ABATE of Florida, it's American
Brotherhood Aiming Towards Education. And our task is to try and
help people understand the problems faced by motorcyclists all over
the United States. But mostly we're focused on Southwest Florida.
And it's ironic that we're here to make a proclamation about
motorcycle safety when you may be aware of all the fatalities that
have just happened for motorcyclists in just this past 30 days. But
that's one of the reasons that we constantly do this. We're here trying
to find out how we can better educate the public.
Now, a lot of people think we're just a group of bikers that are
out to have a good time. No, we care about keeping our friends and
family members safe and everybody that rides.
So we appreciate the opportunity to have this recognition, and we
want to let you know that motorcycles are everywhere, and help keep
us safe by watching for motorcycles. We appreciate it. Thank you,
Tim, for all your help too.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'd like to really thank Gator Alley
and ABATE for their tenacity on this cause. You know, with the
tragedies that we recently witnessed bring this cause to the forefront
today. And it's ironic that we had it scheduled for this.
But you guys are tenacious, you're everywhere, at public
meetings, doing your charity work and everything. I really commend
your work in the community for education. Thank you so very much.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, next proclamation?
Item #4E
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING MAY, 2013 AS INTERNAL
AUDIT AWARENESS MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY.
Page 13
May 28, 2013
ACCEPTED BY MEGAN GAILLARD, PAT BLANEY, RON
DORTCH AND BRUCE BRISTER, INTERNAL AUDIT STAFF
FROM THE CLERK'S OFFICE — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Item 4.E is a proclamation recognizing
May, 2013 as Internal Audit Awareness Month in Collier County. To
be accepted by Megan Gaillard, Pat Blaney, Ron Dortch and Bruce
Brister, internal audit staff from the Clerk's office. And this item is
sponsored by Commissioner Henning.
(Applause.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Crystal, aren't you going to
step down?
MS. KINZEL: Oh, okay, I think I will.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: These are your auditors,
correct?
MS. KINZEL: They are. I usually let them take the recognition.
Go ahead, that's your -- thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. DORTCH: Just real quickly wanted to say thank you to the
Commissioners for recognizing the month of May as Internal Audit
Awareness Month.
Over the last few years we've tried to develop a good rapport
with both the County Manager's staff and also the County Attorney's
Office, and we look forward to continuing those relationships.
Ron Dortch, Senior Internal Auditor with the Clerk's Office.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion to accept
today's proclamations?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner
Page 14
May 28, 2013
Nance, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Opposed?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #7 — Also continued later in the Meeting
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to Item 7, Public
Comments on General Topics.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, we have five public speakers
registered.
Your first public speaker is Vera Fitz-Gerald. She will be
followed by Bob Krasowski.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: I'm Vera Fitz-Gerald. I want to speak
about code enforcement.
When I got back down here late last year after having just lost
my lovely husband, code enforcement was right there. They must
have been staking out my property.
I had complained to code enforcement about my neighbor behind
me who was piling up garbage and yard waste along the back fence.
Being the neighbors from hell, I knew I couldn't go and speak to them
about it.
In retaliation, she called code enforcement about my old shed
being too close to the lot line.
One thing I found about grief is that one can't think clearly and
simply can't act on anything, so I just couldn't do anything about my
Page 15
May 28, 2013
shed. When we bought the shed, my husband, a retired Army colonel
who never did anything even slightly illegal in his life, said we have to
go down to the government offices and see if there are any rules or
regulations on sheds. So off we went, and were shown in to see
someone where the planning offices were.
The middle-aged man we spoke to opened a binder on the codes
and read them. He asked if the shed was going to be put on a slab.
No, we both replied. He then said, then you can put it anywhere.
There are no requirements for a freestanding shed and no permit is
required.
Considering that he was consulting the book, we took him at his
word. He said to use the easement, as that five-foot space tended to
become a no-man's land. We followed his advice and put it close to
the lot line.
Now about 30 some years later code enforcement cited us for
improperly placing the shed, and I was told I had to get a permit too.
This is absolutely insane. If the shed is so offending, why didn't
the neighbor complain 30 years ago or 25 or 20 or 10? Does this
make any sense to any of you?
Meanwhile, code enforcement drove past several glaring
violations to get to my place. There were boats in front yards, trailers
parked on the lawn in front, cars up on jacks. They didn't stop and cite
any one of these because they were hot on the trail of a grief-stricken
little old lady with a 30-year-old shed.
I asked the supervisor why they were so concerned about
something so long ago when things in the neighborhood needed taken
care of. His reply was, we do this all the time. I was really offended.
Are our tax dollars being used by this department to harass us,
the citizens who pay their salary? Can't some common sense be used
in code enforcement, or is it just too easy to harass little old ladies,
seniors who have lived here for decades, instead of current violators?
There's no health or safety issue here, nor public welfare but an
Page 16
May 28, 2013
old shed. If I went out and committed a robbery and managed to elude
police for five years, I would be home free because the Statute of
Limitations for robbery is five years. Murder and Collier County
codes are the only two things that I know about that have no Statute of
Limitations.
Isn't it about time we put some common sense into our codes?
Sheds should not be an issue after decades of existence, nor should
problems with -- well, never mind that one.
Anyway, so I came today to ask you to consider putting some
limitations on perceived violations that were okay back when. Surely
if robbery is forgotten after five years, can't we do the same for code
violations and free up these code workers to tend to current violations?
UNIDENTIFIED MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE: Here here.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: Yes, that's what I say.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Vera, I must say --
Commissioner Henning -- I'm sorry we're meeting under such
circumstances. It's been a long time since --
MS. FITZ-GERALD: It has.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- we've seen each other.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: It has. I've been looking after my husband
for years.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I'm sorry to hear that
he's passed away.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: Yeah, I know.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Your neighbor had debris in
the backyard?
MS. FITZ-GERALD: Oh, piles of garbage and yard waste. And
so as I said, you can't talk to them, so I had to go to code enforcement.
And this was just getting even. You know, you kick my dog, I'll kill
your cat or something stupid like that.
Anyway, I just think code enforcement should just be tending
current violations.
Page 17
May 28, 2013
For instance, I worked with Golden Gate City Association, I can't
remember what it was called, it was the code thing. And we got a
parking ordinance in place. And you'll recall, you actually passed it,
and this parking ordinance worked for a while. Well, code
enforcement is clearly ignoring it, because cars are parked
everywhere. Swales, front yards, everywhere.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, as far as code
enforcement, you can talk to the administrator, Nick Casalanguida,
who's sitting back there, that black tie --
MS. FITZ-GERALD: I will talk to him.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- or a red tie, black suit.
But the County Attorney can address your after-the-fact permit
issue.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, and I know that Magistrate Judge
Brenda Garretson heard this issue, and I find her to be extremely fair
about these things.
I don't really know the particulars about this matter. I do know
we have a new hearing examiner. This is one of the reasons we got
him, to see if we can resolve issues like this.
With the Board's indulgence, if you let me look into it I can work
with Nick Casalanguida and perhaps Mr. Strain and see if there's a
way we can resolve this.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Members of the Board?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think that's fine. You know, I
believe that the -- we have wide agreement on the Board of County
Commissioners that code enforcement needs to be engaged with
things that really impact the quality of our lives. And, you know,
we've taken a few minor steps recently to try to avoid becoming
embroiled in various domestic disputes between neighbors that are
disgruntled. Because that's not the purpose of code enforcement.
So hopefully we have a mechanism here to get this resolved. I
think the County Attorney's recommendation is a good one.
Page 18
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, do you
have a problem with that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just I might add, Vera, thank you
for being here and alerting us. As you know, code enforcement is
responsive to the calls that are phoned in.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And nobody says, you know, I'm
getting even with my neighbor, they just call in and report a violation,
and code has to then follow up on it.
And sometimes they get embroiled in some of these things,
neighbors against neighbors. We've had that in my district also. And
that's sad, but they don't have any choice, they have to respond to
whatever they're sent out for.
And I'm sure that they would appreciate us maybe making things
a little more sensible as we move along so that -- so that we take care
of violations like garbage heaped up in somebody's yard and yet
something that's been there for 30 years possibly have a different
approach to it.
But how we get there right now, I don't know. We haven't
attempted that yet.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: I haven't got any suggestions except
sunset it. Put in a Statute of Limitations.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Vera.
MS. FITZ-GERALD: Thanks.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have no problem with the
County Attorney looking at this, working with -- next public speaker,
and then we have to get to our time certain.
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Bob Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
recorder, my name is Bob Krasowski, and there are two things I'd like
to address this morning.
Sunday I was watching Jeff Lytle Show. Commissioner Fiala was
Page 19
May 28, 2013
on it. She had mentioned to Jeff she didn't know where the concept of
municipal taxing unit districts applied to people living along the beach
to help pay for beach nourishment came from.
I just wanted to mention today for all your benefits that that
actually came out of the Florida Shore and Beach Preservation
Association conference that was held here at the Waldorf Astoria
several months back. And this is a technique that's used in other
places in the State of Florida, sometimes in concert with hotel bed
taxes, sometimes not, where funds are raised proportionately,
identifying the people living closest and benefiting most from the
beach and the protections that are afforded them from storms when
you do a bigger beach nourishment.
So that's -- if anybody wanted to track that down, just look to the
Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association and the people who
are in the industry of figuring these things out.
Another thing I wanted to mention was last meeting you had the
-- you moved forward with the recommendations of staff to -- on our
beach renourishment. And one element in the recommendations was
to allow for -- to -- they said they wanted to -- they preferred work
outside of turtle nesting season. Now we've reduced the amount of
sand and time taken. That's easier to do.
But I've looked at the bid. And in the bid documents that are out
to the dredgers, there's no -- that I could find, I could be wrong, but I
doubt it because I looked it over pretty well -- there is no reference to
a preference to stay out of turtle nesting season. The very beginning
of turtle nesting season, which would occur next year at the end of the
project, has been eliminated. But still the six weeks where there's
turtle nests on the beach and they would have to be moved is still in
for consideration.
I asked the Coastal Zone Management people about it and Gary
and Mr. Sorey out in the hall explained to me that they had the -- no
expectation of being able to secure permits before a November 1st
Page 20
May 28, 2013
start, which would be okay. But then why leave it in there? Why put
out for bid that six weeks when if a company identifies that they could
do it in that six weeks but then there would be no permits to do it then,
it's putting extra work and more confusion on the dredgers, why don't
we eliminate that, tell them we'll start in November and we'll take our
bids that way.
I think to go around and tell the community that we're going to be
out of turtle nesting season is a bit disingenuous. Because the intent's
still there to hopefully secure dredgers within the very end six weeks
of turtle nesting season, that necessitates moving this in the six weeks
and for two months prior to that. Thank you very much for your time.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, we have a time certain?
Item #13A
PRESENTATION BY THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT'S
OFFICE REGARDING AUDIT REPORT 2011-3, FREEDOM
MEMORIAL — MOTION DIRECTING THE COUNTY MANAGER
TO SEND TO THE TDC TO RECOGNIZE THE ACCOUNTING
ERROR IN TOURIST TAX DOLLARS — APPROVED; MOTION
FOR THE TASK FORCE TO CONTINUE BUT FUNDRAISING
ACTIVITIES TAKEN THROUGH A NEWLY CREATED 501C3 —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, we do, Mr. Chairman. You have a 9:30 a.m.
time certain. It's Item 13.A, and it's a presentation by the Clerk of the
Circuit Court's office regarding audit report 2011-3, Freedom
Memorial.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Who's giving that today? All
right.
MS. GAILLARD: Megan Gaillard, for the record, Clerk's
Internal Auditor.
Page 21
May 28, 2013
We completed an audit of the Freedom Memorial project, starting
in conjunction with the Tourist Development audit.
The Freedom Memorial is a project that was established by the
Board of County Commissioners in 2004 to pay tribute to those who
died in the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks.
The audit was limited to management oversight and controls and
funding eligibility. The audit did not address the merit of the project;
that's a decision of the Board.
This project seems to have involved many well-meaning citizens,
but the project didn't receive the guidance and the oversight that was
necessary by county management to ensure proper controls.
In May of 2004 the Board of County Commissioners proclaimed
September and every September thereafter Freedom Month. In June
of 2004 the BCC approved creating the Freedom Memorial Task
Force to coordinate all the activities of the project for awareness and
to work on completion of the ultimate goal, including a fundraising
committee.
The Board also said that the Communication and Customer
Relations Department and the Parks and Recreation Department were
to coordinate the activities and provide the guidance to the task force.
Currently the Freedom Memorial has been partially constructed
and the fundraising activities are still active.
We put together a chart to show the estimated project costs and
where the project currently is. The original estimation was a $2
million project to build the entire project for the granite. So far about
$660,000 has been received through multiple sources of funding.
Some from collections from donations, some from tourist tax dollars,
interest earnings and taxpayer funds.
It's estimated about $1 .2 million is still needed to complete the
project.
These are some pictures. The original design is the top picture,
which is what the Board approved. The bottom, the picture on the left
Page 22
May 28, 2013
is where they're putting in a water fountain behind the Memorial. And
the picture to the bottom right is a side view of the construction.
Our objectives of the audit were to review the eligibility of the
funding received with tourist tax development dollars and to review
the controls in place for the funding and solicitations.
Originally the task force submitted an application to the Tourism
Department to obtain a c2 Grant to receive funds for the project. When
the task force completed the application, they indicated that they were
a 501c3. The other choices on the application were government or a
for profit entity.
The Freedom Memorial Task Force is not registered with the
State of Florida as an organization and is not registered with the IRS
as a nonprofit. The Board of County Commissioners entered into an
agreement with the task force, indicating that they were a 501c3,
which is what would have made them eligible for the funding.
With them not being a 501c3 and not necessarily being a govern
-- being any entity, when they received c2 funding, it was in violation
of the ordinance.
It seems that the county was managing and operating the project
and were assisting with some of the promotion and fundraising and the
activities, but the county was ultimately operating and managing,
which would have indicated that funding would have been more
appropriately awarded from category c 1 as a county owned and
operated entity.
The award of the c2 funding also had further restrictions saying
that they were unable to use funds for construction of the Memorial,
so the use of approximately $140,000 for construction was ineligible.
Under the Florida Statute, construction of the monument is an
allowed expenditure. And under the county ordinance, if it was c 1
funding, it would be an allowable expenditure.
Additional review was completed. It was detected that the
deposits did not reconcile with the activity reports filled out from each
Page 23
May 28, 2013
event because of various reasons. Some, the activity reports weren't
provided from older 2006 events and 2007.
Of the discrepancies, most were minor in nature, but it showed 39
percent of them had exceptions, indicating oversight wasn't being
properly provided and proper reconciliations weren't being completed.
We talked to the Freedom Memorial Task Force and they said
additional funds had been collected in boots and through different
various activities. And the coins were maintained off to the side from
the deposits and then added into the deposits, which would account for
the overage.
The funds collected by the Freedom Memorial Task Force were
commingled with personal funds. The money collected on behalf of
the county was put into personal bank accounts and then a check
issued to the county. The explanation provided was that by putting it
through a personal fund they didn't have to pay fees for check cashing.
But any funds of the county should never be put into personal funds.
Which has since been resolved.
The solicitation for the donations did not have county oversight
to properly track and maintain records or funds.
Sales tax from the sale of t-shirts, pins, hats and items, has not
been reported to Finance or to the Florida Department of Revenue.
Sales tax has not been paid for the sales.
The county was purchasing the different items, t-shirts, hats, pins,
through county purchase orders, then providing the items to the task
force. Then the task force was taking those items and selling them at
events or providing them in conjunction with larger deposits.
When the items were told sold, taxes should have also been
collected and reported back.
The county staff and the task force are working with the County
Attorney's Office to resolve the ramifications.
The inventory that was provided has not been tracked or
supported. It has a lack of documents. The county staff shows what's
Page 24
May 28, 2013
been purchased and then it was not tracked after that. They're going
back and doing a manual reconciliation with the task force to
determine what's been sold or donated.
For the entire audit, management and the task force both worked
with us. They provided all information that was available to them,
even though there was still a lack of support.
Management is going to work with the County Attorney's Office
for resolution, and the task force is also going to work with the County
Attorney's Office to resolve these issues and implement additional
controls as needed.
In conclusion, proper controls should be in place prior to and
maintained in place prior to donations being collected. Donations
should be tracked and deposited into the Freedom Memorial fund
directly and not put through personal funds or alternative avenues.
The county hasn't overseen the project properly and they should
begin to. Currently there has not been a proper control tracking or
monitoring mechanism in place for the donations, the cash collections,
the merchandise sales or the inventory with regard to the project. And
the county should be the only one to collect funds for the county.
Private funds may be collected by private entities and then donated to
the county, but private should not reflect that they're collecting on
behalf of.
To correct this issue with the funding for the TDC taxes, the
county needs to find a way to make the fund whole. The $140,000
was awarded and was ineligible, and it's up to the Commission how to
make it whole.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, questions by the Board
members?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Megan, you said that June 8th,
2004 the Board created the task force?
MS. GAILLARD: Correct.
Page 25
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: What kind of instrument did
we do? I have limited access with this.
MS. GAILLARD: There's an executive summary. I can put it on
the overhead.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
Was this a consent item?
MS. GAILLARD: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, this is a synopsis of that
particular item?
MS. GAILLARD: Correct. We blew it up so hopefully it would
make it a little easier to read.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: The reason I ask, I mean, I
don't see any minutes from the Clerk's Office for this task force. If the
Board created it, it's a -- it's actually, you know, an advisory board that
has to be advertised, public -- open to the public, minutes be taken and
so on and so forth. I haven't seen any of those.
MS. GAILLARD: When the Board created it, they created it as a
12-member committee, and the county was supposed to be overseeing
that committee.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I don't remember even
appointing anybody to this committee.
Do you?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't either, uh-uh.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Crystal?
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Henning -- for the record, Crystal
Kinzel. I think quite honestly that's part of the problem, that the entity
was assumed to be one thing, a private entity that would collect funds
and then deposit those funds. The private entity was never created. It
more or less then became an offshoot of county government through
this committee forum.
And that is part of the audit findings, that when you did issue this
executive summary, there seems to be some expectation that at least a
Page 26
May 28, 2013
department of the county would oversee their activities. And between
then and now it occur -- it seems that some of that has not occurred.
And that very specific point is were they a profit -- I mean, a private
non-profit, which there is no record of that creation.
And I think during the course of time you see that that may have
been the original intent of that group, but then that never came about
by the end, or this audit period. And that might be one of the
considerations that they now more specifically form as either an entity
under the Board or a private 501c3 and begin their activities that way.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I'll have to go back and
look at it. My understanding is the county's going to work with a
group of citizens wanting to create this Freedom Memorial. But I'll go
back to it. And maybe in future past minutes maybe make that
determination.
MS. KINZEL: And we can help you with those work papers.
We did a fairly exhaustive search, and we met with staff and we met
with members of the task force to try to get everyone's recollection of
how it evolved or did not evolve in that direction. But we'll be glad to
share those work papers also.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, do we have public speakers
that are going to talk on this item?
MR. MILLER: I have no one registered to speak on this item at
this time.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay, I see Sam in the audience
there.
MS. GAILLARD: We have the task force that came in case you
had questions for them and also county staff is here in case you have
questions for them.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. Well, you know, I certainly
support creation of the Freedom Memorial, and I think it's necessary
that we move ahead with this. But, you know, just taking a look at the
Page 27
May 28, 2013
executive summary from this consent agenda item back in 2004, it
says a fundraising committee will be formed to raise monies. I think
it's essential that we separate the efforts of the county to fund the
Freedom Memorial and the private collections that are made, and I
think it will solve all those problems.
And, you know, I've spoken to many of the volunteers who are
tenacious in their dedication to see this thing through that, you know,
a not-for-profit name like the Friends of the Freedom Memorial or
something need to be formed so that they can cleanly transfer funds to
the project without commingling the efforts of the county to fund it
and the efforts of private citizens to do the same. So I hope we can do
that and resolve it.
The one question I do have here regarding the audit is it talks
about county owned or operated museums. It was my understanding
that this was part of Parks and Recreation. Is that one in the same, or
how --
MS. GAILLARD: No.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Where do we stand on that?
MS. GAILLARD: It's separated. It's -- the land is out of Parks
and Rec Freedom Park. The project originally appears to have been
assigned to Parks and Communications, but then that didn't happen.
And then Parks kind of offered up the land. Different entities within
the government have been handling different pieces. Facilities is
handling the construction and p-cards. The Office of Budget and
Management is handling monitoring and expenditures. So pieces of
the project got parsed out to different departments and no central point
was overseeing the project.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, at one time John Tory
was, he was the central point person until he moved on.
Jeff, is Colleen here to answer any questions about tourist tax
use?
MR. KLATZKOW: Sure. I can answer them as well.
Page 28
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, does the
ordinance state non-for-profit 501c3?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, just not for profit.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Do we have to make a determination what is not-for-profit under
the ordinance?
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, so not-for-profit not
necessarily would mean 501c3, but it could be that it's not profiting.
MR. KLATZKOW: Ordinance specifically provides that owned
and operated by not-for-profit organizations open to the public. Does
not say 501c3.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Crystal?
MS. KINZEL: No, I just wanted to add that we would have no
problem with that. Part of the problem here is that there is no entity
established in any forum that we could discover as a private
not-for-profit.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a website?
MS. KINZEL: They're not registered with the state, there are no
officers, there are no --
MR. KLATZKOW: The organization -- the ordinance refers to a
not-for-profit organization. The organization was the Freedom
Memorial Task Force is what they called themselves at the time. It
was a grassroots project initiated by the public. And I think that the
Board's award at that time with that understanding was appropriate.
What's happened over the years is that it sort of morphed into
more of a public/private partnership in that we finally found a spot for
the Memorial, it's going to go into Freedom Park; the land is now
owned by the county, looks like it's going to be a county maintained
project over time.
If we're going to do it under those circumstances, then maybe c 1
money should have been used. But at the time that wasn't the thought.
Page 29
May 28, 2013
The thought at the time was that this citizen initiative was going to
come and do the Memorial.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So we need to recognize -- we
need to take action on turning out funds from category, what is it, B to
C?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's category c 1 to c2.
MS. GAILLARD: Jeff, reverse that.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: C2 to cl, sir, I believe. Municipal
owned museums --
MR. KLATZKOW: We took it out of c2. So that if it's the
Board's intent to make c2 whole, you can either do that through a
transfer from c 1 into c2 or you can do it simply by ad valorem dollars
in general fund revenue into c2.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, the action should
be to direct the County Manager -- have his staff take this through the
Tourist Development Council and ultimately the Board of
Commissioners to true up the accounts. Okay?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'll second that.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, I'll make a motion that
we direct the County Attorney to have his staff take to the --
MR. KLATZKOW: County Manager?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm sorry, County Manager,
have his staff have an item before the Tourist Development Council,
recognizing the error and then ultimate executive summary up to the
Board of Commissioners. And that was seconded by Commissioner
Nance.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I just agree. I just want the
public to know that it's not like anybody's absconded with any of the
funds, it just sounds like more of a --
MR. KLATZKOW: This is an accounting issue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Accounting. Yeah, that's exactly
Page 30
May 28, 2013
what I wanted to say, it's an accounting issue.
Jerry, did you have something to say about that?
MR. SANFORD: Yes, Commissioner, I want to thank the
Clerk's Office for their thorough investigation into this matter.
We were just thrown together in 2004. I came to a meeting and I
guess because of my connection to New York City Fire Department, I
come in one day and everybody was calling me chairman. I guess I
shouldn't have went to that meeting anyway.
But anyway, Crystal and Megan and all -- and when this
becomes right, we are exploring ways of being a 501c3, whether it's
the Freedom Memorial Foundation or something like that. But we --
please don't take it -- we just want to get a divorce from the county.
And so -- my New York. And so this will continue to run smoothly.
We meant no intent. We're out there weekends all year round
shaking the tree to make this happen. So I just want to commend the
Commissioners for all their support all these years, and never forget.
We'll get this done. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Jerry. And it's important
to note that this was just something that had a little different
accounting procedure and now we're going to straighten that all out.
But the public can continue to donate once we get all this stuff
properly vetted and in the right accounting form.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I just think that we also ought
to give a little bit of guidance from the Board to indicate that the
Freedom Memorial Task Force should continue in its work as
outlined, other than fundraising, and divorce itself as a task force from
fundraising and allow those fundraising things to be reengaged by the
newly created 501c3. And I'll make that a motion.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm sorry, you want to amend
my motion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, sir.
Page 31
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, yeah, let's expose
(sic) of this motion then. If you want to make another motion, please
do so.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Any opposed?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, sir, I'm sorry, I apologize. I
just wanted to give direction -- a little bit of direction from the Board
regarding the duties of the Freedom Memorial Task Force and allow
them to continue in all their duties as enumerated, with the exception
of fundraising, and allow that fundraising to henceforth be taken up by
the private entity to be created as a 501c3.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, and that's direction to
staff--
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- County Manager?
I'll second that motion.
Motion by Commissioner Nance, second by Commissioner
Henning.
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Any opposed?
(No response.)
Page 32
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Next?
Item #13B
PRESENTATION BY THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF
AUDIT REPORT 2012-6, HOUSING, HUMAN AND VETERAN
SERVICES-DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE GRANT —
MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AUDIT REPORTS — APPROVED
MR. DORTCH: Ron Dortch, Senior Internal Auditor for the
Clerk of Courts Office. Here to present the results of the Disaster
Recovery Initiative Grant limited scope review for Housing, Human
and Veteran Services.
An audit report was provided to the Commissioners previously. I
have also prepared a power point presentation, and if the
Commissioners would indulge me to go through that presentation, or
if you have any questions directly?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, basically this is the issue
with the Housing Department and in particular the houses that were
rehabbed?
MR. DORTCH: Well, there is one -- that was the impetus for
this audit. There was one house where a payment request was
submitted to the Clerk's Office and after inspection it was realized that
work was not being done for the invoices that were provided. That
issue was elevated to the Internal Audit Department. And during field
work on that separate audit it's determined that the individual
homeowner was ineligible for the disaster recovery grant program.
