BCC Minutes 10/08/2013 R BCC
REGULAR
MEETING
MINUTES
OCTOBER 8, 2013
October 8, 2013
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, October 8, 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:
CHAIRWOMAN: Georgia Hiller
Fred Coyle
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
Tim Nance
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo Ochs, County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Finance Director
Tim Durham, Executive Manager of Corp. Business Operations
Troy Miller, Manager of Television Operations
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
Pirtalkal
Mkt i
�(.j ®
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples FL 34112
October 08, 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 BOARD AT THE
BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
Page 1
October 8, 2013
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 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Jonathan Evans - First Presbyterian Church of Naples
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.
D. September 5, 2013 - BCC/Budget Hearing
Page 2
October 8, 2013
E. September 10, 2013 - BCC/Regular Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating October 2013 as Domestic Violence Awareness
Month. To be accepted by Linda Oberhaus, Executive Director, Shelter for
Abused Women and Children and Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, Collier County
Sheriffs Office. Sponsored by the Board of County Commissioners.
B. Proclamation designating October 2013 as Long Term Care Residents'
Rights Month in Collier County. To be accepted by Barbara Pohl, District
Ombudsman Manage; Ro Jones, Ombudsmen; and Ruth Ogieste,
Ombudsmen, Florida Ombudsman Program. Sponsored by the Board of
County Commissioners.
C. Proclamation recognizing Keep Collier Beautiful for its volunteer efforts
during the International Coastal Clean Up on September 21, 2013. To be
accepted by Jim Zimmerman, Volunteer Executive Director, Keep Collier
Beautiful and Keep Collier Beautiful board members. Sponsored by the
Board of County Commissioners.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for October 2013
to Naples Art Association. To be accepted by Aimee Schlehr, Executive
Director, Naples Art Association and Stacey Bulloch, Board President,
Naples Art Association.
B. Recommendation to recognize Amy Kuperman, Laboratory Quality
Assurance Specialist, Natural Resources, as the Employee of the Month for
September 2013.
C. Presentation of Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for Fiscal Year
2013 from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) presented
to the Office of Management and Budget. To be accepted by Mark
Isackson, Director, Corporate Financial Planning and Management Services
Page 3
October 8, 2013
D. Presentation by the Director of the Bureau of Emergency Services and
Emergency Management in response to Board approved action from the
September 24, 2013 County Commission meeting regarding Oil Exploration
in Golden Gate Estates.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request from Anthony P. Pires, Jr., Esquire, requesting that
the Board of County Commissioners look favorably upon the request and
signed petitions for the establishment of the La Peninsula Seawall
Repair/Replacement Municipal Services Benefit District (MSBU).
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Item #8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
A. 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 a Resolution of the
Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida providing for the
establishment of a Conditional Use to allow therapeutic equestrian riding
and stabling on property less than 20 acres in size within a Rural
Agricultural zoning district pursuant to Subsections 2.03.01.A.1.c.19 and
2.03.01.A.l.c.24 of the Collier County Land Development Code. The
subject property is located on the southwest corner of Goodlette-Frank Road
and Center Street in Section 10, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier
County, Florida. [Petition CU-PL20110000719]
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Item #9 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Lely Golf Estates MSTU Advisory
Committee.
Page 4
October 8, 2013
B. Appointment of members to the Golden Gate Beautification Advisory
Committee.
C. Appointment of member to the Historical/Archaeological Preservation
Board.
D. Request for Reconsideration of Item #16A7 from the September 10, 2013
BCC Meeting titled: Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to hold a public
hearing to consider vacating a portion of Mamie Street as shown on Exhibit
A, being a part of Section 36, Township 53 South, Range 29 East,
Chokoloskee, Collier County, Florida. (Commissioner Nance).
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to award a construction contract in the amount of
$19,065,912.12 to Community Asphalt, Ft. Myers and reserve $1,623,088
on the purchase order for funding allowances, for a total of$20,689,000.12
for ITB No. 13-6134 - "Intersection Capacity Improvements (SR90 (US41)
& SR/CR951) and SR 951 3R Improvements," Project No. 60116. (Marlene
Messam, Growth Management Senior Project Manager)
B. Recommendation to approve an informational Fact Sheet to be included with
public opinion survey to be mailed to property owners in the Isles of Capri
Fire District. (Len Price, Administrative Services Administrator)
C. Recommendation to accept the information collected from the Public Safety
Authority, County Medical Director's Office, County Emergency Medical
Services and Physicians Regional Hospital regarding issues raised in agenda
Item #10I on the May 14, 2013 BCC meeting relative to medical protocols.
(Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager)
D. This item to be heard at 10:30 a.m. Recommendation to accept the status
report on the truck haul beach renourishment project and provide any
additional staff direction required to move the project forward. (Nick
Casalanguida, Growth Management Administrator)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
Page 5
October 8, 2013
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
1) Recommendation to direct the County Manager to thoroughly review
all contracts with leases at the Collier County Airport facilities
including Immokalee Regional Airport, Marco Island Airport and
Everglades Airport to ensure lease terms are being met by both the
Airport Authority and tenants. (Commissioner Henning)
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
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 approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for VeronaWalk Phase 4B-1, PL20090000106, and to
authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Final
Obligation Bond in the amount of$4,000 to the Project Engineer or
the Developer's designated agent.
2) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for VeronaWalk, Phase 4B-2 and 4B-3,
PL20100001150, and to authorize the County Manager, or his
designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the amount of
$4,000 to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent.
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for VeronaWalk Phase 4C-1, PL20110000396, and to
authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Final
Obligation Bond in the amount of$4,000 to the Project Engineer or
Page 6
October 8, 2013
the Developer's designated agent.
4) Recommendation to approve the release of two code enforcement
liens in the combined amount of$703,650 for payment of$625.71, in
the Code Enforcement Actions entitled Board of County
Commissioners vs. Linnette Barrett, Code Enforcement Case
Numbers CELU20080016064 and CEPM20080015499, relating to
property located at 4408 18 Place SW, Collier County, Florida.
5) Recommendation to approve the release of lien in the amount of
$198,281.15 for payment of$25,331.15, in the Code Enforcement
Action entitled Board of County Commissioners vs. Richard L. and
Sandra F. Rathjen, Code Enforcement Case Number
CESD20100017996, relating to property located at 4866 21st Avenue
SW, Collier County, Florida.
6) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairwoman to sign an
Interlocal Agreement between City of Marco Island and Collier
County for Utility work in the estimated amount of$136,736.05 as an
integral part of the "Intersection Capacity Improvements (SR90
(US41) &SR/CR 951) and SR951 3R Improvements," Project No.
60116.
7) Recommendation to award the Invitation to Bid (ITB) 13-6152, "Stop
Sign and Residential Street Name Replacement Program," to
Municipal Supply and Sign Co. for signage work in the amount of
$238,664.93.
8) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution amending Resolution 84-79 in
order to correct a scrivener's error found in the legal description of the
vacated portion of platted Tenth Street East in Immokalee, Florida
located in Section 3, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier
County, Florida.
9) Recommendation to award ITB #13-6153 the I-75 Immokalee Road
Landscape and Irrigation Installation to Hannula Landscaping in the
amount of$416,484.32 and authorize the Chairwoman to sign the
attached contract and authorize the necessary budget amendment
Page 7
October 8, 2013
10) Recommendation to award Contract No. 13-6139 - Lely Area
Stormwater Improvement Project (LASIP), Crown Pointe and
Haldeman Creek Weir Replacements to Kelly Brothers Inc., in the
amount of$530,550.51, Project No. 51101.
11) 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 for recording the final plat of Lakoya - Phase II, (Application
Number PL20130001254) approval of the standard form Construction
and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
12) Recommendation to grant final approval of the Public roadway and
drainage improvements for the final plat of Northgate Village Unit
Two with the roadway and drainage improvements being maintained
by Collier County and authorizing the release of the maintenance
security and acceptance of the plat dedications.
13) Recommendation to approve a resolution authorizing the Chairwoman
to execute an Airspace Agreement (with attached Addendum)
between Collier County and the Florida Department of Transportation
for the lease of emergency access ramps to and from 1-75 at
Everglades Boulevard and approve all necessary budget amendments.
14) Recommendation to approve an extension for completion of site
development plan improvements associated with that project known
as Bucks Run Multi-Family (AR-7934) pursuant to Section 10.02.03
B.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
15) Recommendation to award RFP #13-6056, "Collection Agency
Services for Collier County" to MINTEX, Inc., and authorize
Chairwoman to execute the County Attorney approved agreement.
16) Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida supporting the County's
applications to Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) for Long Range Budget Plan Requests for Beach
Renourishment Projects for Fiscal Year 2014-2015. This action
maintains the County's eligibility for State Cost Share Funding for
Page 8
October 8, 2013
future renourishment projects.
17) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (ITB) #12-5886R Right
of Way /Median Mowing Maintenance for the purposes of rural
mowing, to Chuchi Bush Hog as the primary vendor, Caribbean Lawn
& Garden as a secondary vendor and Superior as the tertiary vendor;
for the purposes of urban mowing to A&M Property Maintenance as
the primary vendor, Everything Green as the secondary vendor and
Chuchi Bush Hog as the tertiary vendor.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC)
acting in its capacity as the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Agency (CRA) to (1) extend the dissolution date of
the Immokalee Business Development Center (IBDC) from December
31, 2013 to March 30, 2014 so that the IBDC can carry out its
previous obligation to conduct a USDA grant-funded feasibility study
related to that Center's viability within the Immokalee Community,
and (2) accept a $35,000 Rural Business Enterprise Grant (RBEG)
from the US Dept. of Agriculture (USDA) and approve the attached
budget amendment.
2) Recommendation to approve the shortlist of firms under RFP #13-
6012 for Thomasson Drive and Hamilton Avenue Streetscape
Improvements Design and direct staff to bring a negotiated contract
with the top ranked firm to the Board for subsequent approval.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve the selection committee rankings and
authorize staff to enter into contract negotiations with TKW
Consulting Engineers, Inc., for Request for Proposal No. 13-6020,
"North County Water Reclamation Facility Design Services for
Electrical Reliability and Mechanical Operations Upgrades," Project
Number 73950.
2) Recommendation to award Request for Proposal #12-5871 for Well
Drilling, Testing, and Maintenance Contracting Services to All Webb
Enterprises, Incorporated; Naples Well Drilling, Incorporated;
Page 9
October 8, 2013
Youngquist Brothers, Incorporated; and, Layne Christensen
Company.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to extend an Interlocal Agreement with the City of
Marco Island for the management of the Conservation Collier Otter
Mound Preserve for an additional term of 5 years.
2) Recommendation to approve amendment No. 1 to the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Agreement between Collier
County and Goodwill Industries of SW Florida, Inc.
3) Recommendation to approve amendment #1 to the FY2012-2013
agreement between Collier County and Naples Equestrian Challenge
for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) project
previously approved by the Board on May 14, 2013. (Fiscal Impact
$0).
4) Recommendation to approve ten (10) substantial amendments
amending previous Annual Action Plans for unspent U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Partnership
Investment (HOME) funds in the aggregate amount of$1,936,188.50.
5) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution superseding Resolution No.
2009-266 revising the Collier County Domestic Animal Services Fee
Policy as of November 1, 2013 to reflect the recently adopted
revisions to the Animal Control Ordinance.
6) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to execute an
Agreement between Southwest Florida Workforce Development
Board, Inc. and Collier County to provide snacks and/or supper for
afterschool programs.
7) Recommendation to approve substantial amendments to the FY2009-
2010 and FY2010-2011 Annual Action Plans to clarify the project
scope and project funding for Goodwill Industries Microenterprise
Project and Immokalee Housing & Family Services Sanders Pines
Playground Upgrades. This action also reduces the funding allocation
Page 10
October 8, 2013
for Goodwill Industries Microenterprise Program from $32,949 to
$32,640.10 utilizing U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
funds.
8) Recommendation to approve amendment No. 2 to the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Agreement between Collier
County and the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
Immokalee to update the template language and extend the project
completion date.
9) Recommendation to approve a Home Investment Partnerships
(HOME) Program Developer Agreement between Collier County and
Big Cypress Housing Corporation (BCHC) for construction of a
Multi-Family Rental Housing Project consisting of a minimum of Ten
Single Family Rental Housing Units (Fiscal Impact $1,144,000).
10) Recommendation to approve a Home Investment Partnership
(HOME) Program Subrecipient Agreement between Collier County
and Community Assisted and Supported Living, Inc. (CASL) for
acquisition of Multi-Family Rental Housing Property (Fiscal Impact
$405,564)
11) Recommendation to adopt a resolution establishing application
screening criteria for Collier County administered Federal and State
grants.
12) Recommendation to award Bid (ITB) #13-6136 for "Forest Lakes
MSTU Phase II & III Sidewalk, Lighting, Landscape and Turn Lane
Improvements" Project to Quality Enterprises Inc., in the amount of
$948,353.43.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to authorize routine and customary budget
amendments appropriating $2,270,255.72 of Fiscal Year 2013 carry
forward for approved open purchase orders into Fiscal Year 2014 for
operating budget funds.
Page 11
October 8, 2013
2) Recommendation to approve a Second Amendment to Lease
Agreement with Goodwill Industries of Southwest Florida, Inc. for the
Senior Nutrition Program.
3) Recommendation to approve a Lease with Gulfshore Associates
Limited Partnership for the continued use of office space for Pelican
Bay Services.
4) Recommendation to approve a First Amendment to Collier County
Senior Resource Center Ground Lease to continue providing social
and referral services to senior citizens.
5) Recommendation to accept reports and ratify staff-approved change
orders and changes to work orders
6) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager and staff to use
the Federal GSA schedules (i.e. Schedule 70 and 1122 Program); the
State of Florida Contracts, Agreements and Price Lists;
competitively solicited contracts by US Communities, Western
States Contracting Alliance, National Intergovernmental
Purchasing Alliance (NIPA), National Joint Powers Alliance
(NJPA) public purchasing consortiums; and, competitive solicitations
from State of Florida cities, counties, and other public
municipalities (i.e. Sheriff's Association) for the efficient purchase
of goods and services for the delivery of public services and for
which funds were approved in operating budgets.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) This item continued from the September 24, 2013 BCC Meeting.
Meeting. Recommendation to approve the selection of an award for
contract RFP #13-6129, "Professional State Lobbyist Services," to
Fowler White Boggs PA in the amount of$80,000 annually.
2) Recommendation to adopt criteria defining and classifying activities
using tourist tax revenue that "promotes tourism."
3) Recommendation to approve an amendment to the Tourism Travel
Expense Resolution 2006-40 related to County Purchasing Card limits
consistent with the County Purchasing Policy and make a finding that
Page 12
October 8, 2013
this item promotes tourism.
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners reviews
and approves the proposed FY2013-2014 Action Plan for the County
Manager.
5) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairwoman to
execute FY14 Tourism Agreements for Category B Grant Agreements
totaling $50,000 and Category C-2 Grant Agreements totaling
$40,000, waive the multiple year funding level and receipt of the final
report guidelines in the FY14 Category B and C-2 grant application
due to the past performance of the events and importance to the
community and make a finding that these expenditures promote
tourism.
6) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Adopted Budget.
7) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or his designee,
and the County Attorney to advertise for future consideration an
ordinance amending Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws
and Ordinances, which is the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Ordinance, providing for modifications directed by the Board of
County Commissioners related to a change in the timing of payment
of impact fees to issuance of a certificate of occupancy and the
inclusion of Water and Wastewater Impact Fees as eligible for the
"Impact Fee Program for Existing Commercial Redevelopment" and
including additional minor updates or corrections related to "Adult
Only Communities," obsolete refund provisions, reimbursement
agreements and the "former" Goodland Water District.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting in
its capacity as the Collier County Airport Authority, approve the
attached Third 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
Page 13
October 8, 2013
Airport.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Request for Board approval to attend a function serving a valid public
purpose.
2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended the East Naples Civic Association Luncheon on September
19, 2013. The sum of$18 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel
budget.
3) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Will attend the 60th Anniversary Garden Club Luncheon on
November 4, 2013. The sum of$45 to be paid from Commissioner
Fiala's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Will attend the Heart of the Apple Luncheon on November 19, 2013.
The sum of$33 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To provide the Board of County Commissioners the Clerk of the
Circuit Court's Office Audit Report 2013-10 Concerns Parks and
Recreation Department— Immokalee issued on October 2, 2013.
2) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
September 13, 2013 through September 19, 2013 and for submission
into the official records of the Board.
3) To obtain Board approval for disbursements for the period of
September 20, 2013 through September 26, 2013 and for submission
into the official records of the board.
Page 14
October 8, 2013
4) Request that the Board of County Commissioners accepts and
approves capital asset disposition records for the time period October
1, 2012 through June 30, 2013.
5) Request that the Board of County Commissioners order that the tax
roll be extended pursuant to Section 197.323, Florida Statutes.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to approve the mediation settlement in the lawsuit
of Elayne Jackson v. Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, filed in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for
Collier County, Florida, Case No. 12-1316-CA for the sum of$75,000
and authorize the Chairwoman to execute the Settlement Agreement.
2) Recommendation to approve a Final Judgment in the amount of
$6,466.92 settling all claims for the taking of Parcel 199DAME,
including attorney's fees, in the lawsuit styled Collier County v.
Llevatt, Inc., et al, Case No. 2011-CA-3176 for Outfalls 3 & 4/LASIP
(Project No. 51101). (Fiscal Impact $2,836.92)
3) Recommendation to approve a Retention Agreement with the law firm
of Carlton Fields, P.A., for legal services on an "as needed" basis.
4) Recommendation to Establish Initial Terms for the Members to the
Reconstituted Collier County Planning Commission.
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
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
Page 15
October 8, 2013
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. 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 a Resolution of the
Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida granting a Variance
from Section 5.06.04.F.4 of the Land Development Code to increase the
number of signs on the building to allow an additional sign per unit up to a
maximum of 36 total signs for the entire Del Mar Shopping Center located
on the north side of Davis Boulevard in Section 4, Township 50 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [SV-PL20130000818]
B. Recommendation to adopt an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2013-25,
the Collier County Hearing Examiner Ordinance.
C. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
Fiscal Year 2013-14 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 16
October 8, 2013
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Good morning. I'd like to call this
meeting to order.
If you'd all stand for the invocation and the pledge. The
invocation will be led by Reverend Jonathan Evans from the First
Presbyterian Church of Naples.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
REVEREND EVANS: I'll be reading a prayer adapted from
Walter Brueggemann.
Let us pray. Oh, Holy, you ruler of us all, we talk easily and
often of liberty and justice for all. We are very big on liberty: Liberty
to live our lives as we choose; liberty to make and spend our money as
we will; liberty to protect our property, our home; liberty to travel and
voice opinion; liberty to make, to take and seize and ensure and enjoy.
We are not so zealous concerning justice for all, especially when
it contradicts and violates our liberty. We are uneasy about too much
justice for those unlike us, for those who challenge and disagree, for
those who impinge upon our language, our oil, our jobs, our money.
But on this day we give you thanks for law, for honorable and
courageous lawmakers who do not distort justice, who do not show
partiality, who do not accept bribes but who believe in and practice the
rule of law, even against the ideological fervor of the day.
We ask for patience and gracefulness that we may will your
generous justice even when it crowds our liberty. You are the rule
maker, the judge who rules generously toward those in need. Give us
energy in order to order our common life according to your merciful
way, you who rule over us so that none other is able to rule us.
We pray to you, ruler of all the earth. Amen.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: County Attorney, would you lead us
Page 2
October 8, 2013
in the pledge, please.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
Item #1B
PROCEDURAL CHANGE FOR SPEAKERS DURING TODAY'S
MEETING ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1) EACH SPEAKER WILL GIVE
NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD 2) EACH SPEAKER
TO STATE IF THEY ARE FOR OR AGAINST THE ITEM AND
3) THE CHAIRWOMAN WILL DETERMINE THE LENGTH OF
TIME THE SPEAKERS WILL HAVE FOR THE ITEM WITH THE
CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD — APPROVED
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Before we get started, County
Manager, what I'd like to say is that I've provided each of the members
of the board a copy of the amended law on public meetings. And I'd
like to refer the board to Section 4B, which addresses procedures for
allowing representatives or groups of factions on a proposition to
address the board or commission rather than all members of such
groups or factions at meetings in which a large number of individuals
wish to be heard.
And before we get started today, I believe that we will probably
have a lot of speakers on a number of issues, and I would like to ask
the board to consider setting a procedure so that we can effectively
and efficiently hear these people that are part of a larger group.
Mr. Durham told me that the -- Mr. Durham?
MR. DURHAM: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Could you repeat what you told me
this morning as to what the legislature does when a large group of
like-minded individuals want to address their committee or --
MR. DURHAM: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- their body.
Page 3
October 8, 2013
MR. DURHAM: They'll take a survey of the audience to see
who's in favor or against a particular proposition, then they'll divide
the time up evenly, and then say at a time, fixed time, they're going to
vote on the matter.
So it could be -- you could have 30 or 40 speakers maybe on a
particular issue, but they'll say, look, after 30 minutes, we're cutting
off public comment, and we're going to go forward and vote on the
matter.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So what they do -- do they actually
-- like, if you allot 30 minutes, for example, to public discussion or
public comment on a particular point, do you divide it equally, you
said, between those who are for and those who are against? So, like,
15 minutes for, 15 minutes against, and then let the speakers organize
themselves if they want to have one person speaking for 15 minutes
or, you know, 15 people speaking for a minute apiece or, you know,
five people speaking for three minutes, it's their choice?
MR. DURHAM: That's correct, ma'am. The only exception
would be you may have an issue where maybe only one person wishes
to speak.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is the time then ceded to the
opposing side, or do you still limit both sides to 15 and they use as
much as they want?
MR. DURHAM: They assign it to both sides and --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And leave it at that?
MR. DURHAM: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: As a procedure, would the board
find that acceptable?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have a question about that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If both sides don't have anything to
say, if only one side does and maybe there's one person on the other
side, how do you divide up the time then?
Page 4
October 8, 2013
MR. DURHAM: They would -- let's say there's a single person.
They would go by your normal minimal amount, which in our case is
the three minutes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. DURHAM: And then that would expire, and then if there's
20 or 30 people on the other side, they would get whatever the
agreed-upon allotted time is.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The 15 minutes or the balance of
the -- or the total 30?
MR. DURHAM: Just their balance of the portion, yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Madam Chair, I'd also like to
suggest that we make a provision, if we're going to do that, that each
citizen that comes forward be allowed to enter their name into the
record and which side of the issue they are in the eventuality that they
don't individually get to speak, but they are recorded on the record --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I agree with that.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- and their position is clear in the
public record.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yep. I agree with that. That makes
sense. So --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Excuse me. One more minute,
please.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead, Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I think this is great
because it will help us to cut our meetings short.
My question is, one time years ago -- it's not recently. Years ago
there was a big issue in Pelican Bay in the single-family home section,
and the whole community was against this -- these housing -- this
owner extending their house 18 inches.
Well, quite frankly, I couldn't see what was -- it's 18 inches.
Why was everybody against it. And everybody kept coming up to the
Page 5
October 8, 2013
microphone and saying they were against it, but we heard that. And
then one lady -- and I think everybody agreed there's nothing wrong
with 18 inches.
And one lady got up there and she said, but what nobody else has
said is if they can expand it 18 inches, then they get to build a second
story, and that's against our regulations.
Whoa, that was an eye opener. And had we not heard from the
audience, I would have -- I wouldn't have changed my vote, but that's
how it was.
So I just want to make sure that we recognize that there
sometimes are very important messages, not just "I don't want it."