And that caused -- or was the impetus for Audit Report 2012-6.
We went through the program looking at applicant eligibility,
looking to see if there were duplication of benefit forms in file, seeing
if the applicants also obliged by the HUD Section 8 income limits.
Page 33
May 28, 2013
And then also that Collier County's own DRI administrative plan
guidelines were followed, along with the Department of Economic
Opportunity.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And the Clerk hasn't paid that
invoice.
MR. DORTCH: Regarding that specific individual homeowner,
no, no funds were expended.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions by Board
members, or would you like a presentation?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why weren't they eligible?
MR. DORTCH: They weren't eligible because they had received
insurance proceeds for the same repair work that was contracted under
the Disaster Recovery Initiative Grant Program --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see.
MR. DORTCH: -- and you basically can't double dip.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure, yeah, except that that wasn't
explained in your presentation. I just wanted to clear that up. Thank
you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So we have no money out on --
MR. DORTCH: No money out, no.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thank you for your
working with staff. And also we need to recognize the County
Manager and his staff working with the Clerk in response.
MR. DORTCH: The audit was more of a collaborative effort
working with Kim Grant and Christy Sontag and their staff; they were
very cooperative through the course of the review.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And it's probably appropriate
to entertain a motion to accept the audit reports.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner
Page 34
May 28, 2013
Fiala, second by Commissioner Nance to accept the audit reports.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Any opposed?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What a nice friendly meeting.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
Back to public speakers.
Item #7 — Continued from earlier in the Meeting
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is John Lundin and he
will be followed by Michael Ramsey.
MR. LUNDIN: Hi. I'd just like to announce on Thursday, May
30th, Commissioner Tim Nance is going to have a public meeting on
the issue of the proposed oil drilling in Golden Gate Estates. It's on
the day after tomorrow, Thursday, at 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at the
University of Florida IFAS extension office at 14700 Immokalee
Road, right next to the Collier County Fairgrounds.
I ask anybody interested in this issue to attend this meeting.
And Commissioner Nance, I ask that you be prepared to answer
questions about the issue of fracking. This is going to be -- a lot of
people going to this meeting want to know if fracking is going to
occur in Eastern Collier County. And if it is going to occur, what are
the health and safety issues related to the fracking issue.
And will you -- as a county, will you be regulating these health
and safety issues. Thank you very much.
Page 35
May 28, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Lundin, I'd just like to let you
know that I will not be answering any technical questions. However,
people from State DEP, the oil drillers that have been engaged by the
resource owners in Collier County, will be there to answer as many
questions as possible. And certainly we'll work to follow up. If we
can't answer the questions at that time, we will follow up and get back
to everybody.
It's designed -- you know, I doubt all the questions will be
answered. We'll make our best intention to do so. But if we can't,
we'll follow up until everybody is satisfied that they're getting
accurate information.
MR. LUNDIN: I heard you had a --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Did you set the timer? Excuse
me, did you set the timer?
MR. MILLER: Yes. And I stopped because he had stopped, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, he moved away from the
podium. Maybe this will be a good topic on a private discussion with
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, I called him back,
Commissioner Henning, just for a question.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay, thank you, Mr. Lundin.
MR. LUNDIN: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Michael Ramsey,
and he'll be followed by Al Perkins.
MR. RAMSEY: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Michael Ramsey. You may know me, I am the president of the
Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association, but today I'm speaking
as a resident of Collier County and as a resident of the Estates.
On 14 May, 2013 Physicians Regional made a presentation to the
BCC regarding the life-saving importance of stroke protocol
procedures that had been adopted.
Page 36
May 28, 2013
They also made the same presentation to the PSA on 15 May,
2013.
Based on the information presented in those presentations, it
appears that Physicians Regional violated the public trust we have in
them in regards to emergency medicine. It may have risen to the level
of violating the organization's Hippocratic Oath to the residents of
Collier County.
In both presentations it was made repeatedly clear that life-saving
information about stroke protocols was being presented to this
Commission and to the PSA that were recently adopted.
At that PSA meeting it was acknowledged by the recipients of
this information that life-saving information of these protocols was
extremely important and adjustments needed to be immediately made
to the system.
Further, it was brought out in this meeting with the PSA that the
information was withheld for a period of time from the personnel that
needed to implement it.
It appears, based on the two presentations and subsequent
discussions that followed those presentations, that this information
was withheld to bolster the position of Physicians Regional for cash
flow and profit issues.
This type of behavior in an organization participating in the
emergency medical system of Collier County should not be tolerated
and should create serious concern about their future participation.
These actions appear to rise to the level to warrant an
investigation by the County Manager's Office and possible sanctions.
Saving lives should come before cash flow, and that is the most
important protocol. And I thank you for your time.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Ramsey.
I'm going to say under that item that their allegations are going to
be investigated by the PSA. Is that correct, County Manager? That's
my understanding what the Board directed.
Page 37
May 28, 2013
MR. OCHS: That's my understanding as well, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. And that is going to
come back to the Board of Commissioners. That was -- their
allegations was very serious dealing with our Medical Director and
EMS. And I'm not going to judge anybody until we have that report
back.
Now, did the Board direct the County Manager to provide a staff
liaison to the PSA? Leo, do you remember that?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's true?
MR. OCHS: Yes, it is.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's good.
I think this committee's going to rise to the top to assist the board
on protocols, procedures, this investigation and recommendation of a
Medical Director in the future. I think it's important.
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, thank you.
Is this concern that Mr. Ramsey has just stated included in things
that are being evaluated, Mr. Ochs?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Commissioner. I think they relate directly
to at least one of the three items in the previous executive summary
that resulted in the Board --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Excuse me, I don't think we should
do anything regarding Mr. Ramsey's statements today other than to
make sure that those statements are, you know, made a matter of
public record and considered in the entire evaluation of the
circumstances.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, will do.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, next public speaker?
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, your last registered public
speaker is Al Perkins. I believe he is indisposed at the moment. I
Page 38
May 28, 2013
have been told he has not left the building but just indisposed for the
moment.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, why don't we just delay
this item and go to the next topic, and we can always come back. I
think that's 9.A?
Item #10A
RESOLUTION 2013-118: APPOINTING JOHN FUCHS TO THE
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: That's after 1 :00 p.m., sir. We'll have to move to
Item 10.A, which is Appointment of Member to the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board. Your recommended appointee is Mr.
John Fuchs.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I would like to make a motion
to approve Mr. Fuchs, but the Board had also suggested when they
were meeting that there were a couple other candidates that were also
equally capable to do this job, and they were wondering if possibly
they could establish an alternate in one of these candidates. And I
think the first one that was mentioned was Marilynne Huston or
Houston, I don't know which way. Huston. And the other one was
Kathleen Watts, who would be perfect for the job except that she's
only here seven months.
So is there a way that we could create an alternate? Do we have
an alternate position available?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I'll ask Jeff for some clarification,
but I believe your enabling ordinance should require or call for an
alternate before we appoint one.
MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, it's your ordinance. If you want to
amend it to include an alternate, that's up to you.
Typically we like alternates when we have membership that has
Page 39
May 28, 2013
probability of not having a quorum, which is really why you need it.
When you have committees that get quorums all the time, the alternate
has nothing to do. I mean, you can attend all the meetings as a
member of the public and participate in that capacity.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mr. Fuchs is out of town a couple
months a year, although he has offered on his own to fly back for the
meetings. In case he isn't able to make it, it would be nice to have an
alternate. And I thought that there was at one point in time a position
for an alternate, but I don't see it. Now, is Barry in the audience?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. Okay, so I make a motion for
John Fuchs to -- which is the committee recommendation, but I'd like
you to investigate whether there is a position for an alternate, and you
could bring that back, if you would, please.
MR. KLATZKOW: And if there's not, do you want me to bring
back a proposed amendment?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, that would be nice.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, if you
don't mind, the County Manager is going to bring a report back on all
the advisory boards. It probably would be appropriate to direct him to
make some suggestions on that particular advisory board.
MR. OCHS: I would be happy to do that, Commissioners, when
we bring that report back. And if you're willing to wait shortly for
that, Commissioner Fiala, we could probably handle it at that point.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure, I'm happy to do that. But we
do get John Fuchs in there right now; is that correct?
MR. OCHS: That's correct.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll second your motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Henning.
Discussion on the motion?
Page 40
May 28, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
Any opposed?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Al Perkins is back. Mr. Perkins, good to see you.
MR. PERKINS: Thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen, crooks and lazy people who do not
participate in this meeting, this place should be packed every doggone
time there's a meeting and voice the opinion of the people of this
county. You're paying for it but you're not getting it.
I have two -- or actually four issues with this county, and I intend
to sue the county and some of the personnel.
And the reason why I'm here, I'm going to take and get the Clerk
of the Circuit Court to do the suing on my behalf. Because under the
Constitution and the rules of court, I'm entitled to have you people pay
for this because it's the county who induces these obligations and rules
and also fines.
The biggest one that I heard this morning and I currently agree
wholeheartedly, is I'm going to sue code enforcement. Because they
do not know what the law is, and the lawyers that are involved do not
tell them what the law is. In fact, I don't think the lawyers know.
Now, on your behalf, I read the law books and I also read the rules of
court.
Now, if you ever pay any attention, we have a law library and
you ought to take and participate. Now, the reason I'm getting the
Clerk is on account of I've tried all over this state to find what I would
call an honest lawyer who would take this. The honest lawyers that I
Page 41
May 28, 2013
know of don't want any part of this. And that includes ex-Senators and
also delegations and the congressmen in Tallahassee, Orlando and also
Ocala, which I'm totally involved in, and in West Palm Beach.
Nobody wants to take this.
And the catch to the thing is that when you get right down to it,
you're in a doggone county that condones crooks. And some of the
crooks are still here left over from when the past crooks got thrown
out of here and went to jail.
Now, along with that, there's certain things that I don't like about
this meeting. First of all, you don't hold enough -- you don't have
enough time for the three minutes. Halas is left out of here at three
minutes.
In the charter of this county it requires that they can have five
minutes, which has always been until somebody wanted to change it.
And there was a meeting every Tuesday which I attended here
for seven years. And -- you can tune me out, because I'm going to
keep on going. I got up to say, I came here and I'm an old vet. I'll
probably never be back.
The fact is that just because Barbara Barry wanted to take and go
ahead and take and use her influence to promote her job of accounting,
they decided, that bunch that was here, not to take and have meetings
every Tuesday. I don't want to come in next Tuesday, so it's every
other week.
What the heck is this? That means that you're being censored,
big time being censored. The time amount and also the day. If you
have a problem next week or tomorrow, you can't get back to these
people until two weeks are up.
Wake up, you people. Get your head out of your rear end.
And the people on Marco Island, you have the necessary means
over there that I have provided to take for the safety and welfare of the
Island and also Goodlette. And people over on the beach over here,
the mega-multi-billionaires, stop funding these crooked charities. Pay
Page 42
May 28, 2013
attention to what's going on.
Other than that, I know you guys want to take and get me the hell
out of here.
And by the way, just for your information, in this room, I used to
pack this room. And right over there when I used to set up my camera
and I videotaped everything I saw, I was called a son of a bitch by
county personnel. And I didn't like it so much but I turned around and
I thanked them because there I finally got through to somebody.
Pay attention. You've got 10 tons of crooked charities in this
town. And I'm not going to say thank you. Why should I say thank
you?
Got one other issue. Waste recovery. And Tom, you know this,
backs up and ruins everybody's driveway that is on a dead-end. This is
one of the lawsuits. And I intend to get paid for it. I've been putting
up with it for three years. Some of you people even know about it.
Other than that.
You got a weapon here, people. It's called a Constitution. Code
enforcement violates your Constitutional rights and the law every time
it meets. Look it up. Pay attention. Do your homework.
Thank you for your indulgence. And if you don't like it, stick it.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Perkins, always a pleasure
to see you. Next time when you come --
MR. PERKINS: I'm not going to change, no matter how long I
live. And that's doubtful.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm surprised that you really
didn't tell us what is on your mind. Maybe you and I can get together.
I'll come over to your house and we'll sit down and have an iced tea.
MR. PERKINS: Tom, you're always welcome. You know that.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: God bless you.
MR. PERKINS: Hey, I got news for you. You people don't know
it, I knew him before he was a commissioner. I've been in this damn
town 61 years and in this building so damn many times it isn't funny.
Page 43
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're going to move on, Al.
MR. PERKINS: Okay, I'm out of here.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thanks.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a 10:30 time certain and I
don't know if you want to break before that for the court reporter or
after that?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Who made that a 10:30 time
certain?
Don't we -- are you ready for a break or you can you wait? What
is that, 10:30? What is that 10:30?
MR. OCHS: It's the Item 11.A. The item regarding the victim
advocacy organization.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. OCHS: We can go ahead --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: How about --
MR. OCHS: 11 .B, sir?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, can we celebrate 11.B?
It will only take about 15 minutes.
Item #11B
RECOMMENDATION TO BRING BACK AN AMENDMENT,
PROVIDING A FIVE PERCENT REDUCTION TO THE COLLIER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FEE SCHEDULE OF
BUILDING PERMIT PROCESSING, REVIEW AND INSPECTION
SET FEES AS PROVIDED FOR IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES, SECTION 2-11 — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Well, it shouldn't even take that long.
11 .B is a recommendation to bring back an amendment providing
for a five percent reduction to the Collier County Administrative Code
Fee Schedule of building permit processing, review and inspection set
Page 44
May 28, 2013
fees, as provided for in the Code of Laws and Ordinances, Section
2-11 . Mr. Casalanguida will present.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good morning. Thank you, County
Manager. For the record, Nick Casalanguida. Also have Jamie here
in the back and we were hoping to get some of our other 113 folks
here.
Commissioners, we started this process back in 2010 to look at
the fee structure and services we provide in the building department.
And I'm happy to bring something forward to the Board where we're
actually going to lower the fees.
Service levels have improved. We've added new services to the
customers. We're paying off our debt in FY 2014. And I'd like to
propose that the Board accept our fee reduction of five percent in 113
set fees and recognize the hard work that the folks in 113, the building
department, have done to get us there. So with that, if you have any
questions.
(At which time, Commissioner Coyle joined the meeting via
speaker phone.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you so much, Nick. This
is something I think we all look forward to. I can't imagine anybody
not looking forward to it.
It comes at a very good time, as our tax base is just edging up a
little bit, which will help to compensate -- of course that doesn't
compensate you guys because you're a fee based organization.
And I think that everybody in the industry, especially the
construction industry, will appreciate this reduction. So I make a
motion to approve.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala
to approve 11 .B, seconded --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- by Commissioner Nance.
Page 45
May 28, 2013
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I have no further comment.
Thank you, Nick.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You're welcome, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I just want to say, when I met
with Leo when he was being considered for County Manager, one
thing he said, he's going to reduce regulation. And the result of
reducing regulation has a result of reducing fees and oversight. So I
commend you, Leo, for doing an outstanding job.
MR. OCHS: Well, thank you, sir. It's just staffs hard work.
And I might also add that this is not the end, this is just the beginning.
Mr. Casalanguida and Mr. French are -- will be evaluating their Fund
131, which is your plan review fees here shortly, and hopefully we'll
be able to bring back more recommendations like this in the future.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
MR. OCHS: So thank you, Commissioners, for your support.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: With no other comment on the
motion, all in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Do you want to take a break?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sure.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're going to take a
10-minute break. Be back at 10:29. Thank you.
(Recess.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Next item, please.
Page 46
May 28, 2013
Item #11A
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE PLANS FOR A GRANT
MANAGEMENT PILOT PROGRAM WITH SELECTED VICTIM
ADVOCACY ORGANIZATIONS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. It's a 10:30 a.m. time certain item, 11 .A
on your agenda. It's a recommendation to approve plans for a Grant
Management pilot program with selected Victim Advocacy
Organizations.
Ms. Kim Grant will make a brief presentation.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I understand that there are
some recipients of this proposal that is in favor of this?
MS. GRANT: Absolutely. And several of them are here today
in the front row.
MR. MILLER: I also do have one registered public speaker.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. GRANT: Perhaps, Commissioner -- very briefly, Kim
Grant, Interim Director, Housing, Human and Veteran Services.
The organizations represented under this proposal are Drug Free
Collier, Children's Advocacy Center, David Lawrence Center, Shelter
for Abused Women and Children and Project Help through the
Sheriffs Office.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, thank you.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, these are long-standing county
grant sub-recipients. We have been working at the Board's direction
to collaboratively with the Clerk and the County Attorney and the
sub-recipients to improve the business processes that result in them
being able to provide prompt, seamless service to their customers.
And Ms. Grant has been taking the lead from the county staff position
to work on that agreement. And we have a template put together that
she can describe or answer any questions at the Chair's pleasure.
Page 47
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I think I'm speaking for
everybody when I say all of these organizations are very worthy of
this proposal and the acquisition and management process pilot
program. I think this is the way to go, and I would like to make a
motion to approve.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: A motion to approve by
Commissioner Fiala, seconded by Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Public speakers, please.
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker is David Schimmel.
MR. SCHIMMEL: Good morning, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Troy, can you hear me?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, we can hear you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, I just wanted to make sure
you got me on line there.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's Commissioner Coyle.
Go ahead, Mr. Schimmel.
MR. SCHIMMEL: Good morning, Commissioner Coyle and
Commissioners.
As a representative of one of the providers who will benefit by
collaborating efforts and bringing additional federal and state grant
dollars to the community, we want to express our thanks to the county
staff who have done a great job outlining a pilot program: The County
Attorney's Office, Sheriffs Department and of course Commissioner
Hiller for spearheading this effort.
This gives us a real opportunity to maximize revenue, money that
we're paying up to Washington that needs to come back to Collier
County, and to be able to create a safer community for our most
vulnerable citizens. So we just want to reiterate that we're very
supportive and appreciative of the county's efforts.
Page 48
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Commissioner Coyle,
this is Item 11.A.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I've got the agenda.
I just would like to seek your permission to participate by phone.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, yes, we've done that early
on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, okay. Good, thank you very
much.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any questions or
comments on this item?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I'm very much in favor of this
item.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, Commissioner Nance,
do you have anything?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, Mr. Schimmel, I'd like to
personally thank you for all your fine work over your career, which I
understand is concluding. I think you're going to retire at the end of
this year; is that correct, sir?
MR. SCHIMMEL: Hopefully.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, your contributions to David
Lawrence Center are fabulous and I just wanted to mention that and
bring it up at this time. Thank you for attending today. I will say --
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I will say, you are of course one of
the most successful of an entire large group of successful
organizations we have serving our most vulnerable citizens, and I
support this 100 percent. I think it's a wonderful thing. I think it was
a great initiative by Chairwoman Hiller.
And I will tell you that in my brief discussions out in the
community regarding our work to move forward on assisting with
grant management and administration, that there's a great deal of
interest among many of our not-for-profits, looking forward to our
Page 49
May 28, 2013
successes here and looking forward to take advantage of what we put
together.
So thank you very much. I wholeheartedly support everything
that you all have done. Thank you so much.
MR. SCHIMMEL: Thank you, Commissioner.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by
Commissioner Fiala, seconded by Commissioner Nance to move this
item.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously
4-0.
Commissioner Coyle, is there any particular item that you would
like to hear at this time, or do you want to just move it down the
agenda?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll go down the sequence that you
have already.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Then we'll go to Item
11 .C.
Item #11C
RECOMMENDATION TO REVIEW A PRESENTATION ON
IMPACT FEES PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
DIRECTION PROVIDED BY THE BOARD — PRESENTED AND
DISCUSSED
Page 50
May 28, 2013
MR. OCHS: Item 11 .C, Mr. Chairman, is a recommendation to
review a presentation on impact fees prepared in accordance with
direction provided previously by the Board of County Commissioners.
Ms. Amy Patterson, your Impact Fee Manager and Mark Isackson,
Director of Corporate Finance and Management Services will jointly
present.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, we have one registered speaker
for this item.
MS. PATTERSON: Good morning. For the record, Amy
Patterson, Impact Fee Manager, Office of Management and Budget.
Just to recap, the basis for this presentation arises out of two
items presented by the Board. One, Item 10.K on February 12th, 2013
gave the following request for staff to bring back information on the
change of use program, reviewing the legality of the current policy
and the potential need for funding, potential moratorium on select
impact fees and the economic incentives which were presented in a
separate item.
On March 12, 2013 Item 10.E requested information and trends
on impact fees in Florida counties and other states, historical Collier
County information, revenue streams and impacts to the annual
budget, and policies and programs to improve current and future
business climate.
Just a brief overview. Impact fees are charges on new
development to pay for construction or expansion of capital
improvements that are necessitated by and benefit new development.
They do not pay for operating, maintenance, replacement, those types
of things.
Collier currently has 12 impact fees, which you can see listed
here.
Heading into what are they doing in other states or what states
have impact fees, you can see here a list of states with impact fees,
and there's a good number of them. They're enabled differently, either
Page 51
May 28, 2013
by legislative or similar to Florida home rule authority or some
combination thereof.
Comparison of the average impact fees for a single-family home.
This is from 2012 data. And you can see surprisingly that Florida is
not the highest impact fee state. It's actually still California, followed
by Maryland, Oregon and Florida in fourth place. This is not all of the
states but a representation of the highest impact fee states.
I just wanted to mention briefly about the reductions in other
countries before moving on to Florida and other states. I'm sorry.
Reduction trends have been seen most frequently in the states
with the highest number of impact fees. That's Arizona, California
and Florida. In Arizona there have been a number of legislative
changes. In California they're moving to some reductions but they're
kind of late to the game. And in Florida there's been a good amount of
voluntary reductions, and the suspension trend was mainly a Florida
event.
And onto Florida, what are Florida counties doing and is it
working? Based on the most recent impact fee survey, there are at
least 58 jurisdictions in the State of Florida with impact fee programs.
That is not an exhaustive sample, these are jurisdictions that answered
this particular survey, so this number actually could be higher.
Around the state counties have suspended and reduced impact
fees, where others have left their program completely intact.
The effect of these moratoriums and reductions is at this time
inconclusive. However, some counties are opting to move to a
different type of fee structure. They're looking towards mobility and
multi-modal fees, tax increment financing type of mechanisms or use
of other available revenue streams such as the infrastructure sales tax.
These are some arguments that have been used for impact fee
reductions or moratoriums. These are not mine, these are ideas that are
out there: Need to be competitive to attract development. And
developers and businesses will go where fees are lowest. This might
Page 52
May 28, 2013
stimulate construction and create jobs. What do we have to lose, our
revenue stream right now is low. If we don't try it, we won't know. It's
worth it if it creates even one job. If it doesn't appear to have worked,
we don't know how much worse it would have been and we'll be
positioned for the recovery.
On the converse these are arguments that have been used against
reductions in moratoriums: Impact fees have never been shown to
deter growth. Development follows market opportunity, not lowest
cost. Industries want good transportation, infrastructure, labor force
and low operating costs. Impact fees are visible but not the only
development cost. If it does work, it will only make things worse by
increasing the housing oversupply and depressing housing crises.
Reducing and suspend impact fees will create inequities, where
developers have found that their credits are devalued or builders that
have paid fees are competing with builders who are not required to.
And we looked at a sample of counties around us that are
traditionally compared for our budget and looked at what have they
done with their impact fee programs. And that sampling of counties is
Charlotte, Lee, Manatee, Martin and Sarasota.
Starting with Charlotte, in January of 2008 they rolled all of their
impact fees back to the 1998 impact fee rates. In June, 2011 they
suspended all impact fees except for roads until July 10th, 2013.
I'm going to move on in a minute once I discuss these reductions
and show what's going on as far as permitting activities in these
counties so you can kind of see what's been going on.
In Lee we know, just recently in March 2013 they implemented
an 80 percent reduction to impact fees. This includes their public
safety impact fees and water and sewer, which are referred to as
connection or capacity fees. And we have found that around the state
that water and sewer impact fees or other similar fees haves been left
untouched.
The effect of this reduction is unknown at this time, obviously
Page 53
May 28, 2013
due to the short time frame since they implemented the moratorium.
So we don't have any statistics to support whether it's helped or not.
Manatee County, in July of 2009, they implemented a 50 percent
reduction to transportation impact fees and suspended their school
impact fees. In January of 2011, they extended the reduction and
suspension to July of 2013.
Martin County in July of 2009 suspended all fees except for
transportation impact fees. And about a year later, in October of 2010,
they reinstated all of their impact fees and implemented some
reductions in commercial impact fees and increases, pretty significant
increases, to residential due to the outcome of their formal study.
Sarasota County, December of 2010 suspended school impact
fees until December of 2012 which was then extended to December of
2014. And January, 2011 road impact fees were reduced by 50
percent until February of 2013, which has since been extended to
January of 2015.
So what does this all mean -- I'm sorry, Collier County, before
we go to the permitting statistics.
Collier County has had pretty substantial reductions, starting in
2010. And as you can see, we've got them grouped by impact fee, the
reductions across the board, community parks, EMS. And we'll go
through every one of these, but there have been substantial reductions
in most categories. Transportation particularly has been reduced over
50 percent.
Economic trends in Collier County. Unemployment rate is falling
in Collier, on pace with the moratorium counties. Our jobs are up.
We were just recently awarded a job creation award from the State of
Florida. We have large increases in building activity in new
construction, and we have a list of some of the developments that are
going right now. It's Hacienda Lakes, the Isles of Collier Preserve,
Mirasol, Talis Park, Lantana, Terrafina, Parklands, Winding Cypress,
Treviso Bay. This is not a complete list obviously, but these are major
Page 54
May 28, 2013
developments that are building right now.
Sales tax revenue is up, tourism and tourist tax revenue are up,
and our foreclosures are down.
Onward to a comparison of what's been going on in our
comparison counties. These are single-family homes, one and
two-family permits issued in the current year to date.
I'll have you look at that for just a minute. As you can see,
Collier is up there as one of the highest. I'd also like to mention,
Manatee County, I did speak directly with the building representatives
or the employees of the building department in Manatee County and
asked them, because their numbers are significant, whether they felt
that this was because of the impact fee reductions. And what they did
tell me was they've had a number of large builders in Manatee County
that continued to build even through the recession and have carry them
into the recovery, so this was going on even before they implemented
changes and they were able to remain stable throughout.