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And the purpose of organizing the
speakers is to be more effective and efficient and to avoid the same
statement being said over and over and over again. We want the
message clearly communicated to the board so that we understand
what the issue is, but we don't have to hear the same message five
times or 10 times.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Agreed.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And that's really the purpose of it.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Madam Chair, I fully agree
with your concern that this is sometimes a very, very inefficient way
that we approach public comments, but I -- I'm a little worried that this
is a more complex issue than we're recognizing at the present time.
It also involves situations where we have a petitioner who takes a
rather long time to present their petition and to argue in support of it,
and then individuals were given three minutes only to make their
argument.
I'm not certain that the rule we're talking about today adequately
covers circumstances such as that. And I would urge, unless there's
reason to believe that there's going to be some really long and
disruptive presentations today, that we take this under advisement and
Page 6
October 8, 2013
spend a little more time evaluating it and have a rule that will apply
across the board for all types of presentations like this. But I fully
agree with the desire to make this a more efficient process.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you so much, Commissioner
Coyle.
I like the points you're making. What I would suggest is maybe a
hybrid approach. I'm not sure that we can have one procedure that fits
every situation. So if we could maybe limit a decision today to strictly
public comment on a regular agenda item that doesn't involve, for
example, a hearing or a petition as you describe, it might help us. I do
think we're going to have a lot of speakers on a number of issues.
And I think that we could, then, turn around and, with respect to
the overall approach, refer this matter to the County Attorney's Office
to bring back recommendations for the various different types of
public speaking opportunities there are to address your point.
Would that be acceptable?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. It would be. And if we
were to just deal with the rule that you've suggested for this meeting
and then develop a more permanent process later --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- I think that would be fine.
I, for one, like the idea of asking groups to have spokespersons
who will present the entire argument for the group, and then everyone
can stand up; we can even record their name and their vote if they
wish. But you're absolutely right, to have everybody say the same
thing 30 times is not productive.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. I like your
recommendation. I think that hopefully the board will see consensus
in adopting that.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, let's go with it today and
see if it fits.
Page 7
October 8, 2013
I want to remind you, we do have rules when the public
addresses the board, and that is state your name for the record and
your address. And I think that's very important for today's hearing --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. That is a very good point.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- since we'll have so many
visitors. But, yeah, if we can conduct the public's business in a more
meaningful way, I'm all for it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think what's being talked about
today in your suggestion, I think we should try it today.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a fast note. I think one thing
we ought to consider doing also is before, or -- we shouldn't make a
motion before we even hear the speakers. I think we should wait until
we hear our speakers and then make a motion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I agree, Commissioner Fiala, I do.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So we have a number of items that
have been brought up. I would like to go ahead and summarize what
the board will now adopt as the rule for purposes of defining the
procedure for allowing these representative groups or factions to
address the board with respect to items coming before us today.
The first is, is that the speaker will announce their name and their
address for the record.
The second is that anyone who does not speak but would like to
enter their name and address for, against, or neutral on a position may
do so, and that would be done on the record where they would stand
up at the dais, state their name, state their address, state their position
for the record, and be seated with no time allocated to speaking.
And that -- thirdly, that when an item comes up, what we will do
is we will -- I as the chair will decide the length of time that we should
Page 8
October 8, 2013
allot with consensus support by the board on whether that time is a
reasonable amount of time. That time will be divided between those
who are for and those who are against, and then the speakers can
organize themselves to either speak individually within that time or to
have one spokesperson speak for the entire allotment of that time for
that particular agenda item.
Is that acceptable to the board?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: With that, I'll make that a motion.
May I have a second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously. Thank
you.
And I'd like to enter a copy of the statute on the record, the
appropriate section.
County Attorney, would you like to proceed? I'm sorry, County
Manager, would you like to proceed with the change sheet?
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S CONSENT AGENDA (EX PARTE
DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR
CONSENT AGENDA) — APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED
W/CHANGES
Page 9
October 8, 2013
MR. OCHS: Yes. Good morning, Madam Chair,
Commissioners. These are your proposed agenda changes for the
Board of County Commissioners' meeting of October 8, 2013.
The first proposed change is to add Item 11E. This is an
amendment to the joint participation agreement between the board and
the Florida Department of Transportation related to the intersection
improvement project at U.S. 41 and County Road 951 . This is a
good-news item where the state has allocated additional dollars, and
we would like to have the board recognize that as part of the project.
The next proposed change is to add Item 12A under County
Attorney regular agenda. This is a resolution related to the State of
Florida Department of Transportation and County Water and Sewer
District to resolve the utility relocation portion of the project that the
state has undertaken to widen US 41 east of 951. We believe we have
a resolution here that we would present, and we'll hear that this
afternoon, Commissioners, because there's still some work being done
by the attorneys on the documents.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I just want to comment that this
was -- this has been an ongoing concern, and I believe that a very
positive resolution has been achieved.
Commissioner Coyle at the last meeting requested that, you
know, that be brought forward to the board so there would be finality,
and this agenda item represents that.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, ma'am.
The next proposed change is to continue Item 16D2 from your
consent agenda to the next meeting, which is October 22. Your
change sheet indicates that's at Commissioner Nance's request.
Actually, that was a staff request.
The next proposed change is to continue Item 16D3 to your
October 22, 2013, BCC meeting. It's a staff request.
The next proposed change is to continue Item 16D7 to the
October 22, 2013, board meeting. That move is made at
Page 10
October 8, 2013
Commissioner Hiller's request.
The next proposed change is to continue Item 16D9 to the
October 22, 2013, BCC meeting. That move is made at staffs request.
The next proposed change is to move Item 16D12 to the regular
agenda to become Item 11F. That is a construction project
recommended to you by your Forest Lakes MSTU, and that item is
moved at Commissioner Henning's request.
The next proposed change is to continue Item 16F2 to the
October 22, 2013, board meeting. That request comes from
Commissioner Fiala.
The next proposed change is to continue 16F3 to your next
meeting of October 22nd. That is a staff request.
The next proposed change is to move Item 17B from your
summary agenda to become Item 9A under advertised public hearings.
That's an ordinance relating to the creation of your hearing examiner,
and that change is requested by Commissioner Fiala.
The next proposed change is -- excuse me. This is a couple of
agenda notes this morning, Commissioners. The first relates to Item
16D11 on your consent agenda. This is an item that establishes
review -- further review procedures and due diligence on applicants
for county grants.
Part of the resolution reads that executive director and board
members are reviewed as a result of these new procedures. And at
Commissioner Hiller's request, and with staff concurrence, certainly,
we want to expand and strike that phrase and rephrase it with the
phrase "its employees, officers, and directors" so that we're more
inclusive in that review.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: If I can ask, I want to make sure that
this also includes conflicts of interest.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: That's part of the review procedure specifically, not
Page 11
October 8, 2013
only real, but perceived or potential.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: The next proposed change is Item 16F5. There's a
slight revision in the staff recommendation that came to us from
Commissioner Henning, and staff is certainly supportive. The original
recommendation -- these were for TDC grant awards to not-for-profit
museums and not-for-profit agencies to promote their events.
Part of the recommendation called for a waiver of the receipt of
the final report from each of these agencies. That waiver request is
being removed, again, at Commissioner Henning's request and
supported by the staff. Otherwise, the item is fine.
Then we have a couple of time-certain items today,
Commissioners. The first is Item 11D having to do with discussion on
the beach renourishment truck haul project. That item is scheduled to
be heard at 10:30 a.m.
Item 11E will be heard immediately before Item 11A. And that
is, again, the agreement with FDOT for additional funds. That will be
heard first, and then right behind that will be the presentation by staff
on the actual award of that construction contract for that intersection
improvement.
And Item 12A is scheduled to be heard, as I mentioned, in the
afternoon after we hear your advertised public hearings. So this will
be heard after 9A to allow time for the staff and the County Attorney's
Office and the Clerk's Office to finalize those documents.
Those are all the changes I have, Madam Chair.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. As to the timing, at
10:20, we will take a 10-minute break for the benefit of the court
reporter.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We will break at noon, and we will
-- for lunch, and we will reconvene at one. And at one, we will hear
the Naples Equestrian Challenge petition.
Page 12
October 8, 2013
Members of the board, do you have any additional changes?
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair? Excuse me.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
MR. OCHS: County Attorney, any?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Would you like to move anything to
the general agenda?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Ms. Kinzel?
MS. KINZEL: Thank you, Commissioner. The Clerk's Office
had requested that 16E6 be continued to run in conjunction with the
purchasing policy that was continued, I believe, to the next meeting.
We were rather late in getting that to the County Manager. I do
understand he has, perhaps, an objection to that, but we would request
that that be continued so we can hold one discussion regarding the
purchasing process.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And those contracts were continued
from the last board meeting with the understanding that they would
not be brought forward till the purchasing ordinance was presented
and that they would be addressed in conjunction with that. Is there a
reason that it's being put on this agenda at this time?
MR. OCHS: Well -- yes, ma'am. We continued it last time for
that reason, but you already have this provision in your existing
purchasing policy. We were just bringing these forward. We're in a
new fiscal year. We would like to get several of our commodity
acquisitions under these cooperative purchases so we could be more
efficient in our purchasing procedures here internally.
So I -- what I'm saying to you is I don't see how this conflicts at
all with the discussions we've been having about subsequent revisions
to our purchasing ordinance, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Ms. Kinzel, what is your concerns
with these contracts?
MS. KINZEL: One of the primary clauses in the executive
Page 13
October 8, 2013
summary indicates that these contracts could be used and purchased
against up to the budget limits of the department without any further
board action. And as we've held the discussions on the purchasing
policy regarding public purpose and board approval of certain
purchases, we're concerned that perhaps that issue of "up and to our
authorized budget" -- we would not want that to be inconsistent with
what we end up with on the purchasing policy.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Leo, if we wait to do this, will
that cost us any dollars?
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am. We may lose some opportunity for
reduced pricing due to volume purchases that are part of these larger
term contracts and cooperative agreements, but we're not going to lose
any money, no.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So if we lose the opportunity to buy
it at a cheaper price, it sounds like we're losing more money.
MR. OCHS: Well, we would just hold off, you know, till we
come to a point where we could bring this back again.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, the intent is to have that
purchasing ordinance come back at the next board meeting. So I don't
think we're looking to delay it beyond two weeks. So I think that that
should readily be resolved by then. So I'm going to recommend that
we add --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Leo, you're shaking your head.
Why? Tell me.
MR. OCHS: No. I --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Is this going to preclude us
changing something when we discuss the issue? I don't see any harm
in letting them proceed under normal purchasing between --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It is a problem.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Why?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Because permitting it up to the
Page 14
October 8, 2013
budget limit without board approval is not the same as where the
board approves the amount that will be expended pursuant to clearly
defined limits within a contract.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, that's not going to occur in
the next two weeks.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It could very easily. If you approve
these contracts, it could.
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am. Let me explain, Commissioner. These
are competitive -- nationally competitively procured commodities.
The reason we enter into these agreements is so we can get the very
lowest price as a result of this national competition. So these are
commodity purchases based on low competitive bids, and it's just a
more efficient way for the staff to purchase these kinds of goods and
services.
As I said, you have this provision in your current policy. It
allows the purchase of goods and services from these term contracts,
so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The issue, though, Leo, is --
MR. OCHS: The issue is --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- different.
MR. OCHS: -- whether in the future we're going to be required
to report every single purchase to the board in some formal way, and
that's the discussion that we've been having, and a good discussion, I
should add, with the clerk and his staff.
So, again, I don't want any impression left out there that these are
blank checks that we're getting ready to enter into. These are fiercely
competitive contracts that have the lowest pricing that we can find.
So I think this is actually, you know, the best that we can do for
our taxpayers with regard to these purchases.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The issue is not the contract. The
issue is whether or not the quantity you can purchase without board
approval goes to the limit of the budget, and that is what the
Page 15
October 8, 2013
purchasing ordinance will be addressing and will basically serve to
change what is the existing policy.
And because we are in the process of bringing forward the
purchasing ordinance, it makes sense to address these contracts in
conjunction with that or, alternatively, we can somehow limit right
now by some sort of agreement how much you can purchase without
board approval, which is the whole issue of the debate in the
purchasing ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, may I? You're saying --
you're not saying the same thing. Actually, the County Manager is
saying what you're recommending now, and that will be a part of the
purchasing policy, whatever that is.
So all these are contracts, and what will apply to these contracts
will be that future purchasing policy.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But until the time that the
purchasing ordinance is adopted --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- you have exposure of the county
staff making purchases up to that budgetary amount without board
approval.
Crystal, can you elaborate on that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I was under the
understanding the purchasing policy was supposed to be in here last
month.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It was. The County Manager asked
for an extension, and the County Attorney's Office and the Clerk of
Courts agreed to give the County Manager more time. Then it was
going to be brought forward at the last board meeting, but the County
Manager then asked for an additional extension, which was agreed to
by the other parties. But at this point in time, I'm going to ask that it
be brought forward at the next board meeting.
Crystal?
Page 16
October 8, 2013
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner, just to clarify, if the compromise
that you're suggesting is under the current limits of the existing
purchasing policy for the next two weeks, that would limit it to,
perhaps, the 50,000 that's currently in your purchasing policy. But up
into and including the limits of their budgeted line item is our concern.
And as always, we would just want to put that on the record so
that the county staff is aware that if that becomes a problem or a
question or concern, we may have to bring those issues back to this
board anyway prior to payment for clarification, because we do
require the board's approval.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I think that was from before.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. What's the pleasure of the
board? Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm just afraid that if we get into a
protracted discussion about the purchasing policy, that we're operating
without the benefit of these contracts, I think the risk that we spend
excessive money by not having these advantageous contracts exceeds
the risk that we've got.
I mean, we've had the current purchasing policy for a while, and I
thoroughly support having it under review, but I don't see any grand
risk in going ahead and letting them establish some of these contracts
in the interim.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, again, you can allow for the
contracts to be established but with a cap on the purchases --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah, that's fine.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- as the Clerk's Office has
recommended. And in order not to have problems with the Clerk
down the road, I think it would be prudent of us to accept these
contracts with the caveat presented by Ms. Kinzel.
I'm going to make that as a motion.
MR. OCHS: Is that a new policy limit now?
Page 17
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: For purposes of these contracts, up
until the purchasing ordinance is established.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, perhaps we can move this to the
regular agenda and have a more deliberate discussion about it later in
the day.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let's do that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's do that.
And, Ms. Kinzel, could you have the Clerk come down and
address the board on this, if he'd be willing to.
MS. KINZEL: I'll see if he's available.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that item would become Item 11G.
I'm sorry, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's all right, go ahead.
MR. OCHS: That would become Item 11G on your agenda
today.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And, Commissioner Coyle, I did
that just for you because I know you miss the Clerk.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I know you haven't seen him in a
long time, so I thought the two of you need to bond. That will be
11 G?
MR. OCHS: Yes, Madam Chair.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Just make a note of that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What was it before, Leo?
MR. OCHS: It was 16E6.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. I would like to pull one item
off consent, 16F1, place that on the general agenda, the discussion
with respect to the lobbyist.
MR. OCHS: Item 11H.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Are there any further changes
requested by the board with respect to the current agenda?
Page 18
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no ex parte
communication on today's consent agenda, and I'll move to approve as
amended.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance, any ex parte?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No ex parte --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: On consent.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- on today's consent agenda.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No ex parte disclosure for the
consent agenda or the regular agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No ex parte on consent.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a motion. Commissioner
Nance, will you second Commissioner Henning's motion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a motion and a second to
approve the consent agenda as amended.
There being no discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Item 2B is approval of today's --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, by the way, I have no
disclosures on ex parte for consent. Go ahead.
Item #2B
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED
(EX PARTE DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION
Page 19
October 8, 2013
MEMBERS FOR SUMMARY AGENDA) — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: 2B is approval of today's summary agenda as
amended.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, I have no ex
parte communication on today's summary agenda, and I make a
motion to approve.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I will second the motion. I have
read the staff report on Summary Agenda Item 17A.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have read the staff report of
September the 5th, 2013, and that is the extent of my ex parte
disclosure.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have no disclosures.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I also have no disclosures. We
have a motion and a second to accept the summary agenda as
amended.
All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #2C
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S REGULAR AGENDA AS AMENDED
— APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES
Page 20
October 8, 2013
MR. OCHS: Item 2C is approval of today's regular agenda as
amended.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any disclosures? Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll give them on the --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: On the agenda item.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- regular agenda. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I have read the staff report,
had letters and emails on Regular Agenda Item 8A, and as well as
meetings.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Did you want ex parte disclosure
for this --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, for 8A.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- now rather than at the time we
discuss the item?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: County Attorney, what's your
preference on that? I mean, we've gone both ways. I'd like to be
consistent.
MR. KLATZKOW: I think the better practice would be to
disclose during the items heard.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: During the presentation?
MR. KLATZKOW: Because your problem is that between now
and then you might have --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Might have additional
communications.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think that's a very good
recommendation.
Page 21
October 8, 2013
So if you have any other, besides 8A, you know, if you'd like to
disclose those. Do you have anything else?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No other disclosures of ex parte.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: None.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I also have no disclosures.
We have a motion and a second to approve the regular agenda as
amended. There being no discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Page 22
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
October 8,2013
Add On Item 11E: Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairwoman to sign a First Amendment
to Joint Participation Agreement between the Florida Department of Transportation and Collier County to
receive reimbursement for Construction services on the FDOT resurfacing project on SR951 from Fiddler's
Creek Parkway to South of SR90,along with the County's US-41 and SR/CR-951 intersection project; to
execute a Resolution memorializing the Board's action; and,to authorize the necessary budget amendment;
Project 60116. (Staff's request)
Add On Item 12A: Recommendation that the Board adopt a Resolution approving Amendment No.2 to
the Utility Work by Highway Contractor Agreement(UWHCA)between the State of Florida Department of
Transportation(FDOT)and the Collier County Water-Sewer District(UAO)as amended by Appendix,
Changes to Form Document,Amendment Number 1 dated April 23,2013. (County Attorney's request)
Continue Item 16D2 to the October 22,2013 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve amendment
No. 1 to the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)Agreement between Collier County and
Goodwill Industries of SW Florida,Inc. (Commissioner Nance's request)
Continue Item 16D3 to the October 22,2013 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve amendment#1 to
the FY2012-2013 agreement between Collier County and Naples Equestrian Challenge for the Community
Development Block Grant(CDBG)project previously approved by the Board May 14,2013. (Fiscal Impact
$0). (Staff's request)
Continue Item 16D7 to the October 22,2013 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve substantial
amendments to the FY2009-2010 and FY2010-2011 Annual Action Plans to clarify the project scope and
project funding for Goodwill Industries Microenterprise Project and Immokalee Housing&Family Services
Sanders Pines Playground Upgrades.This action also reduces the funding allocation for Goodwill Industries
Microenterprise Program from$32,949 to$32,640.10 utilizing U.S.Department of Housing and Urban
Development(HUD)Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)funds. (Commissioner Hiller's request)
Continue Item 16D9 to the October 22,2013 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve a Home Investment
Partnerships(HOME)Program Developer Agreement between Collier County and Big Cypress Housing
Corporation(BCHC)for construction of a Multi-Family Rental Housing Project consisting of a minimum of
Ten Single Family Rental Housing Units (Fiscal Impact$1,144,000). (Staff's request)
Move Item 16D12 to Item 11F: Recommendation to award Bid(ITB)#13-6136 for"Forest Lakes MSTU
Phase II& III Sidewalk,Lighting,Landscape and Turn Lane Improvements"Project to Quality Enterprises
Inc.,in the amount of$948,353.43. (Commissioner Henning's request)
Continue Item 16F2 to the October 22,2013 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to adopt criteria defining and
classifying activities using tourist tax revenue that "promotes tourism." (Commissioner Fiala's request)
Continue Item 16F3 to the October 22,2013 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve an amendment to
the Tourism Travel Expense Resolution 2006-40 related to County Purchasing Card limits consistent with the
County Purchasing Policy and make a finding that this item promotes tourism. (Staffs request)
Move Item 17B to Item 9A: Recommendation to adopt an ordinance amending Ordinance No.2013-25,the
Collier County Hearing Examiner Ordinance. (Commissioner Fiala's request)
Note:
Item 16D11: The phrase in the resolution that reads: "its executive director and board members" be
replaced with the phrase"it's employees,officers,and directors"throughout the resolution. (Commissioner
Hiller's request)
Item 16F5 Recommendation portion of Executive Summary should read: Recommend to approve and
authorize the Chairwoman to execute FY 14 Tourism Agreements for Category B Grant Agreements totaling
$50,000 and Category C-2 Grant Agreements totaling$40,000,waive the multiple year funding level and
feeeipt-of-the-Cart guidelines in the FY 14 Category B and C-2 grant application due to the past
performance of the events and importance to the community and make a finding that these expenditures
promote tourism. (Commissioner Henning's request)
Time Certain Items
Item 11D to be heard at 10:30 a.m.
Item 11E to be heard before Item 11A
Item 12A to be heard after Item 9A
October 8, 2013
Item #2D
MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 5, 2013 BCC/BUDGET MEETING
— APPROVED AS PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Item 2D is approval of the meeting minutes from
your September 5, 2013, budget hearing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no discussion, all in
favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #2E
MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 BCC/REGULAR
MEETING — APPROVED AS PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Item 2E is approval of the meeting minutes from
the regular meeting of September 10, 2013.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have a motion and a second. Any
discussion?
Page 23
October 8, 2013
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no discussion, all in
favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS — ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL
PROCLAMATIONS
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING OCTOBER, 2013 DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH. ACCEPTED BY LINDA
OBERHAUS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SHELTER FOR ABUSED
WOMEN AND CHILDREN AND SHERIFF KEVIN RAMBOSK,
COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: That takes us to Item 4 on your agenda this
morning, Commissioners, proclamation. Item 4A is a proclamation
designating October 2013 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
To be accepted by Linda Oberhaus, executive director of the Shelter
for Abused Women and Children; Sheriff Kevin Rambosk, Collier
County Sheriffs Office; and Steve Russell, state attorney.
And this item is sponsored by the entire Board of County
Commissioners. If you'd please step forward and receive your
proclamation.
Page 24
October 8, 2013
(Applause.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Linda, would you like to say a few
words?
MS. OBERHAUS: Good morning, Commissioners. Again, I'm
Linda Oberhaus, the executive director at the shelter. And I just want
to thank each of you for acknowledging October as National Domestic
Violence Awareness Month.
I'd also like to thank several commissioners who showed up for
the shelter's 25th anniversary ceremony this past week; Commissioner
Fiala, Commissioner Hiller, and Commissioner Nance, we really
appreciated your attendance.
Also, I, you know, just want to thank our local State Attorney's
Office for all the work they do on behalf of helping to keep victims
safe and perpetrators accountable for their crimes as well as the law
enforcement agencies, which would include the Collier County
Sheriffs Office, and also the Naples Police Department and Marco
Island Police Department.
As you know, October is National Domestic Violence Awareness
Month. The shelter will be supporting activities throughout the month
of October, and I would just encourage the community to visit the
shelter's website at naplesshelter.org for a listing of those activities.
Thank you again.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Linda, thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I just want to make a quick
comment. Number one, we will not tolerate domestic violence in
Collier County at all, zero tolerance; secondly, our goal is to make
every home in Collier County safe; and, thirdly, thank you so much
for all you're doing. Thank you very much to the State Attorney's
Office, and thank you very much to law enforcement for everything
you're doing to protect victims.
MS. OBERHAUS: Thank you.
Page 25
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING OCTOBER, 2013 AS LONG
TERM CARE RESIDENTS' RIGHTS MONTH IN COLLIER
COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY BARBARA POHL, DISTRICT
OMBUDSMAN MANAGER; RO JONES, OMBUDSMEN; AND
RUTH OGIESTE, OMBUDSMEN, FLORIDA OMBUDSMAN
PROGRAM — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4B is a proclamation designating October
2013 as Long-Term Care Residents' Rights Month in Collier County.
To be accepted by Barbara Pohl, district ombudsmen manager; Ro
Jones, Ombudsman; and Ruth Ogieste, Ombudsman, for the Florida
Ombudsman Program.
This item is sponsored by the Board of County Commissioners.
If you'd please step forward.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Would you like to speak? Yeah, go
ahead.
MS. OGIESTE: On behalf of Florida's Long-Term Care
Ombudsman Program, we would like to thank the commissioners for
this proclamation of Residents' Rights Month.
As volunteers, we are honored to accept this proclamation in
support of all the residents that live in long-term care facilities
throughout Florida. The ombudsman program's mission is to
passionately improve the quality of life for all long-term care residents
by providing services that protect the health, safety, welfare and
residents -- and rights of residents.
With this proclamation, we champion and empower long-term
care residents and ensure that they are informed of their rights as
Page 26
October 8, 2013
residents of long-term care facilities.
Additionally, we should encourage long-term care residents,
facility staff, family members, and others to prevent and speak out
against all types of abuse that may occur in long-term care facilities.
Together, as a community, let us make certain that residents of
long-term care facilities continue to live happily and healthy in a
dignified way, not just for this month of October, but for every day of
the year.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Very well said. Thank you. And
just like with domestic violence, care -- abuse against the elderly and
negligent long-term care will not be tolerated. Thank you.
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING KEEP COLLIER BEAUTIFUL
FOR VOLUNTEER EFFORTS DURING THE INTERNATIONAL
COASTAL CLEAN UP ON SEPTEMBER 21, 2013. ACCEPTED
BY JIM ZIMMERMAN, VOLUNTEER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
KEEP COLLIER BEAUTIFUL AND KEEP COLLIER BEAUTIFUL
BOARD MEMBERS — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: 4C is a proclamation recognizing Keep Collier
Beautiful for its volunteer efforts during the International Coastal
Cleanup on September 21, 2013. To be accepted by Jim Zimmerman,
volunteer executive director, Keep Collier Beautiful, and Keep Collier
Beautiful board members.
And this item is sponsored by the Board of County
Commissioners. Please step forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Would you like to speak?
Page 27
October 8, 2013
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Sure. I'll say just a couple of words.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. Thank you.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Thank you, Commissioners, for
recognizing Keep Collier Beautiful. And we're still at it. We've got --
going to have a cleanup -- shortly after we get our proclamation and
leave, we're going to clean up the parking lot, and you're all invited to
come.
But what I'd like to say is that so far on September 21st we had
reported 14 of 18 sites, and of those 14 of 18 sites, we've had 1,564
volunteers, and of these volunteers, 562 were children, and the rest
were adults. We collected one -- 17,460 pounds of trash. And that's a
little disappointing. I would rather collect about a thousand or a
hundred pounds, because there wouldn't be any but, unfortunately, that
17,000 came in 881 bags of trash.
And we have, this coming October 12th, an adopt a ceremony --
adopt-a-shore ceremony at the Clam Pass, and I want to invite
council's lady, Georgia Hiller.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: It will be at 8 o'clock, Clam Pass. It's
going to be adopted by Hilton Hotels, Hilton of Naples, and Shula's
Steak House. The ceremony lasts about 15 minutes, but they're also
going to clean up, make their first cleanup of that shoreline.
And I just so happened to do some checking, that on October
26th Lorenzo Walker Technology High School is going to be cleaning
their canal. And believe it or not, it happens to be in Commissioner
Henning's area, Pine Ridge and Collier Boulevard right there at the
corner.
We'll start probably about 7:30, because they like to get done --
7:30 in the morning. They like to get done and go out and watch
football. So if you're available, stop down. Guarantee you'll have a
doughnut, maybe even the ability to -- so you're invited to come and
join us.
Page 28
October 8, 2013
And thank you very much. We really appreciate the recognition.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And thank you for all you do. I
actually participated in the cleanup at the Naples beach. And I was
down there several weeks ago. And it's really -- it's -- it was -- to your
point about garbage, there was so little there, I mean, I was actually
scouring to try to find something to put in my bag. So that was an
example of a very successful project from my standpoint, because it
yielded so little.
And they do provide plastic gloves, which is -- and mine were
purple. So it actually was kind of fun to be out there, you know,
digging in the sand for trash.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: Thank you, and we will give you a T shirt,
Mr. Henning.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. The T shirts are very cute.
And I'll fringe it for you. Just like I did for United Way, I'll cut it up
for you and make you look hot. I'm just saying. I'll give it style. You
didn't see what I did to my Tshirt?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I really don't care.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Where is your fashion sense,
Commissioner Henning? I mean, seriously. He needs to get in the
groove.
MR. ZIMMERMAN: We've got to go clean up.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. Thank you so much. We
appreciate it. Take care. Bye-bye.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, may I have a motion to approve
today's proclamations?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: May I have a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So moved.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have a motion and a second.
There being no discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 29
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF
THE MONTH FOR OCTOBER 2013 TO NAPLES ART
ASSOCIATION. ACCEPTED BY AIMEE SCHLEHR, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, NAPLES ART ASSOCIATION AND STACEY
BULLOCH, BOARD PRESIDENT, NAPLES ART ASSOCIATION
— PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: That takes us to Item 5 on your agenda
presentations. Item 5A is a presentation of the Collier County
Business of the Month for October 2013 to Naples Art Association.
To be accepted by Aimee Schlehr, executive director, Naples Art
Association; and Stacey Bulloch, board president of the Naples Art
Association.
Please come forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Congratulations.
Would you like to say a few words?
MS. SCHLEHR: Good morning. My name is Aimee Schlehr.
I'm the executive director of the Naples Art Association.
I would like to thank the Naples Chamber as well as the Board of
County Commissioners for recognizing us as the October Business of
the Month.
This is a great honor for us and a great way for us to start our
60th anniversary celebration, so we do appreciate it. We hope that all
Page 30
October 8, 2013
of you will come out to the Naples Art Association.
We are a long-standing visual arts community center here in
downtown Naples, and we're going to use this next year to really
strive to help people understand why art is so important to our
community and why we should support art in our education.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you so much, and thank you
for your contribution.
(Applause.)
Item #5B
RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE AMY KUPERMAN,
LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE SPECIALIST,
NATURAL RESOURCES, AS EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR
SEPTEMBER, 2013 — PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Item 5B is a recommendation to recognize Amy
Kuperman, laboratory quality assurance specialist, in our natural
resources department as Employee of the Month for September 2013.
Amy, if you'd please step forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We're loading you up. Number one,
number two, and number three. Congratulations. And thank you for
your contribution to the county.
MS. KUPERMAN: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, congratulations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations. Good job.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Thank you for your service.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, let me tell you a little bit about
Amy, if I may. Amy, turn around and face the camera and the
worldwide audience.
Page 31
October 8, 2013
Commissioners, Amy's been with our county agency for more
than three years working at our natural resources department and our
Growth Management Division.
Among her normal responsibilities include maintaining the
quality assurance and quality control procedures to ensure the
integrity of the samples and the test results in our laboratory; very
important work.
Amy was instrumental in the 2012 and 2013 Government Day for
Youth Leadership Collier conducting laboratory tours. And she's
developed the agenda, hosted the tours which were so well received
that the program was suggested to be expanded in future events.
Amy's vast knowledge of the quality assurance field has helped
the lab significantly improve on data quality and document control.
She is held in high esteem, as you can tell, by her colleagues and
maintains a great working relationship with the laboratory staff
She is a true asset to the county, a valuable resource to our
community, and it's my honor to present Amy Kuperman, your
Employee of the Month for September 2012 (sic).
Congratulations, Amy.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Would you like to say a few words?
MS. KUPERMAN: No, just "Thanks, team."
MR. OCHS: Thanks, Amy. Congratulations. Well done.
Item #5C
PRESENTATION OF THE DISTINGUISHED BUDGET
PRESENTATION AWARD FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013 FROM THE
GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (GFOA)
PRESENTED TO THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET. ACCEPTED BY MARK ISACKSON, DIRECTOR,
CORPORATE FINANCIAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
SERVICES — PRESENTED
Page 32
October 8, 2013
Item 5C is a presentation of the Distinguished Budget
Presentation Award for Fiscal Year 2013 from the Government
Finance Officers Association presented to the office of management
and budget. This award to be accepted by Mark Isackson, director of
corporate financial planning and management services, and his
wonderful staff.
Madam Chair, if you could do the honors, please.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Fearless team. Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great job.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Backbone of the organization I'm
shaking hands with now.
MR. OCHS: Picture time, picture time. Fantastic.
(Applause.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Mark, would you like to say a few
words?
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, thank you. It's always nice
to be recognized by the Governmental Finance Officers Association
but, more importantly, this gives me an opportunity to introduce the
five (sic) professionals that work in the office, both veterans of the
county and veterans of the financial world: Ed Finn, Susan Usher,
Therese Stanley, and Sherry Kimball.
My voice hasn't recovered from reading those tax levies at the
last public hearing.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You know, you did that so well. I
was so -- it was so entertaining and uplifting and interesting. I mean,
really, you just outdid yourself this year.
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, just a couple notes of thanks.
First to the board for their confidence in our office in what we do.
That means more than you might think; to the County Manager for
allowing us to function as we do; to the division partners that we have;
and to our constitutional partners that we work with on a regular basis
Page 33
October 8, 2013
and specifically the Clerk's Finance Division, because there is a daily
interaction that goes on between what Crystal in her shop does and
what we do in our shop.
So, once again, thank you for the award, and hopefully I'm not
the guy who doesn't get the award next year. We've had it a few
years, believe me.
(Applause.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much.
Item #5D
PRESENTATION BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE BUREAU OF
EMERGENCY SERVICES AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
IN RESPONSE TO BOARD APPROVED ACTION FROM THE
SEPTEMBER 24, 2013 COUNTY COMMISSION MEETING
REGARDING OIL EXPLORATION IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES
— PRESENTED WITH DIRECTION TO BRING FORTH
PROPOSALS BY VETTING THEM THROUGH THE CCPC ON
LAND USE ISSUES AND BRING BACK TO THE BCC AT THEIR
DECEMBER MEETING — CONSENSUS
MR. OCHS: Item 5D is a presentation by the director of the
Bureau of Emergency Services and Emergency Management in
response to board-approved action from the September 24, 2013,
County Commission meeting regarding oil exploration in Golden Gate
Estates.
Mr. Summers?
MR. SUMMERS: Commissioners, good morning. For the
record, Dan Summers, Director of the Bureau of Emergency Services
and Emergency Management.
You asked me at the last board meeting to take a look at some of
the concerns related to emergency response activity and our
Page 34
October 8, 2013
capabilities. So let me go over that with you briefly.
I will go over the board's request, give you a brief assessment of
emergency management's opinion on this, give you a partial and
preliminary summary of what we're categorizing or the term we're
using as areas of concern, staff actions to date, and certainly be
available to summarize and offer some questions.
On September the 10th, Commissioners, you asked staff-- this is
the direction that was in the executive summary from Commissioner
Nance. Quite a good outline there, I think, of elements, and we've tried
to capture as many of those as possible.
As I mentioned in the discussion, not only raised by the board but
from the citizens that were here, what I elected to do at this particular
level of review is categorize these items as areas of concern. And,
again, I sort of lumped maybe some of those things together that --
how we would evaluate in the emergency management world. Some
of the areas had overlapping discussions, and I attempted to capture
that.
I think it's important, Commissioners, to understand that from the
emergency response perspective, the response coordination with our
agencies is a good one. There's an excellent working relationship
certainly in the field between the Bureau of Emergency Services, our
independent and dependent fire districts, law enforcement, and others.
So you have a well-polished EOC, you have a well-polished
EOC team and, as a result, we communicate, coordinate, and
cooperate very well when the alarm sounds.
I think it's important for you to know that on major activities, we
train, we respond, we critique, we practice locally and regionally. So
in the event of a response issue, we will handle, to the best of our
ability, jointly, whatever we are faced with, and that is always the case
here in Collier County.
I think it's important to make sure that you are aware of what is --
emergency managers look at history, and had some good phone
Page 35
October 8, 2013
conversations in this review process with both Big Corkscrew and
Golden Gate, Ochopee Fire, one of our dependent districts that has a
fair number of sites, albeit most of those on federal lands. They have
not experienced any calls for service to date, and I think it's important
and fair to report that. There's not been a fire or hazardous materials
event based on my interviews with those chiefs.
Calls for EMS service out there have been rare, related to either
minor injury or fall. And, frankly, the fire chiefs remind me that they
do have their standard protocol for approaching and responding to
these situations.
And, again, they've had no challenging issues to date and nothing
relevant in terms of call for service. I think that's important that you
be aware of that.
How does emergency management assess? I think that's kind of
important for you to know what's in our DNA in this particular review.
I look conceptually at the preparedness, I look at the response, I look
at the mitigation and -- or sometimes referred to as prevention, and
look at the recovery, and those are some of the key areas under
preparedness, response mitigation, and recovery that I look at in terms
of off-site or on-site emergency planning.
The mechanism of my assessment was this: Basically a collective
roster of those comments. As I mentioned earlier, I called that the area
of concern. Staff actions or recommendations. How does that fit into
our emergency plan? Any particular resource need or shortfall as that
concern is addressed. And a priority, in other words, do I think,
administratively, is this a high, medium, or low priority that needs to
be addressed?
More importantly, emergency managers -- I think what you
wanted me to do was to evaluate risk. And in some cases, I've done
that by a probability value. What's the probability of a particular
event happening? And in this case, I call it -- it is a subjective
analysis of the likelihood.
Page 36
October 8, 2013
And, finally, a hazard value. If something happened, what might
be the magnitude of that particular concern?
So, again, subjective, but, you know, what has been the
probability, and in many cases the probability is low. But if the action
of that probability generates something off site, off of the oil field
grounds and has health, safety, and welfare concerns then, obviously, I
would escalate that hazard value.
I think the important -- one of the important points that I want to
emphasize to you-all is that emergency management is not a
regulatory body in this particular environment. I do not have enabling
ordinances that require or allow me to intervene or to set forth
stipulations. I do not have that environment within emergency
management.
If there were certain quantities of highly volatile hazardous
materials, then the state and federal hazardous materials Oil Pollution
Act and those types of things, extremely hazardous materials EPA
guidance would kick in. That is not the case in this particular site.
I do have a framework for traditional all-hazards emergency
planning, and that's outlined in Florida Statutes. So the hurricane, the
tornado, wildfire, the particular -- the normal threat, if you will, that
emergency managers look at, that's well within my plan and within the
county ordinance as it relates to developing an emergency
management plan.
Exploratory well. Oil wells in a residential environment are not a
particular part of my all-hazard planning, so I do not have a
subchapter in our comprehensive emergency management plan, but I
do have a framework for responding to whatever might be presented.
If the board directed staff to develop such an ordinance, I would
make sure that it's done in concert. And I use a lot of acronyms here
such as authority having jurisdiction.
The independent fire districts in this case, Big Corkscrew,
Golden Gate, those folks are the authority having jurisdiction there, so
Page 37
October 8, 2013
I want to make sure that I am -- anything that comes forward is done
in concert with those authorities having jurisdiction and Growth
Management Division, obviously, having implications in that land-use
activity as well.
I think one of the things that I -- and I did this a lot in North
Carolina, was to make sure that my board has and you-all have
visibility on cost recovery. While I think the magnitude of anything
out there is very low, one of the assurances that you might want to
revisit is cost recovery should something take place. And I want to
talk more about that in just a minute.
And, again, if you so desired us to look further beyond the DEP
regulations, I'll be happy to work cooperatively with the other
agencies to evaluate that.
As I said, EM does not -- did not locate any permit stipulations
within the DEP activity, and I think, Commissioner Nance, you asked
us to sort of look at that. And as I reviewed the permitting activity,
while DEP does put conditions on that particular permit, I don't see a
lot of stipulations in there for local government interface or the
authority having jurisdiction, such as fire, EMS, and EM.
So, again, I put that out there that there might be some options for
you to consider in future legislative, whether it's at the state level or
something at the local level, that you may desire to ensure some
stipulations are in place there for a continuous review.
In conversations with the chiefs out there, most of the efforts for
fire service concerns are with the driller or the applicant. I have to --
they've been forthcoming, but they're voluntary. And, you know,
therefore, you know, is there any particular mandate for emergency
planning or other stipulations or conditions? They have a cooperative
relationship with the fire service out there. But, again, I would
classify those as voluntary.
So where am I with the emergency plans? One of the concerns
that I mentioned here is wildfire mitigation. That was brought up by
Page 38
October 8, 2013
the citizens. And while I think there would be good compliance out
there voluntarily by the driller, I'm kind of surprised that forestry was
not engaged in that early on. But I do think that they would work
towards mitigation.
There was some inaccurate emergency information/contact
information in the online documents. There was no coordination with
us as it relates to evacuation destination planning. It's one thing to
evacuate someone from the site. It's another thing to get them
temporarily relocated for even a short period of time. So we would
like to be engaged with them on evacuation destination planning.
And, again, this is a specialized field for hazardous materials or
emergency response. And while the driller and applicant has
voluntarily assisted, we would certainly like to see some of-- we
would encourage some more structure there.
The door-to-door contact information that was in the plan, I
think, was weak. And if that's an area that we can help everybody
with, that's certainly an option. There was mention in the emergency
plan of persons with special needs. That certainly needs to be vetted
with my office. We have a full-time special-needs coordinator.
And no clarity on outdoor warning siren systems. There is --
there are warning systems within the drill pad site. And while I think
the probability of anything going off site is very low, I think in this
particular environment good common sense would say let's have an
alert notification system just in case.
And we've not spoken with the applicant about that, but that's
probably not very expensive. It's something we do in many locations
here in the county with perimeter alarm monitoring for any
off-gassing.
And I think the other thing is to have some documented and
reoccurring public education and public awareness. If you have an
alert notification system, you need to remind folks what they need to
do.
Page 39
October 8, 2013
Areas of concern, Growth Management mentioned this in their
report a little bit on fuel containment and, certainly, endorse their
discussion on reviewing any runoff capacity issues.
The bond, there is a bond referenced in the DEP document,
probably a bond between the driller and DEP, but I don't know the
details of that bond and what it particularly covers. Might be
something to look at in the future.
Again, my review, some conversations with the off-site agencies,
the DEP. One thing that is kind of handy to know, our debris-removal
contractor, Witt O'Brien, their other field of specialty is petrochemical
emergency response. So while our current scope of work doesn't
include that, it's nice to know that we do have a contractor if we
needed some technical expertise.
So to summarize, just a couple of options for the board. Again, if
you wanted to look at some type of enabling ordinance for emergency
management, it might cover these areas -- pardon me -- such as
emergency and evacuation coordination, training, security, alert
notification, and ensuring that the authorities that are having
jurisdiction in this case, with special emphasis on the local fire
departments, that their needs are met.
A second option might be to review the statutory changes for
DEP in the future for a little more closer local government interface.
And, finally, mandate or -- mandate or seek voluntary participation in
an interlocal agreement with the driller. That may be one way --
another way to address some of these off-site concerns. But, again,
how that relates to stipulations or requirements, that would be
something that would require further legal review.
I anticipated that you probably wanted to ask me at the end of
this what are my major concerns. Let me wrap those up. I would say,
first of all, again, off-site, off-gas alert notification is important to me.
I can take care of the folks if I have adequate time in any alarm
scenario. And, again, the alarm scenarios are -- at least historically,
Page 40
October 8, 2013
are a very low probability. But, again, I think having alert notification
is critical.
Industry or regulation assistance towards supporting stipulations
for a specialized response. Again, making sure that we are -- we have
sessions that allow us to sit down, discuss, and to formalize plans and
procedures with the applicant, with the responsible party so that we've
got good, clear visibility in EMS, EM, fire, law enforcement, and
mutual aid, that we've got good visibility on what the response
protocol should be.
Risk assessment, as you go from exploration to a formal drilling
operation, risk assessment is a continuous process. You just don't sit
down -- you just don't do it one time and put it on the shelf. I think it's
important that you maintain that dialogue frequently.
Other issues that were mentioned -- pardon me -- such as sound,
odor, nighttime lighting, noise, road utilization, et cetera, may or may
not be part of any emergency review but certainly something that --
something worth your review in terms of nuisance or returning those
things to -- once the operation is completed, making sure that things
are put back in good shape.
So that's a very beginning overview, and some of my backup
analysis I provided for you as well as a -- some information from
GMD. And I'm available to answer any questions you might have.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you.
You gave a great presentation, and I think you've covered a lot of
bases but, of course, you really don't know what to plan for because
we've never had oil drilling in a residential neighborhood before. It's
always been remotely. And I don't understand why they think that it's
okay to drill in a neighborhood. I'm having a problem with that. And
then all these precautions have to be taken because they're going into
somebody's neighborhood.
MR. SUMMERS: Yes, ma'am. I have not -- and, again, it's not
Page 41
October 8, 2013
been prominent on our radar either because the other locations have
been -- have, indeed, been very remote.
Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: County Attorney, can you address
the drilling in proximity to neighborhoods?
MR. KLATZKOW: This comes down to a zoning issue, all
right. If it's the board's desire to look into this and possibly change
your zoning rules to allow certain distance between oil wells and
residential property, that's something staff can look into.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think that should be done. I think
it's absolutely essential that the County Attorney's Office explore what
options we have to address, you know, distance requirements. And if
it's the board's consensus position to have the County Attorney do that,
I'd like to recommend that he consider that.
MR. KLATZKOW: What I'd like to work with county staff on is
this, the zoning -- you have zoning experts here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. And what I would
recommend -- and what I'm -- listening to the presentation, I just want
to summarize, we have a question with respect to level of service, we
have a question with respect to funding, we have a question with
respect to whether or not an ordinance should be drafted as it relates to
this matter, we have a question with respect to cost recovery, and then,
finally, we have a question as to what type of agreements can be
entered into with the permittee.
And what I would propose -- you've laid out a lot of issues and
different types of solutions. I think you need to narrow it down, and I
think, if the board is agreeable, come back to the board and say, this is
a proposed level of service, this is the funding required to achieve that
level of service, here is the ordinance to enable us to do whatever
we're proposing to do, here is an ordinance with respect to the zoning,
here's how you can recover costs, whether it's through, you know, a
requirement of insurance on the part of the permittee or if we have to
Page 42
October 8, 2013
get supplemental insurance ourselves in light of what potentially could
happen or not, and then, again, permittee agreements. Whether they're
mandated or voluntary is a question that has to be looked into both
legally and as to what you would ask of them with respect to such
agreements.
So I think taking a lot of time to discuss these details here really
isn't worthwhile because I think you need to do the research to come
back and narrow down and give us a proposal. I mean, you've given
us a State of the Union Address, and you've told us it ain't there. So
now come back and tell us what needs to be done, make it legal, and
fund it. That's my recommendation, if the board is agreeable to that.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, mineral rights is a right,
and I think if you -- if we want to -- I think we could limit oil drilling
in neighborhoods through a conditional use, but to eliminate it, I think
it's going to be very tough. I think that's what your staff is going to
probably advise you.
But I don't see anything wrong with a conditional-use process to
cover some of the concerns of safety.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I think it's important that the
County Attorney go back and research that and come back and tell us,
you know, what are the mechanisms that are available to us to legally
do the right thing.
MR. KLATZKOW: If it's the will of the board, I'll work with
staff, and we'll come back with a proposal.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah.