Multi-family. Need to point out with multi-family that these are
permits issued. And for all of the counties, except for Lee, the number
is actual permits. It does not indicate the number of units, except for
in Lee County where they report a little bit differently, so I wanted to
point that out as that number kind of sticks out as being exceptionally
high.
Our number would be very high if you were to correlate that to
the number of units in the number of permits. And I actually believe I
have that for Collier. I'll turn to my slide. For our number 293 units
are behind our 41, so just so you know for comparison purposes.
And I wasn't able to get all of that information from the other
counties. Not everybody reports their data the same way. We can
probably dig down into that a little bit more if need be.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Say that again, 293?
MS. PATTERSON: 293 units.
And here is commercial. And again, because of the reporting
Page 55
May 28, 2013
requirements or the way that the reports are structured in various
counties, we have Collier County and Manatee County where we
know that those 15 permits are new construction, new square footage.
But in the other counties there are a mix of things reported in there.
So there could be remodels, redevelopment, some things like that. So
we can't really -- it's hard to make a direct comparison to what this
means as far as new square footage.
Looking at Collier and Manatee, we know that we separate out
our data a little bit differently than the other counties. But I just
wanted to point that out. The numbers, even the way that they are, are
not that widely different.
And this is a slide that was prepared by the Growth Management
Division for their presentation in April, and it shows the forecasted
one and two-family homes new construction, and you can see the
trend is up, and continues to trend up into your 2014.
And just a brief overview: There are some implications to
arbitrary reductions to impact fees, including loss of revenue, debt
repayment issues, pressure on the general fund. And these will be
covered in more detail by Mr. Isackson.
Equity. We will discuss later about our Certificate of Adequate
Public Facilities Program, as well as our developer contribution
agreements and demand, which is a consumption of available capacity
without reserving funding for future growth-related improvements.
I'm going to turn it over at this point to Mr. Isackson to move on
through the financials.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, Amy.
Commissioners, good morning. Mark Isackson with the County
Manager's Office.
We have spoke on a number of occasions both individually and
collectively at this podium about our debt position. The revenues that
correspond help pay off debt service. And the slides you're going to
see in the next few minutes shouldn't come as a shock to anybody
Page 56
May 28, 2013
regarding where we're at with our debt and the importance of having
specific revenue streams that are dedicated to paying off certain types
of debt service.
You can see from this slide Commissioners, that impact fee
collections, while high back in 2006, 2007 took a precipitous drop
leading into where we are in 2014 with an estimate of$21.8 million.
You can also see that this slide shows you that the vast majority of
collections are in the areas of roads and water and sewer. So it gives
you a little bit of a breakdown as to the type of impact fees coming in
and again how they have taken a drop over the past several years.
We've talked at length about our outstanding principal debt. You
can see that it peaked in 2008 at $804 million outstanding and has now
dropped to $594 million outstanding. That will be at 9/30 of 2013.
That component, which is enterprise debt, you see at $220 million in
'13 versus the general governmental debt component of$375 million
in 2013.
Here's another way of looking at those same numbers. If you
look at the various bond issues that we have outstanding, you can see
that for example our gas tax bonds are all depicted in red and they are
what we call non-impact fee related debt service. Those bonds are
issued to fund backlog road transportation projects. And the pledge to
pay that specific debt service is gas taxes.
Continuing on, we've had a series of refinancing over the past
two years, and you see that with the next series of special obligations
bonds: 2010, 2010-B, '11 and '13, where a majority of that debt
associated is what we call growth-related debt.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is this all just transportation
impact fees, or these are all --
MR. ISACKSON: These are all impact fees. All in, sir. You'll
see it as we go through the progression.
Now, just to speak to your comment for a second, Commissioner,
the transportation has no growth-related impact fee debt. The only --
Page 57
May 28, 2013
the debt that we're showing here is related to backlog projects, which
are not connected with growth.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: The '13.
MR. ISACKSON: The gas -- you see the gas tax, that is a
non-impact fee related pledge back to payment of that debt.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. ISACKSON: 2010, '11, '13, special obligation bonds, they
are buried within the various projects that were financed. Originally
they were backed by sales tax debt, as you'll recall. With the
refunding that we did, that pledge has now been switched to what we
call a covenant to budget and appropriate of all legally available non
ad valorem revenues.
Then you switch to water and sewer, you can see the outstanding
debt related to water and sewer. The 2003 issued, the 2006 issued.
Parts of those were constructed -- were financed to construct projects.
Some of them were growth related, some of them were not.
So it gives you a little sense of the various bond issues that we
have and what is supported by -- what was used to pay for
growth-related projects and what was not.
This is an interesting slide in that it kind of gives you a lot of
different pieces of information. We have been asked -- we being the
budget office -- and I have talked with Commissioners individually
and at this podium about the amount of loans that are emanating from
the general fund to support growth-related -- the backlog of
growth-related debt due to the inefficient or the lack of impact fee
collections that have been coming in.
That number currently stands at $66 million. Those are dollars
that have been moved from the general fund over time to support the
payment of growth-related debt service.
In 2014 that number, as we currently planned for, will be about
$6.4 million. So that outstanding amount now would be at the end of
'14 as we project would be a little over $72 million.
Page 58
May 28, 2013
And you can see from this graph there's a gap between -- certain
of our impact fee areas there's a gap between the annual impact fee
debt service, which is depicted by the red dot, versus impact fee
collections that were budgeted.
You can see that that $6.4 million essentially relates to the gap
that exists between the red dot and the impact fee collections that are
coming in.
There are certain impact fee categories that are more leveraged
than others; certainly with corrections, with law enforcement and with
general governmental facilities. Those are the three that come to
mind, looking at this folio, that there exists a gap between the debt
service payments annually and the impact fee collections coming in.
In another chart here that kind of indicates sources and uses of
2014 impact fees. Again, you can look at those areas that are more
leveraged than others. We know that impact fee for roads, for
example, that revenue doesn't go to pay debt but essentially is set
aside for projects that are contained in the long-range planning
scenario that relate to growth-related improvements.
You have water and sewer. Again, a significant amount of
money coming in. And that money is used exclusively to pay for
growth-related debt service.
Parks: We've been able at this point in time to keep parks away
from receiving loans from the general fund, the -- their impact fee
streams coming in regarding the payment of debt and projects. EMS,
library, corrections, law enforcement, general governmental facilities
all receive money from the general fund, and you can see that
breakout there.
I'll let Amy pick up on -- in the next couple slides that relate to
Certificate of Adequate Public Facilities and Developer Contribution
Agreements.
MS. PATTERSON: Start first with the Certificate of Adequate
Public Facilities Program, which is our -- we refer to as the upfront
Page 59
May 28, 2013
payments implemented in 2003. The Certificate of Adequate Public
Facilities, otherwise known as COA Program, provides upfront
funding for growth-related transportation projects.
Developments are required to pay 33 percent of their estimated
transportation impact fees to obtain a final local development order,
which is a site plan, site plan amendment, plat, other things like that.
Now, this number originally was 50 percent at plat or site plan,
and then the second 50 percent in three years. During the economic
downturn the Board did change that to five payments of 20 percent,
and changed it again recently to only one payment of 33 percent. This
has been flexing with the needs of the development community.
The remainder of transportation impact fees currently and all
other impact fees are paid at issuance of the building permit. Upfront
payments are applied as an offset to the final impact fee calculation
for transportation impact fees.
These numbers in the box, developments yet to begin
construction, developments with remaining square footage or units to
be constructed that have paid upfront transportation impact fees.
$64.7 million to be applied to future building permits.
There's a question about what that would cover as far as units and
square footage. Right now 100 percent of impact fees could be paid
for 5,988 units.
And for the commercial, three million square feet of commercial
to be covered.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Say that again?
MS. PATTERSON: 5,988 units.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Of prepaid impact fees?
MS. PATTERSON: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Of housing.
MS. PATTERSON: Of housing. Now, it's using the mid-sized
home. Obviously developments use different mixes of construction,
but that applies an average. So if we were to divvy that money up to
Page 60
May 28, 2013
house and commercial construction, those are prepaid balances.
And we're going to move on to the developer contribution
agreements next.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, what's the average
single-family permit are we doing?
MS. PATTERSON: Remember, these are transportation impact
fees only. These are not -- this is not -- these are not all the impact
fees. This is road impact fees only, and it's about $5,000 a unit right
now.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And how many buildings are
we -- what are we doing, a couple hundred homes a year?
MS. PATTERSON: I would need to look to Mr. Casalanguida
for that number, if he has it. 1,200.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: 1,200. We're doing 1,200. So
that's approximately four years of prepaid transportation.
MS. PATTERSON: And that's -- it's part of the reason why you
saw that drop-off in transportation impact fees because these people --
these developments paid a lot of money early and now they're drawing
those balances down, so you don't have a lot of new money coming in.
They're working off of their prepaid balances. And their money went
farther because of the reductions in the impact fees.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sony to interrupt.
MS. PATTERSON: Oh, that's okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just to work off what you just
started, I think I heard you say and three million square feet of
commercial?
MS. PATTERSON: Commercial, that's right. All different types
of commercial. And of course now if you had -- that's using an
average. It's looking at what they paid based on their commitments to
develop. If they change what they -- if they wanted to build a medical
office, let's say, instead of an office, of course that would decrease the
available square footage -- or the square footage that we're saying this
Page 61
May 28, 2013
balance would cover.
But this is speaking in generality. And based on what they paid
these impact fees towards, this is the amount that would be covered at
this time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MS. PATTERSON: We're going to move on and have a similar
discussion about developer contribution agreements.
Developer contribution agreements provide a credit against an
impact fee owed for a specific type of public facility for any
construction, construction or land dedication conveyed to, accepted
and received by the county for that same type of public facility. So
this is when --
MR. OCHS: Next slide, please.
MS. PATTERSON: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, got ahead of
myself.
So this is when a developer comes in and wants to dedicate a
park or they want to give right-of-way. And I'm going to tell you that
this $32 million represents almost entirely transportation impact fees.
That's -- the bulk of our developer contribution agreements are done
for transportation impact fees for things like road construction or for
right-of-way or anything else.
Relative to the developer contribution agreements, so same
scenario, developments yet to begin construction or developments
with remaining square footage or units to be constructed that have
entered into an agreement with the county for a contribution and
resulting impact fee credits, the balance is $32.2 million to be applied
to future building permits. And on that it covers 5,329 residential
units, and the square footage is about 130,000 square feet of
commercial DCAs, generally speaking, are related to residential.
Sometimes they'll have a commercial component, but these are
heavily residential based.
Just to touch briefly on the study process, we currently have six
Page 62
May 28, 2013
fees that have required full studies underway. And the remaining six
impact fees are also scheduled to commence in calendar year 2013.
The results of these full studies will capture what's happening with
costs, demand, offsetting credits, et cetera. And you are familiar with
that study process as we go through it at least every three years with
each one of the fees.
The current study processes provided 15 impact fee reductions
over the past three years, and we're recommending the study
mechanisms be allowed to continue and review each of the impact
fees as the full studies are brought forward.
And to touch briefly on the request for changes of use, this is a
special program that was adopted in 2009. And this was designed to
help businesses get into existing buildings that had already paid their
impact fees without the requirement to pay impact fees related to the
change of use.
This program was thoroughly vetted and supported by the
Development Services Advisory Committee, the Building Industry,
realtors and at the time the Economic Development Council during the
creation of the program and subsequent revisions.
On March 12th, 2013 the Board extended the sunset date of the
program from March 24th, 2013 to July 1st, 2013 due to this topic
being identified as a future workshop discussion item.
MR. OCHS: Amy, let me just jump in.
There. Commissioners, you recall that the question brought up
by Commissioner Hiller in her previous executive summary on this
topic, her concern was that it was her belief that we -- the Board had
to find another way to fund whatever impact fees would otherwise
have been borne by these change of use applicants. And it's really I
think in my view a legal question that she was posing.
And before we leave this topic today, because this sunsets in July
of this year, you know, if the Board does not intend to continue with
that program, we really need to know one way or the other. Because
Page 63
May 28, 2013
we have to come back and get it renewed or let it sunset in July.
Go ahead, Amy. I'm sorry.
MS. PATTERSON: This slide just outlines current parameters of
the change of use program. The development is proposed within a
lawfully existing building which has had a certificate of occupancy
issued for at least three years. Impact fees for the existing building
must have been paid at the then applicable impact fees at the time of
construction, so it has to be lawfully constructed.
Proposed development is solely within the existing building and
does not include the addition of any new square footage.
And three: Demolition and reconstruction projects are not
eligible for this program.
To date this program has assisted 92 businesses. And we have
continuing interests in this program.
And that brings us to the conclusions.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, again, based on the staff research
and the evaluation of that research that we were able to do, we've
drawn a few conclusions that we would -- in the presentation this
morning.
The first one is that again, based on the results of research that
we were able to do to date, at least for counties in Florida, those that
have eliminated or reduced impact fees based solely on the
assumption that these actions would stimulate local development have
proven to be in our view inconclusive at best. In fact, it appears that
other factors such as market demand and access to capital and
financing availability of infrastructure capacity have proven to have
more direct impacts on the rate of growth and decisions by developers
on when to proceed with the project.
Number two: In Collier County historically our impact fees have
not been found to be a primary deterrent to growth and development.
And in fact many of you will recall in the early and mid-2000's, here
in Collier we experienced one of the fastest growth rates in the
Page 64
May 28, 2013
country while assessing impact fees that were among the highest in the
state. So we were unable in that research to find any direct correlation
between reducing the fees and accelerating growth rate. In fact,
somewhat of the opposite occurred.
Third point is that reductions or elimination of impact fees that
are currently being applied to long-term debt service obligations
would, without a new offsetting revenue, require more general fund
dollars currently allocated to other programs and services to be
diverted to pay debt and/or force large reductions in the reserves that
you've been trying to build up over the last few years.
If we were having to do this, we would cause the aggregate
general fund loan balance to impact fee debt to increase well above
that $70 million mark that you saw previously.
And then the final two points. Timing doesn't appear to be right.
New development activity as you can see is up substantially in Collier
County, compared to the peak of the recent recession. That economic
forecast is that it will continue to improve in the near term future at
least.
And our question is why cut the fees now, especially with the
current impact fee debt service challenges and the potential need for
added capacity to serve many of these new large developments that
are coming on line.
Then finally, we did want to suggest perhaps an alternate to the
Board, that instead of random impact fee reductions, the Board might
want to consider adjusting the timing of payment of impact fees.
Currently those are collected at the time of building permit issuance
and they could be slid back further perhaps to the time of certificate of
occupancy issuance. In some cases, particularly in commercial
projects, that adds quite a bit of time where the developers could keep
that money in their pocket for a while.
So those are our conclusions. They're not complete. And as the
Board will recall, in this item and the next one were both to be
Page 65
May 28, 2013
presented solely as informational items, and then you wanted to have a
larger discussion with the community at a Board workshop that is
already scheduled for June 4th, next Tuesday, at 1 :00 p.m.
So we stand ready, Mr. Chairman, to respond to any questions
the Board may have.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by members?
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I think it's an excellent report.
Thank you very much.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. Mr. Ochs, while all this is
very interesting information, back in March what I had requested and
my understanding was that we were going to get a great deal of
comparative data. What I asked for was comparative data from
Florida counties and other states, kind of outlining where we were and
what others had done in regard to managing their impact fees and
related revenue streams. And although on one of the slides you
mentioned that other counties had opted to implement new fee
structures, including mobility, multimodal fees, tax increments,
financing type mechanism, infrastructure sales taxes, and I've heard
other people mention franchise fees, I don't see any comparative data
for us to understand how we compare and contrast to other counties.
So while I appreciate your editorializing on the fact that we
shouldn't apparently be having this discussion, I think in light of some
of the things that have happened we do need to have this discussion. I
was looking forward to some comparative data, which I don't see in
this presentation.
MR. OCHS: Sir, we're happy to have the discussion and respect
whatever decision the Board makes. We did provide, best of our
ability, some comparative data on permitting activity and the changes
of the other regional counties compared to us in terms of what they've
done to lower their impact fees, as we have, over the last few years.
Page 66
May 28, 2013
In terms of alternative revenues, we can talk to you about that. In
some counties -- for example, Lee County has tolls and electric utility
franchise fee. Sarasota County has long had a one-cent infrastructure
sales tax in place to help them pay for their capital improvements.
But your point is well taken, sir, and we will try to gather more of
that information for the workshop.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I don't dispute, you know, anything
that you presented here. It's all good information. But I believe if
we're going to have -- you know, if this community and this Board is
going to have a realistic discussion of whether we should reduce
impact fees or modify our approach to their management in any way,
that we need to know what others have done. And that's what I was
trying to get through my executive summary item, which was -- I
know it was continued in March but, you know, it was included and
referenced in this agenda item.
And I don't think that there's near the amount of information that
has utility for this Board to discuss how we might change our impact
fees, adopt other mechanisms and -- you know, your presentation of
the need for us to repay our debt is certainly things that we need to
take into account and we should of course review those.
But what other options do we have? I'm interested in options.
Because, you know, the greater discussion of course is economic
development. And if everybody in this -- you know, I don't think the
extent that Collier County stands out in the level of its impact fees has
been presented here.
You know, this one slide, which is about the third or fourth slide
in that describes the average total fees by state doesn't indicate that
Collier County's average fees are about double what the state average
is, for example. It throws us right up there above the highest states,
including California.
So maybe some people don't think that it impacts a company like
we just saw with Hertz. But, you know, we didn't discuss how others
Page 67
May 28, 2013
see Collier County. We need to see ourselves as others see us, in my
opinion.
And, you know, Mr. Register is going to want to develop these
programs. You know, I would like to understand what impact fees
Hertz would have had to pay in Collier County versus Lee County.
Some people might not think it was of significance, but perhaps it is.
I really need to see more data. I don't see a lot of data. I see a
good editorial approach, you know, in defining the problem if we
change impact fees, but I don't see any information here that helps me
decide whether we should reduce it or not. I just don't see any
comparative data to go by.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance, do you
have a particular community that you'd like a comparable of?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, you know, they listed the
five typical counties that we always compare ourselves to.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I would like to see all the levels,
you know, of transportation impact fees, residential impact fees,
commercial impact fees for those. I'd like to see other growth areas in
the nation. I'd like to see the states that have been particularly
successful, like Texas. I'd like to see other states that are particularly
aggressive right now, like Arkansas, and things of this nature. It's not
-- you know, I'm not trying to be hypercritical of staff, but I'm looking
for information.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Leo, does that help you out?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
I think also if I heard you right, Commissioner Nance, you want
more specifics on the alternative financing and revenues --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: For example, for counties that have
much lower impact fees, how do they accomplish their infrastructure
financing.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
Page 68
May 28, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: You know, what other mechanisms
do they use. What are other counties successful at or employing that
we are not, for example. And I realize some don't have near the
infrastructure we do. But we have five counties. And, you know, if
others are doing innovative things, I would certainly like to know
about it as an option.
And certainly we have this debt we have to pay, everybody
recognizes that, and I'm not minimizing that at all. But I'm just
saying, do we have other options to approach it. I just want to know --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Absolutely we do.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: But what are they? What are others
doing? That's all I'm asking. I'm not asking for you to recommend for
or against it, I'm just -- you know, I would like to know what sorts of
capital revenue programs some of these other states and counties have
just with the idea that it might be worth taking a look at. If we're
going to discuss it, let's go into it with some information.
Like I say, Mr. Register of course is going to be out there in a
competitive environment. And, you know, I'm sure he's going to
weigh in and he's going to suggest, you know, which ones of these
other mechanisms might have a greater or lesser impact on economic
development enticement to our community.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chair?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, go ahead, Commissioner
Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I would like to offer some
opinions concerning the comparison with other counties.
One of the things that makes it very difficult to have a precise
comparison of cause and effect between Collier and other counties is
that we are all unique. The other counties have additional sources of
income which we do not have. And we do not have it because the
community and Board of County Commissioners has been reluctant to
Page 69
May 28, 2013
add additional taxes to Collier County.
The choice is really very, very simple. If you don't like impact
fees, if you don't like the level of impact fees, then what other tax do
you want to impose on the people of Collier County to pay for that?
Now, we reached the decision a long time ago that growth should
pay for growth, that residents who have already paid the cost in impact
fees for the homes that they have built here should not be saddled with
funding the developer's cost for building new homes. Those new
residents and the developers should foot that bill. That is a policy
decision we made in the past a long, long time ago, and before any of
us were on the Board.
So if we want to change the policy, the decision is simple: What
other tax do you want to impose? And then we can conduct a study of
that tax to see how much money it would raise and whether or not it
would be adequate.
Now, the issue about trying to compare with other counties once
again is sort of a fool's errand. Because we are not the same as those
other countries. The property values in Collier County are among the
highest in the entire state. And the mitigation costs are about the
highest in the entire state. So every time we want to build a new lane
road or lane mile of roads, we have to buy very expensive property,
we have to mitigate for that expensive property, because in almost all
cases there is a problem with either protected species or with flood
control and water management.
These are issues that are not so prevalent in most of the other
states. We have a lot of bridges that have to be built when we extend
road or widen roads. We probably have more bridges in Collier
County than almost any other county in the state.
So there are lots of reasons why it is more expensive to do things
in Collier County than it is in lots of other counties, including Lee.
So the impact fees represent the cost of constructing the
infrastructure. And the cost of constructing it in Collier County is
Page 70
May 28, 2013
very, very high.
So I think that trying to develop a precise comparison with what
other counties and/or states have done is an exercise in futility. We
have to take a look at what is the best way to handle the situation here,
and we know more about what our requirements are in Collier County
than anybody else. I think we're smart enough to make the decisions
on our own.
And my observation is that the fundamental decision is if you
don't like impact fees, define the other tax that you want to impose on
the people of Collier County to fund infrastructure and let's debate
that. That is the only way we're going to move forward on this issue,
in my opinion. Otherwise we'll spend another three or four years with
futile comparisons with things that are irrelevant. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Boy, you've been so patient
with all of us, thank you very much.
I agree --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's my job.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There are so many things to say.
First of all, we're probably putting the cart before the horse here today,
because here on next Tuesday we're going to be discussing this
anyway and coming up with all of these -- with more information yet
to be seen. And so I agree that we can't make any decisions here until
we have our workshop, and we should very had this meeting after the
workshop rather than before.
Having said that, I think that one of the things, and I don't know
how you can weigh this, but our appeal to -- versus other counties,
yes, we do look really good compared to other counties in the State of
Florida. And everybody knows it. They use it as far as real estate
sales go. And even as construction. Construction I think, in my
opinion anyway, they build a nicer place, a nicer house, because we
live in a nicer community. And that appeals to a certain category of
Page 71
May 28, 2013
people that we want to continue to come here. If we built lower
construction or lower income houses, we would appeal to a different
category of people.
We're a premier county with superior infrastructure, and that has
been something that we've been very proud of. Just our appearance,
for instance, with the median landscaping. It makes all the difference
in the world as to how we look and other people are now emulating us,
which I think is interesting.
Right now you don't have to worry about stimulating
construction. They can't keep up with the work as it is. Which is
great; there's no complaints there. I'm delighted to see everybody
working and working so diligently.
So I'm wanting to know what really can be accomplished if we
do lower impact fees. As Commissioner Coyle just said, and I'm sure
others will agree with him, I don't know about on this commission but
others, that you've got to have the revenue from some source or you've
got to reduce our appeal to the buyers. And I for one do not like -- do
not like taxes at all. I don't want to see gas tax changed, I don't want
to see franchise fees, tolls, property taxes increase.
Let's face it, when we were at our high, which was a few years
back, we had very high impact fees, we had very low taxes. We're
sixth from the bottom in the State of Florida as far as property taxes
go, millage rate. And also we had the second highest growth rate in
the entire country. Only Las Vegas was ahead of us. And we were
the highest growth rate county in the State of Florida. That says that
we must be doing something right.
And as you see now, we -- and I'm sure you've read this in
Florida, the Florida magazines around the state that say that we are
ahead of the other counties as far as our growth now, and recovery.
And we like that. We like that. We haven't compromised in any way
our infrastructure in order to move ahead like this.
So those are a few things. I have so many more things here that
Page 72
May 28, 2013
I've marked and written down, but I'm going to save them for
Tuesday.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, thank you.
There is a lot of comparables that we can do. Just in our last
CAFR report, it showed that comparing with Sarasota County our debt
load per population is pretty high.
So however, there is one question the County Manager asked,
was do you want to change collection of impact fees from time of
permit to C.O. I think that question should be asked next Tuesday
again.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Agreed.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now, I'm not sure if it's
whether you like impact fees or dislike impact fees. I think the
question is, is it the appropriate source of funding. And
Commissioner Coyle is right, if you take away one funding source,
you need to think about replacing that funding source. Because the
need or the desire for infrastructure is not going to stop if we stop
collecting a fee for that infrastructure.
And quite frankly, I think it's worth a discussion, not necessarily
implementation, because it really -- the implementation needs to
happen from the voters. But infrastructure of sales tax should be in
my opinion considered.
Janet Vasey did an editorial on that maybe a year ago that I
thought was quite interesting, and that had to do with tying with
economic development. That infrastructure sales tax provided by law
is a sales tax that you can use with economic development.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now, Mr. Register is going to
speak on his thoughts and maybe the community's thoughts, but next
Tuesday if we're going to talk about the elimination of impact fees,
particularly transportation, I think it's worthy of kicking something --
Page 73
May 28, 2013
having something rise, such as infrastructure sales tax.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I ask a question on that?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Infrastructure sales tax, who pays
that?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: It would be -- it's a sales tax.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. So everybody pays that --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Everybody pays that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- rather than just the people who
are using the new construction.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And the thought by some on
this, and in fact I think this was in Janet's editorial, is everybody
enjoys that -- to help pay for that, and because they enjoy using that
infrastructure, like a road, things like that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So does that mean as we're still
talking about this particular subject, and you might want to address
this Tuesday, does that mean then we have to go to referendum to
approve that sales tax, or we as commissioners just impose that sales
tax on everyone?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, that's a referendum, a
ballot initiative that has to go to the voters. And you remember what
happened last time we did that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I do. I was looking at the flames,
actually.