MR. KLATZKOW: Or we'll come back with several alternative
proposals for the board to consider. It probably won't be ready for next
meeting but, you know, certainly the second meeting.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I can't imagine. I think there's a lot
of work involved in what has to be covered. I don't think the next
meeting would be realistic.
Page 43
October 8, 2013
MR. KLATZKOW: No, it's not going to be.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: County Manager, what do you think
would be a fair time?
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, you have one meeting in
November, one in December. I would like to do this right and not
fast. And in that regard, I would say we'll be back to you hopefully in
the November meeting but no later than your December.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Why not just say the December
meeting?
MR. OCHS: Fine.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Because I'm concerned -- you
know, this is something that needs to be done, you know -- I mean,
everything we do needs to be done properly and professionally.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am, but this is new territory, so to speak.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: This is new territory, and I think the
level of research will be far greater than with other issues that we have
experience in.
MR. KLATZKOW: And if I may because -- and I'm sorry, I'm
talking on the fly here and I'm thinking on the fly.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, go ahead.
MR. KLATZKOW: Do you want us to come to you first, or do
you want us to vet this through your Planning Commission?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think it would be actually a good
idea to vet it through the Planning Commission first, and so maybe --
would that be a problem, Leo, if you took it to the Planning
Commission, and then it gives you additional time to tweak between
November and December? Would that be acceptable?
MR. OCHS: That's very acceptable with regard to potential
land-use issues --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. OCHS: -- but operational issues we'll work on and bring
those along with the final land-use recommendations.
Page 44
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. And very clearly -- you
make a good point. The operational issues are not for the Planning
Commission. It's strictly the land-use-related issues, because that's
their limited jurisdiction.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're right, there's no point in
trying to discuss the details, but I'd like to get some parameters
established here.
And, Dan, I think you've done a good job of summarizing how
we would need to coordinate and maybe supplement our capabilities
somewhat to accommodate the oil wells, but residents have a different
concern, which is not to have any oil wells there.
And, in my opinion, it is less important where the oil well is
located than it is to determine where they're allowed to drill. With
horizontal drilling technology now, they could be located a mile away
and still maybe drill right up to your property line; I don't know. But I
think that's something we need to make sure that we can control and
prohibit.
And that brings me to the question that I'm sure the staff will
answer. If we are to create zoning laws that apply certain restrictions,
will they be retroactive to those wells that have, perhaps, already
received at least federal approval, and how do you prevent that?
So even though we create the zoning laws that place some
restrictions, they might only apply in certain cases and to only
additional wells in the future. So it's an important issue we need to
resolve, and I think it's wise to spend some time getting answers.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I'd like to -- I fully support
this approach for long-term regulation. But I'd like to mention three
things that I believe are necessary for a little more immediate guidance
from the board, and I'll lay them out in three points.
Number one is I think it is very essential -- Mr. Summers, I
Page 45
October 8, 2013
congratulate you, and thank you very much. I would certainly like the
board to enable Mr. Summers to start making planning for adding oil
exploration and petroleum issues to his emergency management
preparedness, No. 1 .
Number 2, I think it is past time that Collier County engage the
owner and their vendors regarding an interlocal agreement. And Mr.
Summers has done a fine job under staff recommendations sub -- a
portion of the backup to identify things that are practical applications
to what's going to take place that are not addressed by DEP.
I'm personally very disappointed that DEP went out and they
established a hazard zone and did not follow up with any guidance
regarding what was going to occur when this hazard zone overlapped
a residential area. And that's -- the gaps between who's -- the overlap
between responsibilities and where the gaps are is what we're left to
determine.
So I believe that in an interlocal agreement and a discussion with
our property owners in Collier County regarding reports of releases,
annual site inspections, containment, groundwater monitoring, H2S
monitoring, all these things that haven't been contemplated are
appropriate, because they have made some statements that they're
willing to do some things, but thus far they've made no commitment.
So I believe we should engage them -- staff should engage our
business owners in Collier County immediately to start to talk about
interlocal agreements and what they would be willing to be
responsible for and what, perhaps, we may have to impose on them, if
any.
Secondly, we certainly need to define our specialized response
capabilities that are going to be needed if this industry is going to
grow in our area. Every indication is that it is. So we have to
understand what specialized response capabilities we're going to need
and who's going to do it.
And, finally, in the short term, we're coming up on our legislative
Page 46
October 8, 2013
-- talking about our legislative priorities. I think we need to seek
legislative changes in that. If DEP and South Florida Water
Management District are going to be the permitting and regulating
agencies, their planning stipulations and regulations need to
contemplate what they're going to do and how they're going to handle
it when they get in conflict with the residential areas and when their
hazard zones do have an overlap.
I think, you know, they've been, unfortunately, very silent on
this. I'm very uncomfortable with it. And I think we have an
opportunity to address it as soon as our November 26/27th meetings.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much.
We have a recommendation to direct the County Attorney and
staff to accomplish what has already been described. Does staff and
County Attorney have any questions, or is everyone in agreement? Do
we have consensus on the board?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being consensus, we will
thank Mr. Summers, and congratulations on the project you have
ahead of you.
MR. SUMMERS: Thank you, ma'am.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you're scheduled for a break.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a hard break. Yeah, we're
going to take a break for the court reporter. It's now 10:20. We'll
return at 10:30. We have a time-certain at 10:30.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And then again, the next hard break
will be at noon.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mic. Ladies and
gentlemen, if you would please take your seats.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The next item on the agenda is a
Page 47
October 8, 2013
time-certain. County Manager?
Item #1 1 D
RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT THE STATUS REPORT ON
THE TRUCK HAUL BEACH RENOURISHMENT PROJECT AND
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL STAFF DIRECTION REQUIRED TO
MOVE THE PROJECT FORWARD — MOTION TO COMMENCE
TRUCK-HAUL WHILE CONTINUING DISCUSSIONS WITH LEE
COUNTY REGARDING TRANSPORTATION CONCERNS —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. That's Item 11D on your agenda this
morning. It was a recommendation to accept the status report on the
truck haul beach renourishment project and provide any additional
staff direction required to move the project forward.
Mr. Casalanguida, your growth management administrator, will
begin the presentation.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you, County Manager.
Good morning, Board Members. I have here Gary McAlpin, our
project manager, as well as our transportation engineering director,
Jay Ahmad, to answer specific questions about the project.
As you know, this project has been lumbering along, and we're
about to kick it off We're about to issue the notice to proceed, but
we've had a couple obstacles along the way: The original bidding to
the second portion bid now to with the truck haul.
In the first area, we have a notice to proceed from FDEP,
currently, right now. The only portion that does not is the Pelican Bay
portion, and we believe that we can secure that before we get to that
portion completion. So we should be able to meet the back end of that
schedule.
It should be noted that the reason that portion is being held up
Page 48
October 8, 2013
right now is there is a challenge from Lee County on that part of the
permit modification.
Right now we're about 21 calendar days behind schedule. In
terms of the truck haul, we've met with Lee County staff several times.
The County Manager and myself have talked to their County Manager
and their staff, and we came up with four points that we thought would
address some of the concerns. And after the folks from Lee County
spoke to some of their elected officials, they raised some issues and
drafted a resolution, commissioners.
And there's really three key points to that resolution. The first
point, they've asked us to use only Collier County roads, which we
think is, you know, very problematic. But in lieu of that, or an
alternative is the second part of their resolution. They've mentioned
using the Alico bypass off of Corkscrew.
County Manager, if you could turn on the monitor for me, I'll just
highlight where that is.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Mr. Casalanguida, are you going to
show us the Corkscrew route as well?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. I think --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Can you hear me? Is that working?
Okay. This is the location of the --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: It's upside-down, sir.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay. This is the location of the sand
mine itself off of State Road 82. It comes west down State Road 82
down to Corkscrew and then comes down. Corkscrew makes a right
and heads west.
This is the point where Alico comes in. And as part of their
second clause in the resolution request, they've asked us to divert
north up Alico and west to I-75 and then down. So the route would
come up I-75 and return and come back Alico and down.
The planned route that's been used in the past is this Corkscrew
Page 49
October 8, 2013
direct route all the way to I-75.
The third part of their resolution is they asked for a formal
commitment to repair any roads that the Lee DOT finds were damaged
by the truck haul.
Now, we've agreed in principle -- obviously, we'd have to bring
something back to the board where Lee County staff and Collier
County staff would evaluate the haul route. And if there was anything
obviously, would come back and bring something to the board.
I think both staffs are comfortable that these routes are being
used for truck hauls right now. We wouldn't expect any major
damage, but we'd obviously look into that as part of our consideration.
We have completed a staff evaluation of Corkscrew. We had our
traffic engineering director go out and take a look at it. He found the
road was well designed, met DOT standards, and was well capable of
taking trucks on it. He noticed in his observations there was truck
traffic on Corkscrew already.
Some of the project highlights, to give you a feel. Just to let you
know, we've used Corkscrew in the past as recently as last year.
We've had about 120 trucks a day coming down Corkscrew for a
period of six to eight weeks intermittently. This project proposes to
put about 360 to 400 trucks a day.
Project limit is expected to be 60 or 90 working days, about
four-and-a-half months calendar days. We're going to take some
Sundays off, and sometime around Thanksgiving and the holidays and
Christmas as well, too.
The project begins to drop off after about 50 working days, as we
have three delivery sites, two in the city of Naples and one at
Vanderbilt Beach. So each one of those sites is expected to receive
about 120 trucks a day. That's where you get that number of about
360 trucks a day.
Again, I noted the truck haul route has been used in the past, and
our staff-- and I even -- I think their staff agrees that it can
Page 50
October 8, 2013
accommodate trucks. This is more of a policy request from their
board to your board. Now, that has implications, obviously. We have
never, in Collier County, restricted truck traffic on any public facility
that could handle that traffic for a construction project.
Yes, sir?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Nick, in linear miles, how far is the
little leg of Corkscrew Road between the Alico Road turnoff and I-75?
That's kind of the disputed segment.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Five miles, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's five miles?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir. The total trip around is a
difference of about 7 miles each way, so about 14, 15 miles round trip.
So we had our staff evaluate it. Again, I don't think their staff is
questioning whether Corkscrew is designed or can carry that capacity.
It's more of a policy decision.
Point of fact, you know, Hacienda Lakes, Jet Blue Park, any
construction capital project that a community does privately or
publicly has a period of construction traffic that goes forward.
Hacienda Lakes will import almost 600,000 cubic yards of dirt to
make that project complete. So you can imagine that's going to put
truck traffic on our road.
The destination points in the city of Naples and Collier County
are two-laned local roads that have homes on both sides. So those
roads are going to get 120 trips a day on those destination routes that
go forward.
So, Commissioners, I think, you know, in talking to our County
Manager and our County Attorney, it basically is a policy and
financial decision. We've looked at two alternatives. One is a
complete reroute up Alico, both heavy loaded and returning empty.
It's about 661,000 that it adds to the project. It might add some days.
And then I've looked at a partial reroute, which would be heavy
trucks leaving, going out Alico, and then empty trucks coming back
Page 51
October 8, 2013
Corkscrew would cut the trucks in half on Corkscrew on the portion
they're concerned about, and that's about 528,000 additional project
impacts in terms of cost.
That's it, Commissioners. I don't think staff have any
disagreement. I don't think there's a technical issue here. Again, I'll
reiterate, it is a request from their board to your board to do an
alternative, and it has financial implication.
With that, we'll take any questions.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Henning was first.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, sorry.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nick, where's that mine located?
Is that in Lee County or Collier County?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's in Collier County, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is that the only question,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nick, I'm -- I'm interested in
finding out how you calculated the difference in cost.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Please tell us if you evaluated
alternate routes, where were those routes, what was the distance
difference in those routes, and how did we come up with such a big
cost.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'll let Gary break down the cost, but
in terms of route evaluation, there was really only two routes that were
-- you know, three considered but two that were, you know, practical
and feasible. It was either the Corkscrew direct route or the Alico
bypass route. I know Lee County pursues that. Alico bypass is their
Page 52
October 8, 2013
preferred route for trucking, although on any approved mines that are
there now, they can use Corkscrew if they were put in place prior to
any prohibition. The difference between that is seven miles one way,
14, 15, miles two-way.
Gary's got a breakdown of what the two applicants or vendors
have submitted to us in terms of cost increases, and I'll let him get into
detail as to what those cost increases come from.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
MR. McALPIN: Thank you. For the record, Gary McAlpin.
Commissioner, to give you a perspective, contract price that
DePhillips and Jordan had to haul and place was $15.41 a ton. The
contract haul price, just to haul from the beach to the -- from the mine
to the beach, was $10.83 a ton.
Now, if we add seven or eight miles one way, 14 or 15 miles
round trip, we're adding -- the price we received is $1.76 a ton for
those -- for that additional length of mile -- length of route that we
have in there.
Incidentally, we received that same price not only from people
that are hauling from the Naples and the Park Shore beaches, but we
also, from the other contractor, he had the same price at $1 .76 a ton.
When we talked to truck-haul contractors, they generally have
priced that anywhere from 20 to 25 cents a ton-mile. So based on
what we received from both contractors and what we're looking at in
terms of the additional length and what we have talked about when
we've talked directly to hauling contractors, all the numbers are
hanging together, and that is a pretty reputable price in terms of the
additional cost for the additional length that we're doing.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. Can we hear from our
public speakers?
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. We have nine registered public
speakers. I'm going to remind the speakers, when you come to the
microphone, please state your name and address. We will use both
Page 53
October 8, 2013
podiums. If you could be waiting -- the second speaker could please
be waiting at the next podium.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Actually, why don't we get all the
speakers up and line them up, please.
MR. MILLER: You want me to read all of them now and have
them line up at opposing microphones? Certainly, ma'am.
Your first speaker is Bob Krasowski, and he's been ceded three
minutes of time by John Lundin. I do believe John is -- yes, John is
here. Bob will be followed by Jeff Stanner, or Stainer. He will be
followed by Michael B. Elgin, Doug Meurer, Nicholas Batos, Jim
Banks, JJ Passo (sic), and James Shields.
We'll begin with six minutes for Bob Krasowski. Bob.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What's --
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good morning, Commissioners.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Hang on a second. Don't start time
yet.
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I want to make sure everyone's here.
Not everybody -- how many speakers do you have?
MR. MILLER: Nine total, but it would actually physically be
eight, as John Lundin has ceded his time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. MILLER: So there should be eight folks.
MR. OCHS: Would the eight speakers please just raise their
hands and acknowledge that you're here, please, for the chairwoman.
Keep them up.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So one, two, three, four, five, six,
seven, eight, okay.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So the total time on this will be -- so
30 minutes in public speaking time.
All right. Could we start the timer?
Page 54
October 8, 2013
MR. MILLER: Sure. Bob?
MR. KRASOWSKI: Hello. I'm Bob Krasowski, for the record,
Collier County resident.
I want to make a couple of comments on this. In terms of the
Pelican Bay permit, that's part of a -- what is an amended --
amendment to the amended petition or permit -- request for permit
from you and the DEP, that issue, and that's being -- there's a request
for an administrative hearing that hasn't been resolved yet, and that's
from myself and my wife.
I don't know what Nick was talking about when he told you it
was Lee County -- Lee County challenge -- I'm getting too old for this
-- Lee County challenge, because I thought that Lee County had
missed the timeline for participating in the petition.
So I'd like truthful information. I wish Nick would tell the truth
in regard to that if he hasn't already represented what he
misunderstands or what I misunderstand, but I'd like to get to the
bottom of that.
The truck-haul routes, so often we seem to find ourselves in
controversies because we haven't done enough -- adequate amount of
research and work and development, like this truck haul situation is
presenting to us. There are also routes -- and I did a Google search
and Map Quest, and we could come out of the sand mine, go down,
I think it's 29 towards Immokalee and then cut over to New Market
Road, staying out of downtown Immokalee. New Market Road, and
then go down to where you can make a right turn and cut over, get on
Immokalee Road, and then keep going down Camp Keais Road to Oil
Well Road, cut over Oil Well Road, and then there's a nice, new, big
six-lane Immokalee Road to 75, or you can go down 951, or you could
go down Livingston Road in those places, and that mileage is very
similar, if not a little less, some cases a little more.
But the reason we might want to do that is anybody that's been
over at Golden Gate and 75 in the morning, if you're going west on
Page 55
October 8, 2013
that bridge and you look north and see all this traffic coming down
from Lee County, it's like -- and the cars are pulling over in the right
lane of the interstate because the exit ramp is so crowded with
vehicles.
So even if it's just for the morning hours, it might behoove us to
look for other adjustments. And also it's a bit longer trip if you go all
the way down 29 to 75 and then take 75 coming up from the south,
then you avoid all of that, too, and this just might be for specific times.
I know you're -- this commission isn't into fine-tuning these
things, but the fine tuning is what makes us good neighbors and allows
us to cooperate.
So there are routes that go right through Collier, and there are
routes -- various routes that should be considered, and I hope you'll
take a look at it.
If I can see -- oh, also another big point that I brought up before
was the gas tax. Those trucks are going to have to use gas, and the
county, Collier County or Lee County, is going to benefit quite a bit
from those taxes on the gas. So I would think we'd want to keep that in
Collier County. That was one of the benefits when we were talking
about truck haul as an option, when we had options. And so, you
know -- and then those gas taxes go to roads. So if they're going to
buy their gas in Lee County, those gas taxes will go towards fixing our
roads. If they're going to buy it in Collier County, we can use the gas
taxes.
So pretty much that covers a lot of what I wanted to say. As
many people realize -- maybe they don't realize, but it was a good
opportunity to bring it up. My wife and I did object to the scheduling
of beach nourishment in turtle nesting season, towards the end of turtle
nesting season, which is problematic, but we're getting further and
further away from that now, messing with the turtle nests, as
November 1st is the end day, and most of the nests, I think -- or all of
them will be off in October.
Page 56
October 8, 2013
And then -- but the beginning of May -- your permit request for
the DEP still includes the month of May, the beginning of May, which
is a horrendous assault on the beginning of turtles coming to nest.
There's quite a few of them. They come back. So if they're not
successful the first nesting effort, they might not come back for other
ones.
And, you know, it's really time, like with the oil well and other
things, to stop performing incremental assaults on our environment.
We're just totally destroying it. And this whole turtle thing didn't
include an evaluation of the BP oil spill, the correct materials, and --
on the Gulf of Mexico, also it didn't include what's happening with
Lake Okeechobee with all the water coming down and freshwater and
with nutrients killing grasses and that kind of thing. Our government's
very insensitive to that kind of stuff. You're more in protecting, like,
the Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association expansion of
beach nourishment into the Gulf of Mexico and that kind of thing.
So that's pretty much it. And I hope a lot of the questions I've
raised will get answered. Thanks.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jeff Staner, and he'll be
followed by Michael Elgin.
MR. STANER: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Jeff Staner. I live at 8389 Coral Drive, Fort Myers, Florida, 33967.
I've been a Lee County resident and vice president of Miromar
Outlets for over 15 years now. I am speaking today to put Miromar
Outlets on record to object to having 400 dump trucks a day driving
by Miromar Outlets and the Miromar Design Center.
First, it's a major safety issue, bringing 400 dump trucks a day
filled with tons of sand to an already overburdened roadway and
interchange. This is like playing russian roulette with thousands of
lives of tourists, customers, pedestrians, employees, cyclists that use
this roadway daily.
Page 57
October 8, 2013
Whether just coming across the street from Stoneybrook on your
bicycle or turning into the Miromar Outlets or Miromar Design Center
in their vehicles, these trucks make for a dangerous trip.
A large number of our customers are first-time visitors who
might not know exactly where they're going and make that mistake
and turn in front of one of these massive trucks with fatal
consequences.
Corkscrew Road is currently at its traffic capacity and would
highly be overburdened and negatively impacted by the addition of
these massive trucks for several months during the height of our
season.
Miromar Development privately spent over a million dollars for
safety improvements to the section of Corkscrew Road between I-75
and Ben Hill Griffin Road installing new traffic lights and additional
turn lanes to help improve safe access into our centers.
Just last month we saw the negative impact that higher traffic can
bring when a truck fire closed down the southbound lane just north of
Corkscrew Road on I-75.
An FHP officer detoured traffic off the Alico Road interchange to
come south down Ben Hill Griffin Road onto Corkscrew. This
created gridlock. Traffic trying to access the under designed I-75
southbound single left-hand turn lane was so bad, traffic was
congested all day and backed up past the Ben Hill Griffin inter -- or
past the back hill -- excuse me -- backed up past down to Ben Hill
Griffin and backed up on Ben Hill Griffin Parkway past Germain
Arena's north entrance.
This could cause a disruption of traffic flow into the communities
and commercial centers as well as negatively impacting our many area
businesses. The impact this would have on our businesses are
unimaginable.
If you're a local customer or tourist, you're not going to drive into
an area where you know traffic congestion will be a problem and
Page 58
October 8, 2013
hardship to deal with. This is the time of year we all rely on for our
business.
We strongly support Lee County Commissioners in their request
that Collier County use Collier County roads for this project. We
value the safety of our tenants, our tenants' employees, our employees,
our customers, and residents and ask that you do also and remove this
route from Corkscrew Road. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Michael Elgin. He'll be
followed by Doug Meurer.
MR. ELGIN: Good morning. For the record, Mike Elgin, 14700
Indigo Lakes Circle, Naples, Florida. I am a Collier County resident
and the director of planning for Miromar Development Corporation.
Also a member -- an appointed member of the Corkscrew Special
Improvement Advisory Committee since 2003 as appointed by Lee
County Commission that oversees operations on Corkscrew Road.
I'm here today as a representative of Miromar Development, to
put on the record Miromar Development's strong opposition to the use
of Corkscrew Road as a route to transport sand to Collier County for
replenishment projects on Naples Beach and Vanderbilt Beach.
As an owner of two of Lee County's largest commercial
businesses along Corkscrew Road, Miromar Outlets and Miromar
Design Center, I assure you that this route would create a tremendous
safety hazard in an area full of residence and tourist traffic.
The Corkscrew Road route would bring these massive trucks past
the residential communities of Bella Terra, Wild Cat Run Preserve,
Grandezza, and Stoneybrook in addition to Pine Woods Elementary
School, Miromar Outlets, the Shoppes of Grande Oaks, and Miromar
Design Center.
Miromar Outlet alone draws millions of tourists a year who are
new to the area and may not know where they're going. I feel strongly
that adding 400 massive trucks daily to this equation would result in a
potential deadly situation. Imagine a tourist who misses the road,
Page 59
October 8, 2013
mistakingly turns into the lane of one of these loaded trucks with fatal
consequences.
Surely, no one from Collier County Board of Commission would
allow this tremendous safety hazard and eyesore in front of Waterside
Shops.
Use of Corkscrew Road is unacceptable. According to the Naples
Daily News, the cost of sand to haul contract is millions under the 15
million budget. I can't imagine that you as commissioners will be
willing to put people's lives at stake simply to save more money.
In addition to serious safety concerns, Corkscrew Road is
currently at traffic capacity, highly overburdened, and negatively
impacted by the addition of massive trucks for several months during
the height of season.
This would cause disruptive traffic flow into the communities
and commercial centers as well as negatively impacting our area
businesses.
I strongly support Lee County Commissioners in the request that
Collier County use Collier roads for this project, encourage you to
carefully weigh the consequences. It's imperative for the safety of the
Estero community and businesses that Corkscrew Road and Interstate
75 routes be removed from consideration.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Doug Meurer. He'll be
followed by Nicholas Batos.
MR. MEURER: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Doug
Meurer. I'm from South Fort Myers in Lee County. I am the assistant
County Manager from Lee County.
Since we became aware of this project, we've provided several
documents to Collier County administration regarding our concerns
about utilizing the Lee County roads.
We're worried about, you know, lack of notification of this, some
of the environmental and habitat issues.
Page 60
October 8, 2013
Our discussions with the Collier County administration have
been professional, and they've been cordial. But since we weren't
really properly notified of this project, we've only recently become
aware of it, and that is the sole reason for Lee County requesting a
45-day extension to comment on the permit and also filing a challenge
to the FDEP permit. It's really to provide time for us to have that
discussion.
You've also received a resolution from our Lee County board.
That was a serious deliberation by the board, and it absolutely is
sincere, the request to Collier County not to use Lee County roads.
But the last thing I wanted to talk about is really in a
conversation with your Chair, Commissioner Hiller, we talked about
some of the safety issues that we were concerned about. And I think,
wisely and appropriately so, Commissioner Hiller requested that we
really quantify what those safety issues were.
So I would like to -- and we did do that, and we've provided that
documentation to Collier administration.
But I'd like to highlight what some of the concerns are.
Corkscrew Road transitions from a rural road to an urban road
very quickly, and it really happens in about the three miles -- as you
head to the west, three miles before you get to Interstate 75.
The accident rate in that three-mile stretch is documented as
being four times higher than the remainder of Collier to east of there.
There are documented 17,000 vehicles per day in that three-mile
stretch, and it has five residential communities and the major retail
center that you've heard about adjacent to Corkscrew. Adding the
truck traffic heightens the concerns over dangerous cross-traffic
conflict.
There are also three panther corridors along this route on
Corkscrew, and that clearly heightens our concerns about any deadly
interactions. More importantly, Pinewood Elementary School with
995 students is located on Corkscrew. There are 28 bus stops along
Page 61
October 8, 2013
Corkscrew at nine locations, and the Lee County School District has
expressed concern that there will be an increase in the degree of
danger with additional traffic flow interfering with their buses.
So in closing, Lee County requests that the Collier Board of
County Commissioners reconsider the contract that identifies
Corkscrew as the haul route, and we feel this is critical for the safety
of our residents, our endangered species and, most importantly, the
safety of the schoolchildren.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Nicholas Batos. He'll be
followed by Jim Banks.
MR. BATOS: For the record, my name is Nick Batos. I'm the
Chairman of the Estero Council of Community Leaders, and I live in
Estero, Florida.
I'm here to ask that you reject the Corkscrew Road route your
staff is recommending. We ask that you do not use Corkscrew Road.
We have serious traffic safety concerns for the heavily populated and
traveled segment of the route from three miles east of I-75 to the I-75
Interchange.
Safety concerns should take priority over the small percentage
increase in the cost of this project. Your staff recommended the
current route because of financial considerations, but your staff has
not taken into account the route they have proposed takes trucks down
a three-and-a-half mile stretch of a two-lane road, Corkscrew Road,
that that road houses Pinewood Elementary School where the principal
of the school is concerned about the safety of her 900 students who
must enter and leave school by an unsignaled intersection where the
buses, filled with children, will have to contend with trucks speeding
by the intersection.
Corkscrew Road also has five community developments:
Grandezza, Stoneybrook, Wild Cat Run, Bella Terra, and the Preserve
at Corkscrew, home to approximately 9,000 residents who will be
Page 62
October 8, 2013
putting their lives at risk when entering and exiting their communities.
In addition, this route will take trucks by one of our busiest
shopping centers, Miromar Mall, where an average of over 25,000
shoppers go in and out of this mall daily. They will now have to
contend with the enormous amount of additional truck traffic you will
be creating which will create unsafe conditions and/or cause financial
hardships to the hundreds of shop owners and workers.
Finally, the I-75/Corkscrew Road intersection is failing and is
signalized, the turn lanes that are inadequate for today's traffic, much
less for the additional 400 truck trips per day.
The request of Lee County Commissioners and residents of
Estero are simple: Just divert trucks off of Corkscrew Road. It is
discouraging that your staff never notified Lee County staff of your
plans while in the planning stage. That would have allowed Lee
County to react to your plans and at least offer some suggestions
before you completed your plans.
Please do not select the proposed route. It will put the men,
women, and children who live, go to school, and shop on Corkscrew
Road at risk. You have received this request from the Lee County
Commissioners; in addition, you have received over 750 emails from
Estero residents all asking you not to put money over lives and the
welfare of the residents -- of our children and residents who are your
neighbors.
In conclusion, I ask -- no, I implore you to consider the route you
will use. Do not put our residents at risk. If there should be an
accident or, God forbid, a death, it will be on your hands for putting
money in front of the lives of our residents.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. BATOS: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Before we call the next speaker,
Commissioner Henning, you had a comment?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I'll wait.
Page 63
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I just would like to ask the County
Manager, if you would -- the gentleman made a statement that staff
did not apprize Lee County staff ahead of bringing this to the board,
and that is not a true statement.
Can you elaborate on the level of communication that you had
with Lee County staff ahead of coming to the board and their
agreement on your proposal and how they proposed the concessions
that you accepted and you brought before this board for approval?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. Very briefly, Mr. Casalanguida and I
had at least four different teleconference calls with my counterpart,
Roger Desjarlais, the County Manager in Lee County, Mr. Meurer and
Mr. Loveland, and we discussed the issues, as he said, professionally,
we went through all of the concerns of each party, and we offered,
over a series of days and phone calls, different alternatives, and
ultimately arrived, at least in my view and I believe Nick's, in the
agreement that we reached with the staff people in Lee County, given
the fact that we had specified this road segment as the most efficient,
most cost effective for the project and came back then with,
essentially, four points that we had proposed and discussed with staff.
And all of that was done prior to me, under communication at the
last meeting, providing that informative memorandum on the subject.
And so that's the extent, essentially, of those discussions. Certainly, it
occurred well before I brought that item in front of the board.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And Commissioner Kiker
subsequently confirmed to me that their staff did agree with what you
had proposed with Corkscrew being the route.
MR. OCHS: Well, I don't want to put words in their mouth. I
think what they said was, you know, if you're determined to use
Corkscrew, we acknowledge it's a public road. It's an evacuation
route. It has direct access to 75. But given our concerns, what can
you do to help mitigate some of those concerns? And that's when we
discussed, you know, essentially --
Page 64
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And you provided all the mitigation
that they requested prior to bringing it to the board?
MR. OCHS: It was my understanding we had an agreement that
that would be sufficient if the board continued to want to use that
route, yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Consider using that route. And they
acknowledged that it was a public road and that they could not deny
access to that road?
MR. OCHS: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Did they raise public-safety
concerns during your conversation?
MR. OCHS: Yes, in general terms, same thing you're hearing
now that -- you know, there's businesses and there's schools, and --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Was there any request for support
with respect to bolstering staff, like the Lee County Sheriffs Office
presence or anything like that to manage traffic?
MR. OCHS: Well, part -- part of our understanding was that we
would meet on site weekly with representatives from Lee County
FDOT and Lee County Sheriffs Office to monitor the traffic situation,
and if there was more mitigation required, that certainly I would bring
that back on a request basis to the county commission.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jim Banks. He'll be
followed by JJ Passo (sic).
MR. BANKS: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
my name is Jim Banks. I'm a local engineer. I have 26 years of
experience in the fields of traffic and transportation engineering.
With regards to your consideration of the use of Corkscrew
Road, as it relates to safety issues of dump trucks using that as a route,
the handout that you just were provided has a summary of six items
which I think that the competing interests have failed to provide to
you in order for you to make an informed decision.
Page 65
October 8, 2013
And what I mean to say is that you've heard testimony and there's
suggestion that there is an inherent -- there is an inherent failure with
Corkscrew Road to accommodate haul trucks or dump trucks in this
case.
I'm here today not to persuade you to recommend approval or
disapproval of the use of that route. It's not my intent. My intent is to
address this board to inform you that you're hearing testimony without
credible evidence to support those claims that there are safety issues
along Corkscrew Road.
Now, my firm did -- reviewed the accident data, the crash reports
through the years 2003 through 2006, which is a four-year span. And
based on our evaluation, we found -- we did determine that the
number of dump trucks involved in accidents was extremely low in
relation to the number of accidents that occur on Corkscrew Road.
Now, you've heard testimony that there's concern about the
schools, concern about -- for pedestrians, concern about the additional
impacts that the dump trucks may -- how they may affect the safety of
Corkscrew Road.
And what I submit to the commissioners is that it is the
obligation of those that make those claims to present evidence to you
for your consideration. And as of-- to date there's been a lack of
evidence to support that claim.
And so this memo that I just provided to you on the second page
outlines six pieces of critical information that is necessary for the
board to make a decision.
I'm not going to read each one of these into the record but,
basically, if Lee County or the competing interests want to convince
you that there's an accident problem on Corkscrew Road, these six
items are necessary to be presented to you in order that you can make
an informed decision.
Right now, today, there's nobody in this room that can tell you
what percentage of those accidents on Corkscrew Road are involved
Page 66
October 8, 2013
in -- the dump trucks are involved in accidents in relation to the total
number of accidents.
Now, during our four-year evaluation from 2003 to 2006, we
found that the type of generalized truck -- when they come to you and
say we have a truck accident issue out there, that's all trucks. That's
landscaping trucks, that's refrigerator trucks delivering food, that's
furniture trucks, and that's also the dump trucks.
Now, when we took that actual -- the information from the
four-year period --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sir, I'm going to have to stop you.
Your time is up. If any of the commissioners would like any further
information from you, they can call you and request that information
be presented, but thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is JJ Passo (sic). He'll be
followed by your final speaker, James Shields.
MR. BASSO: JJ Basso. It's with a B. Thank you. I'm JJ Basso.
I live at 19741 Markwood Crossing, and that's in Estero. I am the
president of the Grandezza Master Homeowner's Association.
And I'd like to just suggest to the engineer who just spoke, no one
has ever done a study of 400 trucks a day, and I can tell you there's
been a lot of accidents on Corkscrew where people have gone off into
the bushes to avoid trucks, so -- it's virtually impossible to make a left
turn or a right turn when there's a bunch of trucks going down there,
and all of the communities along Corkscrew are affected.
I'd also like to correct the News-Press story this morning, among
their many omissions. We don't have 169 homes in Grandezza. We
have 978 homes, and we lie along the entire stretch of Corkscrew. So
we are -- we have at least two exits on there and entrances that would
be vitally affected.
Since we pull out into that traffic and see the lineup of cars
waiting to make left turns into the school area and the buses, you'd
have to travel that area yourself to get a good feeling for it.
Page 67
October 8, 2013
I do have some connection to Collier County, even though I live
in Lee County. My wife and I are guardian ad litems for Collier
County. We chose, purposely, even though we went -- we're foster
parents in Lee County, we chose Collier because we like the staff and
we also like your judge down here.
So we also have an affinity for children, obviously, and we think
that what you're doing -- if you choose to go down Corkscrew, you are
putting lives at risk.
The last thing I would say is that as my wife and I were leaving
Grandezza, and we made a left turn out of there headed toward Bella
Terra, and for the first time in our 15 years living here in Florida, we
saw a Florida Panther, and he was traveling from south to north across
Corkscrew, and he was at just an easy gallop. Fortunately, we were
going 20 miles an hour, so there was no danger.
But it's easy to see how these beautiful animals are killed so
often, because they don't know a car, okay. And he just galloped
across, and we were able to stop. But 400 trucks a day, I'm not so
sure. Even though we have three panther crossings further down the
road, they're all filled with water, and I'm not sure that panthers really
like to swim a lot, so they find a way to get across, and we think that
also is a concern.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your final speaker on this matter is James
Shields.
MR. SHIELDS: I'm Jim Shields. I live in Estero, 19918 Marker
Crossing in Grandezza, which is located just across the street from
Pinewoods Elementary.
I wrote each one of you on the 27th of September and said please
be good neighbors and do not use Corkscrew Road.
I'd like to talk about trucks for a minute, because it's a statistical
report. To understand that is important to each one of us, and you
probably need to go a little bit deeper and say, who's driving these
Page 68
October 8, 2013
trucks? Are they owner operators, or are they owned by one or two
fleets? Are the owner-operators properly licensed? Are they properly
insured? I'm sure these are questions that you want answers to.
Are the trucks -- the age profile of the fleet of trucks, if it's 100,
150 Class 7, Class 8, large trucks and tractors, is the average age three
years or 13? I suggest to you that dump trucks are -- average age
would be much closer to 13 years. They're in their second or third life,
maybe over a million miles per vehicle, and trucks that have got a
million miles of wear on them, you'd want to make sure they passed
all the necessary inspections. The steering systems, the braking
systems, and the rest of it.
So it's not just about the number of pickups and straight trucks,
but let's take the true picture into consideration.
It is about safety. Corkscrew Road is very difficult, even under
present conditions, to make a left-hand or a right-hand turn out of
these gated communities, and that's the only avenue they have to get
out on Corkscrew.
Corkscrew Road, most of it has no speed control. A majority of
the miles of Corkscrew Road can be a speedway. The 20-ton loaded
truck traveling down the road at 55 to 65 miles an hour, the average
age 12 to 13 years, can't stop on a dime, if the brakes fail -- we've
people in -- that live where we live that have been maimed for life,
and it takes just one accident.
Clearly, without question, any deliberated group would say that
safety trumps cost. Safety trumps cost.
If I understand the numbers, the difference is $1 .76 a ton to take
Alico -- and, by the way, Lee County Board of Commissioners have
worked diligently -- and it's a matter of record -- for the last 10 years
working with us to see that these dump trucks, when there's a caravan,
that they do take Alico. That's an industrial corridor. Corkscrew is a
residential corridor with gated communities. Thousands of people live
up and down Corkscrew and the elementary school.
Page 69
October 8, 2013
But if the difference is $1.76 a ton, and if there are three principal
parties, one of which is Collier County, the other is the mine, and the
third is the hauler, then you could divide $1.76 by three and say it's 59
cents a ton.
Let's get back together, let's sit down, let's take a look at it, and
let's not let cost trump safety.
As Nick Batos said to you this morning, and as Mike Elgin said,
God forbid that as a result of what could be approved, and if it's -- if
it's 400 truckloads, let's understand the right verbiage here. It's 800
truck trips. Every truck that takes a load will come back. That's two
trips. For every truckload, there's two trips.
So if they're talking about 360 trucks on Corkscrew Road, that's
720 truck trips. If you're talking 400, that's 800 truck trips. If it's 450
loads, it's 900 truck trips a day and that's, every 45 seconds a truck
rolling down Corkscrew.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think the time is up.
MR. SHIELDS: The last thing I want to say ---
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is the time up?
MR. SHIELDS: The last thing I want to say is that you need to
know that 75, within a mile and a half--
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much, sir. Your
time is up.
MR. SHIELDS: -- there are five traffic signals.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much.
MR. SHIELDS: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I appreciate your time. That's it for
-- Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if we give staff direction,
I hope my colleagues realize, direction for a different route, we're
going to have a different group up here. There's no question about it
in my mind.
I'm disappointed that the Lee County commissioners decided to
Page 70
October 8, 2013
challenge our permit instead of communication; however, with that
said, I hope at the end of the day -- by the way, this is a staff decision.
There's -- the only reason you're bringing it to us, Leo, is because
there was objection from Lee County, correct?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would hope that we can give
staff direction to monitor the situation and make adjustments
accordingly. That's the only direction that I would like that -- hope the
board gives.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I have some questions of
staff.
Nick?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What route will not result in
passage near a school?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The Alico route would take you away
from the Lee County schools. I think -- in Collier County, I don't
think there are any schools in the way.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So the Alico route all the
way to 75?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that's the one that costs
$700,000 more?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Six hundred sixty something
thousand, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And the route through south
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Via Immokalee?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Roughly the same cost.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Same additional cost?
Page 71
October 8, 2013
MR. CASALANGUIDA: But that would go through a couple
schools -- three school zones, yeah. Actually, more than that, Leo.
Four school zones.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So the question is not whether we
can find a route that doesn't increase the danger for someone. It's
where we can minimize the danger and cost for everyone, except for
the Alico Road route.
I'm not at all sure that I would object to some negotiation with
Lee County about that route and see if we all couldn't share the cost
increase. But the important thing, I think, is that we try to be good
neighbors and we accommodate the concerns of those who are along
the routes that we're considering. And I'd like to know that we have
done that to the maximum extent possible.
So I cannot, in good conscience, recommend that we take another
route, as Bob Krasowski has suggested, south and ultimately winding
up on Oil Well Road. Those -- that route is at least as dangerous for
people as the one we would be considering through the Lee County
route that you're currently recommending. There is no route that
doesn't go through commercial centers.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They all do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There are no routes that don't go
through other schools except the Alico Road route.
So it seems to me that is the only route that you can possibly
evaluate as an alternative, and it becomes only an issue of paying an
additional, roughly, $700,000.
So my preference would be to at least evaluate that and see if
there's some way we can cut the cost, and that narrows down the
choices we have to make.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle, I asked the
same question, and Commissioner Kiker's response was, there is no
counterproposal. His position was, you know, we basically don't want
you using the Lee roads, and that was it.
Page 72
October 8, 2013
I mean, his position was no concession. He didn't have a
counterproposal. It was, you know, do what we want, and that's it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I don't want to get in the
position that Mr. Boehner and President Obama are in right now.
I think if there is no counterproposal from the other side, we
should make a counterproposal to them and see where that leads us.
They should be at least as concerned about safety on their roads as we
are and I think, maybe if we work together on some of that, we could
solve that part of that problem.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. If I understood correctly,
Michael Hilton (sic), I think that was his name, from Indigo Lakes,
said that we're coming in way under budget as to what we had
originally proposed. And if that's the case and if we're saving a lot of
money there, could -- in your negotiations with Lee County, could that
be a point that possibly could be used to maybe do the Alico route
rather than save the money?
I mean, if we're not spending any extra, that might just be a good
negotiation point.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ma'am, it -- relative to the budget, it's
not that we came in under budget. We had a budget of 15 million, and
hopefully we were going to try and do a dredge project, then we
switched to a sand project. When we compared the sand price -- haul
prices from prior truck hauls, we came in just about the same price as
paid before, if not a little bit more in terms of that.
There's more money in that TDC account but not relative to
saying we came in under budget. We came in as expected, if not a
little higher for a truck haul project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. You know, I don't think
there's anyone, including all the members of this board -- not to speak
Page 73
October 8, 2013
for them -- that thinks that this project is anything everybody's
particularly thrilled with. It is certainly invasive on everybody. It's a
very, very difficult thing to do, but these are the conditions that
prevail. This is where we find ourselves.
So I believe -- I support what Commissioner Coyle says. I don't
think the members of this board nor the members of the Lee County
Board of Commissioners want to do anything that we have to do that
is going to put anybody at risk.
I think there's certainly maintenance of traffic things that we can
do together that can reduce, as much as possible, traffic in these areas.
And 2003, '4, '5, throughout the boom, have been horrendous. You
know, the traffic that's produced there is nothing that we're
unaccustomed to.
I understand Commissioner Pender -- Chairman Pendergrass'
concern about his district and the neighborhoods. You know, my
district is in the east as well where there are very few roads. The
residents in fairly large communities depend on just a few roads to
commute.
But, you know, we have to work to overcome those things.
That's not anything that's going to go away. I'm afraid that -- you
know, that challenges that we're facing with our waterfront are going
to mean that we're going to have all sorts of related construction
projects that are all going to be convenient -- inconvenient. And I'm
sorry about that, but we are going to have to work together.
I certainly echo what Commissioner Coyle says. I think we
should reach out again to the Lee County Manager and Mr. Ochs to
open discussions there at that level and try to, perhaps, lower the
rhetoric a little bit and see what we can do, where we can spend some
money on maintenance of traffic to deal with, you know, critical
intersections, schools, peak periods of times, planning, whatever we
can do.
And so, you know, I just feel like -- and, you know, the default is
Page 74
October 8, 2013
that usually the most direct route, the least hours that we're going to
have extra vehicles on the road is -- it's just fundamentally the best
thing we can do, but I think we need to -- I think we should look at it
again. And I endorse what Commissioner Coyle said, to reach out and
see if we can't reach a compromise everybody can support.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead, Mr. Casalanguida.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners, I like the way it's
going to a certain extent. It's bothersome when people tell you that --
God forbid someone gets killed on any road. No one wants to see that
happen. And to put that on the record that it's a decision you based or
staff has based with disrespect for safety is not a place I want to go.
What I can tell you based on Commissioner Henning's comment,
I think, might be appropriate. If the County Manager and I can speak
with their folks on the other end, if we can consider things like can we
get a full-time SO on site on Corkscrew and Alico area patrolling, we
help fund that, can we work with our vendor, maybe start a half hour
early and then take an hour or two-hour block during the school hours
and divert them on Alico, there's little things that we can do that, I
think, if you open it up for discussion with our staff and their staff that
might be beneficial.
I think delaying it any longer is going to risk, again, the time on
completion of the project. If you give us direction to move forward
and immediately talk to them to make some, you know, minor
modifications, or it could be major modifications that could work for
both of us such as those peak hours, such as school hours, such as
maybe having an SO on duty on Alico and Corkscrew dedicated to
patrolling that road, making sure the trucks are, you know, obeying
the laws, those are little things that we can do that I don't think have a
huge financial burden but may allay some of their concerns.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: If I may, I would like -- can --
where is that expert, transportation expert? Mr. Banks, would you
mind coming back up to the podium.
Page 75
October 8, 2013
What you said is of great concern to me. And if my
understanding of your comments is correct, you stated Lee County
failed to provide the necessary information to prove that, in fact, there
was a public safety hazard with respect to these trucks driving the
distance from where Alico and Corkscrew intersects and the I-75
interchange which is a stretch of about, what, three, four, miles or
thereabouts.
MR. BANKS: Yeah, four miles.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It is absolutely essential -- and why
I ask the question -- that Lee County present the evidence that
commerce is not adversely affected because of an illusory
public-safety concern. Any decision made by either of our boards has
to be based on absolute fact.
And the evidence to show there is a public-safety concern must
be presented in totality, and the response has to be appropriate based
on the evidence presented. That evidence has not come forward based
on your letter that I have here and based on the comments that you
have made.
And I was separately sent several -- actually, a case involving
Lee County's hearing examiner addressing the very issue of mining
truck traffic on Corkscrew as well as a study prepared by engineers. It
was a traffic-accident analysis. And both the conclusion of the hearing
examiner and the conclusion of the engineers did not consider the
truck traffic to create a public-safety concern.
I'm going to introduce what I received on the record. Since I
received it, I want everyone to see it.
And then going to your letter, again, any decision we make
should be based on evidence. You know, all the Items 1 through 6
that you've listed in your letter -- and I'd like you to introduce a copy
on the public record so anyone who wants to read it can refer to that --
has to be answered in order for us to make a valid determination that,
in fact, this public-safety concern is a valid and justifiable concern,
Page 76
October 8, 2013
and our response should be appropriate relative to that.
So I think part of the discussion that staff needs to have with Lee
County is to request Lee County produce the evidence, because they
haven't, and take negotiations, as Commissioner Coyle suggests, from
that standpoint.
And what the solution is may be a combination of many different
things. As you suggested, you -- it may very well be, you know, you
change the hours of operation or you mandate certain speeds or -- I
mean, there are just so many different options that could be
considered. I can't list them all. But I think it's extremely important
that this be an evidence-based decision.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Yeah, I totally
agree with that. Just -- and, again, I think, in my part, it would be
different if they didn't challenge our permit and hold up our projects,
which is going to affect the residents that live along the beach and
travel on our roads, okay. That's the bottom line.
So there's a consequence of what we do. The best thing to do is
communicate. What Commissioner Hiller said is absolutely spot on.