MR. OCHS: Yeah, we were there.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, I reminded
somebody of that Friday, that same discussion that we had.
But anyways, we have one public speaker?
MR. MILLER: Your register speaker is Bob Murray.
MR. MURRAY: Good morning, Commissioners. County
Manager.
Wow, there is so much information that could be commented on
Page 74
May 28, 2013
that I'm going to find it challenging certainly. And we look forward to
being with you next Tuesday and being part of the workshop.
And who are we? Well, my name is Bob Murray and in this
instance I'm representing an ad hoc group, we call ourselves the
Collier Communities Economic Recovery Task Force.
Our purpose ultimately is to stimulate jobs, the development
growth of jobs through development and growth. And we did have
the opportunity to look at the impact fee presentation document. And
Commissioner Nance picked up on something, and perhaps all of you
did that I certainly would have commented on, having to take the
average of the state's impact fees does not reflect accurately the real
cost of impact fees for our county. They are considerably higher, and
California would not look so unattractive then.
It's really challenging to try to comment on all of the words that
have been stated here. Whatever I had as a thought coming here has
been taken down a little bit. And I have very little time, so let's get on
with it.
Impact fees are in most people's minds a tax. Even though we
know by law fees can only be charged to the extent of the expense that
the county has and not greater than; otherwise it becomes de facto a
tax.
While looking back and looking forward, if we look forward for
the moment we see okay, we still undoubtedly have some work to do
in the future with roads and so forth, but not to the degree that we have
had. Looking back the decisions that were made were fine. We don't
disagree that it was necessary to jump on and get those properties --
those roads and water systems, et cetera, all of those things under the
impact fees, they were necessary.
But there comes as time for breathing room. And we are of the
mind, and we will say it more clearly, that impact fees can be reduced.
We are not looking to see impact fees eliminated necessarily, but we
believe that they could be reduced. And our emphasis quite frankly is
Page 75
May 28, 2013
on the area of commercial. We realize, especially in East Naples --
I'm just going to just say, if I may quickly, in East Naples and out in
the eastern areas, whatever went up in value went down considerably.
And recovery, although it looks good for residential, recovery for
commercial is going to be a problem unless we provide the
opportunity for commercial to provide those services, retail,
restaurants, et cetera. Again, not enough time to talk, but thank you for
listening.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
A fee is for somebody to use. A tax is enjoyed by everybody. I
know that I've been at -- no, four structures that I've been in Collier
County, I've never paid an impact fee. So it's not a tax, it's a fee for
building new.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, if I may, just --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, thank you.
MR. OCHS: Because Commissioner Nance rightly brought this
up. We did not address in our original slides various revenue sources
that are used in other areas as well as ours to pay for infrastructure
improvements related to growth, but we have done some of that
research for Commissioner Coyle's benefit. If he's not in front of the
television screen, I'm going to ask Mr. Isackson to just briefly run
down this partial list of potential revenue streams for funding of
capital improvements and make a few comments on where we stand
with those here in Collier.
Mark?
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, the list that you see in front
of you is essentially what other counties in our comparable group have
used to finance capital improvements. If you look at impact fees, gas
taxes, property taxes, those are primarily the sources that we've used.
Now I want to be careful, because property taxes are used as a
backfill mechanism. They aren't used to support debt, but they're used
to support an ongoing maintenance effort in the road area specifically
Page 76
May 28, 2013
with our transfer to the Fund 313.
We have not delved into the -- we being the county have not
delved into the other series of revenue streams that you see on the
bottom there beginning with user fees/assessments going forward.
The two guys in particular I know, both Sarasota and Martin,
kind of use a re-approach, both of which have infrastructure sales
taxes and both of which have franchise fees that they use to augment
their capital effort.
The county certainly has a millage rate at 3.5645 per $1,000 of
taxable value. You know the maximum cap is 10.
You have gas taxes at this point in time for the county. That is
the pledge source of repayment on your gas tax bonds. You're at your
maximum ability to raise gas taxes at this point, and that will extend
through the life of the bonds, which I believe is 2026 or '27, if I'm not
mistaken on your gas tax bonds.
The fact that we have not enacted the franchise fees, we've had a
whirl at it with the infrastructure sales tax, as Commissioner Henning
said, and took some lumps on that one.
Those are really policy decisions from the Board from staffs
perspective I know in talking with County Manager. What we try to
do is simply present the information as it relates to our specific entity
and the necessity to have certain revenue streams in place in order to
satisfy our debt obligations going forward, which I have spoken to at
the podium is our first and foremost priority from a -- certainly from a
budgeting perspective. We may have to make sure that whatever our
diversity of revenue streams are going forward that there's enough
there to not only satisfy our debt obligations but also our continuing
obligations to fund maintenance of our infrastructure asset.
And we have also mentioned to you that our debt load continues
to go down. Commissioner Henning mentioned the comparable slides
that were put up by John DeSanto from Ernst and Young.
Our debt per capita compared with Sarasota and Martin, which
Page 77
May 28, 2013
were those other comparable communities, are going down.
And as you recall, within the next 10 years, assuming the
issuance of no new debt, that our debt load will be cut in half.
So those are all things to consider I guess going forward. But
those are my comments, Mr. Ochs, on the caption in front of you.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, any more editorials?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just one more comment, if you
don't mind, Mr. Chair?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would like to briefly address the
per capita debt load. That again is a misleading figure. Collier
County has a very low population but a very, very large land mass.
That means that we have a lot more roads and utility requirements and
expenses. I mentioned bridges before. So when we take a county that
has a relatively low population and divide it into the cost of
maintaining a very, very large land area, it is naturally going to be
higher than most other counties of similar type.
But I just want to point out that the use of a per capita figure for
debt load is misleading when it comes to an application to Collier
County as opposed to some of the other counties. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Is there any items on the agenda that we can take care of in the
next 20 minutes?
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, I suggest perhaps your CRA items
you could be able to dispose of, certainly.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Muckel is here. And then he can move back to
his office.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So we have a CRA chairman,
and I believe that's Commissioner Nance.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, sir.
Page 78
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right, I'm going to close the
regular meeting and let the chairman open up the CRA meeting.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, sir.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: We will now convene as the
Collier County CRA.
Item #1481
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS (BCC), ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA), APPROVE
RELOCATION OF THE IMMOKALEE CRA OFFICE,
AUTHORIZE GIVING NOTICE TO THE CRA'S CURRENT
LANDLORD OF ITS INTENT NOT TO RENEW THE EXISTING
LEASE AGREEMENT, APPROVE ENTERING INTO A LEASE
AGREEMENT FOR OFFICE SPACE WITH THE SOUTHWEST
FLORIDA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD, INC., AND
AUTHORIZE THE CRA CHAIR TO SIGN A LEASE
AGREEMENT FOR AN ANNUAL CRA RENT EXPENDITURE
OF NOT-TO-EXCEED $21,766.32 — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that brings you to Item 14.B.1 under
Community Redevelopment Agency. It's a recommendation Board of
County Commissioners, acting in its capacity as the Community
Redevelopment Agency, approve the relocation of the Immokalee
CRA office; authorize giving notice to the CRA's current landlord of
its intent not to renew the existing lease agreement; approve entering
into a lease agreement for office space with Southwest Florida Work
Force Development Board, Inc.; and authorize the CRA chair to sign
the attached lease agreement with an annual CRA rent expenditure of
to not exceed $21,766.32.
Mr. Muckel?
Page 79
May 28, 2013
MR. MUCKEL: Thank you, County Manager Ochs. Brad
Muckel, for the record. Good morning, Commissioners.
This item is simply requesting the relocation of the CRA to a new
venue for an annual savings of just over $25,000 a year in overhead.
So I'm here to answer any questions that you might have.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Brad, very noble of-- you understand that the square footage or
the rent per square foot is going to dramatically be different?
MR. MUCKEL: Yeah, I do. I do. We --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And this is the Work Force
Development?
MR. MUCKEL: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can't believe that there's no
room for negotiation on this. That's -- is this the average in
Immokalee?
MR. MUCKEL: No, but it's a set rate at that facility that they
charge all of the people. There's, you know, roughly 100 offices in
that building. We're looking to lease four of them. So it's not open for
negotiation. The rate is what it is. But we will have at our disposal --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why did -- I can't figure out
why that's not negotiable.
MR. MUCKEL: Well, I can only say that I tried to negotiate
them and they wouldn't negotiate. But we will have at our disposal
three large conference rooms, two reception areas, restrooms, a break
room, kitchen.
If you look at all the stuff that we're sharing with the other
tenants, the rate is actually much lower.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You've answered my question.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did you look at any other properties
to see if you could get the same or better than at a lesser price?
Page 80
May 28, 2013
MR. MUCKEL: We did. There was only one other facility
available to the CRA that would serve our needs, and it wasn't in the
condition -- it wasn't in the condition that we would want to occupy.
It would need a lot of work to it, cleaning, tenant improvements,
painting, drywall work, carpeting. It just wasn't attractive, to be quite
honest.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: And Brad, I understand from your
analysis here that the proposed office space also includes janitorial
services, electric utilities and alarm system monitoring, which we had
previously paid for under the old arrangement.
MR. MUCKEL: It does.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: So in addition to ancillary meeting
facilities that you enjoy, you also have the direct operational benefits
included in the rent.
MR. MUCKEL: That's correct. There's a chart that I provided in
the body of the executive summary that shows you the comparative
analysis of what's covered under the existing and what's covered under
the proposed lease.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: And due to your initiative and the
reduced staffing you currently are managing at the CRA, I actually
commend you for this initiative, Brad, and I think it's going to be a
good savings. That $25,000 is going to come right back to the
taxpayers through benefits that can be funded through the CRA. And
with that said, I will make a motion to approve this item.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't feel comfortable with it, but
I'm going to respect your views on this. You've seen it and you know
what's happening and this is your district, so I will vote for it.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, any additional
comments?
(No response.)
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none then, I'll call the
Page 81
May 28, 2013
question.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
Any opposed by like sign.
(No response.)
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Coyle, I apologize,
sir, did you have anything you wanted to add to that? I apologize for
not recognizing you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, that's not a problem at all. It
was well covered. Thank you.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, sir.
All right, passes unanimously 4-0.
Item #14B2
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, AS THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (CRA), APPROVE IMMOKALEE CRA'S PROPOSED
EXIT STRATEGY FOR THE IMMOKALEE BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT CENTER (IBDC) AND AUTHORIZE THE
COUNTY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS FOR FUTURE CRA BOARD CONSIDERATION —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That takes us to 14.B.2, Mr. Chair. That's a
recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners as the
Community Redevelopment Agency to approve the Immokalee's
CRA's attached proposed exit strategy for the Immokalee Business
Page 82
May 28, 2013
Development Center and authorize the County Attorney to prepare the
necessary documents for future CRA Board consideration.
Mr. Muckel?
MR. MUCKEL: Thank you. This item, Commissioners, is
related to the Immokalee Business Development Center which you
voted at a past meeting to spin off from under the CRA's management
to a nonprofit organization.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: I have a motion and a second.
Commissioner Coyle, do you have any comments?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, not at all. I'm all in favor of it.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, sir.
I have nothing but good things to say about this. We hope Marie
gets her chance to continue with Immokalee Business Development
Center. And I thank you, Mr. Muckel, again for working with her.
Marie, we wish you the very best.
Do you have any comments, ma'am?
MS. CAPITA: I just want to thank the Commissioners for all
their help and helping me extend this into a not-for-profit, and staff for
all their help in planning this exit strategy with me. It took the effort
of the whole community and we did put it together and I wanted to
thank everyone for that.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well thank you.
Are there any other comments from the Board?
(No response.)
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, Commissioner
Coyle, if you're good, I'll call the question.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 83
May 28, 2013
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
All those opposed?
(No response.)
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, it passes 4-0
unanimously. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Muckel, thank you, Marie.
MS. CAPITA: Thank you.
MR. MUCKEL: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that concludes your CRA Board
regular agenda items today.
CRA CHAIRMAN NANCE: Concluding the agenda items for
the CRA, we'll call the CRA adjourned and return to Commissioner
Henning.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, seatbelts are on?
Why don't we go to 11.F.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Formerly 16.D.12.
Item #11F
RECOMMENDATION THAT COLLIER COUNTY NO LONGER
PURSUE WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS AT THE PEPPER
RANCH PRESERVE, BUT CONTINUE TO PURSUE GRANTS
FOR WETLAND RESTORATION AND PANTHER HABITAT
MITIGATION CREDITS ON THE PROPERTY — MOTION
DIRECTING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO REVIEW AND
CONSULT WITH PROFESSIONALS REGARDING INITIAL
SALE AS IT PERTAINS TO MITIGATION — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Thank you. And 11 .F is a recommendation that
Collier County no longer pursue wetland mitigation credits at Pepper
Ranch Preserve but continue to pursue grants for wetland restoration
Page 84
May 28, 2013
and panther habitat mitigation credits on the property. This item was
brought forward for discussion by Commissioner Nance.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, thank you very much.
I just wanted to bring this forward because there are three -- there
were three items on today's agenda that had to do with Conservation
Collier, this I think being the most important one.
But what I wanted to bring up and I just want to make it a matter
of public record, the fact that the county is really struggling with
finding value in our Pepper Ranch Preserve purchase. And it appears
that we really don't -- despite the recommendations from consultants
which steered us apparently in a direction that was improper back in
'08, prior to our purchase in '09, that we don't have any opportunities
for wetlands credits or really a mitigation bank opportunity here. And
I just want to go ahead and say that before -- you know, I understand
that Conservation Collier is winding down a little bit and we're
gathering our forces to create a -- I guess the ordinance calls for a full
report to taxpayers on monies that we spent and where we are, I am
remiss at this point to take action that ceases our work on this when it
might be the only -- you know, one of the only values that we have
there. And I just thought it deserved a grant or discussion than
perhaps we were giving it on the consent agenda.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd like to point out, I think I'm
correct here, but we need the County Manager to verify this, the
problem seems to be that the state has made a recent change in their
mitigation requirements. So the assumption and guidance at the
beginning of this process was certainly sound, but because of a fairly
recent change in mitigation application requirements we find it very
difficult now to get those same mitigation requirements.
Is that true, Mr. Ochs?
Page 85
May 28, 2013
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Actually, Commissioner, the change is at
the federal level and the code of federal regulations. That did occur
some time ago, however, but certainly after we had initially received
authorization from the Board to proceed on the concept of developing
a public mitigation bank here.
But I think it's worthy, Mr. Chairman, for Ms. Sulecki to make a
few comments in that regard.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Go ahead.
MR. OCHS: Go ahead, Alex.
MS. SULECKI: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Alex Sulecki, Coordinator of your Conservation Collier Program.
And I have with me together Melissa Hennig, she's a Senior
Environmental Specialist Land Manager and staff member who most
closely was involved with this.
We did invite our consultant here to speak with you today, but
she's not going to be here 'til about 1 :00, so she'll miss the discussion.
I do have a presentation for you, but I can't tell you that it's short,
so I'd be happy to answer questions, if you'd prefer at your pleasure.
MR. OCHS: Alex, why don't you give a summary of what
happened.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, I think the issue is about
our understanding credits that would be available and now things have
changed.
Is that correct, Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, I just didn't think that we
shouldn't take action closing the door on anything until we sit down
and let everybody understand what's going on.
According to the executive summary, the federal mitigation rule
change that we discovered in 2011 took place prior to our purchase of
the Pepper Ranch, which I think is just a little disquieting to me when
you hire somebody that represents themselves as an expert in the field
Page 86
May 28, 2013
and obviously led the Board into error, at least in this segment of the
purchase.
I'm not saying that Pepper Ranch is without merit, don't get me
wrong on that. But I just want to understand. I think it's worthwhile
for us to go through this with some detail now and understand clearly
what opportunities we have and opportunities that we don't have or no
longer have rather than doing it incrementally. I think it's a disservice
to do that incrementally. And I don't really want to subject the Board
to this extended discussion at this time.
Maybe we need to bring it back as an agenda item in the future,
Mr. Ochs. I don't know what the feeling of the Board is, or
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well if I may, if in fact that change
was made before our purchase, you're absolutely correct and I would
support it. I would be interested in knowing if someone intentionally
deceived us in the process or if we failed to conduct an appropriate
investigation of our abilities to get mitigation credits ourselves.
So if it occurred before we purchased it, I fully agree with your
position, Commissioner Nance.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So what's the answer?
MS. SULECKI: Would you like me to go through the summary
of what happened? I'd be happy to do that.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MS. SULECKI: All right. Pepper Ranch Preserve was acquired
in February, 2009. And you may recall that mitigation wasn't a goal
in the referendum, but it was considered a viable secondary
opportunity.
And as part of our due diligence, staff commissioned a feasibility
study in April of 2008 to determine the potential to receive mitigation
credits as part of the benefits of acquiring the property.
At the time we were considering a regional offsite mitigation area
or ROMA, so the study was geared to that.
Page 87
May 28, 2013
The feasibility study was completed and submitted to us in June,
2008, indicating there was potential. That study was mentioned and
offered to the Board during a presentation as a part of getting approval
to make offer on the Pepper Ranch. July 22nd, 2008, Item 10.E.
In addition to the study, staff also consulted with U.S. Fish &
Wildlife regarding the potential for panther habitat units and
understood this potential was there and discussed the potential for
mitigation and received a preliminary estimate from a member of
county staff familiar with mitigation. So all things pointed to a
realistic potential at that point.
So we acquired Pepper Ranch. And early in 2010 we contracted
with Shada Environmental to permit a Pepper Ranch Preserve ROMA.
Permitting would be through the Army Corps of Engineers and South
Florida Water Management District.
In pre-application meetings with the district it was decided to
pursue the ROMA in phases to gather the low-hanging credit that was
most expeditious to acquire.
The Phase I boundary that you see on the screen in yellow was
created to take in an area where extensive exotic removal was
required. There was not a lot of lift to be gained by improving
wetlands, because they were in relatively good condition. But the
assumption was that we could get significant wetland credits by
placing a conservation easement over the area and removing exotics.
Staff and our consultants attended a pre-application meeting with
the district but no mention was made of the new rule which went into
effect in June, 2008, the same month that we got our feasibility study.
A year into that permitting process our consultant learned of the
April 10th -- well, excuse me June, 2008 federal rule changed what we
could get credit for under Army Corps federal permitting regulations.
It essentially removed the ability for us to get credit for anything that
was part of a land management plan and would otherwise be done,
like exotic removal and prescribed fire, which were two of our big
Page 88
May 28, 2013
things.
In early 2011 Shada subsequently met with Army Corps, who
made some recommendations to shift the focus of the prospectus from
a ROMA to a mitigation bank. But no mention was made of the rule
change.
In late 2011 we learned of a situation in Lee County that was
very similar, where a Lee County perspective for 20/20 lands was
denied by Army Corps. And by this time we knew we weren't going
to get credit for exotic removal, but we still believed we could get
credit for the conservation easement, enough to make it worth
pursuing.
At that point we spoke with Army Corps about the Lee County
denial and asked if Pepper Ranch was likely to be denied. The Army
Corps staff would not provide an answer on the appropriateness of the
Pepper Ranch prospectus without it having been submitted. So we
submitted it.
The first request for additional information, RAI, included a
request to submit the South Florida Water Management District
environmental resource permit, which was the other permit that we
required.
We submitted that with the estimated wetland credits reduced,
from 73 to 25, based on that 2008 mitigation rule change and the Lee
County denial.
We received and responded to a couple more RAI's from Army
Corps and South Florida Water Management District through 2012.
In December, 2012 staff and members of all agencies met at
Pepper Ranch to conduct a site visit where agency staff started
conveying concerns.
As a result of that visit, the Army Corps representative advised
staff she did not think the proposed bank would meet criteria for
mitigation credit and we could either withdraw our application or
pursue it to a letter of denial. And we chose to pursue to that formal
Page 89
May 28, 2013
letter, which is part of your packet.
So at this point we believe there are a few options. We can
restrict public use at Pepper Ranch; and I want to talk to you a little bit
about that.
We could design some additional hydrologic restoration,
including some restoration of isolated wetlands and pasture areas,
which we would call Phase II, which would on your screen be the
pasture areas there. That would mean removing the cattle that we
have there. And the existing cattle lease has another year option on it.
We could revise the funding mechanism in our prospectus to
satisfy the Army Corp's concerns about lack of assurance for funding
restoration work with the credit sales, and that was part of the issue.
But something kind of important I would like to bring to your
attention. Public access is an important part of the management and of
this program. And that's directly from the ordinance. Mitigation is
not in the ordinance, but it was determined early on that it was not
something that was prohibited by the ordinance.
So at Pepper Ranch, as part of the approved management plan,
we have current and proposed uses. And these are hunting -- current
uses: Hunting, hiking and horseback riding. And proposed uses: All
the above and mountain biking, boardwalk and primitive camping.
And so you see the map on your screen shows the location of
these proposed uses. Red is the boundary of the ranch; the broken
yellow lines are hiking trails, hiking trail there; solid yellow are
mountain biking, over here; and broken orange or multiuse trails with
horseback riding; the light blue is the access road; and the purple and
white is the proposed boardwalk in the cypress area. And camping is
in the lodge area.
So something important to note to you: In light of the denial and
our recommendation to you to continue to pursue PHUs, panther
habitat units, we met with U.S. Fish & Wildlife permitting staff on
May 15th, just a couple weeks ago, to discuss potential for generating
Page 90
May 28, 2013
PHUs via a conservation bank. And this is in reference to the second
to last paragraph in your executive summary, Page 2, where we told
you we will submit a prospectus to U.S. Fish & Wildlife to determine
if they would consider Pepper Ranch an appropriate place for a
conservation bank before we begin that lengthy permit process. It's a
different process, it doesn't require Army Corps approval, and the
federal rule was specific to wetland mitigations and would not apply
here.
So at that meeting we were advised that the proposed level of
public use access at the preserve will be a determining factor in
permitting the ranch as a conservation bank.
There's a potential for U.S. Fish & Wildlife to require a reduced
level of public use in order to grant the full amount credits.
And we already know -- the picture on your screen, we already
know there's one panther that frequents the lodge area. You can see in
this photo taken by a hunter just a few weeks ago on May 13th.
There's been sightings in this area for a couple of years and it's likely
the same panther.
So if U.S. Fish & Wildlife indicates in response to a draft
prospectus that reduced level of public use will be required to permit a
conservation bank, then staff will return to the Board for more
direction and see what you'd like to do.
So our recommendation is to abandon the pursuit of wetland
credits. We don't believe that it's worthwhile at this time. And if you
want me to go into more detail on that, I'd be happy to. But we think
we should pursue grants for wetland restoration. We've already
submitted one for the restore grant.
We also think we should pursue panther habitat mitigation
credits. Because even with reduced credits, we still believe it would
be worthwhile for us to pursue those.
So if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can I make a suggestion?
Page 91
May 28, 2013
Have the County Attorney look at recommendations by consultants,
including the appraisal -- an appraiser on this, and see if we purchased
-- and I do recall somebody saying -- giving a value on some kind of
mitigation credit or whatever. Take a look at it. I think we're running
up to the statute of limitation. And I think that should be the direction
at a minimum on this.
Is there any comments on my recommendation?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I support it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, me too.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: As do I.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So I'm going to go ahead and
make that motion.
I don't know if we really need to approve this one. This is just a
-- it's not a time sensitive or anything, it's just a direction under this
one.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chair, you do have a registered public
speaker for this item.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, I'm going to make
a motion that we direct the County Attorney to look at consultants and
professionals that made any recommendations on any kind of
mitigation that made the sale happen through the price and support.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second your motion.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. First public speaker?
MR. MILLER: Your public speaker is Amber Crooks.
MS. CROOKS: Hi. Amber Crooks from the Conservancy of
Southwest Florida.
In the interest of time, I'll just summarize some comments that I
was going to speak on, and that's just the incredible value of the
Pepper Ranch Preserve for its recreational and esthetic and
environmental values. Of course that's one of the reasons for the
Conservation Collier Program, to acquire properties like this. And it
was a victory for that program with this acquisition for a multitude of
Page 92
May 28, 2013
reasons that I won't speak to in detail.
But in regards to your direction, the Conservancy would have an
interest in continuing to work with the county in trying to find the
balance between public use and the mitigation banking opportunities
on that property to recognize that's one of the aspects that the county
was looking for and its acquisition was the mitigation aspect. And
with the remaining option of the panther habitat units. We would like
to continue to work with staff on that opportunity. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, the Board would not want us to
continue the pursuit of that panther habitat mitigation, irrespective of
the action that the County Attorney is taking?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, we already gave that
direction a long time ago, right, on a panther mitigation?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Hasn't it been ongoing?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, it's been ongoing, right?
MS. SULECKI: We've been pursuing it at your direction. We'll
continue.
MR. OCHS: Thank you. I just want to clarify.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any other discussion?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor, signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. Mr. Chairman, could I just
make a brief comment about federal government's actions? You
know, this is an extremely unfair process where the people of Collier
County voted to buy conservation land and the federal government
would not recognize that conservation for mitigation purposes. They
Page 93
May 28, 2013
want the people of Collier County to pay twice. I think that is an
unfair process.
And for whatever purpose it might serve, we might ask our
lobbyists in Washington to see if they can explore ways of getting that
process overturned. That's a long, long, long shot. But I just wanted to
express my disapproval of the federal government's actions on this.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: But Commissioner Coyle, I
think it's worthy of us trying to understand why they did that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think I know why. They want you
to pay twice. They want you to set aside conservation areas, and then
when you spend your monies doing that, they won't give you credit for
mitigation, which is really a stupid process.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, my understanding is that
only has to do with government. Government cannot seek credits on
their own property that they preserve; however, the public can do that.
Is that a correct statement? No?
MS. SULECKI: Well, I believe that we can't pursue credits for
things that we were already going to do under approved programs.
And my understanding was that this benefits private mitigation banks
who are supported by this group.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think if you really dive
into it you'll find that it was the private sector that lobbied their
legislators to create legislation. And I believe they also did that on the
state level --
MS. SULECKI: I'm not aware.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- in the recent past.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I wouldn't doubt that at all.
But it's extremely unfair to the taxpayers of Collier County.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So I think Commissioner
Coyle's suggestion is worthy of discussion.
Jeff? What do you -- oh, I'm sorry, you wanted to say something.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah, Commissioner Coyle, I
Page 94
May 28, 2013
agree with you 100 percent. And that's why I brought this up. I mean,
I can't fathom that somehow we've undertaken this -- that the citizens
of Collier County have endorsed taxing themselves to work forward
for conservation and now we can't get any conservation value out of it
or mitigation value back out of it to the county. I think it's a bizarre
situation. I just think everybody needs to be aware of it.
And like I say, there's three items here: There's the Pepper Ranch
Preserve, there's the Red Maple Swamp and there's Horsepen Strand.
All three of those are really very good projects that benefit Collier
County and its taxpayers and also have this wonderful conservation,
you know, feature about it.
So I don't know that we can take action today, but I hope that we
move this into another agenda item, you know, without incurring a
tremendous amount of cost or litigation or anything else that we can
figure out what we can do here. I just thought it was worthy of
discussion. I support what you said 100 percent, Commissioner
Coyle.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, we can add this -- or you can add
this to your federal legislative agenda and we'd be happy to work with
our federal lobbyists to see what we can do to change the law in
Washington.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: But I think we need to
understand the history of it. So if you could bring that back --
MR. OCHS: I'd be happy to.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- in our communications or
something like that we can give you direction at that time.
MR. OCHS: Very good.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that okay, Commissioner
Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, that would be great, thank
you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Did we vote on this item?
Page 95
May 28, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: We voted on your item, your
motion to let the County Attorney take it.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. And if there's no other
action on this item, we'll go ahead and take lunch.
MS. SULECKI: Commissioners, thank you.
Can I approach you please and hand you one of our newest
brochures before I leave?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, we're going to go to
lunch, so we'll be back at 1 :1 1 .
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd like for you to give me one.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: You give one to Commissioner
Coyle.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: We're putting the stamp on it right
now, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, thank you very much.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Lunch recess.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle, are you on line?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Hello?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, okay. That's fine.
Next item?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sounds like him coming through.
Riding a horse in.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's the voice from beyond.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sounds like he's trying to break
through those chains.
Item #1 I E
Page 96
May 28, 2013
RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT A STATUS REPORT ON
OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT OF THE ISLES OF CAPRI
FIRE DISTRICT — MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH
NEGOTIATIONS IN SUPPORT OF AN INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ISLES OF CAPRI AND EAST
NAPLES FIRE DISTRICTS AND BRING BACK FOR BOARD
APPROVAL — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, you're on to your 1 :00 p.m. time
certain. It's Item 11.E on your agenda this afternoon. It's a
recommendation to accept a status report on operational management
of the Isles of Capri Fire District. And Len Price, your Administrative
Services Administrator, will present.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, we have five registered public
speakers for this item.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, great. Thank you.
MS. PRICE: Good afternoon. For the record, Len Price,
Administrative Services Division Administrator.
You have before you a status report. As you may recall we asked
for -- or you approved the County Manager to request proposals from
Marco Island and from East Naples Fire Department -- Fire District to
handle management of Isle of Capri Fire District. And we received
one proposal from East Naples and a letter from Marco Island stating
that they were not planning to submit a proposal at that time.
Subsequent to that, my understanding is that Marco Island City
Council has reconsidered that and is perhaps planning on submitting
something. However, we've advised them that they would have to
submit that direct to you and that we were not contemplating that at
this time.
We did have a very good meeting with East Naples Fire District
to go over the proposal that they sent. And as you see, I've identified
some of the questions and answers that they provided to us. At that
Page 97
May 28, 2013
time the -- your advisory Board voted not to take action until the fall.
Since that time they've had another fire advisory board meeting
at which they've requested that the Commissioners ask county staff to
fully vet the proposal that came from East Naples so that they can get
more of the answers, look more into the numbers, et cetera. And so I
believe that that is what your advisory board has asked of you, to
direct staff to fully vet that proposal.
And I think that there are several people here who can either
supplement what I've said or correct anything that I've stated
incorrectly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could you explain to me what fully
vet means?
MS. PRICE: I believe that they want us to take it almost to the
point of negotiation, find out what the status of our firefighters would
be, what the status of our fire station would be, to look at the numbers
and make sure the numbers that are proposed -- like East Naples is
talking about bringing the millage for the entire area down to 1.5 mils,
which is a reduction in the dollars that would be collected. I think
they want to make sure that they can do what East Naples is stating
they can do, which is provide the same level of service. And I believe
that the reasons East Naples believes they can do it for the less costs is
because they're going to capitalize on and maximize some of their
current resources, you know, that we use differently.
So it is my understanding that they really want us to get all the
questions answered so that the next time that the fire advisory board
looks at it they know exactly what the new circumstance would look
like.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nope.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So it sounds like we're going to
actually continue this item? That's --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Maybe not.
Page 98
May 28, 2013
MS. PRICE: Depending on what you all decide to do. I wouldn't
think of it as a continuation but rather as direction to staff, HR, your
County Attorney's Office, O&B, fire district personnel, I would ask
that on any conversations that we're having to get these questions
answered that the advisory board appoint one of their members to help
us and make sure we're asking all the right questions. That would be
my suggestion. And we form a small committee to just try and work
through all the issues that might come up.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, if I might, just for the public's
benefit, as I understand the proposal from the East Naples Fire and
Rescue District, it essentially is to take over through an interlocal
agreement or some other instrument the management services for the
Isles of Capri District for fiscal year '14 and then work during that
year with the legislative delegation to effect a change in their district
boundaries through their special act or some other mechanism that
would then allow for a full merger of the two areas into a single
district in fiscal year '15.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You understand it correctly.
MR. OCHS: So that is the proposal essentially that we've
received from the East Naples Fire and Rescue District.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And Mr. Chairman, could we hear
the speakers before I make any further comments?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure, I would love that. But I
want to ask Commissioner Coyle if he has anything at this time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nothing at this time, Mr. Chair,
thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's hear our speakers.
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker is Phil Brougham. He
will be followed by Matt Crowder.
COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Good afternoon,
Commissioners. My name is Phil Brougham and I'm a resident of the
Page 99
May 28, 2013
Fiddler's Creek community. And I've been involved with the question
concerning the Isles of Capri Fire District now for about a year, a little
over a year, and I know the other folks here from Isles of Capri have
been involved in discussing this issue longer than I.
I am speaking for, not elected by, but speaking on behalf of 280
property owners within Fiddler's Creek, plus some commercial
properties in Fiddler's Creek that are taxed in the Isles of Capri taxing
district, fire district, and we are currently paying two mils and we've
been paying two mils for quite some time; whereas the other 1,500
approximate property owners within Fiddler's Creek are taxed by the
East Naples Fire Department paying 1.5 mils. That's why I got
involved.
Len has told you, you've solicited -- after many, many
discussions of many, many committees, you solicited proposals from
East Naples and Marco. You now have a proposal from East Naples
to do essentially what I just heard, enter into an interlocal agreement
effective the next fiscal year, hopefully leading through negotiations
and involvement of the Fire Advisory Board on Isles of Capri to a full
consolidation. And I would support that effort.
But I have my doubts. And the residents of Fiddler's Creek have
I think been patient for a year. And I think there are some immediate
actions we can take to ensure that those residents are taxed equally
and fairly, and we have a homogenous tax rate throughout all of
Fiddler's Creek.
The Isles of Capris Fire District is an MSTU, and I think it's
within your power to direct county staff to modify that MSTU to enter
into an interlocal agreement with East Naples Fire to provide fire and
rescue service to the 280 properties that I just mentioned. That can be
effective at any time, but it could also be made effective October 1.
That would guarantee to these residents that we are taxed at 1.5 mils.
Further, you could direct, and I would urge you to do that, that
you modify the boundaries of the Isles of Capri MSTU, which is also
Page 100
May 28, 2013
within your power to do that, to remove those 280 plus properties
from the Isles of Capri MSTU, and then further support a local bill to
be advanced by East Naples and Fiddler's Creek later this summer to
the state legislature to formally adopt those properties within the East
Naples Fire District.
I think we deserve some immediate relief. I think I'm lobbying
very heavily that we receive a fair tax for excellent fire services,
whether they're from Isles of Capri or East Naples. And so I would
really urge you to take three actions today as I just mentioned.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next speaker?
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Matt Crowder. He'll be
followed by Jeri Neuhaus.
MR. CROWDER: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, thank
you. For the record, Matt Crowder. I'm currently the vice-chairman
of the Isles of Capri Fire Advisory Committee.
I've been involved with the Isles of Capri Fire Department in
some capacity or another starting in 1997. And some 15 years ago I
stood in these very chambers, as Mr. Ochs can attest to, trying to
convince the Board of County Commissioners to not go forward with
an Isles of Capri/East Naples fire consolidation. We prevailed back
then, but if given the same opportunity today, I would speak in favor
of such a consolidation for these three reasons; and I want to state that
these are my personal opinions, I'm not here today speaking on behalf
of the fire Board.
And they are: Number one, I believe consolidation is inevitable.
I also believe it's a good idea. And thirdly, I know that the people of
Collier County, including those in our precinct, have voted
overwhelmingly in favor of consolidation.
I also believe that our current fire Board is not well equipped to
advise the BCC on this important issue. And I'll tell you why: I think
that as I have stated to certain members of county staff, I think we lack
the expertise to address such issues as differing retirement plans, a
Page 101
May 28, 2013
dispensation of durable assets, and quite honestly, with four or five of
our board members relatively new to this conversation, I think we lack
the collective insight to make an informed recommendation.
And just a final word on why I think now is the time to go
forward with this interlocal agreement. I believe our fire department
is falling behind in terms of resources needed to protect our district.
And I'll just give a couple of examples, if I could.
Our fire department currently has no paramedics certified to
practice in Collier County. We rely completely on the firefighter
exchange program with EMS in order to have advanced life support
capabilities in our district.
Also, we have three of the tallest high-rises in probably a 20-mile
radius and we have no aerial apparatus to handle these very tall
buildings. Again, we rely on neighboring departments in order to
provide those recourses.
So it seems logical to me personally, to move forward with an
interlocal agreement as it has been described. I believe we could
alleviate the shortages and at the same time have our millage reduced
to -- by a half a million. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jeri Neuhaus, followed by
Jim Hughes.
MS. NEUHAUS: Hi. I'm Jeri Neuhaus. Like Matt, I have been
involved with the fire department since 1997 and fought very loudly
and strongly to keep the merger from happening with East Naples
back in '97 and then once again back in the 2000's.
Like Matt, I agree that given the choice today, I would have to
support consolidation, because it is inevitable. I think we've outgrown
ourselves. I think we've done a fine job. And I think under the
direction of our former chief, we rocked. It was a great department.
I don't think we're capable anymore of handling our district. I
think it's time to really look at consolidation that everybody in Collier
County voted for.
Page 102
May 28, 2013
However, when it comes to Fiddler's Creek, unless the decision is
made to consolidate, I can't support the idea of Fiddler's Creek pulling
out of our department, because that would decimate our budget. And
although I appreciate their desire to do so in order to get a 1.5 mil rate,
that the entire district needs to be treated as one district. We don't part
and parcel pieces out until a decision's made. We're going to
consolidate and we take Fiddler's Creek with us and we go for it. If
we're not, then Fiddler's Creek has to be part of the conversation about
why we're not doing it.
Again, I have fought long and hard against it. And this time I'm
fully, fully in support of it. As long as the questions get answered that
we presented to East Naples and as long as certain things get
addressed; such as how are the firefighters going to be handled, how is
retirement going to be handled, how are assets going to be transferred
and things like that. I think it's just -- it's inevitable. Thank you very
much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jim Hughes, followed by
George Lara.
MR. HUGHES: Commissioners, you're hearing different
agendas. I'm sure you have different ideas on how you're going to
vote. And instead of standing up here and telling you what you should
or shouldn't do, I'd like to give you the opportunity, if there's any
questions you have that I might be able to answer, I'll try my best, that
-- in order to help you make your decisions. I'd like to take this time
to give you that choice to ask me questions.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions by the Board?
(No response.)
MR. HUGHES: Okay. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your final speaker is Jorge Lara.
MR. LARA: I always have time with these really tall -- trouble
with these really tall mics.
Page 103
May 28, 2013
Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Jorge Lara and I'm
here speaking on behalf of the firefighters at Isle of Capri Fire Rescue,
the guys who are on the front line.
East Naples and Golden Gate are fine organizations. They do
phenomenal work even during times where dollars are short. We hold
incredible regard for both organizations. However, these departments
are at the inception of their merger. There are lots of variables
regarding the trial and error methods still. I'm sure that obstacles will
be overcome, but it will take time and dollars. In the end only time's
going to ensure their success, and I'm sure they're going to be
successful. Which brings me to my department, Isles of Capri Fire
Rescue.
Why merge with us now? Not even merge, why disintegrate us
now? Was the introductory cost saving of .5 mils really worth losing
firefighters that know most of the district by name? I mean, when we
get an address to go to a call, before knowing the address we know,
oh, well, that's so and so's neighbor or so and so's neighbor. Because
we see them every day. We see them every day when we work out, we
go jog. I mean, we've got sweat equity, as the community has sweat
equity, into this department.
Make no mistake about it, that a merger right now is going to
mean losing the staff you have. Every one of us.
And I'm not here to fight for our jobs. In a way I am. I'm here to
fight for the department that really belongs to that community. It's
under the county, but it really belongs to our community. It's one of
the last departments, just like Ochopee is, that belongs to the
community where we go outside, we can wave at somebody and they
know who we are, we know who they are. We know whether he
fishes, whether he's an electrician, how many children they have, what
elements the children may have. So we're prepared.
Yes, none of us are paramedics that are Tober Cert, as they call
it. But most of the calls are ALS. We know what we're doing. We
Page 104
May 28, 2013
work alongside fine medics, you know.
So remember, guys, change gives and it takes. You got the light
bulb, you lost the candlelight dinner. You got the car, you gained
pollution. You're going to get a .5 millage reduction, who knows what
you're going to lose. You're losing us for sure.
With that, you know, I leave it on you folks. Thank you very
much, and thank you for your time.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you.
Leo, or Len, whomever, one of the things I just wanted to clarify,
if I make a motion to move forward with the interlocal agreement for
Isles of Capri Fire Department and the East Naples Fire Department
and everybody sits around this table to further that effort, does that
mean Fiddler's still has to separate themselves and they want their own
three things, or does that all become part of the process?
MS. PRICE: My understanding, and Jeff Page is here, he can
answer further, that if we enter into an interlocal agreement effective
October 1, part of that interlocal agreement would be reducing the
millage rate at that time to 1.5 mils. So I think that that gets Fiddler's
Creek essentially what they're looking for under an interlocal
agreement.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That way we don't have to separate
them, we can take the whole group.
You know, we've been trying, we've been working. People in
Isles of Capri, they've had a lot of heartache over all of this. And, you
know, they've discussed it and discussed it. But in the end they're
coming forth and realizing that this is the way of the future, really.
They can see that it's going to happen so they just want to make sure
that they're treated fairly and that they can keep some of their people
right there who know the island, who they know personally on the
island. We can't get an assurance from East Naples that they'll do that,
Page 105
May 28, 2013
but I'm guessing that they're smart enough to know that they've got
good people in place, they're going to keep those people in place.
So I tell you what I really want to do, and I don't know if you
guys -- well, you should be able to discuss this some more, but I'd like
to make a motion that we move forward and enter into an interlocal
agreement between Isles of Capri Fire and East Naples Fire and then
come back to us with that effort.
MR. OCHS: Clarification, please, Mr. Chair?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, sir.
MR. OCHS: You said enter into an agreement. Do you want to
enter into negotiations and come back with a recommended
agreement, or do you --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Leo.
MR. OCHS: -- want us to just consummate the agreement?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm just jumping ahead.
MR. OCHS: I'm not parsing words. Because there is a
distinction, particularly when you're going to have to set your millage
rate, you maximum millage rate on July 9th. If you don't have a
decision by then, then you'll have to -- you can always lower the rate
before you adopt the budget in September, but you have to set your
maximum millage rate for that MSTU on July 9th.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I want to move forward right
now into the negotiations with the final result of consolidating two fire
departments.
MR. OCHS: I understand.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a second to the
motion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I will second it.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: A motion on the floor and a
second.
Commissioner Coyle, do you have any input, comments?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I'm fully in support of the
Page 106
May 28, 2013
motion.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, you're
doing the right thing. Thank you. It's sending the right message to
Collier County and the independent fire districts that we do want to
consolidate.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I have to say, it's through
cooperation with the Isles of Capri. They could have dug their heels
in, but they could see that this is what we should be doing to move
forward.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And during the economic
downturn we've had to make some hard decisions with the staffing in
the county. And those hard decisions are still going to come forward.
One thing I would like to see in negotiations is that the Board of
Commissioners retain the facility on Isles of Capri. Either through we
own it and they maintain it, or if it ever ceases to be a fire station, it
will revert back to the county. That is a great asset for not only the
citizens of Isles of Capri but the citizens as a whole.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Henning, I totally
agree. The County Manager has assured me that they're going to keep
that fire station open. They need to have that just because of its close
proximity to the island, as well as to Main Sail Drive.
And secondly, he has assured me that they're going to keep their
boat, because they do fire rescue on boats. So those -- well, of course
the County Manager has assured me. I don't know that East Naples
has assured me. But that will be going into the negotiations, I'm sure.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for that.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, we have a motion and a
second on the floor. Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I just have one comment I'd like to
make. I congratulate Commissioner Fiala on her leadership on this.
I will say that joining us today you can see a number of people
Page 107
May 28, 2013
from fire districts all across the county, significant people from East
Naples and from Golden Gate, which is in my district. And of course
not that this puts any pressure on you guys there, but what it does is I
think, you know, that the Board is trying to send a signal to put things
into your hands. And I hope you take this opportunity to make the best
out of this negotiated process to do the right thing and continue your
leadership on it with the understanding that it's very critical to the
continuing success of everything. So no pressure, but do the right
thing. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, no further discussion, all
in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Are we going to 9 or —
Item #9A — Discussed; Continued to later in the Meeting
ORDINANCE 2013-41 : AN AMENDMENT CHANGING
DESIGNATION OF THE GORDON RIVER GREENWAY PARK
TO THE CONSERVATION DESIGNATION — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. We're going to your advertised public
hearings, Item 9.A. It is a recommendation to approve the 2012 cycle
of Growth Management Plan amendments. This is an adoption
hearing. Mr. David Weeks will present.
MR. WEEKS: Commissioners, David Weeks of your
Comprehensive Planning Staff. I just want to make a couple of
Page 108
May 28, 2013
introductory remarks and as then as usual the applicant will make his
or her presentation, followed by staff.
As the Manager has identified, this is an adoption hearing, so this
is your final action on these two items that comprise the 2012 cycle.
These have been heard previously at the transmittal stage a few
months ago and obviously were transmitted by this Board. The
Department of Economic Opportunity at the State of Florida has
reviewed both of the amendments and have no objections, no
concerns, no comments at all for either of the two items. The Planning
Commission has unanimously recommended approval of both of these
petitions at their adoption hearing.
And final, to remind you that this does require a supermajority
vote. It's my understanding we just have four commissioners at
today's hearing, so all four would have to vote in the affirmative for
either of these to be adopted, and would suggest that you do vote on
them separately.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Coyle is still there?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, we've heard this item
before, and if there's no comments from the ORC, do they still call it
ORC report?
MR. WEEKS: For this last cycle, yes, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. If nothing's changed,
then why do we have to have a presentation?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I have a couple questions.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. I don't have any
problems with the first one at all. I think that that's an outstanding
thing to move forward.
The second one I just have questions on. And I was able to talk
with Jean Jourdan a little bit, because maybe I was led astray but I just
wanted to -- I wanted to ask a few questions.
We're talking about the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
Page 109
May 28, 2013
Redevelopment Overlay. And in both of these items we talked about
the different projects. I wanted to know what kind of a new project
could qualify under number five, like does Arboretum qualify?
MS. JOURDAN: Well, it would have to be a project whereas
someone had demolished all of the buildings and were going to
develop new. Now, there was a --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's Arboretum, right?
MS. JOURDAN: That would be Arboretum. Arboretum would
quality.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So that could open it up for a new
and better development. What we're trying to do of course is improve
the housing in that area, improve the quality of life in that area, reduce
the crime, which is what a CRA is all about in the first place, and
eliminate slums. And so -- but these are the questions I have.
What about Cirrus Pointe?
MS. JOURDAN: Cirrus Pointe being a vacant piece of property
would not quality. It would only be for redevelopment in order for
incentivize someone to clear dilapidated properties such as old
apartment buildings, mobile homes, things of that nature. Those
would be the only properties that would quality.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, great.
Now, you talked also about density bonus units designated for
the upgrading and housing improvement in an area trying to climb out
of low and very low income housing. This is the way I interpret. Is
that correct, we're trying to get into a new realm of housing?
MS. JOURDAN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let's see. Is there any way that
we're trying to reserve this land for an upgrade in the housing rather
than more low and very low income housing or rentals?
MS. JOURDAN: Well, right now as it's written, I don't know --
and this was a question you had brought to my attention, whether or
not someone could come in and utilize those density bonus units to
Page 110
May 28, 2013
build affordable housing. I don't think there's anything that would
preclude that.
I was discussing with Mr. Weeks here if there would be any
issues with maybe assigning, and plus this would be a question for the
County Attorney's Office, whereas in order to qualify for those density
bonus units it would have to be market rate housing. I don't know if
we could put that type of stipulation in there or not.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, it's too late now. I mean, we've
already sent this to the state the way this is. Everybody qualifies
under this.
If you want to change it now, David, I mean, this is a substantial
change, isn't it?
MS. JOURDAN: Land Development Code.
MR. WEEKS: It is a substantial change. There's some level of
risk that the state could raise an objection. My professional opinion is
they would not. Having dealt with the state for many years and most
particularly because of the statutory changes that occurred a couple of
years ago, their role is really looking at state interest. And my
professional opinion is the allowance or in this case the proposed
preclusion of affordable housing for use of the bonus units I don't
think is an issue that would rise to their level of concern.
If I can go ahead a little bit further --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me interrupt you for one second.
Being that you talk about your professional opinion, which I rate
about here, I have to believe that you know what you're talking about.
You would never state that unless you did.
MR. WEEKS: Thank you, Commissioner.
As the density bonus presently exists and as it is proposed, this is
totally separate from the density rating system that you usually are
involved with when a rezone petition comes before you.
In this case, the pool of bonus density pool units that is only
applicable in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle area, has no restrictions
Page 111
May 28, 2013
as to how it may be used. It is not an affordable housing bonus, it's
not a bonus of any particular type. It is ask it and the Board has the
discretion to grant it. Which I think goes right to the point
Commissioner Fiala, that you raised, is there a way that we can say,
well, I understand that but we don't want the density pool to be used
for anything other than market rate housing.
MR. KLATZKOW: David, you have this listed as of right. Your
language here is, are allowed to redevelop.
In your professional opinion, if we just changed that from are
allowed, to may be allowed to redevelop, would the state have an
issue with that? That would give the Commission leeway on the LDC
amendments to do what Commissioner Fiala wants to do.
MR. WEEKS: Where are you reading from please, Jeff?
MR. KLATZKOW: Paragraph five, which is the issue
Commissioner Fiala had on packet Page 15. The language is "are
allowed to redevelop". So it's -- there's no discretion here.
In your professional opinion, if we change that to "may be
allowed to redevelop" and then flesh it out with the LDC amendments,
would the state have any objection on that?
MR. WEEKS: I don't believe they would.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great. Great.
Just to be assured , you know your efforts in that area aren't
hampered by something written in here, I think this would then
encourage you forward. I know they feel the same way. They
received those 388 units, I think it was from the Botanical Garden
with the understanding it would go to improve that area to building
better housing, which would then support Botanical Garden's efforts to
upgrade that area.
And I just wanted to make sure that those units are used for what
they were intended.
MS. JOURDAN: I think that's a great point, Commissioner.
Appreciate it.
Page 112
May 28, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great. That is just wonderful.
Okay, then I think I've gotten all of my questions answered. Oh,
one more question.
On the units, the density bonus units or density increase in this --
in the government center area, activity center number -- what is it?
MS. JOURDAN: Sixteen.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could you -- I don't think we can
get any more density on this government complex. Can you tell me a
little bit about where you're intending that to go?
MS. JOURDAN: I'll let David explain that, about how it was
actually within the boundaries the entire time. However, the language
made activity center 16 be applicable instead of the Bayshore overlay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you.
MR. WEEKS: Commissioners, before I go to the visualizer, if I
may, I wanted to follow up on the earlier discussion, before we get too
far away from that.
We have what I'll call regulatory affordable housing, and that's
where we have strings attached. And that's what you typically would
deal with as an affordable housing density bonus. And of course that
correlates to certain price points, certain amounts of income of the
persons occupying the residential units.
And then you have the non-regulatory, which is simply market
rate. If I can build this house and if I can only sell it to someone that
happens to fall within one of those affordable housing categories but
I've not got any regulatory restrictions in place, I didn't come before
this body for a density bonus for the affordable housing density bonus,
that is a market rate house, market rate price that simply happens to
correlate with affordable housing.
I want to make sure I'm clear on that point, because I don't think
you have the legal right to preclude someone from building and selling
or renting dwelling units that happen to fall within the affordable
category. And it's important I think to make that point because of the
Page 113
May 28, 2013
proposed language we're going to add. Well, the property owner, if
that's all they can sell or rent their unit for, they could still be
providing quote unquote, affordable housing, but it's non-regulatory, it
is not something that this body controls.
The other point goes back to the very beginning, Commissioner
Henning. I should've spoken up when you said there haven't been any
changes because there have been. The Planning Commission did
make a few changes to this petition, CP-2012-3 that we're discussing
right now at your adoption hearing. So I'm glad we're having some
dialogue.