Let's provide the evidence to where their concerns is -- are and see
what we could do with those concerns, if the evidence provides that
they are factual information.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And that evidence should already be
present. I mean, it should take no time whatsoever for them to
accumulate it because they've asserted repeatedly that they have all
this evidence, so let them produce it because, obviously, we can't
make decisions in the absence of it.
Is my understanding of your statement correct?
MR. BANKS: Yeah. And just so the record's clear, I'm not here
representing anybody.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, we understand that.
MR. BANKS: Yeah. I'm not being paid to be here today.
Page 77
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, of course not.
MR. BANKS: But as an engineer that lives in Collier County,
again, it's just -- it's my obligation to make sure that the board, you
know -- it's a collective intelligent body, and it must be informed as to
the facts.
Now, I can get up here and tell you we have accidents on
Corkscrew Road. What does that mean in relationship to dump
trucks? And so the information that I've seen that has been
transmitted to you so far is very generalized. They talk about accident
frequency indexes. Well, how do the dump trucks affect the accident
index frequency -- the frequency index?
They're just numbers. And we can feed you stats all day long to
-- whether it's intentional or non-intentional, I -- you know, you could
be confused or misunderstand the information as it's presented to you.
And that's what I was trying to say earlier is it's not Collier
County staffs responsibility and it's not your responsibility to dig up
all this evidence. I spent, again, four years digging through police
records. I mean, I've got volumes of police records, and I had to go
through and decipher all that information in order to determine what
percentage of those accidents out there were dump-truck related. And
then once you're armed with that information, then you can see where
the problems are.
I mean, Mr. Casalanguida got up here and said, you know, we
can look at the school zones. Well, I can tell you during those four
years we didn't have single truck -- dump-truck incident with a school
bus. We never had a pedestrian accident. We never encountered a --
most of the accidents -- well, not most of them, but there were quite a
few accidents that were single-vehicle accidents, a truck swerves off
the road. And that -- again, landscape trucks, refrigerator trucks,
dump trucks, all kinds of trucks are on that road. And to isolate one
specific truck and say that's the problem, if it's the problem, then just
bring the evidence forward.
Page 78
October 8, 2013
Now, because I'm not working for anybody, but I did do the
report for another entity, I'm not at liberty to disclose all my findings,
but I submit to the board that if there was a clear understanding of how
dump trucks affect the safety aspects of Corkscrew Road, I suspect
that you will come to the same conclusion that I did is that dump
trucks do not contribute, to a significant degree, to the concerns on
that road.
There are a lot of passenger-car accidents that are occurring on
Corkscrew Road, and there are many traffic improvements that could
be made to address the issue of the -- significant number of accidents
on Corkscrew Road that have nothing to do with the dump trucks.
So, again, it's just -- my thought is, if I come here before this
board and I make a claim, I'm obligated to provide you with the
evidence that supports my claim.
And, again, I'm not trying to sway your decision on this matter.
All I'm trying to say is that at this point I don't know how you weigh
in the issue of safety in relation to dump trucks on your final decision,
regardless of what that decision is.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, thank you.
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I think so far, from what I've
heard from different board members, I think they really -- an idea has
emerged that seems to be pretty fair, and that is for the two counties to
negotiate together and address the different points that they're
concerned with, especially with the schoolchildren. And you had a
great idea. So the trucks don't operate during that time. They leave
early, and they're not in that area.
I'm sure that you can come up with some kind of negotiations
where, you know, Lee County might be just a little more comfortable
using their roads, and at the same time we can work with them to a
positive outcome.
And next time we talk about renourishment, we ought to be -- till
Page 79
October 8, 2013
that time -- and I'm sure Leo is working toward finding a dredge that
we can buy.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And, by the way, our previous truck
hauls for renourishment have been down Corkscrew, historically.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I know that. Never this
many, but, you know.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Absolutely.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, if I might, just so the board is clear,
if we issued the notice to proceed with the project to our contractors
today, your final -- or your substantial completion date is February 24.
So for every day that we negotiate and delay, just, you have to
understand there's an implication for the completion date of the project
and the traffic in Collier County that is associated with that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If we issued the permit -- the
permission to proceed today, when would they actually start hauling
sand?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Within four or five days, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. There still is no reason for
us to stop talking to Lee County about how we can make this a better
and safer process.
We all encounter circumstances where unusual things occur on
the highways, and it requires unusual solutions. And one of those is
you convoy that stuff through at one point in time with -- a vehicle
with flashing lights at the front and a vehicle with flashing lights at the
rear, and you take 10 trucks and you go through there, maintaining an
appropriate speed, lots of warning to people, and get them through
there.
I'm not saying that's an ideal solution, but that's one kind of thing
that you can do to minimize the danger to schoolchildren and to other
drivers. I'm sure there are other ways of dealing with some of that, but
Page 80
October 8, 2013
it's worth talking to people rather than issuing ultimatums. We should
be good neighbors.
There is no way we're going to resolve the emotional reaction to
this many trucks going through a residential neighborhood. I don't care
what you do. You can collect all the data in the world, and it's not
going to make the people feel any better. But if we can take some
tangible steps to make it safer and the additional cost of escorting
vehicles through a five-mile stretch of road is not an exceptional cost,
in my opinion. But, nevertheless, I understand it's going to wreak
havoc on traffic movement for those periods of time.
Okay. That's all I have to say about it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I agree, Commissioner
Coyle. I think certainly we have the skills in Collier County and Lee
County, certainly together, to handle the maintenance of traffic on an
intense segment that's this short. We've certainly done it in the past,
and I think we can.
So I would endorse -- I'll make a motion that we go ahead and
issue the intent to commence and, at the same time, coordinate with
Lee County what it is that we should and can do, and I think we
should be as absolutely responsible as we can to work out an
innovative solution. So that's my motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a motion and a second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
Page 81
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST FROM ANTHONY P. PIRES, JR.,
ESQUIRE, REQUESTING THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS LOOK FAVORABLY UPON THE REQUEST
AND SIGNED PETITIONS FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF THE LA
PENINSULA SEAWALL REPAIR/REPLACEMENT MUNICIPAL
SERVICES BENEFIT DISTRICT (MSBU) — MOTION TO WORK
TOWARDS ESTABLISHING THE MSBU AS REQUESTED BY A
MAJORITY (65% TO 70%) OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND
BRING BACK TO THE BCC — APPROVED
Commissioners, that moves us back to Item 6A on your agenda
this morning. It is a public petition request from Anthony Pires,
Esquire.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Mr. Pires is requesting that the Board of County Commissioners
look favorably upon the request and signed petitions for establishment
of La Peninsula seawall repair and replacement MSBU.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let me just -- just before we move
onto that, I want to make sure that the documents are on the record. Is
Mr. -- what's his name --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Banks.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Banks. Is Mr. Banks' letter in the
record?
MR. OCHS: Yes.
MR. DURHAM: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I just turned in whatever had
Page 82
October 8, 2013
been sent to me by way of studies as well. That's on the record also.
Okay, go ahead. Hi.
MR. PIRES: Madam Chairman, members of the board, for the
record, Tony Pires with the law firm Woodward, Pires, & Lombardo,
and thank you for allowing this item to be on the agenda for today.
I've been retained by the La Peninsula Condominium
Association, Inc., to represent them and provide assistance to them in
requesting that the Board of County Commissioners adopt an
ordinance and direct staff to advertise and draft an ordinance to
establish a municipal services benefit unit to fund La Peninsula
seawall repairs and/or replacement.
On their behalf, I'm here today to request the board look
favorably upon the request for the establishment and schedule a public
hearing for November 12, 2013, to adopt the ordinance and to have it
created before the end of this year. That's important from a budgetary
and funding perspective.
In the three-week period of time, the various individuals who
have been involved on behalf of my client have mailed out and
received back 125 signed petitions supporting the establishment of the
MSBU, and they have been validated by -- 126 came back; 125 were
validated, and I have a copy of those petitions along with the backup
material for the validation for the record, if you wish. I can hand that
to the court reporter.
The purpose of the district, we would request, is to repair and/or
replace the seawall at La Peninsula located on the Isles of Capri, with
the cost of the design, repair, and/or replacement project being paid by
the benefitting property owners through special assessments and
collection on the county tax bill.
It's proposed that the MSBU would provide for an advisory
committee to be appointed by the county commission consistent with
what you have provided in other instances consisting of five members,
all of whom would be permanent residents within the MSBU and
Page 83
October 8, 2013
registered voters in Collier County to make recommendations to the
board as to the nature and scope of the remedial action as well as the
assessment methodology and professionals to be retained.
It's further proposed that the determination as to the nature and
scope of the remedial action as well as estimates for the design, repair,
and/or replacement and the assessment methodology will be
determined by the Board of County Commissioners at public hearing
or hearings after review of recommendations from the advisory
committee at public hearings taking into account recommendations
and estimates from professionals, including professional engineers
retained pursuant to required statutory and county selection processes.
We appreciate the opportunity to make this request, and it's being
proposed as a financial mechanism whereby La Peninsula property
owners will be able to pay for the repair and/or replacement of this
seawall by way of a Collier County special assess collected on the
Collier County property tax bill.
The concept is to collect the special assessments and not ad
valorem taxes to fund this project. The proposed concept of the
MSBU is established and, after the project's scope and cost are
determined at public hearings, is that the county will sell bonds to
fund the entire project, and the total cost of the project would be
amortized over a period of time, perhaps 15 or 20 years or more,
whatever is appropriate.
It's also proposed that those property owners who wish to prepay
may be able to do so, but typically the property owner will only pay
the annual amortized amount for the period of time that they own their
unit.
We appreciate the efforts and assistance to date of the county
staff, the County Manager's Office, the alternative transportation
modes, or I call it the ATM department, as well as the County
Attorney's Office.
Therefore, we request that the board authorize the staff to prepare
Page 84
October 8, 2013
the ordinance for establishing the MSBU and set the hearing for
adoption of the ordinance for November 12, 2013. And, again,
encompassed within that ordinance would be establishment of an
advisory committee of five members. And that's just the first step in a
multi-step process.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'd like to make a motion to that
effect.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, could I make --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead. You make it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's my district.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead. I just think it's such a
good idea, I get excited, you know, when someone comes forward
with, like, a very reasonable solution. So I'll second whatever --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The motion that I'm about to make.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Whatever Commissioner Fiala says.
Well, you better say the right thing. Go ahead. It's yours.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: First I want to explain, I think that
they've gone about it admirably. They've worked together. There
were many opposing views. They've worked together to come up with
a pretty united effort here, as you can see by the petitions, and I've
enjoyed working with them every step of the way. I'm glad they took
this route, because this way then everything can be collected from
everybody, and they can participate. They'll also have staffs input to
guide them along as they go through this process, and that's extremely
important as well, so I make a motion to approve.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can I second it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You may.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no, no, no. Your district is up
north.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have to share with you why I'm so
supportive and excited about this. The residents of your community,
Commissioner Fiala, had also come to me and asked me what I
Page 85
October 8, 2013
thought in terms of a possible solution looking at it from, you know,
the financial angle, how to best solve this problem.
And the MSBU was discussed at that time, and they were just so
intelligent and so understanding, and they just ran with it and got it
done, which is super. You know, I was very impressed. Very
professional.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We have some nice people in my
district.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You do. So that's why I have -- I
feel I have a special place in my heart for this excellent project.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just before you do that -- and I
hope you do second it. At least we need to get on the record that the
majority of the property owners have, in fact, expressed their approval
of this process. So you -- I would like for you to get that at least on
the record.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I've been told that that is true, but it
should be on the record in this meeting that a majority of the property
owners have, in fact, expressed their approval.
MR. PIRES: And, for the record, there are -- as I understand it,
and I could be corrected by my clients, because they are very
intelligent and they do a lot of homework, that there are 176 individual
property owners, and 126 submitted petitions representing 128
property interests, and 125 of those property owners' petitions were
validated. And there are 190 property interests, because there are some
cabana units.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Does that satisfy you Commissioner
Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
MR. PIRES: So between 65 and 70 percent, depending upon
which number you use. Thank you very much, Commissioner Coyle.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you, Commissioner Coyle.
Page 86
October 8, 2013
Commissioner Henning? Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Pires, why can't this be
handled by the HOA? There's HOA fees being collected now,
correct?
MR. PIRES: To my understanding, yes, but this is a mechanism
whereby it would be allowed to be amortized as well as collected on
the property tax bills as opposed to -- the other financing mechanism
may not be able to be amortized. It would be a one-time funding,
which would be a substantial hardship to individual property owners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's tax deductible, too.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Hang on, now.
You're asking the county to bond monies to make improvements
to private property, and the county is responsible for that?
MR. PIRES: The MSBU would be --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That -- but what it also does is --
we have a millage cap, so that increases our millage cap.
MR. PIRES: I beg to differ, because it's a special assessment.
It's not an ad valorem taxation. It's a special assessment that's --
there's an allocation by an assessment methodology as to who the
benefit accrues and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're saying MS --
MR. PIRES: BU.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- BU will be responsible for it?
MR. PIRES: The residents and property owners with the MSBU
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If they default, the county has to
backstop it? No.
MR. PIRES: The proposal is the special assessments be placed
on the tax bill. They would have to -- they can't discreetly say I'm
paying my ad valorem taxes but I'm not going to pay my special
assessment. They have to pay their entire tax bill, that's the beauty of
Page 87
October 8, 2013
having an on-roll special assessment. So there isn't -- and then if the
taxes are not paid, the tax certificate gets sold at public sale, and that's
a revenue source to ensure that there is that flow of funds so that the
county would not be in the position or have any concerns.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you confirm that, County
Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: We're going to come back on executive
summary. I've got some concerns about a BU; I've got concerns about
bonding. And it will give my staff a chance to work with Mark
Isackson's people, work with Tony Pires, and come back so that we're
comfortable with the transaction before you actually have an
ordinance to go forward on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, you know, the
slippery slope is HOA community forgot to, you know, collect in their
annual fees replacement of roofs. This is the infrastructure of a
community, and it's a slippery slope of doing it on and on when the
HOA should have been taking care of it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The question I have is, this seawall
protects not just this building but basically protects that whole
peninsula, doesn't it?
MR. PIRES: That's correct. It goes around the entire area, that's
correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Why aren't more buildings involved
in this?
MR. PIRES: Briefly, this was the appropriate benefit unit, those
who were in support of this particular project and scope of the project.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning?
MR. PIRES: And, again, there are other -- the precedence, I
believe, of it established in other areas where you have either taxing
units or benefit units to pay for substantial infrastructure
improvements. It's not like just a roof. Because here you have a
substantial opportunity for property itself, real property to be damaged
Page 88
October 8, 2013
and end up in the sea. It affects the tax base of Collier County.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: An analogy would be, for example,
the Marco -- the Hideaway Beach MSTU. And what they are doing is
funding the renourishment of the private portion of the beach, as I
understand, if that -- is that correct?
MR. PIRES: That's my understanding. I believe theirs is a
taxing unit versus a benefit unit.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. Well, regardless, the
principle is the same.
MR. PIRES: That's correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: To basically protect that whole
corridor, if you will.
MR. PIRES: Erosion control structures for Hideaway Beach, is
my understanding, yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And that too. Both, right?
MR. PIRES: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Both the renourishment and erosion
control structures.
MR. PIRES: That's my understanding.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So the erosion control structures --
well, I guess the difference -- what Commissioner Henning is pointing
out is that the erosion control structures are public versus the seawall,
which is private, but then the beach is private, which is analogous to
the seawall, and the beach is a barrier just as readily as the seawall is a
barrier protecting against the waters.
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I think Commissioner
Henning is right, and I agree with the concerns that he has, and I'm
very interested to see what County Attorney Klatzkow says about that.
That having been said, I endorse this sort of a project, and I this
-- I think that the determination that we need to make is very
important on this, and I'll tell you why.
Page 89
October 8, 2013
This is a major project. This project is in excess of$35 million.
This is not a situation where an HOA or a POA has been negligent in
assessing. Maybe they should have been collecting a reserve. But my
point is this: We have waterfront issues -- anybody that's familiar
with this knows where this is. If this repair is not done, there's going
to be a catastrophic failure of a building in a major navigable
waterway of Collier County and the State. This is not a light
engineering project. This is an enormous undertaking.
And so I do think that the county has an interest and the public
has an interest in not having a failure and, in fact, encouraging
homeowners and property owners to take on these big projects simply
because I think there's going to be a bunch of them. And I think we
can't afford to have them fail.
So I believe that we need to craft a -- we need to craft an
understanding to Mr. -- to Commissioner Henning's concern that we
not get involved in roofs and sidewalks and --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- things of that nature, but we
reserve our involvement with private endeavors and private capital
construction where it does have major implications for the public if
they're not undertaken, because I believe that we're going to -- we're
going to find ourselves in that position in the future more frequently.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can I just ask a quick question? If
Pelican Bay MSTU does a number of improvements to property, are
all the improvements that are done in Pelican Bay to public property
or to both public and private? Like, for example, do the streetlights go
down any private roads or in any common areas as opposed to just the
county-owned street, roads?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't know that off the top of my head,
Commissioner.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But that's something to look into.
Go ahead, Commissioner Fiala -- Coyle?
Page 90
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, okay. Thank you very
much.
With respect to the conversation, I think it's good if we recognize
that what Mr. Pires is asking us to do is really schedule a hearing for
the creation of this MSBU. So the details will be worked out with the
County Attorney and Mr. Pires and staff.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So all we're saying is that we are in
agreement of bringing this back for a full hearing and creating an
agreement --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's exactly --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- hopefully that will meet
everyone's concerns.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's exactly right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we can debate that whenever
the time comes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yep, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we'll also protect our
waterway.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because it's not their waterway, it's
our waterway, but they're going to be building this road not only for
their use, but for the rest of the waterway use, and they're taking this
load on all by themselves.
And I love the idea that they want the county to be involved
because, number one, they have access. You know, the public has a
right to access from their county government, and they have an access
to persons who could answer questions that they might not have
otherwise, certainly not dealing with the homeowner association.
So to me, I just think this is the right way to go.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. We have a motion and
a second.
Page 91
October 8, 2013
No further discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. PIRES: Thank you very much. We appreciate it. Thank
you.
Item #7 — Presented; Continued to later in the Meeting
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. OCHS: That takes us to Item 7, Commissioners. Public
comments on general topics.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And just so you know, we will be
breaking at noon. Are there any public speakers?
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. We have 11 registered public
speakers. Your first speaker is --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Hang on a second.
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What is -- what are the subjects?
MR. MILLER: Some are not listed. It's public comment on
general topics, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. What I want to be sure of,
again, is if we have a group of individuals who are talking on one
specific topic, that we cluster them.
MR. OCHS: I believe one would have to do with the oil.
MR. MILLER: Yes. I have several that I think have to do with
Page 92
October 8, 2013
oil. I know some specifically say that. Others --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, let's take -- let's go ahead and
take a count. How many people are here to speak on the oil issue?
(Show of hands.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. Let's see. How many?
One, two, three -- only three people?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Five.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, sorry, five. Okay. And you're
all just for three minutes, or have people ceded time to you?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: You can't cede time on public
comment.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So that's 15 minutes on that?
MR. MILLER: Yes, at least. I do have one speaker that
registered to speak about oil that has had to leave and has left a
comment that he wants submitted into the record, which we will
handle.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. That's fine. And that's the
other thing, that anyone that doesn't want to speak but would like to
put their comments on the record are welcome to write something up
and submit it for the record behind the agenda item if they don't feel
comfortable speaking.
MR. MILLER: I generally place these in the order that I get
them.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What are the other -- who are the
other speakers?
MR. MILLER: The first speaker on my list is Jim Flagler
followed by Kenneth Thompson.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. MILLER: And neither one of those -- I don't -- Mr. Flagler,
are you here to speak about oil exploration?
MR. FLAGLER: No, not at all.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And who's Mr. Thompson?
Page 93
October 8, 2013
MR. THOMPSON: Mr. Thompson is not here to speak about oil
exploration either.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, what I would like to do is I'd
like to cluster the oil exploration people as, you know, one segment,
and have the two speakers who are non-oil to present now, because we
do have to break at noon, and we have a time-certain at one, and then
we can come back to those other speakers later in the afternoon.
MR. MILLER: Well, then we'll begin with Jim Flagler, then?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. Yes, please.
MR. MILLER: Jim, please.
MR. FLAGLER: Wow, what a meeting. Let me say -- my name
is Jim Flagler, and I reside at -- in Collier County for the last 30 years.
And I also have -- can make a comment that I now know more than I
could ever possibly want to know about beach renourishment.
Anyway, we've got it, and I'm glad that that's going to be happening.
I would address the chair and say to her how grateful I am that
she's here and that she's doing, I think, a wonderful job --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. FLAGLER: -- with the commission.
And one of my favorite commissioners is not present, but I'll talk
about her anyway, and that's Donna Fiala. She's my commissioner. I
can tell you that when I moved here 30 years ago, and I -- to East
Naples. After I moved in I thought, well, maybe I didn't move to the
right place because North Naples, people were living in North Naples,
much better place.
But now, because of Donna Fiala and all the work that's going on
in East Naples, East Naples is a wonderful place to stay. And there
she comes right now. There's Donna Fiala. Let's give her a little
round of applause for the work she's done for East Naples.
(Applause.)
MR. FLAGLER: All you have to do is drive down 41 and look
around, and you'll see that the building boom has hit East Naples.
Page 94
October 8, 2013
And we're not going to call it South Naples. We're going to continue
to call it East Naples, because that's what it is. And I'm proud to live
there and proud to have Donna as my commissioner.
Now, to other business. If I can get this to work right. Well, the
clock is ticking. It was working fine a minute ago. My goodness.
All right. I wrote a letter to Jeff Lytle, and it's supposed to be
right here. And here it is, with my glasses. Sorry, I'm delayed here.
This letter was to Jeff Lytle, and I mentioned it the last time I
appeared before you. And it's announcement of a third party in
Collier County and in the State of Florida. And to -- and today I also
make the announcement that I will offer Collier County voters a
choice at the polls and throughout the state, all 67 counties, I hope to
find independent candidates to challenge incumbents and to run for
open seats.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You know what you can do, Mr.
Flagler? Why don't you take a copy of the letter you sent Mr. Lytle
and just go ahead and put it on the record; that way anyone who cares
to can read what you've written besides what they've already read in
the paper. But thank you for your time.
MR. FLAGLER: Thank you. Thank you all for your service to
the community.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kenneth Thompson.
MR. THOMPSON: I'm Kenneth Thompson. I live at 2831
Becca Avenue.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Mr. Thompson, would you kindly
speak into the mic.
MR. THOMPSON: I'm Kenneth Thompson. I live at 2831
Becca Avenue, and I'd like to know why you give this guy $50,000.
I live right across -- in front of him here. You give him $50,000. And
I stood right there, and I watched him dredge that boat -- I mean that
dock right out with the dredge, because the guy that was dredging, the
Page 95
October 8, 2013
guy that was doing all the dredging there lived in that house, and he
brings the dredge there that one afternoon and dredged that dock right
down. And then you turn around and you give him $50,000 to put it
back. I can't understand how you did that.
And I want you to know, buddy, my -- Fred Coyle is mine, but I
seem to keep getting Donna Fiala all the time, and I don't like it. I
really -- I don't like it. I think you should stay in your own corridor.
Hold on a minute. This -- I don't care. I'm in bad shape. I
shouldn't even come up here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No. It's okay, sir. Let me suggest
the following.
MR. THOMPSON: But this is -- and then I want to show you
who I'm living in front of. You won't believe it. And this is all the
stuff that Donna Fiala's done over there. She even goes to the -- to the
lady over there, the election office, and asks her if it's all right for her
to do these things.