Now I think specific to Commissioner Fiala's question, the map,
on the visualizer, the bold black line identifies the Bayshore/Gateway
Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. That is the very provision that
we're discussing today.
All those areas in blue highlighting, those are areas that through
this amendment would now be eligible for the mixed use project
density bonus. That is, if you're doing a commercial and residential
project, that you could be eligible to request density pool units for.
And that would remain at the cap of 12 units per acre. So the blue
area is showing the expanded area that the mixed use project provision
would apply to.
Secondly, the residential only project, being able to use the
density pool, that's something totally new being proposed in this
amendment. That also would apply to all those blue areas, as well as
areas where the existing mixed use project provision would apply.
And as Jean earlier stated, the activity center which on the map is
outlined and striped in red, that previously or right now does not apply
to the density pool bonus. But if this amendment is approved, then the
activity center, as well as the other blue on that map, would be eligible
to request the density pool bonus units.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just as a far-out question, so we just
-- just in the last couple of weeks we read that St. Matt's is going to
Page 114
May 28, 2013
expand. Would that then give them many more residential units that
they could apply for?
MR. WEEKS: That would then make that property, the St.
Matthews House property that they've acquired, the DeVoe Auto
Dealership, that would be eligible for the mixed use project, and along
with that the density pool units of up to 12 units per acre. They would
be eligible to request that of the Board, yes.
They would be eligible for the density pool units of all the way
up to 12 units per acre, as any other mixed use project would be
allowed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, can I ask a
question?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: With respect to St. Matthews
House, they have informed me that they have no intention of going or
increasing the density of residential units in that facility. Is there any
way we could hold them to their word and essentially provide that
they will not go beyond the residential level that they're at right now?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: You'd have to prohibit that
certain property from doing so.
MR. WEEKS: I believe that's correct, Mr. Henning.
And furthermore, right now the DeVoe dealership, that property
is zoned commercial. Part of it's a commercial PUD, part of it is C-4
zoning. It has no density assigned to it. It is zero. The only way for it
to get density would either be through a rezoning or through the mixed
use project application that would come before this body.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: They would have to do it
through a PUD amendment or straight zoning.
MR. WEEKS: That's correct.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: But I think what Commissioner
Coyle says, is there any way to prohibit them from asking? In other
words, they would have to do a comprehensive amendment and a
Page 115
May 28, 2013
zoning in order to get it.
MR. WEEKS: Well, it goes back to your first response,
Commissioner, which I agree with. We would need to as part of this
amendment insert language that precludes that property from being
eligible for these density pool --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that too much of a change to
adopt today?
MR. WEEKS: I don't believe so. I think we could craft the
language if necessary, take a break from this item, bring something
back for you to look at in a few minutes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, why don't we do that?
Commissioner Fiala, is there anything else on that one?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I think I've got all of my
questions asked. No, that would be great.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, we have the other
ordinance that we can approve now, and does it seem like there's any
discussion on it. That's a greenway.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I make a motion to approve the
first ordinance.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, do you
have any --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I'll second the motion if it
hasn't already been seconded.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: It has been seconded. So A
motion by Commissioner Fiala to approve PL-2012000371, and
seconded by Commissioner Nance.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 116
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
We're going to, on this next one, allow staff to work on some
changes to the ordinance and we're going to move on to the other two
items, then come back.
MR. WEEKS: Mr. Chair, one question, please. As we were
discussing a while ago, of changing -- in paragraph five, changing the
word from "are" to "may", that is for a residential only project that
would use this density pool. Paragraph four pertains to the existing
provision for mixed use projects. Is it the desire of the Commission to
also limit a mixed use project to non-affordable housing?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think that that would be in keeping
with the efforts that the CRA is extending, as well as their Board; is
that correct? Yes, so that would be perfect.
MS. ASHTON-CICKO: For the record, Heidi Ashton-Cicko,
Assistant County Attorney.
I was just suggesting to staff that under section four where it has
"are" that we also change that to a "may be" to be consistent to the
change. And number five it's "may be", because both of those are
discretionary, and typically you'd keep the language similar, otherwise
the intent of the language would be --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's fine.
MS. ASHTON-CICKO: -- non-discretionary.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's great. Thank you very much.
MR. WEEKS: Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, next item?
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, I see Mr. Curry's here. If the Board
Page 117
May 28, 2013
has no problem, maybe we could move on that one.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
Item #14A1
PRESENTATION BY THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR IN RESPONSE TO MARCH 26, 2013 AGENDA ITEM
#14A1 DIRECTING THE AIRPORT DIRECTOR TO BRING
BACK PRO FORMA FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUPPORTING
THE DIRECTOR'S PLAN TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE
ANNUAL GENERAL FUND TRANSFER, AND PAY BACK THE
COUNTY LOAN — PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED
MR. OCHS: Which is 14.A.1. It's a presentation by the Airport
Authority Executive Director in response to March 26, 2013 agenda
Item 14.A.1, directing the Airport Director to bring back pro forma
financial statements supporting the Director's plan to reduce or
eliminate the annual general fund transfer, and pay back county loan.
MR. CURRY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Chris Curry,
Executive Director of the Collier County Airport Authority.
I'm here today to provide you with the presentation for the airport
plan for self-sufficiency to also include a pro forma that was identified
at the last few meetings ago as an essential part of this plan.
The task at the time was to submit a plan to the Board of County
Commissioners to reduce or eliminate the annual fund transfer and to
pay back the county loan. Agreement for repayment was signed in
1995 and the loan history includes interest of about $21 million. The
payback provision applied at the airport authority's loss statement for
the respective fiscal year proves a net income status for the fiscal year.
What I've depicted here is the general fund transfer by fiscal year
from 2007 to 2013. These are the actual numbers that attach to that
graphic display.
Page 118
May 28, 2013
As you can see, from fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 2013, the
reliance on the general fund has decreased slightly. Airport revenue
sources are those that are displayed: Fuel fees, land leases, aircraft
parking fees, landing fees, which is at Marco Island Airport only,
hangar and building leases, rental car fees and grants.
We also took a look at comparable airports and evaluated 10
airports that were similar in comparison to the Immokalee Regional
Airport. These were general aviation airports owned by city/county
government located within the State of Florida and had an economic
benefit, as determined by the Florida Department of Transportation of
six million to $10 million.
The airports or comparable airports are displayed. As you can
see, the one at the top is the only self-sufficient airport, which is
Valkaria. And the interesting thing about that airport is it has a golf
course on the airport.
As a caveat, general aviation airports are not generally
self-sufficient, but most of them hide under the umbrella of
commercial airports.
Pro forma: The attached pro forma is one that was generated
working with Clerk of Court's Office and the Office of Management
and Budget. Ms. Crystal Kinzel and Derek Johnssen from the Clerk's
Office, Mark Isackson and Randy Greenwald from OMB.
The Clerk's Office role in this was to really verify historical
numbers, provide the pro forma format and in certain numbers, based
on the financial strategy briefed at the prior presentation.
The Office of Management and Budget verified consistency
related to current and future budgets.
You will notice in the pro forma that it projects out only to 2017,
although I indicated it was an eight-year financial plan. We just felt to
go further than 2017 provided an area for much more guesswork than
strictly budgeting out to 2017.
What's not mentioned in the pro forma is the imputed rent of
Page 119
May 28, 2013
$160,000 that is based on the agreement between the county and the
Army National Guard. Once they occupy about 26 acres of land out at
the airport, $160,000 will automatically be applied to the loan.
The pro forma format is also neutral in regard to increases and
expenses and revenue. Essentially what we're doing is using 2013
numbers. So there's no consideration for increase to CPI, raising fuel
costs, landing fees, et cetera. At the same time, we didn't add any
additional for salaries, utilities and insurance.
Many airports have struggled during the recession to become
self-sufficient or stay self-sufficient. The county has had 18 years of
reliance on the general fund by the airports. And our challenge is to
become safely self-sufficient.
In the last presentation I indicated the financial strategy moving
forward was to lease 50 acres of property within the next eight years.
This number changed slightly because when we went back to look at
the land, we did an equal split between aviation and non-aviation uses.
And the difference is that they are charged different. Aviation land is
valued at 10 cents per square foot at Immokalee and 14 cents for
non-aviation.
We indicated that we would try to increase operations by 50
percent at Immokalee in the next four years. We felt that we could do
that because we've increased operations by 100 percent in two years,
and we felt it would create about $100,000 in additional revenue.
We also indicated that we would try to increase operations by
10 percent at Marco in the next four years, generating about $10,000
in additional revenue.
We would also look at a land lease at the Marco Airport for
hangar development of about $60,000 for approximately three acres.
We did not include any construction costs in this because we simply
looked at it as an opportunity to lease the land and use a public/private
partnership to build or construct any hangar facilities.
And the manufacturing facility at Immokalee is currently being
Page 120
May 28, 2013
rented for $140,000 per year.
We also included revenue we thought we could generate from the
oil, gas and mineral rights lease. Again, we feel like we could
generate at least $48,000 prepaid for a five-year lease because we've
been offered this by two companies that were interested in doing that.
So essentially what we would do, is set the base line for the RFP
at the cost that we've been offered. Plus we also spoke with some
geologists in the area that are conducting some business on behalf of
the Colliers. So that equates to approximately $9,600 per year for the
next five years.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does that include fracking?
Just kidding.
MR. CURRY: The revenue portion you will see slightly
increases in the pro forma for catering, tie-down fees, landing fees,
rental car revenue, advertising revenue. We did not take into account
any reductions for utilities, because that would require some type of
capital input to decrease that, especially if we looked at green
technology associated with LED lighting. Workmen's Comp, lease
obligations, was not considered in the pro forma.
So as we look at the pro forma, I will highlight some of the
significant areas that sort of match items that I previously discussed.
At Marco Airport you'll see minimal increases in fuel for Avgas
and Jet A.
What is significant is in 2016 you see -- or 2015 you see 1,500
for land lease and that goes to 61,500. That takes into account the
lease of the land that I mentioned that we would lease for
public/private partnership to develop hangar facilities.
The next item is in the concession and catering line item you'll
see in 2015, 30,800 increases to 35,800 and 5,000 (sic) respectively.
And that's based on the recent agreement that the Board approved for
the airport to have a catering agreement with different companies.
The other thing that I would highlight, which is closer to the
Page 121
May 28, 2013
bottom with expenses, you'll see under contractual services that the
amount goes from 6,200, to 30,600, then down to 12,600 and back up.
And what this indicates is that every other year we have to do some
mangrove trimming out at the airport to protect the approach surfaces.
At the end of the day for Marco, going through 2017, we show a
profit margin of$161,250.
The Immokalee Airport: The most significant increase occurs in
2015 with fuel costs. The numbers look rather large, but if you look at
bottom under expenses for it, what we indicated was that we could
generate $25,000 of profit. So when you look at the bottom, the
expense goes up to create the $25,000 of profit. That is situated in the
revenue line items.
The next item is the land lease, and we talked about the fact we
could increase land lease revenue 261,000 over eight years. So since
the pro forma doesn't project out eight years, that's approximately
32,000 per year. So you'll see from 2014 to 2015, 2016, it goes up
incrementally approximately $32,000 a year.
The other item that's rather significant is under other operating
revenue. You'll see from 2014 to 2015 it goes from 6,700 to 16,300.
And simply what we've done is incorporated the lease revenue that we
would generate from the oil, gas and mineral rights into that column.
So it's about $9,600 just carried constant throughout the end of the pro
forma.
By 2017, if you look at the bottom, Immokalee would still be
operating in the red but it would only be operating in the red at about
$108,000, which is significantly down from 2014 of$301,000.
Everglades City Air Park: Nothing significant to report. We just
basically held everything constant because we simply do not see too
many avenues for improving revenue at the airport unless we consider
it an option in the future for a sea plane base, but that's also going to
require some type of capital in order to get there. So we kept
Everglades City constant at about 143,625 in the red.
Page 122
May 28, 2013
So I think if you kind of look at all three airports by 2017, we
could be somewhere around 90,000 to $100,000 reliant on the general
fund, which would be down about $400,000 from where we are today.
And this slide basically shows in 2017 $90,726.
As I've mentioned before and on several occasions, the airports
do provide a significant economic benefit to the community. We had
the study conducted in 2010. It evaluated the economic benefit of the
airports at $28 million. By 2017 I would estimate that number to be
approximately $60 million.
And the reason why, is if we're able to lease the land, then
businesses will build on the land, they'll hire more employees and
they'll contribute more to Collier County as a whole.
That's the end of my presentation. I'll take any questions that you
have.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the members?
Commissioner Coyle?
Commissioner Coyle, are you there?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I'm here.
I don't have any questions or concerns. The trend looks good.
But I think if you project this trend out another four or five, six years,
that the net funding required -- or general funding required from the
county would be zero and it would start showing a profit. So I would
hope that we would monitor that closely and as we move forward
extend this estimate out to maybe 2020 and even beyond as we get
more experience about how closely we're able to achieve the goals
that have been set here. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. CURRY: I agree. And the thing about this that I didn't
mention before, is that this does not include matching grant money
that we may need to come back to the county to match, FAA FDOT
grant funded projects. This is just the general fund.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that general fund money
Page 123
May 28, 2013
comes from -- or match comes from the general fund. You're just
putting in here the operations and not new construction or
maintenance that would create a grant with matching funds.
MR. CURRY: That's correct.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, you briefly spoke of a
public/private partnership at the Marco Airport and about hangars.
Now, as you know but I don't think my fellow commissioners know,
I've been contacted by people who want to actually build hangars out
there and have volunteered to build extra hangars, as long as they have
one for themselves, and then would lease the land. They're ready to
do that. But I --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't you manage the
airport out there? That's what we need out there in Marco, we need
those people that will invest money.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's right, they want to do that.
I so I was wondering, Chris, you have the area identified already.
Do you know when we could start to see this happening, or do you
have to go through very much -- a lot of permitting first?
MR. CURRY: Well, we would have to go through some
permitting and I would want to make absolutely sure that the zoning is
appropriate before we started to build in any of those areas.
I think, according to the pro forma, I show that as a possibility in
2016. And because there will be so much demand for that too, we'll
have to make sure the process to obtain those that wish to build is fair
and that we also give the appropriate consideration to those that's been
on the waiting list since the 1990's.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, they've been on the waiting
list for at least 15 years, right?
MR. CURRY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, have you
Page 124
May 28, 2013
expressed that interest to Mr. Curry, on people building --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I had him in his office. Yeah,
we were already there. He met with the people. He gave them ideas.
They came up with drawings. He's been communicating with them
regularly, so --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. Mr. Curry, I'm going to focus
my remarks to Immokalee, because I think that's where the most
suggested improvement in revenue is. I just want to ask you a couple
of questions.
I noticed just by taking a look at figures based on your estimated
cost and your estimated revenue, that it looks like over the next four or
five years if you consider 2013 still within the estimated range, that
you've dropped the profit margin from 33 percent on fuel sales down
to 16 percent. Is there any methodology there, or why did you -- why
are you suggesting that's the case?
MR. CURRY: Could you -- I don't understand. Dropping the
profit margin?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, sir. If you take a look at the
profit margin in 2012 on fuel, it's 33 percent. If you take a look at the
profit margin on your projections down into 2016 and 2017, it's 16
percent. On the Avgas and on the Jet A it's 26 percent.
I just wondered if you were systematically -- what I'm getting at,
my question is this: You know, when we chatted the other day, you
said that operations had doubled at Immokalee in the last several
years, up to 36,000 operations. And you were suggesting it would be
possible through the term of this estimate to add an additional 18,000
operations, which would be growth of 50 percent.
MR. CURRY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. So your fuel sales,
particularly in Avgas, reflect a 400 percent increase. How do you get
a 400 percent increase in fuel sales when your operations are only
Page 125
May 28, 2013
going up 50 percent?
MR. CURRY: Well, I think part of that is to have some of the
tenants that are on the airport right now buying more fuel. So they
will impact operations. But there's no intent to decrease the profit
margin. If the profit margin shows that it's decreasing in the pro
forma, then that's not the intent of the pro forma.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay. Well, I'm just -- I
understand how you're systematically decreasing the losses. You're
basically adding $25,000 a year profit through fuel sales and 32 or 32
and a part thousand dollars per each year on land lease. And that's --
you know I think that's a great goal. But I'm just trying to flush this
out because I didn't see any backup to imagine how you're going to
increase your flight operations at Immokalee by 50 percent and gain
400 percent in fuel revenue sales. I was just hoping that maybe you
could shine some light on that for me. I mean that's quite an increase,
don't you think?
MR. CURRY: Well no, I understand that. I don't have the ability
to do any calculations now, but I certainly --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm not saying it's a calculation.
Let's just take for example 2012, if you just put the numbers up there.
Your Avgas fuel sales in 2012 are $160,000 and they're rising to
$658,000. That's four times as much revenue from fuel sales, which
I'm assuming is roughly 400 percent in the number of gallons that
you're going to sell. So I'm just trying to wonder, how do we get there
when we're only adding 50 percent to our operations? How is it that
we're going to sell so much more fuel?
I mean, it's admirable. You know, I understand that that's going
to produce the result we want. I'm just trying to figure out how it is
that we're going to sell so much more fuel on the last 18,000 when in
the last couple of years we've doubled that from 18 to 36 and we
haven't seen anything to suggest fuel sales are going to do anything
like that. As a matter of fact, it looks like they're trending just a little
Page 126
May 28, 2013
bit down between 2012 and what you're estimating for 2013.
MR. CURRY: No, I see exactly what you're talking about. And
the intent was that the expense of the fuel and the revenue generated
from the fuel would move together.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Oh, I understand that. I'm just
saying, how are we going to sell 400 times as much fuel?
MR. CURRY: Well, we'll certainly have to increase the amount
of traffic. And we would have to sell more fuel to turbo services and
the other jet traffic on the airport.
I'm not saying that this is something, you know, that's guaranteed
to be achieved. I'm not saying that. I'm just saying that that is the
goal that we would shoot for.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I understand. I was just hoping
that you would be able to shed -- I understand this is a goal.
MR. CURRY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So, I mean, what we're looking for
is a plan. I was just hoping that you had some backup to suggest how
it would be that we would be able to sell so much more fuel. That's --
MR. CURRY: I will work on a follow-up answer to you.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, I have some questions.
On the executive summary it states construction of the Florida
Army National Guard at the Immokalee Airport. Is that included in
your performance for Immokalee, your spreadsheet?
MR. CURRY: That is not. I just mentioned that in the form of
the imputed rent calculation. So it wouldn't affect anything to do with
revenue and expenses, it would go directly to paying off the debt.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And that's the
agreement that the Board at that time, Commissioner Nance, said
we're not going to collect any rent from the National Guard; however,
we're going to apply that, what we would collect, to the debt.
What does it mean by seeking additional advertising revenue on
Page 127
May 28, 2013
the executive summary?
MR. CURRY: Well, it means that we would continue to market
the airport as a place to advertise. We've done that successfully with
the Seminole Casino. We're working on some advertising ventures
with the Marriott and Hilton hotels as well.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you advertising at the
casino?
MR. CURRY: No, we're not advertising at the casino. The
casino is advertising with us.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, that's -- I just want to
make sure that it's revenue and not expenses.
MR. CURRY: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sadly, I've learned a lot about
the Immokalee Airport, having to go out there and work on this lease.
Not having to, but happy to work on this lease with Mr. Fletcher. It's
just very time-consuming.
I'm coming to the same conclusion that Commissioner Nance is,
your fuel sales projections are way out there. Turbo services are going
to use jet fuel, correct?
MR. CURRY: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Not Avgas.
MR. CURRY: No, they use jet. They can use different types of
fuels but they basically agree to use jet fuel.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So Commissioner
Nance's question was on Avgas. The response was continue increasing
the use for turbo services. So your projections I think are way off.
And quite frankly, I think you need to come back with something a
little bit closer to reality, because you're not projecting cost, employee
costs going up. And I think that's reliable that they will go up.
MR. CURRY: I mean, that's not what the county has
demonstrated in the past four years. And again, we didn't --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, the reason it hasn't gone
Page 128
May 28, 2013
up is because we have made the decision to keep salaries the same,
okay? We're coming out of an economic crisis. Our revenues are
going to increase, I think that's reasonable to say, and I think we're
going to see our employees' salaries go up accordingly. So I think
that's a fairly good conclusion.
However, with that said, you're projecting all this fuel sale but
you're not projecting any new employees.
MR. CURRY: No, no, I can accomplish this up to that level
without any new staff.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And what that tells me is
you've got too much staff now.
MR. CURRY: No, it's not necessarily saying that, but what
happens --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's what it's telling me, you
have too much staff now.
MR. CURRY: Well, I don't of course reach the same conclusion,
because airplanes are not like cars. You know, you don't have to fuel
an airplane immediately and they turn around and leave. An airplane
will come in and may park and stay for several hours, so you can
rotate that staff around to fill those aircraft.
And again, in regards to the question before about employee
raises and that type of thing, nor did I include CPI, nor did I include
any adjustment to the fuel cost itself that could very well balance that
out.
I mean, the employee part, I can't predict that. I'm just at the
mercy of what the county agrees to raise it to and then it affects our
budget.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you can't put in CPI in the
fuel cost, because fuel costs, they're just all over the board. It's
whatever the market --
MR. CURRY: Not in the fuel cost, but in land. You know, right
now this is based on 10 cents and 14 cents. But if that cost goes up to
Page 129
May 28, 2013
whatever cost it is, I don't have any idea, I haven't factored in those
things to increase as well.
And again, for the fuel costs, my intent with the numbers was
strictly to show $25,000 profit per year in fuel profit. That was it.
Now, if the numbers don't reflect that, then I need to go back and
work with others that are more capable to help me project that.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think you should.
MR. CURRY: Okay. Well, I don't have a problem with that.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. And also, your land
leases, I want to discuss that.
I understand from 2012 to 2013 Salazar is coming on board. I
can see that jump there, from 56,000, to 155,000. Is that a fair
assessment?
MR. CURRY: Yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And then you go from
2013 to 2017 you're almost doubling your revenue. How can you
project that?
MR. CURRY: Again, this was predicated on leasing 50 acres of
land.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: That 50 acres to the National
Guard.
MR. CURRY: No, not 50 acres to the National Guard. That's
not a part of this, because that's imputed rent. I haven't counted that.
What I'm saying is that our goal has to be to try to do that over eight
years.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that reasonable?
MR. CURRY: I think it is. I mean, if you look at since 2009
we've probably done it since 2009.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, we have. We have done
that since 2009 with the National Guard coming on board.
MR. CURRY: Yeah, with them included, which is all part of
airport land that is no longer available to rent.
Page 130
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: But would the National Guard
have made the deal to come to Immokalee if we would have charged
them for that land? That's another question.
MR. CURRY: I have no idea. Nor can I predict if a company
will call me tomorrow that wants to do a cargo operation and say we
want 15 or 20 acres of land. I can't predict any of that. I'm just
hopeful it will happen and we provide the airport so that it's receptive
to that. But this is just trying to establish a goal.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, I -- well, I thought we
were trying to project out when you believe that the airport can be
self-sustaining without the general fund. That's what I thought the
direction --
MR. CURRY: Eight years. Eight years is what I've said from
the start.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. But I think you need to
adjust your numbers to reflect reality. And I'm willing to continue this
item until we can get that, quite frankly. I mean, I can't -- I would like
to see something -- if we're going to get there in eight years from 2013
and moving on, then let's see it. I just can't support -- I don't think
anybody could support these numbers. So if we can rework the
numbers and come back.
And quite frankly, I think you really need to take a look at
reducing staff. I think you really need to take a look at using purchase
cards, especially out in Immokalee and Everglades where, you know,
the historic users of fuel are going to still be historical users. And if
you have a purchase card that you -- like they do, again, I worked on
this comparing Immokalee with Everglades -- I'm sorry, with Labelle
and Clewiston which only has one person for both of those airports,
okay. One person. How they do it is customers -- historical
customers, like we have now, have a pre-purchased card and they buy
fuel. And they draw off that, so --
MR. CURRY: Well, I think you have to kind of figure out what
Page 131
May 28, 2013
kind of airport you want to run. You can run one like that, whereas if
a person's not available, the airport operates on its own. There's
airports that function like that.
You know, I would even, you know, go farther to say, which is
not an airport related item, but if, you know, the people in Lee County
said that, you know, we would have a major company like Hertz come
in in this year, most people would have probably not believed that.
So again, this was an eight-year goal, assuming that hopefully we
can attract somebody that's fairly big. Hoping that we could probably
achieve royalties through oil, gas and mineral rights. That is
something out there as well --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think that's feasible.
MR. CURRY: And that could make the airport self-sufficient on
its own. What we're talking about now may not even be a question.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. But I don't think we're
going to get a Hertz out in Immokalee.
MR. CURRY: Well, no, I don't think that. But I think it's
possible that we can get a large company to operate cargo or
something like that because of overflow out of Miami, the possible
opening of-- you know, the enlargement of the Panama Canal,
possible trade opportunities with Cuba. All of that is possible,
especially as the economy recovers.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What I understand from
other airport operators is the produce that comes into this country and
the goods that is exchanged from coast to coast is done on the bellies
of not commercial airplanes but passenger airplanes, okay. And
there's -- and I've had a couple of people tell me that there's no way
that somebody's going to fly in avocados from South America into
Immokalee unless it was a passenger airport.
MR. CURRY: Well, I never said that.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, I know that. But that's --
the assumption is the Panama Canal is going to bring trade to
Page 132
May 28, 2013
Immokalee. And the assumption is trade from South America and the
overflow from Miami is going to come to Immokalee. However, I'm
just saying what I -- and we got that a long time from discussions in
the past. However, I just want to tell you what I've heard from two
people, is that those products come in from passenger airplanes, and
I'm just looking for your feedback on that.
MR. CURRY: No, I'm aware of that. You know, I can't
guarantee you anything that's projected out. But what you do as an
airport is you try to prepare infrastructure so that if opportunities are
available you're ready. That's the only thing that we can do. I mean,
you know, 2021, you know, if we're both around, we may be saying
that, you know, we were not able to achieve any of this. That's just
how it is in the industry.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well anyway, I think
Commissioner Nance is right, 400 percent increase on your fuel sales
is not a reasonable assumption. And what I'm asking you and the
Board is to come back, continue this item, come back with more
reasonable projections. That's all.
MR. CURRY: I will. All right.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that okay with everybody
else?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Have you been working with the
Finance Department at all on these projections?
MR. CURRY: Well, I've worked with them. What has happened
is that I have indicated my intent, and the Clerk's Office basically
inserted numbers into the pro forma that portrays my intent. So I'll
still continue to work with them, because at the end of the day my
projection is that you can make 25,000 more in revenue on fuel, and I
don't think that is very far-fetched. But I'll come back and we'll have
this discussion again.
Page 133
May 28, 2013
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd like to make just one comment
on the issue of private/public partnership building hangars.
That is a very profitable process, not only from the standpoint of
deriving money from the lease of the land, but also ancillary benefits
of having more aircraft based at the airport. With more aircraft based
there, they're going to have more fuel sales, and it has a ripple effect
throughout the entire airport operation. And it also is the same way
that supermarkets check rooftops to find out where they should build
their next big store, the same is true of any aircraft maintenance
facilities or avionics facilities or flight training facilities. They do the
same thing based upon the number of aircraft that are based there or
which operate within the area.
And the evolution of the economy in Immokalee is a key factor
in seeing that happen. Because right now not a lot of people in
Immokalee on airplanes will be based there. Not a lot of people in
Immokalee will spend the money to build a hangar on the airport for
an airplane. But as the standard of living and affluence of Immokalee
increases, then there is a significant future opportunity for all of these
things that are included in this pro forma report.
So as Ave Maria begins to develop out, it would be reasonable to
expect that more people who own airplanes would be looking for a
place to hangar them and they would be willing to build a hangar.
So I'd just like to share my personal experience with that sort of
thing, and I think it is reasonable in Immokalee, but I think it is
dependent upon the speed with which the economy in Immokalee
continues to grow and people become more affluent. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Commissioner
Coyle. And quite frankly I agree with your statements.
Talking to Mr. Curry, he stated that the airports, including Naples
Page 134
May 28, 2013
Airport, have a vacancy on airport hangars right now. However -- I'm
sorry?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, that might be true now. But
I'll tell you, just a few years ago the waiting list was years and years
long.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And the problem today is that fuel
prices have been so high that the average user has diminished their
aviation use. And as we get out of the recession and things begin to
settle down, I think we'll see resurgence in that. But not many people
are going to go from Naples out to Immokalee to hangar their airplane.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I agree.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I agree with that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: But we ought -- when
Commissioner Fiala seals the deal on building a hangar at the Marco
Island Airport, we're going to commission you to bake her a cake.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, I'll do that, but I'm not sure
she'll eat it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You got it right.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, anything else,
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, that's it for me. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, next item, please.
Item #9A — Continued from earlier in the meeting
ORDINANCE 2013-42: AN AMENDMENT RELATED TO THE
BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY AND DENSITY BONUS — ADOPTED W/CHANGES
Page 135
May 28, 2013
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we're going to come back to Item
9.A and finish that last item off.
MR. WEEKS: Commissioners, to -- this is back to the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
Per your discussion a while ago and direction, staff and the
County Attorney's Office have worked together to make changes that
you see on the visualizer. Specifically in paragraph four of the --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can you blow that up a little
bit, make that bigger?
MR. WEEKS: I'll jump to the second change. We changed the
word "are" to "maybe". We discussed that specifically. And then the
first change is to insert the forwards, "the west side of' on the second
line after "and/or".
This goes to the discussion we had of wanting to exclude the St.
Matthews property. There was concern, legal concern, about singling
out a specific parcel. So instead what we've done is written language
that excludes all the parcels on the east side of Airport Road.
And then for paragraph five we've made the same change,
changed the word "are" to "may be", in the first sentence as it was in
paragraph four of the first sentence.
And we've inserted parenthetically "west side only" on the
second line of paragraph five after the word "road".
So again, precluding the east side of Airport Road.
And Commissioners, the final matter is you discussed but you
did not give specific direction, but we wrote some language so you'd
have something to react to. If you don't want to include it, fine. If
you do, fine.
And that's this language at the bottom of the page. Would be
applicable to paragraph five. It would be a new paragraph D that
would require -- well, let me read the exact language.
New paragraph D, 5.D: "All residential units shall be market rate
units."
Page 136
May 28, 2013
And then the existing paragraph D actually should not be
lettered. So whether you do or do not approve this inserted sentence,
we need to take that present paragraph of 5.D and remove the letter
and pull it over.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: David, are you saying if we
accept the change in D that we strike out the existing language in D, or
the proposed existing language?
MR. WEEKS: No, sir, we simply eliminate literally the letter D
and the period after it. That should not be a lettered item. What is
presently --
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, it should be 7.D.
MR. WEEKS: No, sir, the D should simply slide over in line
with the word "properties". Go down the line of-- on paragraph five
the first word on the left-hand column properties, road, density, 11
units, limitations eligible.
The present paragraph D should not be a letter. There should not
be a letter D there, and it should not be indented. It should be in
alignment with the remainder of the sentences.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. WEEKS: And that change needs to occur. The question to
you is whether or not you want to insert the new letter D regarding
market rate housing. That's purely your discretion.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy that would give me a great deal
of comfort. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you're saying to accept the
amended word language and include the new D?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, yes. Thank you. I'd like to
make a motion to that effect.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I have a motion on the
floor to accept the resolution -- or, I'm sorry, the ordinance as revised.
Is there a second on the motion?
Page 137
May 28, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And third by Commissioner
Coyle.
Discussion on the changes?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So there's a motion and a
second to approve. Would it be PL-201200001213; is that correct?
MR. WEEKS: Yes, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Thank you, Mr. Weeks.
MR. WEEKS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks for all your hard work.
You too, Jean.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. No, we're just about
done. They're not going to change out. We're not taking any breaks
either.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do we still have 11.D or did we do
that?
Item #11D
RECOMMENDATION TO REVIEW PROPOSED CHANGES TO
COLLIER COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Page 138
May 28, 2013
ORDINANCES AND DIRECT THE COUNTY MANAGER
TO PRESENT THOSE OPTIONS TO THE COMMUNITY FOR
INPUT AND ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS. PROPOSED
DRAFTS OF CONCEPTUAL CHANGES INCLUDE REPLACING
AND CONSOLIDATING ALL EXISTING ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM ORDINANCES
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE INNOVATION ZONES
ORDINANCE INTO THREE SIMPLIFIED INCENTIVE
PROGRAMS AS COLLIER COUNTY POLICY BASED ON
ADOPTION BY FORMAL MOTION OR RESOLUTION RATHER
THAN ORDINANCE — PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED; TO
DISCUSS FURTHER AT THE SCHEDULED JUNE WORKSHOP
MR. OCHS: No change out? Okay, then we're moving along.
11.D. It's a recommendation to review the attached draft
proposed changes to the Collier County Economic Development
Ordinances and direct the County Manager to present those options to
the community for input and additional recommendation. Proposed
drafts of conceptual changes include replacing and consolidating all
existing economic development incentive program ordinances, with
the exception of the Innovation Zones Ordinance, into three simplified
incentive programs as Collier County Policy based on adoption by
formal motion or resolution, rather than adopted ordinance. Mr.
Register, your Director of the Office of Business and Economic
DOvelopment, will present.
MR. REGISTER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Bruce
Register with your Office of Business and Economic Development.
Today I'd like to talk about a couple of things that I believe will
give us a background and set the stage for the workshop that we've
been describing that has an inclusion of the economic incentives, as
well as the impact fee programs.
The directive on February 12th, Item 10.K from an economic
Page 139
May 28, 2013
development standpoint, the economic incentives, we were directed to
prepare for Board review and discussion/recommendations to amend
or extend Collier County's economic development ordinances. The
objective was to develop background and content for a workshop and
public vetting to develop a legally sound and financially feasible
economic development program to reflect citizens' expectations.
Again, free workshop discussion and establishing some guiding
principles I believe is a worthwhile step. We'd like to make certain
that the Board understands that any of the proposals that we'd like to
make will fully be accountable from both a fiscal and legal standpoint.
They will be designed to achieve our objectives and fully align with
the measures that we'll use as metrics.
Determining how those policies and procedures will meet a
public policy test will equally be important, and will also be
underscoring the need for competitiveness in all those programs.
First accountability. In the accountability features that are
available to us to mimic, and particularly in Florida statute, we can
borrow from them liberally and we have done so Florida Statute
288.106 and 288.075 are those in particular that address
confidentiality, as well as some of the other incentive notions that help
guide us with some of the policy accountability focus.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Excuse me, Mr. Register, that
means you're relying on statutes to provide the guidance for the
accountability?
MR. REGISTER: We are borrowing liberally from those yes sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay.
MR. REGISTER: That includes program eligibility assessment,
as well as the reporting and monitoring compliance focus that those --
and guidance that those statutes provide.
Public policy test: We need to make certain that there's equity
across the board with those programs. They also need to display a
rational business case regarding our strategic value in developing a
Page 140
May 28, 2013
return on investment and making certain that there's complete public
fiscal responsibility.
I believe these will also need to be focused on our compatibility
with the public expectations, and I think that's a big component that
we'll be interjecting from the public comment at the workshop.
Strategically we need to align those incentive objectives with our
performance measures. That entails achieving a healthy economy; it's
really going to be looking at our attitude and focus towards
consolidating a balanced approach, both with short-term objectives
that have quality job growth and reducing unemployment in mind.
Our long-term objectives, we're more characteristically looking at
broadening our industry base and improving our net earnings and
productivity growth rates.
Our first platform in that consolidated balanced approach would
be a basic industry promotion incentive that really will provide a
target of quality export jobs, though they'll be below in most cases
QTI wage thresholds.
And the specifics would be that the award would be $1,500 per
job with a $500 bonus for applicants with green products or green
processes. And those would have to be certified and clear definitions
established. Those are available, though.
The minimum threshold of that program would be 10 target
industry jobs with wages meeting or exceeding the Collier County's
specific industry average wages. Meaning you'll be matching the
industry wage with the requirement for each individual corresponding
applicant.
The program will last for four years and the annual payments of
the grant would be after performance is certified.
The second platform would be a continuation and participation
with the Florida's Qualified Target Industry, commonly known as
QTI. It really is focused on targeted industries that the state has
established. And of course that will be corresponding with our first
Page 141
May 28, 2013
tier or first platform that we've just previously described. And it does
target industries that have prevailing wages that will meet or exceed
the county's average in their specific tiers and corresponding awards
that go along with those tiers.
But the basic fundamental premise of QTI is that there is a local
participation of 20 percent, while the state provides 80 percent. Those
are tax refunds, and they've paid out over four years after compliance
has been certified and the taxes have been paid.
The third platform would be an advanced long-term productivity
strategy, which is really going to establish a target for premium
industries. The minimum threshold for that program will be creating
at least 25 jobs with average wages that are over 150 percent of
Collier's current average which is 59,958.
That would be -- that would have a slight departure from some of
the other programs in that the incentive award would be based on the
percentage of annual payroll for a four-year period, but they would
have to have minimum thresholds of average wage in the number of
jobs maintained to maintain that eligibility.
As I said, the one percent of payroll would be established for the
150 percent average wage category, and a 1.063 percent of payroll
annually for a 200 percent average wage.
By the way, that's based on the annual payroll that they have
each given year, and that will be adjusted for inflation.
The final request that we have in this -- our proposal to be
deliberated in the workshop is to introduce the notion of flexibility of
policy by resolution over an adopted ordinance as we're currently
practicing. I believe that that will provide us some adaptability and
responsiveness to the economic climate that we have not previously
enjoyed. It will also give us the flexibility that will reinforce a
proactive marketing message. It will also make certain that rigor of
compliance is both secured and intact and I see no serious distinction
at all from how we are functioning with ordinances at this point.
Page 142
May 28, 2013
From a contextual comparison, I think I'm going to try to
describe the thinking process that led our work to develop these
proposals. We certainly, after listening to the community and the
concerns from all different parties in the community since my arrival
here, I've come to the conclusion that we probably need to focus on
being competitive without overreaching in our financial incentives,
but certainly maintaining a solid accountability but being very
attractive to prospects in terms of how we approach these incentive
packages by crafting them such that they are not considered onerous,
they're considered business friendly in establishing partnerships that
we want to with the kind of progressive thinking companies that I
think will help us achieve prosperity in our community.
Just to give you an idea of where these proposals would put us in
terms of other communities, I just took a couple of examples. A recent
headquarters relocation with 700 jobs and high wages that was going
to garner a $4.6 million incentive from a local community and nearby
local community and the existing Collier incentives would be
calculated at about a 3.9. And the proposals that you have in front of
me -- excuse me, in front of you, are 3.7.
Now I want to make a comment about that, in that my experience
has demonstrated to me that from a programmatic sense your financial
incentives in economic development don't necessarily need to exceed
those of your competitors. You do need to be relatively competitive
and within a certain range.
I've also learned from some experience that a successful
negotiation doesn't necessarily -- a successful negotiator doesn't
necessarily put his best offer on the table up front.
So I believe posturing ourselves as being competitive is going to
allow us the opportunity to be in the hunt, be competitive, make the
selection cuts that happen and occur on all these big projects, provided
that we do have suitable land, and of course we have the quality of life
here. But the battery of incentives that are available are going to be
Page 143
May 28, 2013
considered, and this will put us in position to further our posturing and
communicating our desire to be involved in these kinds of projects,
and it will avail us to the opportunity to have the final discussions and
final negotiations with any kind of large project. It does not mean that
we are stuck with this as a final offer.
The other example that I use is a smaller company and it has
incorporated our first tier of program incentives. It's a green products
manufacturer with 25 jobs at a 10,000 square foot facility, new
construction, with approximately three million of capital investment in
a distressed zone. And they are going to provide the wages that are --
the prevailing North American industry classification average wage.
The existing Collier programs are 110,000. Our proposed Collier
incentives would be 50,000. Now, I understand that that may appear
to be less competitive, but you need to realize that what we've tried to
establish by bringing this forward to you is a responsiveness to agenda
Item 10.K from February 12th to help us establish a platform from
which to build new programs and to establish our presence in Collier
County, opening up the potential for moving forward with developing
new programs and reaching out to the community to understand what
their expectations are and how we can be establishing a new delivery
system for economic development services in Collier County.
With that, I believe, Mr. Manager, I'll open up the floor for
questions.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think the program is a very good
program. I think it does build the platform that Bruce is looking for,
and we'll just have to fine tune it as we go forward.
The only remaining area that I think we must continue to place
emphasis on is the availability of venture capital funding from the
private sector.
The private sector has a very important role to play here, and
Page 144
May 28, 2013
we're not going to get it done just doing it out of Collier County
government headquarters. We need to have the private sector fully
involved, and it would be very good if we had the private sector
raising venture capital funds to get preferred companies into Collier
County.
So otherwise I think that the program is a good one and gives us
a good opportunity to tweak it as we move forward.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. Mr. Register, I was just
looking back at the executive summary from February that we're
talking about, and you've lined it out on the type of jobs and the sorts
of incentives.
What did you contemplate was going to be the methodology of
paying this? It looks like you've got a couple of them that are
payments of cash and some that are tax refunds? Or how did you
imagine that to be flushed out?
I'm just saying that because in the executive summary back in
February there was some discussion of local option ad valorem tax
exemptions, impact fee exemption programs or repayment programs.
Is that something that we need to go out into the community and talk
about further, or when were we going to address those items?
MR. REGISTER: Well, I believe through the budgeting process,
I believe we had earmarked some funds that would provide an
adequate resource to allocate those dollars that would be required to
service those incentive programs. I think --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay.
MR. REGISTER: I'd like to point out that every one of the
programs that we described is constituted on an annualized payment at
least over four years. So the inducements of these projects will be
spread out over time. So the independent cash flow impact on any
given fiscal year is mooted to some degree, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's very attractive. But I just
Page 145
May 28, 2013
wanted to know if you are including -- you know, I notice you called
this the Qualified Target Industry Tax Refund Program. And that's
strictly what's coming from the state?
MR. REGISTER: Yes.
MR. OCHS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Comprised of the 80 percent, and
then our 20 percent is cash?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. And this Board has typically participated
in that QTI matching program.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: It doesn't necessarily have to
be cash.
MR. REGISTER: You're absolutely correct. It could come into
the -- as donation of land or in-kind services.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: And it could be coming from
the private sector through the county to meet that matching grant.
MR. REGISTER: That's -- that is possible, Commissioner. It's
highly unlikely.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I'm sorry to interrupt
you.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, not at all. I'm glad to have an
open conversation.
How do you imagine that the workshop feedback is going to
proceed, based on the other items from February?
MR. OCHS: Well, Commissioner, we're going to present this,
essentially the same information as part of the agenda backup from a
staff presentation standpoint and then --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Just going to work it around?
MR. OCHS: Yes. If the Board would like to -- I should point
out, because you did mention it, Commissioner Nance, correctly that
we took a measured conservative approach, as Bruce said, to build a
platform based on three different tiers.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think that's excellent.
Page 146
May 28, 2013
MR. OCHS: But this is all performance based payments after the
jobs are certified. That is unlike some of your existing incentives.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
MR. OCHS: And the one area that I see may get some traction
or discussion over the workshop is our recommendation in this
proposal to eliminate the current incentive that you offer for assistance
with impact fees.
So in the program that we've advanced here this afternoon, there
is no incentive for a capital investment made by a firm. Unlike Lee
County, for example.
So I would anticipate during the workshop we'll probably have
some discussion from the private sector on that particular issue, for
example.
MR. REGISTER: We'd also be receptive to any direction you
have today on ways to change this, make this better in preparation for
that workshop.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Henning, may I
make a brief comment?
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: One thing that we haven't talked
about in this particular meeting, I have talked with the County
Manager and Bruce about this, but several years ago we created an
incentive zoning or enterprise zoning category that would provide
preapproved zoning for the types of companies that we would like to
attract to Collier County. In other words, providing something that
was almost shovel ready where people wouldn't have to spend a year
or so going through a rezoning process.
I think that the availability of land is a -- availability of good land
and good locations is a great attracter for innovative businesses. And I
would like to see us continue that process. In fact, place a little more
emphasis on that so that whenever a company wants to start up in
Collier County or wants to relocate to Collier County, we have some
Page 147
May 28, 2013
attractive parcels that are already zoned for a certain type of business.
We have in the past had a tendency to go far out east looking for
cheap land, and unfortunately it takes some companies out of their
comfort zone. And we need to develop more opportunities for that
kind of incentive zoning or technology zoned property, and we could
certainly begin part of that in the mini triangle there in -- not far from
our offices.
There are other opportunities, urban infill properties that could be
properly zoned for that sort of thing. So I would like to see us flush
out that program and get it moving ahead a little more rapidly.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: May I expand upon that?
I think that we ought to give staff direction not only to identify
what you identified in the CRA, but look at other opportunities and
PUD's and existing buildings to where we can identify for certain
businesses to go.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, exactly. That's exactly the
thing we need to do, yes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So I fully support that.
And furthermore, without venture capital we're not getting a clear
message from the community that the community is buying into
economic development. If they're not -- if they're not going to put
skin in the game, then why are we doing what we're doing?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Absolutely right. Absolutely 100
percent right.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, you're right on target.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So you got three nods
on that.
One of the slides shows that the recommendations is these
incentives, instead of having it in an ordinance, have it in a resolution
so that we have the opportunity to react to market conditions. Is
anybody opposed to that?
Page 148
May 28, 2013
(No response.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't hear anything.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm not.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-uh.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I hear a majority of us want to
create that.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Thank you, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there anything else?
MR. OCHS: No, sir. Just to mention real quickly what
Commissioner Coyle referred to as the Innovation Zone Incentive
Program. That is the one existing program that we have
recommended that you keep and try to expand along the same lines
that both the Chairman and Commissioner Coyle mentioned.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct. We need to let these
property owners know -- somehow let them know the diversity of
what they can do on their properties. You get an executive
headquarters that's not producing anything, it's no different than an
office building. So -- and they need to be marketing that as an
executive headquarters.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Feeding off of that, that's a great
idea. In fact, everything that's been said.
Do we have anything within the county that shows or identifies
empty buildings sitting there or property, maybe the empty building is
on a piece of property that the building could be mowed down and that
piece of property could be joined with others right there in that area
that you could encourage new businesses to view? Do we have
anything at all like that?
MR. REGISTER: It's funny you mention that, Commissioner,
because we've been working with our private partners to -- and with
our growth management division to develop the capacities for that
very types of tools that you're talking about. It's a critical tool. You're
Page 149
May 28, 2013
very astute in recognizing that.
And Commissioner Coyle is absolutely correct, suitable land is a
key component. It's essential to having a successful economic
development program. You've got to have the sites and they need to
be prepared and shovel ready.
MR. OCHS: When her refers to the private partner in this case,
he's talking about the Naples Area Board of Realtors who has large
data banks that we are trying to access, with their permission, to be
able to identify different available buildings and certain zoning and
certain uses that are already preapproved so that we have all that data
at our disposal.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I hope at our workshop we
can expand on your -- I think you've got an excellent framework here,
Mr. Register. I hope we can talk about some of these other things that
we might also be able to utilize and we can get your feedback on some
of the ones that we know others have tried, perhaps things that we've
had in the past that weren't so successful. I hope we can go through a
very comprehensive discussion.
But also, I think that in Collier County we have a unique
opportunity to allow you to guide us through the sorts of steps that
major job producers are going to demand from us if we're going to be
competitive.
And I think we're in a unique situation, because in Collier County
we happen to have a tremendous amount of land owned by relatively
few landowners. And as far as I can tell in my recent experience and
experience over the long term, most of the landowners would like to
see some of that land developed. So I think we've got an opportunity
to do things that are public/private that can make an extraordinary
amount of land shovel ready if we make it our business to do that. I
wouldn't see any reason why we wouldn't be able to do that.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Page 150
May 28, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I mean, the people are there,
they're land rich, they're anxious to utilize their land for productive
means and I hope we can get some of that discussion as well and start
examining how our perspective new businesses see us and make sure
that we meet each one of these areas of concern that they've going to
-- that you know they're going to come to you with.
MR. OCHS: Understood.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, thank you.
MR. REGISTER: Thank you.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Last item is communications.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, I have nothing for the Commission today
from me.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing, sir.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I would like to thank the County
Manager, Mr. Ochs, for putting the future workshop topics on there.
MR. OCHS: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I appreciate that as part of your
communications. And I hope we'll go ahead and start scheduling a
few more in the fall when you let us know which ones are going to be
open in the fall.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Because some of them are going to
be dedicated to the budget process or take some time; is that correct?
MR. OCHS: No, you'll finish most of your budget work in late
June and early September when you come back. But we'll be talking
Page 151
May 28, 2013
to you as soon as you get back in September for October/November
workshops or even perhaps on July 9th, if you'd like to think through
to what you'd like to talk about in November, December.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Thank you.
Other than that, I don't have anything.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a fast one, talking about all that
land. I was just wondering if someone could get back to me
sometime, maybe Steve Carnell over there, see how we're doing in
locating land for the remote controlled airplane field.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we owe you a report on the 25th of
June on that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great. Okay, thank you. That's
good.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would just like to say, Mr.
Chairman, that it was an excellent and very productive Board of
County Commission session. Thank you very much.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
And looking forward to your safe return and Commissioner
Fiala's (sic) return.
I do have a couple of returns.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm here.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller's safe
return.
I wanted to find ways we can capitalize what Lee County has
done with Hertz Corporation. And we have. We're going to benefit
from that greatly.
Talking to the County Manager and County Attorney, who has
great knowledge of the community where Hertz comes from, I have
taken the opportunity to call one of the commissioners in Lee County
to see how we can partnership and go up to New Jersey to entice other
Page 152
May 28, 2013
companies to come to Lee County -- or Lee and Collier. Southwest
Florida.
And I'm sure I'm going to hear something possibly later on today
or tomorrow.
And the County Manager and I are working on other things that I
think is also going to be very productive for economic development,
trying to get companies down here. I believe it's something we need
for our community and I think Hertz Company locating in Lee County
is -- we're just as much a benefactor as Lee and Charlotte quite frankly
so we need to try to partnership with the folks up there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I say that I'm really pleased
you're taking more or less the lead on that, stepping forward and
seeing the need and filling that? Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Yeah, well, the
County Manager -- we have a County Manager that really believes on
changing this community for the better and not compromising our
quality of life.
The last thing I have is Gulf Coast Consortium. It looks like the
feds are going to come out with their rules on how projects are
submitted. We are doing a fantastic job with Deb Wight and Bill
Lorenz and other people on that committee to bring projects to the
Board to approve and to submit for that BP money and Transocean,
and there's somebody else in there.
However, what's happening on the consortium, counties are
partnering and submitting projects together. So you have like the
affected -- eight directly affected communities out there are going to
submit projects such as reefs that are going to be contiguous to
counties. And that's very smart, because it's more likely to gain
support for funding when they do that.
So I've asked Lee County if they would partnership with Collier
County so when we submit, we submit with Lee County's so we have
a better chance of getting those projects funded. And it's a possibility
Page 153
May 28, 2013
to reach out, and I need to find out what Monroe County's needs are
and what their thoughts are as far as submitting for projects.
Because they're doing it all the way up the coast and we better
get on board so we're not just submitting projects individually.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's great.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. So I think from here on
in it's really going to kick up and get busy.
And there is one other pot of money coming, and I can't think of
the organization. Oh, it's a big national company that does consulting
work. And Dick Cheney was involved in that company?
MR. OCHS: Halliburton.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Halliburton is also involved in
these lawsuits which is still going through the courts. So more fun.
Anyways, I don't have anything. If nobody else has, I'll entertain
a motion and a second to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Excellent meeting. Motion to
adjourn.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner
Fiala, second by Commissioner Nance.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: (Nods head affirmatively.)
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: No one is opposed. Thank you
Cherie'.