And what I'm finding out, that I don't think this lady's legally
supposed to give you nothing to do unless you ask for it. And when
you ask for it, you ask for it by voting for it.
But I'm going to show you real quick who I live in front of.
Do you know this guy? That's RJ Lucas. He's a rapist, a child lover.
He likes little girls under 12 years old. That's who -- Mary Luky (sic)
owns the house. And you should see what comes out of this
boathouse every morning; six black guys, one Puerto Rican, and one
black woman. And that's in that boathouse. And then they got another
one turns over men like a popcorn popper. I have never seen so many
men that this woman turns out in my life.
And I'm going to show you another one right quick. I can't
believe this is going on in front of me. Here's another one right here;
$550,000 bond. They get out of jail, and what happens? Right back in
front of me. Here's another one.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much, sir. Let me
Page 96
October 8, 2013
make a couple of suggestions.
MR. THOMPSON: It's terrible.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: First of all, County Manager, could
you have code enforcement visit the location and make a
determination that it isn't being used as a multifamily dwelling and
ensure that -- you know, that if it is a single-family home or if it is a
boathouse, it isn't being used.
MR. THOMPSON: It's a boathouse.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: If it's a boathouse, that it isn't being
used inappropriately and ensure that it doesn't get used inappropriately
prospectively, if it is being used inappropriately.
And with respect to the expenditure, Ms. Kinzel, if you could get
the information from this gentleman, and if there was expenditure of
$50,000, could you validate that it was legal?
MR. THOMPSON: Do you want it?
MS. KINZEL: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Just go ahead, and Ms. Kinzel will
get that information from you, and we'll investigate it.
And, then, if you could both bring the information back to the
board under County Manager comments at the next meeting and under
Constitutional Officers' comments at the next meeting, we would
appreciate it.
With that said -- thank you very much. You may have a seat.
MR. THOMPSON: If you could get this guy to do something
with his crazy --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you so much, and thank you
for taking the time to speak to us. You can have a seat now.
We're going to recess for lunch. We have --
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, excuse me. You do have one more
that was not oil related.
MR. MILLER: I have at least one more that's not oil. I have a
gentleman from a veterans group that's here just to introduce
Page 97
October 8, 2013
themselves. They presented a letter to all you folks.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, yeah, absolutely. Let's go ahead
and have him introduce himself That would be great.
MR. MILLER: John Dykhuis. Am I saying that right, John?
That's the envelope that was provided to all of you this morning.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's great. Thank you.
Sir, would you like to introduce yourself?
MR. DYKHUIS: Oh, yes. My name's John Dykhuis. Kind of
tired here. Anyway, my name's John Dykhuis, and I'm commander of
the Naples base of the USSVI, which, we're a submarine veterans
group that we formed here in the Collier County area in June. So far
we have about 35 members. The USSVI is a national group with
13,000 members.
Our focus in -- or our reason for being is, number one, we want
to celebrate veterans of submarines, and we're doing presentations in
schools and et cetera. We're moving on that.
We have several charitable organizations that we support. One is
Caps for Kids, which is, we find medically challenged children,
hospital organizations, and we present them with caps based on their
gender. Anyways, essentially, we make them submarine sailors or the
honorary submarine sailors which, to us, is a very, very important
thing. We're kind of a small brotherhood.
The other charity we have is Wreaths Across America, which we
are bringing more action in Collier County, and that's where wreathes
are placed on veterans graves on the 14th of December.
We just came out of the chute on this, so we're staggering along,
but we'll catch that up.
We're also building a submarine float, which is kind of what
we're begging money for in other places, and this float will be 25 feet
long, and it will be in the Naples Christmas Parade next year, the 4th
of July Parade. We'll be in the parade this year, and we were in the
4th of July Parade also showing our presence.
Page 98
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. That's very kind. And I
want to thank you very much for your letter. The commission
received the letter, and it highlights everything that you're doing, and
we want to welcome you to the community, and thank you for your
good service.
MR. DYKHUIS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much.
MR. DYKHUIS: Thanks for the time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thanks. With that, we're going to
adjourn for lunch. We're going to return at 1 o'clock for a time-certain
to hear the Naples Equestrian Challenge petition.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We only get 54 minutes for lunch.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: This meeting is back in order.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mic.
Item #11G
RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY
MANAGER AND STAFF TO USE THE FEDERAL GSA
SCHEDULES (I.E. SCHEDULE 70 AND 1122 PROGRAM);
THE STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACTS, AGREEMENTS AND
PRICE LISTS; COMPETITIVELY SOLICITED CONTRACTS
BY US COMMUNITIES, WESTERN STATES CONTRACTING
ALLIANCE, NATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL
PURCHASING ALLIANCE (NIPA), NATIONAL JOINT
POWERS ALLIANCE (NJPA) PUBLIC PURCHASING
CONSORTIUMS; AND, COMPETITIVE SOLICITATIONS FROM
STATE OF FLORIDA CITIES, COUNTIES, AND OTHER
PUBLIC MUNICIPALITIES (I.E. SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION)
FOR THE EFFICIENT PURCHASE OF GOODS AND
Page 99
October 8, 2013
SERVICES FOR THE DELIVERY OF PUBLIC SERVICES
AND FOR WHICH FUNDS WERE APPROVED IN OPERATING
BUDGETS — MOTION TO CONTINUE AND BRING BACK
AFTER REVIEW OF PURCHASING POLICY ORDINANCE —
APPROVED
Commissioners, before you move on to your advertised public
hearing this afternoon, I would like to ask the board's indulgence and
please consider a motion to allow me to continue Item 11G, which
was previously 16E6 on your agenda, and that was the discussion we
started this morning on state and cooperative contracts.
I've had some discussion with Ms. Kinzel over the lunch hour,
and I think a little more discussion on this, although my position
remains the same, wouldn't hurt anybody at this point, so -- and we'll
have this discussion when we bring it back with the proposed changes
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So moved.
MR. OCHS: -- to the larger policy.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I make that motion.
MR. NANCE: Second, I'll second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no discussion, motion
passes.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
MR. OCHS: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Fiala, thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: This is how we vote in Collier
County.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 100
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. We're back to where we
were, where I, you know, was in the. very beginning, which is motion
passes.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right.
Item #8A — Discussed; Continued to later in the meeting
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROVIDING ESTABLISHMENT
OF A CONDITIONAL USETO ALLOW THERAPEUTIC
EQUESTRIAN RIDING AND STABLING ON PROPERTY LESS
THAN 20 ACRES IN SIZE IN A RURAL AGRICULTURAL
ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION
2.03.01 .A.1 .C.19 AND 2.03.01.A.1 .C.24 OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY IS ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD AND CENTER STREET IN
SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — DISCUSSED
MR. OCHS: All right. So now that moves us to Item 8A on this
afternoon's agenda. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be
provided by commission members, and all participants are required to
be sworn in.
This is a recommendation to approve a resolution of the Board of
Page 101
October 8, 2013
Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, providing for the
establishment of a conditional use to allow therapeutic equestrian
riding and stabling on the property less than 20 acres in size within a
rural agricultural zoning district pursuant to Subsections
2.03.01 .A.1 .c.19 and 2.03.01.A.1.c.24 of the Land Development
Code.
The subject property is located on the southwest corner of
Goodlette-Frank Road and Center Street in Section 10, Township 49
south, Range 25 east, Collier County, Florida.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. Let's begin with ex
parte communications.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I received a request for a
meeting. I received the staffs communications to the Planning
Commission and several emails from volunteers and residents in the
area.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I've reviewed the staff report
from September the 5th, I've received letters, numerous emails, and
I've had two meetings all on this item, 8A.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have read the staff report of
September the 5th, 2013. I've also met with Wayne Arnold and Kim
Minarich representing the petitioner. I've met with Clay Brooker,
Caroline Martino and Ron Brown representing homeowners opposed,
and I have received substantial correspondence and emails concerning
this item.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've had calls and emails,
correspondence. And the meetings -- and I read the staff report. And
the meetings that I've had is with Kim Minarich and with Clay
Brooker and Wayne Arnold.
Page 102
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have them all here and everything
I've gotten.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I've had meetings,
correspondence, emails, and calls, and I've reviewed the staff report.
Before we get started, I'd like to have the board agree to the
amount of time we're going to allot for public comment on this matter.
What is the board's will?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How many speakers?
MR. MILLER: We have fifteen registered public speakers on
this item.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So shall we say 30 minutes with --
how many are for and how many are against?
MR. MILLER: That I don't know, ma'am. They don't list that on
their slip.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: How many are here that are for the
NEC project? You are the speakers that are for?
And how many are against? Okay. Are you all going to -- are
you all speaking?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We're against.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, you're against. Okay.
All right. Then I think what we need to do, I would say, what, 30
minutes and divide the time between the two?
MR. MILLER: I do have one speaker who has three other
speakers ceding time to him, Clay Brooker. So that would be --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, but I spoke to Clay, and what
we discussed is he would be the spokesperson for the entire group and,
basically, speak on behalf of all the individuals that are opposed and
would, basically, get the entire time, because what I would like to do
is let each side decide how they want to use the time allotted to them.
I mean, they can have, you know, 15 speakers talking one minute.
They can have one speaker talking 15 minutes. I want to defer to
Page 103
October 8, 2013
them and let them choose what they want to do with the time available
to that.
MR. MILLER: We could set the timer for 15 minutes and just
start and stop with each speaker. So if some wanted to say more, some
just want to support something previously said, we could do it like
that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. But what I want to do is
have everyone who is for speaking and then everybody who is against
speaking. So there are two divided pools, each with the same time
allotment as we agreed to this morning.
MR. MILLER: Would you like me to poll those names I have
here to see whether they're for or against so I can divide them
accordingly?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. And then, again, Mr.
Brooker had indicated he would speak for those who are against.
MR. MILLER: Against. So I have him here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So all the names of those
individuals could be read into the record so that their position is
clearly noted as a matter of record.
MR. MILLER: I just think there are more names that are
speaking against the item than I have here with Mr. Brooker --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It doesn't matter. I mean --
MR. MILLER: -- so I just want to make sure I have them all
divided equally.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Of course.
MR. MILLER: Marylee Kandel, will you be speaking in favor or
against?
MS. KANDEL: In favor.
MR. MILLER: Tom Peek?
MR. PEEK: Against. I don't remember ceding my time to Mr.
Brooker, either.
MR. MILLER: You did not, sir. I just --
Page 104
October 8, 2013
Okay. Caroline Martino?
MS. MARTINO: Against.
MR. MILLER: Okay. Yale Freeman?
MR. FREEMAN: Against.
MR. MILLER: William MacMaster?
MR. MacMASTER: Against.
MR. MILLER: Kevin Kalb?
MR. KALB: Against.
MR. MILLER: Bill Swartz?
MR. SWARTZ: For.
MR. MILLER: Ronald Brown?
MR. BROWN: Against.
MR. MILLER: Nancy Dauphinais?
MS. DAUPHINAI S: In favor.
MR. MILLER: Holly Shapiro?
MS. SHAPIRO: In favor.
MR. MILLER: And Hans Miller (sic)?
MR. MULLER: For.
MR. MILLER: Okay. Looks like we have five speaking in favor
of and nine speaking against. I've just been handed two more names
here that would like to speak against.
So -- and clearly not -- the one gentleman, at least, has not ceded
his time to Mr. Brooker, so I don't know how you want to approach
that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Again, that's up to Mr. Brooker and
those individuals to work out among themselves. And we can take
five minutes and let them figure out how they would like to use the
time. But I think we agree that a half an hour of testimony is --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Total?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Total. A half an hour of testimony
in total, 15 minutes for each side, and allow the sides to -- let's give
them five minutes to decide how they want to --
Page 105
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is anybody going to present what
the facts are?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, staff is. Staff-- our staff will
MR. OCHS: Ma'am, the petitioner usually first presents.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. I'm sorry. Well, the
petitioner will present. The petitioner will present.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I don't want to deny
anybody the right to speak, I think that's very important. If somebody
doesn't want to delegate their time, that they have every right to speak
to their elected officials.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Except that we have a procedure
when everyone is -- you know, we talked about that this morning.
That's what we all agreed, that we were going to have a process and
that we were going to set the amount of time, and you know, the -- if
you have a group --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I understand what you're saying
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- however --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's what the legislature provides
and allows for us to do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- you give a lawyer as much
time as you allot him, he's going to take all of it. So it could be that 30
minutes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But he needs to -- he actually
represents that group of people. Oh, you don't?
MR. BROOKER: Only a handful. I don't represent all of them.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Nobody represents me.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, he only represents whom?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Nobody represents me.
Page 106
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Understood. Well, in that case, that
allotment of time won't work for you. But you guys need to work it
out between yourselves.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: You're making an unbalanced deal
here, 15 minutes, and you've got 4-1 against.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But that's --
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: But that's not fair politics.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: If you don't mind, you can step up
to the mic. I'll allow you to address the board, if you like.
The procedure was established. And, essentially what legislature
has allowed through statute is for us as a board to establish a
procedure where, if we have a collective group that's for -- you know,
or a group that's against, that we can set a limit on the amount of time,
divide that equally. And if you have more or less speakers -- I mean,
it could have been imbalanced to the other side. You've got a lot of
people here who appear to be in support who are not going to be
speaking.
So you can delegate someone as your representative to speak,
you can agree, collectively, to individually speak, you know, a certain
amount of time, but that's the process that the board adopted as the
procedure to handle this kind of situation. Because we don't want to
hear the same thing over and over again from all these people.
You know, we understand that the positions -- there's a consensus
among the opposing views.
So, go ahead, County Attorney.
MR. KLATZKOW: I think this is the wrong way to go.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: This is quasi-judicial.
(Applause.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, is it quasi-judicial? I thought
you said it was legislative.
MR. KLATZKOW: This is --
Page 107
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, that makes a difference
because --
MR. KLATZKOW: This is different.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. So I need to clarify that.
If it's quasi-judicial, then everyone has the right to speak. If it's
legislative, then we can limit it. Then I need that clarified for the
record.
MR. KLATZKOW: This is quasi-judicial. I think we let them
speak.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: But I do think -- and this has been the
board's practice -- when you get repetition, after a while you say, does
anybody have anything different to say, and that usually works.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. Well, the County
Attorney gave us clarification. Since this is a quasi-judicial hearing,
we will allow everybody to speak, but please don't repeat yourself. If,
you know, someone has already made the statement, then don't, you
know, take the time to repeat the same thing.
If you agree with a statement that has been made, state, you
know, your name, your address, that you agree, and just don't repeat
all the same facts; add to what has been presented so that we have
additional information to better make our decision.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fine.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is that good?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. With that, do you want to
swear everyone in? Everybody who's going to testify, please rise.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. OCHS: You ready to begin, Madam Chair?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
MR. ARNOLD: Good afternoon. I'm Wayne Arnold. I'm with
Page 108
October 8, 2013
Q. Grady Minor & Associates representing Naples Equestrian
Challenge.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Could you speak a little louder?
MR. ARNOLD: I'm Wayne Arnold with Q. Grady Minor &
Associates, and I'm a professional certified planner. And I'll be
representing the Naples Equestrian Challenge on their conditional-use
application.
And what I thought I would do is just provide you a brief
overview of where we are and what we're requesting, then let Kim
Minarich come up and talk to you a little bit about what Equestrian
Challenge does and what they anticipate using the new facilities for,
and I think that will maybe frame the rest of the discussion when I go
over the site plan and some other information I have for the record.
So I've got an aerial photograph. I'm sure most of you know
where the current Equestrian Challenge facility is on Goodlette-Frank
Road, the red barn. And they currently have a conditional use on what
is known as Lot 21, and that's where the existing improvements are
located, and I've got some closer aerials on a site plan that can show
you those.
But currently they have their barn and riding arena and offices
for the organization on that lot for which they have a conditional use
that was approved about 13 years ago.
And we are now requesting a conditional use for an additional
property that they purchased several years ago, which is known as Lot
20, and they are under contract to purchase what's known as Lot 19,
where most of the proposed improvements are anticipated to go.
So the county has established, in the rural agricultural zoning
district, that you are required, if you do stabling on less than 20 acres,
to seek a conditional use and then, secondarily, because they're doing
a therapeutic riding and instructional program, that, too, is a
conditional use of the agricultural zoning district.
So we have two conditional uses before you, and that's the same
Page 109
October 8, 2013
two conditional uses that was previously approved on their existing
site.
The organization has, I think, been a good neighbor for many,
many years, and I'm proud to be representing them on their request to
build some additional facilities on the two lots that they hope to
develop.
And maybe with that, I'll let Kim take over and tell you a little bit
for a few minutes about what they anticipate doing, and then I'll spend
more time talking a little bit about surrounding land uses and their site
plan and things like that.
MS. MINARICH: Good afternoon. For the record, I'm Kim
Minarich, the executive director of Naples Equestrian Challenge.
Back in 1995, Naples Equestrian Challenge was established by a
small group of people that -- with two borrowed ponies and served
four children with special needs.
And today we have grown to serve this unfortunate demand in
our community. Today we serve over 540 children and adults with
special needs. And in addition to therapeutic riding, which we've
offered for the past, well, 16 years or so, this last year we expanded
our services to include equine facilitated learning and equine
facilitated psychotherapy programs.
And we were able to do that by collaborating with other
not-for-profits in our community. It's a great way to leverage our
donor dollars in this community, and with that we were able to
collaborate with David Lawrence Center for their adult addiction unit
with an equine facilitated psychotherapy program as well as with their
children's unit.
We've collaborated with PACE Girls of Collier County out in
Immokalee, and we also have a program with New Beginnings special
school that we do an equine facilitated learning program with. We've
done things with Youth Haven, and we also have a program with the
Friends of Foster Children.
Page 110
October 8, 2013
It has really opened up our scope of services and been able to
touch on so many more people that have special needs such as autism,
cerebral palsy, down syndrome, learning disabilities, attention deficit
disorder, at-risk children.
In addition, this last year in January we were able to add
Operation Strides, which is our veterans program. It's an equine
facilitated psychotherapy program for veterans, and we're very
fortunate to have on our board Dr. Virginia Condello, who is a
psychotherapist, and she volunteers her time to facilitate that program.
That program is fully funded. We were able to, with a group of
very generous donors, have fully funded that program for another year
and a half, so that program is offered free of charge to our veterans.
This -- the new program -- the new facilities on Lot 19, we're
proposing a round pen, a covered round pen, which will look
somewhat like a very large gazebo, a multi-purpose room, which will
be a meeting room, a training room, that we need. We have a
wonderful core group of active volunteers, over 300 active volunteers,
and we do several trainings a month to educate our volunteers with
side walking and groom and tack and leading.
And, also, we are proposing a four-stall barn for four additional
horses when needed. It's actually designed as a six-stall. One's for
tack and one's for feed, and then the other four stalls would be for
horses.
Right now we have a 10-stall barn, our landmark red barn on
Goodlette Road. And we have a herd of 10 amazing horses that are
still able to serve the group of participants that we do annually. But,
obviously, with expanding the services, we anticipate the addition of a
couple more horses.
But with these additional facilities, we'll be able to do concurrent
programming, particularly in the evening. As you can imagine, a lot
of our kids, it's after-school time that they're able to come during the
school year. This will allow us to even expand our services into
Page 111
October 8, 2013
interactive vaulting and to do a lot more equine facilitated learning
and psychotherapy programs in the round pen and then allow the
therapeutic riding to be conducted in the large arena that we have, the
covered arena.
The multi-purpose room, as I said, will provide us with meeting
space that we need for training but, in addition, it will allow NEC to
be a destination for our sanctioning organization call PATH, which is
the Professional Association of Therapeutic Horsemanship, which is --
we abide by their core standards. We've been accredited to the
premier center.
And we would very much like to be a destination for instructor
training, and this additional facility would allow us to do that, and
that's an income-generating activity for NEC.
And then further into the future, we would very much like to
partner with FGCU, the University of Florida to conduct research
projects on therapeutic riding and equine-assisted activities to further
promote this type of alternative therapy, and to -- and to provide that
type of education and abstracts that can be a result of that.
So with that, I hope it's kind of given you an idea of what we do.
And I think Wayne will finish up for you. Thank you.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Kim.
I'm going to go ahead and put an aerial photo on the visualizer
that depicts the existing and proposed facilities, and I'll talk from that.
On the left of the screen, for instance, that's the existing facilities
that you see. The large rectangle is the covered riding arena that
you're familiar with and then, of course, the barn is the closest
structure to Goodlette-Frank Road.
And all the way to the far right is what we refer to as Lot 19, and
you can see the proposed riding pen and the training room and the
barn also closer to Goodlette-Frank Road.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you -- hang on a second. Can
you point out --
Page 112
October 8, 2013
MR. ARNOLD: Sure.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You're not making it clear. I mean
MR. ARNOLD: Let me try to point it out. The existing facilities
are located, barn right here, the covered riding arena is here, the
offices for the organization are largely here and then, of course, there's
a small parking lot that serves the facility.
This lot is owned by Naples Equestrian Challenge, and currently
it has only paddocks and the former residence that's been used as some
office space closer to Ridge Drive.
Those paddocks were put in, and they've never really been able
to use them for anything other than grazing because they didn't have
the conditional use to operate their instructional program on that lot.
And then this is Lot 19, and what we're proposing is the covered
riding pen, the training room, and then this is really a six-stall barn,
but it's anticipated and restricted to four horses, and then we would
have a tack room and feed space as well.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So if I may interrupt and just ask,
you are not proposing any increase in parking to the facility?
MR. ARNOLD: We have some additional parking that's
proposed, and it is largely -- let me show it on another plan. It will be
easier to see. This is a color version to highlight the structures a little
bit better.
This is the existing parking facility. We're proposing to add
some parking here and here. And I should say that, you know, we've
had a lot of dialogue with the neighbors over the last several months,
and, you know, out of that dialogue grew some pretty significant
changes to the site plan. And I'll point those out. That's probably a
good time to do that.
We originally proposed this area for more parking. The
neighbors were concerned about the number of parking spaces we had
on site and the impacts it could have to their neighborhood, so we
Page 113
October 8, 2013
eliminated the parking and made it another paddock for the horses.
This access point that exists where I'm pointing now on Ridge
Drive, for instance, there was concern of the use of that with the
expanded activities. So Kim Minarich, early on, agreed that, we'll
close that access point when we build these new facilities and make
that an emergency access only so we don't have any additional impact
on your local street.
So they anticipated tearing down what's -- where there's currently
a cottage and making the project's future and only access really to
Center Street.
This driveway would remain. That serves their offices and the
garage where they use for some incidental storage, but that's very
nominal traffic associated with that and not typically on a daily basis.
So the site plan -- there's some rhyme or reason to this, too. I
mean, one of the things that our neighbors said, we wouldn't oppose
you if you took all of your proposed improvements on Lot 19 and put
them on Lot 20. And the basis for putting the riding pen and the other
improvements on Lot 19 were simple. This arena has three to four
participants in it currently, and they use amplified sound to conduct
their training.
So the idea behind moving the small riding pen farther away is
they wouldn't need the amplified sound to conduct their training
sessions, that they could do that in normal conversational voices.
So early we also agreed that we wouldn't have amplified sound
there, and that message was carried forward, and it finds its way into
one of your conditions with the Planning Commission approval.
So what we have really going on in the big picture of what NEC
will own and operate is the existing facility, much as it currently
operates, the continued use of the riding paddocks, and there's a
sensory trail that's a component of that where riders would ride, and
through different visual and touchable-type things that are on the
paddock gates and other features, they get sensory help for whatever
Page 114
October 8, 2013
their disability seems to be, and then on the new proposed
improvements, we have paddocks now all along Ridge Drive, and
then, of course, the improvements are pushed much closer to
Goodlette-Frank Road, which I think the plan, as it evolved, is really a
good one, and I think the long-term elimination of the access point to
Ridge Drive is really a big, big deal for everybody, and I think it
greatly improved the plan and the compatibility of the facility for the
neighborhood. So I think, very wise choice and a good neighbor thing
to do.