**** Commissioner Fiala moved, seconded by Commissioner Nance
and carried unanimously that the following items under the Consent
and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Page 154
May 28, 2013
Item #16A1
CONTRACT #13-6077 FOR THE AMOUNT OF $877,157 THAT
INCLUDES A $100,000 ALLOWANCE, WITH C.W. ROBERTS
CONTRACTING, INC. FOR "NAPLES MANOR SIDEWALK
IMPROVEMENTS PHASE II" (PROJECT NO. 69081) — IN
NAPLES MANOR ON SOUTH SIDE OF BROWARD STREET,
NORTH SIDE OF CAROLINA AVENUE, SOUTH SIDE OF
FLEMING AND GILCHRIST STREETS AND NORTH SIDE OF
TRAMMEL STREET THAT INCLUDES 5-FOOT WIDE
SIDEWALKS AND DRIVEWAYRECONSTRUCTION TO MEET
ADA REQUIREMENTS
Item #16A2
AMENDED AND RESTATED ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT
FOR LOT 17, GREY OAKS UNIT NINETEEN, APPROVED BY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DECEMBER 14, 2010
AS AGENDA ITEM #16Al2 — A HOME OWNER'S REQUEST
WITH PROPERTY OWNER ASSOCIATION'S CONSENT THAT
CONSISTS OF A PORTION OF A POOL DECK & RETAINING
WALL AND THE OWNER AGREEING TO PAY ANY COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH REMOVING IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN
THE EASEMENTS (IF NECESSARY) AND TO ALSO HOLD
THE COUNTY HARMLESS FOR ANY COSTS ASSOCIATED
WITH REMOVING THE ENCROACHMENTS
Item #16A3
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO PARCEL 106FEE, ET
AL, PART OF US-41/COLLIER BOULEVARD INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT #60116 (FISCAL IMPACT: $5,455) —
Page 155
May 28, 2013
TO SETTLE A LAWSUIT AGAINST KRG 951 & 41, LLC, ET AL,
FOR PARCELS 106FEE & 106TCE AND TO ELIMINATE ANY
FURTHER COSTS FOR EXTENDED LITIGATION
Item #16A4
RESOLUTION 2013-114: DECLARING A PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER VACATING A PORTION OF A DRAINAGE
CANAL EASEMENT, RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORD
BOOK 4385, PAGE 3675 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ALSO BEING A PART OF
SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PART OF THE SABAL BAY
PUD. APPLICATION VAC-PL20130000413 — TENTATIVELY
SCHEDULED FOR THE JULY 9, 2013 BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONER'S MEETING
Item #16A5
THIS ITEM CONTINUED FROM THE MAY 14, 2013 BCC
MEETING. INCREASING THE COLLECTIVE ANNUAL LIMIT
ON MULTIPLE CONTRACTS FOR RFP #12-5892, "FIXED
TERM LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES" — STAFF
RECOMMENDS AN INCREASE FROM $200,000 TO $300,000
FOR CONTRACTS WITH MCGEE & ASSOCIATES, INC.;
RICHARD TINDELL D/B/A GREENWORK STUDIO; JOHNSON
ENGINEERING, INC., GOETZ & STROPES LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTS, INC. AND WINDHAM STUDIO, INC. FOR
RECURRING MSTU CONSULTING SERVICES AND FUTURE
COUNTYWIDE PROJECTS
Item #16A6
Page 156
May 28, 2013
DONATIONS FROM THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF
COLLIER COUNTY FOR THE ARTIFICIAL REEF PROGRAM
WITH PROCEEDS GOING INTO A RESTRICTED FUND AND
CONSIDER NAMING COUNTY REEFS USING SUGGESTIONS
MADE BY THE FOUNDATION — THOSE WHO GIVE $55,000
OR MORE TO THE CFCC'S FUND WILL BE GIVEN THE
OPPORTUNITY TO "NAME" A REEF
Item #16B1 — Withdrawn (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC), AS THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, APPROVE AN AMENDMENT
TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DISASTER RECOVERY
INITIATIVE (DRI)/DISASTER RECOVERY ENHANCEMENT
FUNDS (DREF) GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BCC
AND THE CRA
Item #16B2
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTING IN ITS
CAPACITY AS THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) APPROVE CONTRACT
#13-5988, IMMOKALEE STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS
PHASE II AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRWOMAN TO SIGN
THE GRANT FUNDED CONTRACT WITH CDM SMITH, INC.
(CDM) — VALUED AT APPROXIMATELY $321,954 TO
REVIEW AND PRIORITIZE PROJECTS THAT REMAIN FOR
IMMOKALEE STORMWATER MASTER PLAN AND PROVIDE
PERMITTING, BIDDING AND CONSULTING SERVICES FOR
IMMOKALEE DRIVE PROJECTS #33214 & #33266
Page 157
May 28, 2013
Item #16B3
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC) ACTING
IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) REJECT PROPOSALS
RECEIVED REGARDING GRANT-FUNDED SOLICITATION
#12-5855, IMMOKALEE CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENTS AND
APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $73,070 TO ALLOW
STAFF TO ISSUE A WORK ORDER WITH AIM ENGINEERING
& SURVEYING UNDER CONTRACT #09-5262 - INTENDED TO
FUND PEDESTRIAN SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE
IMMOKALEE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT CORRIDOR
Item #16C 1
INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #13-6069, SLUDGE TRUCK(S)
REPLACEMENT, FOR THE PURCHASE OF THREE SLUDGE
HAULING TRUCKS TO LIFT ONE, LLC - TO REPLACE OLD
TRUCKS THAT MOVE SLUDGE ON/OFFSITE FOR DISPOSAL
USED AT THE NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION
FACILITY AND SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER
TREATMENT PLANT
Item #16C2
WAIVE COMPETITION AUTHORIZING 5-YEAR EXTENSIONS
FOR EXISTING SOLE-SOURCE AGREEMENTS WITH (1)
ALLEN-BRADLEY/ROCKWELL AUTOMATION FOR
VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVES & COMPONENTS AND (2)
DATA FLOW SYSTEMS, INC., FOR TELEMETRY SYSTEMS -
AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 158
May 28, 2013
Item #16C3
WORK ORDER UNDER CONTRACT #08-5011-83 FOR $469,520
TO MITCHELL & STARK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.,
FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITY SERVICES FOR WOODCREST
DRIVE UTILITY EXTENSION PHASE 2 PROJECTS NO. 70044
AND 70071; AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS — TO INSTALL A POTABLE WATER MAIN
AND 8-INCH WASTEWATER FORCE MAIN DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM ALONG WOODCREST, CALUSA PINES DRIVE AND
TREE FARM ROAD 1-MILE EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD
(C.R.951), SOUTH OF IMMOKALEE ROAD, AND NORTH OF
THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION FOR FUTURE
DEVELOPMENT AND BENEFITTING BENT CREEK/SUMMIT
LAKES, CALUSA PINES, HABITAT FOR HUMANITY,
MOCKINGBIRD CROSSING AND ACREMAKER ROAD
Item #16C4
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $700,000 TO
FUND FUTURE WASTEWATER PROJECTS ON VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD, LOGAN AND SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD
AND EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL UNDER "WASTEWATER FORCE
MAIN TECHNICAL SUPPORT" PROJECT NO. 70044
Item #16C5
A WORK ORDER UNDER CONTRACT #08-5011-82 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $337,275 WITH KYLE CONSTRUCTION FOR
UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONTRACTING SERVICES FOR
WASTEWATER PUMP STATION 312.25 REHABILITATION
PROJECT NUMBERS 70046 AND 70051 — PROJECT LOCATED
Page 159
May 28, 2013
EAST OF WILDWOOD LAKE BOULEVARD IN THE BRIAR
LANDING-ENCLAVE SUBDIVISION OFF DAVIS BOULEVARD
Item #16C6
ADVERTISE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING 2001-73, COLLIER
COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UNIFORM BILLING,
OPERATING AND REGULATORY STANDARDS ORDINANCE,
TO PROVIDE CLARIFICATIONS, ADMINISTRATIVE
CHANGES AND CODIFICATION OF EXISTING ORDINANCES
Item #16C7
THIS ITEM CONTINUED FROM THE MAY 14, 2013 BCC
MEETING. PURCHASE OF A NEW CASE 580N BACKHOE
FROM TREKKER TRACTOR LLC, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$65,050.07, USING FLORIDA SHERIFF ASSOCIATION'S
STATE CONTRACT #12-10-0905 — USED TO REPAIR AND
MAINTAIN COLLIER COUNTY'S WELLFIELD ASSETS
Item #16C8
ADVERTISE A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REPLACING COLLIER
COUNTY RECLAIMED WATER SYSTEM ORDINANCE 98-37,
AS AMENDED
Item #16D1
MODIFICATION #2 TO DREF GRANT AGREEMENT #12DB-P5-
09-21-01-K3 9 BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY (DEO) AND COLLIER COUNTY
Page 160
May 28, 2013
TO APPROVE TERMINATION OF A SUBRECIPIENT
AGREEMENT, REPROGRAM AVAILABLE FUNDS, APPROVE
A NEW SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT AND 2 SUBRECIPIENT
AGREEMENT AMENDMENTS — AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D2
CONTRACT AMENDMENT #1 WITH THIRTEEN VENDORS
UNDER CONTRACT #12-5856 "SERVICES FOR SENIORS", TO
INCORPORATE GRANTOR REQUIRED SUBCONTRACTOR
LANGUAGE INTO THE AGREEMENTS, THEREBY ENSURING
FULL COMPLIANCE WITH GRANT REQUIREMENTS — WITH
VENDORS: LIFELINE SYSTEMS COMPANY D/B/A PHILLIPS
LIFELINE, GULF COAST ASSISTING HANDS, VIP AMERICA
OF SWFL, SUNRISE COMMUNITY, SOUTHERN HOME CARE
D/B/A RESCARE HOME CARE, BIDWELL HOME CARE
SERVICE D/B/A HOME INSTEAD SENIOR CARE, ELEVEN
ASH D/B/A HEALTH FORCE, NURSECORE MANAGEMENT
D/B/A NURSECORE OF FORT MYERS, SUMMIT HOME
RESPIRATORY SERVICES D/B/A SUMMIT HOME HEALTH
CARE PRODUCTS, CARE CLUB OF COLLIER COUNTY,
ALWAYS THERE HOME HEALTH CARE, ACCU-CARE
NURSING SERVICE AND FIRST CARE HOME SERVICES
Item #16D3
PARK & RECREATION DEPARTMENT'S PARTICIPATION IN
THE IMMOKALEE OUT-OF-SCHOOL TIME INITIATIVE AND
FOR THE CHAIRWOMAN TO SIGN A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING (MOU) WITH THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT BOARD, INC. FOR FUNDS
Page 161
May 28, 2013
THAT WILL ALLOW UP TO 80 CHILDREN TO RECEIVE FREE
RECREATIONAL AND TUTORING OPPORTUNITIES DURING
THE SUMMER — FUNDS ALLOWING STUDENTS TO ATTEND
A 9-WEEK SUMMER PROGRAM AT A REIMBURSEMENT
RATE OF $13.33 PER DAY AND NOT TO EXCEED $48,540
Item #16D4
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $83,203.21 IN
PROGRAM INCOME REVENUE GENERATED BY PROPERTY
ACQUIRED UNDER THE NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION
PROGRAM (NSP1) — RECOGNIZING $83,097.39 FOR THE
TERMINATION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH COLONIAL
SQUARE REALTY TO MANAGE SIX DUPLEXES AT 5318-5340
GILCHRIST STREET AND A $105.82 CREDIT FROM LCEC
Item #16D5
AMENDMENT TO THREE (3) SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENTS
WITH CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF COLLIER COUNTY,
DIOCESE OF VENICE, THE SHELTER FOR ABUSED WOMEN
AND CHILDREN AND ST. MATTHEWS HOUSE FOR THE
FY2012-2013 U.S. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
(HUD) EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT (ESG) TO CLARIFY
REQUIREMENTS — TO CLARIFY A REQUIREMENT THAT
RECIPIENTS PROVIDE A 1 FOR 1 MATCH FOR ALL GRANT
FUNDS RECEIVED, TO CORRECT A SCRIVENER'S ERROR
AND TO ADD NEW PURCHASING AND INVOICE LANGUAGE
Item #16D6
WAIVE COMPETITION AND APPROVE A MEMORANDUM OF
Page 162
May 28, 2013
UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND GULF
COAST ADULT SOCCER LEAGUE, INC. TO PROVIDE
AMATEUR SOCCER LEAGUE PROGRAMS AT COUNTY PARK
FACILITIES — AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D7
AFTER-THE-FACT AMENDMENTS BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND AREA AGENCY ON AGING
FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. D/B/A SENIOR CHOICES
OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, WHICH REFLECTS FUNDING
CHANGES; AND APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS
ACCORDINGLY FOR THE FY12/13 STATE GENERAL
REVENUE SENIORS PROGRAM (FISCAL IMPACT: $68,019) —
REQUIRED SO THE COUNTY CAN PAY VENDORS FOR
SERVICES THROUGH JUNE 30, 2013
Item #16D8
FIRST EXTENSION OF AN INTERIM MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR THE CONSERVATION COLLIER RED MAPLE SWAMP
(A/K/A NGGE UNIT 53) MULTI-PARCEL PROJECT — ONE OF
TWO DESIGNATED BOARD-APPROVED MULTI-PARCEL
ACQUISITION PROJECTS FOR CONSERVATION COLLIER
THAT WAS SUSPENDED BY THE BOARD IN JANUARY, 2011
Item #16D9
FIRST EXTENSION OF THE INTERIM MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR THE CONSERVATION COLLIER WINCHESTER HEAD
MULTI-PARCEL PROJECT— ONE OF TWO DESIGNATED
BOARD-APPROVED MULTI-PARCEL ACQUISITION
Page 163
May 28, 2013
PROJECTS FOR CONSERVATION COLLIER SUSPENDED BY
THE BOARD IN JANUARY, 2011
Item #16D10
INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #13-6073 PURCHASE & DELIVERY
OF NON-BULK CHEMICALS AND POOL SUPPLIES WITH
POOL COURT SCP DISTRIBUTORS, LESLIE'S POOLMART,
COMMERCIAL ENERGY SPECIALISTS, DAVIS SUPPLY AND
CHEM-RITE FOR ESTIMATED ANNUAL SPENDING $150,000 —
A ONE (1) YEAR CONTRACT WITH THREE ONE (1) YEAR
RENEWAL OPTIONS FOR SERVICE AT SUN-N-FUN LAGOON,
NORTH COLLIER REGIONAL PARK, GOLDEN GATE
COMMUNITY PARK, IMMOKALEE SPORTS COMPLEX,
EAGLE LAKES AND VINEYARDS COMMUNITY PARKS AND
FUTURE PARKS OR WATER FEATURES
Item #16D11
CHAIRWOMAN TO SIGN AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2012
ECOLOGICAL CONSULTING SOLUTIONS, INC. GOPHER
TORTOISE RECIPIENT SITE AGREEMENT TO RELOCATE
UP TO AN ADDITIONAL 10 GOPHER TORTOISES FROM
THE GORDON RIVER GREENWAY PARK PROJECT SITE TO
THE NW HACKLETRAP LONG TERM PROTECTED GOPHER
TORTOISE RECIPIENT SITE IN HENDRY COUNTY FOR THE
ESTIMATED AMOUNT UP TO BUT NOT EXCEEDING $8,000
AND APPROVE AN ADDITIONAL $3,000 MITIGATION
CONTRIBUTION PAYMENT TO THE FLORIDA FISH AND
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION (FWC) — STAFF
ESTIMATES BETWEEN 33 AND 38 GOPHER TORTOISES
WILL NEED TO BE RELOCATED ($800 PER TORTOISE)
Page 164
May 28, 2013
AFTER CONDUCTING SURVEYS OF THE DEVELOPMENTAL
FOOTPRINTS IN MARCH AND APRIL OF 2013
Item #16D12 — Moved to Item #11F (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16D13
AFTER-THE-FACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND AREA
AGENCY ON AGING OF SWFL D/B/A SENIOR CHOICES OF
SWFL AND APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO REFLECT
A DECREASE OF $65,520 IN THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT
PROGRAMS, AND $7,280 IN MATCHING FUNDS — FUNDING
CUTS ARE THE RESULT OF FEDERAL SEQUESTRATION
Item #16D14
BUDGET AMENDMENT ALLOWING CONTINUOUS
OPERATION OF COMMUNITY CARE FOR THE ELDERLY,
ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE INITIATIVE AND HOME CARE FOR
THE ELDERLY GRANTS FOR COLLIER COUNTY'S SERVICES
FOR SENIORS PROGRAM FROM THE AREA AGENCY ON
AGING OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA D/B/A SENIOR CHOICES
OF SWFL PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF THE FUNDING AWARD
(FISCAL IMPACT: $853,290) — TO ENSURE UNINTERRUPTED
SERVICES FOR ELDERLY CLIENTS & AUTHORIZE ELIGIBLE
EXPENDITURES PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF THE FUNDING
AWARD AGREEMENT
Item #16D15
INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #13-6082 "RADIO ROAD MSTU
Page 165
May 28, 2013
DEVONSHIRE BOULEVARD ROADWAY LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE" TO FLORIDA LAND MAINTENANCE D/B/A
COMMERCIAL LAND MAINTENANCE, INC. — A 1-YEAR
CONTRACT WITH THREE (3) 1-YEAR RENEWALS TO
MAINTAIN LANDSCAPE & IRRIGATION INSTALLED BY THE
RADIO ROAD MSTU WITHIN THEIR BOUNDARIES
Item #16D16
A BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $44,297.28 USING BOATER
IMPROVEMENT MONEY IN PARKS AND REC CAPITAL
FUND 306 FOR THE PORT OF THE ISLANDS BOAT RAMP
REPAIR PROJECT — TO REPAIR EROSION ON THE RAMP
Item #16D17
THE SECOND PARTIAL RELEASE OF A CONSERVATION
EASEMENT WITH SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT
DISTRICT ON COUNTY PROPERTY AT THE VANDERBILT
BEACH PARKING GARAGE FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH
RESTROOM FACILITY, AND FINDING THE EXPENDITURE
PROMOTES TOURISM (PROJECT #90046) — AS DETAILED IN
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D18
AN EASEMENT CONVEYANCE TO FLORIDA POWER &
LIGHT ON COUNTY PROPERTY AT THE GORDON RIVER
GREENWAY PARK (PROJECT #80065.1) — MEASURING
APPROXIMATELY 400 SQUARE FT TO INSTALL ELECTRIC
INFRASTRUCTURE ALONG GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD
Page 166
May 28, 2013
Item #16D19
TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL EVALUATION POINTS FOR
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IN IMMOKALEE FOR
THE FY13/14 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (HUD) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION
CYCLE — GIVING PREFERENCE TO PROJECTS THAT
CONCENTRATE THEIR FOCUS IN IMMOKALEE
Item #16E1
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) #13-6046, AGREEMENTS
FOR APPRAISER SPECIAL MAGISTRATE(S) FOR THE VALUE
ADJUSTMENT BOARD (VAB) AND RFP #13-6047, ATTORNEY
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE(S) FOR THE VALUE ADJUSTMENT
BOARD (VAB) AND AUTHORIZE THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONER'S CHAIRWOMAN AND VAB CHAIRMAN TO
EXECUTE CONTRACTS WITH ARMALAVAGE VALUATION,
LLC. AND THE COASTAL CONSULTING GROUP, INC. FOR
CONTRACT #13-6046 AND CONTRACT #13-6047 WITH THE
LAW OFFICES OF ELLEN T. CHADWELL, PL AND DAVIA
MAZUR, ESQ. — AN AGREEMENT PERIOD OF TWO (2) YEARS
WITH OPTION TO RENEW AN ADDITIONAL 2-YEAR TERM
Item #16E2
AWARD ITB #13-6018, "FASTENERS AND WHEEL WEIGHTS
FOR FLEET" TO LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC. — TO MAINTAIN
AND REPAIR COUNTY VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT
Item #16E3
Page 167
May 28, 2013
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE CHIEF HEARING
EXAMINER WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF MAY 29, 2013 —
AN AGREEMENT WITH MARK STRAIN WITH AN ANNUAL
SALARY OF $110,000, PROVIDING 80 HOURS UP-FRONT FOR
VACATION, A COMPREHENSIVE BENEFIT PACKAGE AND
HOLIDAYS & ACCRUED PERSONAL LEAVE CONSISTENT
WITH OTHER COUNTY EMPLOYEES
Item #16F1
RESOLUTION 2013-115: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO FY12/13 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F2
REFUNDING AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONTRIBUTION
TO REGAL POINT DEVELOPERS INC. TOTALING $56,000
DUE TO THE REMOVAL OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING
CONTRIBUTION COMMITMENT FROM THE PINE RIDGE
MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT — FOR A 2006
AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONTRIBUTION
Item #16F3
CONTRACT #12-5957, FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES
WITH PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, INC. — A TWO (2)
YEAR AGREEMENT WITH TWO (2) OPTIONAL 1-YEAR
RENEWALS FOR SERVICES REGARDING SPECIFIC BOND
ISSUES OR CAPITAL FINANCING; PUBLIC SECURITY
OFFERING AND NEGOTIATED SALE OF BONDS WITH
$50,000 IN ANNUAL ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES
Page 168
May 28, 2013
Item #16F4
ACCEPTING THE 2013 LEGISLATIVE SESSION SUMMARY
REPORT— AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16G1
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING IN ITS
CAPACITY AS COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY,
APPROVE THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO A SUB-LEASE
AGREEMENT WITH RAVEN AIR LLC, D/B/A ISLAND
HOPPERS AERIAL ADVENTURES FOR FACILITIES AND
SPECIALIZED AVIATION SERVICE OPERATIONS AT THE
MARCO ISLAND AIRPORT — REPLACING RENTAL OF A
HELICOPTER STORAGE UNIT WITH AIRCRAFT TIE-DOWN
SPACE AT THE AIRPORT
Item #16H1
COMMISSIONER HILLER'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE ATTENDED THE LEGAL AID SERVICE
BARRISTER'S BASH EVENT APRIL 25, 2013. A SUM OF $33.60
PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HILLER'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE WITH ACTION AS
DIRECTED. DOCUMENTS ARE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW
IN THE BCC OFFICE UNTIL APPROVED
Page 169
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
May 28, 2013
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Miscellaneous Correspondence:
1) Notice of Public Meeting:
Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority Board 5.13.13
2) Notice of Official Interpretation of Collier County LDC Ordinance:
Riverchase Shopping Plaza Landscape Review 4.23.13
3) Naples Heritage Community Development District:
Meeting Minutes/Agenda 11.13.12
4) Verona Walk Community Development District:
Proposed Fiscal Year 13/14 Budget 4.29.13
5) Port of the Islands Community Improvement District:
Meeting Minutes 12.7.12
Meeting Minutes/Agenda 12.21.12
6) Larry Ray, Tax Collector Correspondence:
Letter to Dept. of Financial Services Bureau of Acct. with forms
necessary to meet statutory compliance 10.26.10
Letter to Dwight Brock that included Tax Annual Report for the
09/10 FY and Schedule of Revenue 10.29.10
7) Collier County Property Appraisers Office:
Letter to the BCC sent to attn. of Donald Berry, Director of
Accounting regarding commissions due their office 4.1.13 to 6.30.13
for various taxing authorities 3.15.13
8) Heritage Greens Community Development District:
Meeting Minutes/Agenda 10.15.12 and 11.19.12
May 28, 2013
Item #16J1
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF APRIL 25, 2013
THROUGH MAY 1, 2013 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 2, 2013
THROUGH MAY 8, 2013AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J3
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 9, 2013
THROUGH MAY 15, 2013 AND FOR SUBMISSION INTO THE
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J4
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $1,470,000 IN
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES IN THE SHERIFF'S FY 13
GENERAL FUND BUDGET — REVENUE FROM FEES
COLLECTED BY THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE FOR PROVIDING
MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES DURING THE FISCAL CYCLE
Item #16K1
COUNTY ATTORNEY TO FILE A LAWSUIT ON BEHALF OF
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGAINST N CAMPOS CONSTRUCTION CORP AND EDEL
CAMPO MOREJON IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TWENTIETH
Page 170
May 28, 2013
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, TO RECOVER DAMAGES INCURRED BY THE
COUNTY FOR REPAIR TO A SECTION OF GUARDRAIL IN AN
AMOUNT OF $11,862.18, PLUS COSTS OF LITIGATION — A
CLAIM WAS DENIED BY THE CORPORATION'S INSURANCE
COMPANY BECAUSE THE ACCIDENT ON JANURAY 18, 2012
TOOK PLACE OUTSIDE THE POLICY PERIOD; N CAMPOS
CONSTRUCTION REFUSES TO REIMBURSE THE COUNTY
Item #16K2
RESOLUTION 2013-116: APPROVING ISSUANCE AND SALE
OF REVENUE BONDS BY COLLIER COUNTY EDUCATIONAL
FACILITIES AUTHORITY TO REFUND BONDS PREVIOUSLY
ISSUED FOR FACILITIES AT AVE MARIA UNIVERSITY — AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16K3 — Withdrawn (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTING AS THE
AIRPORT AUTHORITY TO APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO RETAIN CONSULTING
AND EXPERT WITNESS SERVICES FOR THE LAWSUIT
CAPTIONED QUALITY ENTERPRISES, USA, INC. V COLLIER
COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY(CASE NO. 12-4345-CA) IN
COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION VII H OF THE PURCHASING
POLICY (EST. FISCAL IMPACT: APPROXIMATELY $38,105)
****Commissioner Fiala moved, seconded by Commissioner Nance
and carried unanimously that the following items under the Summary
Agenda be adopted ****
Page 171
May 28, 2013
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2013-117: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND
SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE FY 12/13 ADOPTED
BUDGET
*****
Page 172
May 28, 2013
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 3: 15 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
TOM HENNING, VICE .P AIRMAN
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
ntta-AL
,Attest n's
Signature Qn1y
These minutes a oved by the Board on jj �S, at�13 , as
presented or as corrected
Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Court Reporting,
Incorporated by Cherie' R. Nottingham, CSR.
Page 173