Even though I think -- when you hear from Mr. Banks, our traffic
engineer, I think you'll understand that it's probably unnecessary,
given the volumes of traffic that are here, they're so low and de
minimis that it's probably not necessary to close it off completely, but
because they're trying to continue to be the good neighbors they have
been, they're willing to go ahead and do that.
So that's kind of our site plan. And, really, your conditional-use
process, it's a process that typically you think of a conditional use as a
use that -- it's a use that normally would find itself in that zoning
district but it probably needs further scrutiny with possible conditions
to make it compatible or the better fit for that area.
One of the unique things about this property and other properties
along Goodlette-Frank Road is that these were deeded properties as
agriculture. These are not residential lots. They're designated
agriculture on the plat for Pine Ridge.
They were deeper lots than most of the others. They were larger
lots than most of the others, because Goodlette-Frank Road used to be
railroad tracks that served Naples.
So you had a tier of agricultural lots separating you from the rest
of Pine Ridge which was designated residential.
So we're kind of unique in the sense that we are an agricultural
designated and deeded tract of land. And, you know, if you bought in
Pine Ridge, your deed describes what you can do and may have other
Page 115
October 8, 2013
restrictions. And on ours, we're restricted to a maximum of 16 horses
per lot, which would be 48 horses for these three pieces of property.
But through the conditional-use process, they're going to be limited to
a maximum of four horses on -- or six horses on this particular piece
of property for the new improvements. So --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Which particular piece of property?
MR. ARNOLD: Lots 19 and 20 are the subject of this
conditional use. So on those two lots, they would be allowed to stable
six horses maximum.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So 12 total or six -- six each or 12?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, they currently have a 10-horse-stall barn
here, so it would be 10, and I think their immediate plans are to find a
way to acquire four additional horses, but it is designed to be a
six-stall horse barn. So the Planning Commission limited us to a
maximum of six horses for this conditional-use application for Lots 19
and 20.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So the total number of additional
horses is six?
MR. ARNOLD: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: In addition to what currently exists
on Lot 21?
MR. ARNOLD: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And that number again is?
MR. ARNOLD: Ten.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So, basically, 16 horses for
three lots as opposed to 16 for each lot individually?
MR. ARNOLD: Correct, yep. So I think that's something -- and
I know that the opposition's going to tell you that your zoning code is
something that we have to deal with regardless, but I think it's
important to know that, historically, these lots were meant to be
agricultural, which I think fits with the equestrian theme that we have
going on here and, of course, the stable that's on the other side of
Page 116
October 8, 2013
Center Street as well that operates largely as a commercial stable
because it conducts for-fee stabling and training.
So historically we have a use that's not residential, and we
understand we have residential neighbors, and we also understand we
have to be good neighbors to them.
Staff had originally recommended two conditions, and those
were limiting the hours of operation for participants to 8 p.m., and
then we could conduct other training on site till 9 p.m. for these two
sites, and they also indicated no amplified sound, which we were fine
with both of those. And I should just tell you at the Planning
Commission hearing, we heard a lot of testimony, a lot of facts, and
the opposition toward the end of the hearing offered up a set of
conditions, and those conditions -- you know, the first condition was
don't put any improvements on Lot 19. And, you know, after
discussion, we decided that was a nonstarter. That was one we
couldn't agree to.
There were other conditions in there that the Planning
Commission also heard. And while they didn't agree completely with
the opposition, I think they did do a long and hard job of debating
these and adopting a set of conditions that tried to address each and
every zoning-related item you could find.
For instance, landscape buffers. You know, a continuation of a
landscape buffer along Ridge Drive, closing the access point on Ridge
Drive, not allowing the office space to be rented that's historically
been rented on Lot 20, which is this building, taking away the
driveway to Ridge Drive for that building, and agreeing that this
would -- after these improvements are constructed, this becomes the
only true access point to the Equestrian Challenge facility.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you clarify that? Because you
have two -- you have that second access point on Center.
MR. ARNOLD: Yes. This access on Center would remain.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: This one to the -- no.
Page 117
October 8, 2013
MR. ARNOLD: Middle.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- to the east.
MR. ARNOLD: This one. The one that we intend to gate?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, on Center.
MR. ARNOLD: Oh, I'm sorry, on Center. That's a secondary
access that's used for, I believe, hay and feed deliveries only.
MS. MINARICH: For the barn.
MR. ARNOLD: It's really for the barn use only. It doesn't get
public access for participants or the staff And that's -- the other side
of that is this isn't really a subject of a conditional use, and we had that
debate at the Planning Commission, too, that, I mean, we're not to
re-trade the deal we already have for the conditional use that we have.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No. I just wanted to clarify for the
record so everyone understands what exists versus what you're
changing and identify --
MR. ARNOLD: Good point.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- you know, what is.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you.
So the Planning Commission also then imposed the hours of
operation, the amplified sound. They have conditions that limit our
lighting, affect our landscape buffering. So we started getting all
those things, so if you can't see it, you can't smell it, and you can't hear
it, you know, what are the compatibility issues?
Because when you look at the conditional-use criteria that's in
your Land Development Code, there aren't many. There are four
criteria that you have to meet for a conditional use, and those are
consistent with your Comp Plan; agricultural use and institutional-type
uses are permitted throughout the urban area by right. I mean, they
have to seek a conditional use, but they're permitted in that land-use
designation. Access to site, is it safe, convenient, and does it not
cause problems?
Are we compatible? And, you know, compatibility is not a
Page 118
October 8, 2013
defined term, but I think we all know that the reason we have
buffering requirements and height standards and setbacks and things
of that nature all go to the compatibility of a particular use.
And then the other criteria, it's kind of a play on compatibility,
but it's the effect of noise, glare, economic, or odor. And I think the
question then is noise issues. We're ceasing operation early. We have
no amplified sound. What would be the issue of noise? Unless there's
an opposition to having horses graze on the paddock, but those are
allowed by right anyway.
The issue of access is addressed through closing the access to
Ridge and making that our emergency access only.
Further, Kim agreed to put in a solid gate so that there would be
no light from the car lights that could shine through it.
We agreed to continue our landscape buffer and make it
consistent along all of Ridge Drive, including the Lot 21 where the
current improvements are located.
So staff and the Planning Commission, I think, did a good job of
analyzing what our neighbors asked us to do to try to make
concessions to make this a better fit for the community, and I think
each and every one of them do that.
Are all of them necessary? Probably not, but, you know, where
we could find common ground, we were willing to go there and try to
address that.
One of the things that the opposition said is that -- well, they said
they were not going to be as big as they are today. But, as I've said to
others, you know, the conditional-use process from 12 or 13 years
ago, we have evolved immensely with the way we address things.
You know, things change in a neighborhood -- and we have an active
Pine Ridge Civic Association. We know that.
We don't have railroad tracks anymore that are our
neighborhoods, so we have Goodlette-Frank Road, which is a county
arterial roadway. So things have changed, and we're trying to respond
Page 119
October 8, 2013
to those changing conditions as we can.
And I think, from a professional planner's perspective, everything
that we've addressed in these conditions addresses really the issue of
compatibility. And I think your staff has determined that it's a
compatible project with these, your Planning Commission did as well,
and I certainly do.
One of the things that was also discussed extensively by the
opponents who were there was the fact that this has grown large, it's
created traffic impacts, it's -- they didn't believe the traffic numbers
that we have. And our traffic numbers that we've presented were
based on NEC's operational numbers. They keep records of every
participant that's there. They know exactly how many participants are
there. They know how long they're there, because you don't show up
without an appointment.
Your sessions are at scheduled appointment times. And, you
know, the way these operate, it's not one person on a horse. You have
a person that has two to three volunteers that are assisting with that
horse and the participant.
So you end up with volunteers who are on site for more than the
therapy period, but you have, then, the turnover of the participants.
So from a standpoint of managing traffic, it was a low number,
and staff had asked us to project for the new facility based on some of
the historical counts for the existing facility. And, you know, we
decided after the Planning Commission hearing that we would try to
validate those numbers, because we don't fit neatly into any traffic
engineering standard. It's such a unique use; you don't have a standard
to easily point to that would give you a fair idea of what the traffic
impacts really are.
So NEC retained Jim Banks, and Jim Banks made visual
observations. He actually did traffic counts to validate what we have.
He prepared a report that was submitted to your staff. They've
reviewed it. I believe they agree with his conclusions.
Page 120
October 8, 2013
Jim is here. I'd like to have him come up and maybe just
describe to you what he observed and what his findings were. And I
think we have copies, if you'd like them for the record, we can offer
up.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, we would like them for the
record.
MR. ARNOLD: So with that, Jim, if you don't mind.
MR. BANKS: Sure.
THE AUDIENCE: What happened to the 15 minutes?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: They don't have limited time on
their presentation, and you're not going to have limited on yours.
Each of you individually get to speak three minutes for as many of
you that want to speak.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: New information.
MR. ARNOLD: Validation of old.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. BANKS: For the record, Jim Banks. I'm here on behalf of
the petitioner. My firm prepared the traffic-impact evaluation that was
just handed to the board. This information was transmitted to Collier
County staff for their consideration. They did review the findings and
conclusions of that report and did concur.
I'm now going to just briefly give you some highlights of what
we did. I'm not going to read this entire report into the record, as
you've got a copy. But my firm, J&B Transportation Engineering,
when we were asked to get involved in this, the first thing we said is,
we need to go out and actually do traffic counts. We need to know
physically what is being generated by this site.
And speaking with NEC, it was their indication to us that their
busiest days are Thursdays. So we specifically targeted a Thursday
study. So the information that is provided to you is at the highest
intense use of NEC, and so that's what the conclusions are based upon.
But what we did is we conducted traffic counts at the intersection
Page 121
October 8, 2013
of Goodlette-Frank and Center Street, and we also conducted traffic
counts at all the side accesses for NEC.
Now, NEC typically does not begin their operations till about
8:00 a.m., 8:15. So we limited our traffic counts in the morning from
8 a.m. to 9 a.m., which was their peak period of folks that were
coming into the site, and then we also did -- conducted an evening
count between 4 and 6 p.m. when folks are entering and exiting the
site during those periods.
And what we found was that the peak -- the peak hour trip
generation that occurs for NEC does occur between the hours of four
and six, and during that -- the week that -- the Thursday that we
counted, they had a total two-way traffic demand of 26 vehicles per
hour.
Now, 26 vehicles per hour represents -- I'm sorry. I'm skipping
ahead. Let me -- so we compiled that data.
Then we went out and actually did an observation and the traffic
counts on Center Street, and we determined that Center Street
currently on Thursday -- and we did adjust this to reflect seasonal
conditions. In other words, we obtained the traffic counts in October,
so we adjusted that for seasonal conditions to reflect what the traffic
volumes on Center Street would be during the month of January,
February, March.
And based on those projections, Center Street has a current
approximate traffic demand, two-way traffic demand, of 270 vehicles
per hour during the p.m. peak hour, and that is approximately just less
than 25 percent of Center Street's carrying capacity.
And so when I'm talking about carrying capacity, if I have a
5-gallon bucket and I tell you it will hold five gallons but I've got a
gallon in it, that's the difference. So Center Street's capacity is -- its
current capacity is being used up to 25 percent of its available
capacity.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So what you're saying is there's 75
Page 122
October 8, 2013
percent available capacity adjusted for seasonality?
MR. BANKS: There's a surplus of capacity still on Center Street
of 75 percent. It can handle 75 percent increase in its traffic to
accommodate future demands. We're not going to have that kind of
increase, but it does have the potential to do that.
Ridge Drive has a peak season, peak hour, peak demand of 170
vehicles per hour two-way, and the reason being, is as folks come in
Center Street, some head north, some head south on Ridge Drive and,
conversely, when they're exiting, it's just the opposite. So that's why
there's a decrease in the amount of traffic on Ridge Drive.
And that represents approximately 15 percent of Ridge Drive's
carrying capacity, so there's still a surplus of 85 percent of capacity
that's not used on Ridge.
The intersection of Center Street and Ridge Drive has a four-way
approach volume during p.m. peak hour peak season conditions of
approximately 600 vehicles per hour. That means all four directions
as it approaches the intersection is 600 vehicles. It's a four-way-stop
intersection. That is less than 35 percent of that intersection's carrying
capacity. And currently today it operates at Level of Service A.
And then Center Street at Goodlette-Frank is a T intersection
with the north/south approaches being Goodlette-Frank Road, and
those are free-flow north- and southbound movements. The eastbound
approach has an exclusive eastbound to northbound left turn lane and
right turn lane.
Also on Goodlette-Frank you have a left ingress and a right
ingress lane onto Center Street. So there's no additional improvements
needed to the intersection when -- as relative to the need for turn lanes.
Now, what we did is we took the existing trips that are generated
by NEC, and we took the peak season peak hour background traffic on
Center Street and Ridge Drive, and then we also forecasted the
additional -- the net new trips that's going to be generated by the new
facility.
Page 123
October 8, 2013
So what that means is the existing facility is still going to
continue to generate whatever volume of traffic it is today, which we
said is 26 vehicles per hour. Then there's going to be an increase in
the volume of trips with the new facility.
And we conservatively overestimated the amount of trips based
on what NEC described as a use of that facility, and we said there's
going to be as -- there could be 15 vehicles -- new trips generated
during that p.m. peak hour.
So, again, I just want to remind the board I'm talking about the
highest peak hour during peak season conditions for the highest peak
weekday.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But how much of your work is
seasonally affected? I mean, is there really seasonality to what you
do?
MR. BANKS: There's a slight increase, yes, and it's all
documented based on the historical counts that Collier DOT
maintains, and they -- there's a reflection of how much trips are on the
network during October versus that during January and February. So
we did make those adjustments.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Within the community of Pine
Ridge, there's a seasonal peak?
MR. BANKS: Yeah. We applied a 15 percent increase to the
traffic in October.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The only reason I'm asking is it
would seem that, you know, that is a very conservative estimate
because, you know, Pine Ridge is primarily a stable --
MR. BANKS: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- non-seasonal residential
community. And I'm just wondering how, you know -- I mean, it's a
more conservative count by adding the seasonality factor, but I just
don't know how real it is.
MR. BANKS: Yeah.
Page 124
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And then on the service side, I
mean, the kind of service you provide, I would think that those clients
are pretty much here year-round also. So I, again, am questioning the
seasonality on the service side. And, again, your numbers are more
conservative not less conservative because of that factor, but I'm just
questioning the reality.
MR. BANKS: And to answer your question, yeah, we don't have
a lot of beach tourists using Pine Ridge and Center Street or Ridge
Road and Center Street to get to the beaches. So there's not this
significant increase.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So what is the seasonality factor
again?
MR. BANKS: In that area it's about 20 percent, 20 to 25 percent.
We applied 15 percent simply because, you're right, it's an established
residential neighborhood. You have some folks that head up north.
A lot of them live down here full time. And so we did apply an
adjustment factor.
And I would like to add to your point about the conservative
approach. Every step of the way we made sure that we were
providing or submitting to the board and to staff what we perceived to
be the worst-case scenario. I don't want to get up here and, you know,
talk about what happens on Monday which is, clearly, one of their
lower trip generation days. I want to tell you what happens on
Thursday during p.m. peak hour, and I wanted to make adjustments
that would say, if anything, I'm overstating what's going on. I don't
want to understate to the board because this is a -- you know, a
decision for you guys to make.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Of course.
MR. BANKS: And back to my earlier testimony, I want to
present the facts to you guys as they are.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Understood.
MR. BANKS: I will just conclude that when we projected the
Page 125
October 8, 2013
additional trips and added them to the background traffic to get an
idea of what the demands are on the surrounding road network, I'm
just going to summarize real quick, as determined, Center Street
currently operates at a Level of Service A and will continue to operate
at Level of Service A with the completion of the expansion.
The same is true for Ridge Drive, Level of Service A today,
Level of Service A when they complete the expansion.
The intersection of Center Street and Goodlette-Frank, that's the
-- I want to make sure we're talking about -- Center and
Goodlette-Frank currently operates at Level of Service C, and that's
mostly the side street level of service, not the north/south movements
on Goodlette-Frank which operates at Level of Service A.
And then, finally, the intersection of Center and Ridge Drive
function at Level of Service A.
And in conclusion, I would submit to the board that the
relocation of the project's primary access on Center Street is proposed
to be strategically located to ensure that there are no turning
movement conflicts with either intersection of Center and Goodlette or
Center and Ridge.
And that proposed location, as shown on the plan that Wayne
presented to you, exceeds the county's minimum intersection
separation criteria, and the reason for that is, is we want to make sure
that when folks are coming in and out of NEC, we do not create any
type of conflict with folks that are at the intersection of Center and
Ridge and Center and Goodlette-Frank.
Now, as far as the need to move the access, it was my opinion
that it did not need to be done, but I understand it was NEC's desire to
work with the neighbors and to try and minimize the amount of traffic
that is on Ridge Drive, and so that was the reason for moving that
access.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think it's absolutely essential that it
not be on Ridge. I mean, I -- I could never support it if there was
Page 126
October 8, 2013
traffic going on Ridge.
MR. BANKS: And I think that that was what they were
responding to, not necessarily the degradation of traffic, but the desire
not to have it. And NEC was happy to do so.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning, did you
want to raise a question at this time, or did you want to wait?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I have questions for Mr.
Arnold and Mr. Banks.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Would you like to raise them at this
time?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure, if you don't mind.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No. I would appreciate, you know,
the questions to come out now so if the public wants to discuss issues
that we discussed, that they have the opportunity to do so.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, absolutely.
Mr. Banks, your traffic counters, did you use mechanical or
people?
MR. BANKS: Visual, visual.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Did you -- in your
observation, the trips establishing to the Center were actual counts that
went into the Center at all three access points?
MR. BANKS: Yes, they -- we had our volunteers station
themselves up on a podium, and they had clear visibility of all three
accesses. I was there as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Volunteers?
MR. BANKS: Yeah, somebody assisted me. While they were
doing the traffic counts, I was on site observing the traffic in and out
of the center and that type of things.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So they wasn't employees of
your --
MR. BANKS: It was not an employee of my firm. It was a
volunteer that I instructed on -- provided them the methodology. I sat
Page 127
October 8, 2013
with them while they were doing the traffic counts as well as moving
from location to location to visualize what was going on.
I submit to you that I was there during the traffic counts and did
validate the data that was being collected.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Mr. Arnold, do you
agree with the Planning Commission's stipulations?
MR. ARNOLD: We do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you recognize that this is a
commercial establishment?
MR. ARNOLD: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It is a --
MR. ARNOLD: We believe that this would be classified as more
of an institutional agricultural use. I mean, we are zoned agricultural.
It allows a full range of agricultural uses in that district, and these are
two that are --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you don't need a
conditional use to plant row crops.
MR. ARNOLD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But you need a conditional use
to provide for institutions or churches, things of that nature, and I'm
just trying to figure out, with our Land Development Code and
standard industrial code, is this classified as a commercial use.
MR. ARNOLD: You can ask your staff, but I believe they will
tell you that it is not a commercial land use.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. It's not a residential, I
know that.
MR. ARNOLD: It's clearly not residential, but it is an
institutional use much like you said, a church, or we have other things
like senior housing projects. We have in this particular case, under the
agricultural zoning district, certain agriculture-related activities
require also the conditional use.
And, for instance -- I forget the year. I think it was 1998 or so --
Page 128
October 8, 2013
you used to be able to have stabling on any agricultural lot regardless
of size subject to certain number of horses per acre.
And at that point, the county --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But that was for individual uses.
MR. ARNOLD: Correct. But there was no limitation on stables,
and their kennels were the same thing. So now if you do kenneling,
stabling, and certain other agricultural activities on anything less than
20 acres, you absolutely have to have a conditional use, and that
applies whether you're on Goodlette-Frank Road or 30 miles inland.
And I'm not sure of all the history involving that, but I think we
all knew that as we grow, certain agricultural uses may not be
compatible without conditions. And in this case, a horse stable and
the equestrian instructional riding --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the zoning on that is
agricultural?
MR. ARNOLD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you could have a pig farm on
there?
MR. ARNOLD: With limitation. There are deed restrictions that
limit the number of pigs that they can have and chickens, for instance.
But your code does have some parameters that deal with --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's a great place to live.
MR. ARNOLD: It's very unique. I mean, I think the people who
have been in Pine Ridge a long time will tell you the equestrian
experience of having a horse in your home were kind of the special
part of Pine Ridge community, people seeing their neighbors ride up
and down their streets with horses. I don't think it happens as much
today as it did, but that's kind of been the history.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But you couldn't use that for a
commercial use, though?
MR. ARNOLD: Correct, I could not. I'd have to do a
Comprehensive Plan amendment to do so.
Page 129
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There are people there that have
chickens and goats and --
MR. ARNOLD: And I think, historically, it wasn't in town -- it
wasn't still here when I moved to town in the late 1980s, but there was
historically an egg farm on --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I remember the stairs (sic).
MR. ARNOLD: You probably do; I don't. But there are
limitations. I noticed when I was reading the deed restrictions on
number of fowl and not being able to operate an egg farm or whatever
they call it. There's an agricultural term that Commissioner Nance
may know that I don't that refers to what's really an egg farm, so.
But, yes, I do think that all the conditions -- and, you know, they
grew from two to 15, and I'd say that's largely because of the
neighborhood input, which I think shows that we were all trying to
find some common ground trying to address each and every one of
those zoning-related issues.
And they have other issues that I believe are not necessarily
zoning related that you may or may not hear about when they speak,
but I hope that we have a chance to respond to any of those comments
that they may bring up.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have a couple of questions and
concerns.
I need assurances that there won't be any traffic that will access
the site through the adjacent residential streets. I think there needs to
be a very clear stipulation, if this is to be approved, that you can't, for
example, come down East, cut through Ridge, and go to Center, for
example, to get to this site.
I think the ingress and egress has to be strictly, you know, off of
Goodlette through Center to protect the neighborhood from, you
know, the traffic that could potentially result from this site. And I
don't think it would be an inconvenience or a hardship whatsoever to
Page 130
October 8, 2013
limit the access to that Center Street access point.
MR. ARNOLD: I want to make sure I follow you. Some of the
volunteers and probably some of the participants reside in the Pine
Ridge community.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And an exception could be carved,
obviously, for those individuals who are residents. I mean, clearly,
we're not going to limit them. But what I don't want to see people do
is start using the Pine Ridge residential community as I cut-through to
get to stables for whatever reason, whether it's, you know, for, you
know, the training or for an activity.
And I can't imagine that that limitation is going to be -- have a
significant impact. I don't think there's going to be a lot of traffic, but
I think the residents of the neighborhood should have the assurance
that, you know, this -- these, essentially, residential roads will not be
used in that fashion.
MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think they would probably --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And if I just -- if I may say, there's a
precedent set for that. When we were working -- and, by the way, just
for the record -- and I wanted to introduce this earlier, but I didn't have
the email. I just received it. I actually live in Pine Ridge, and for those
of you who don't know, I live on North Street, which is, let's see, one
block down, one block over, and then a half a block down.
And I asked the County Attorney to give me an opinion as to
whether or not I had a conflict of interest in voting on this matter, and
he did give an opinion. He is the ethics officer for the county. And
I'm going to introduce that opinion on the record.
In his opinion, I do not have a conflict in voting on this. But I
want, in the interest of full disclosure, to state on the record where I
live and introduce his opinion as part of the record.
So going back to what I was saying, I think it's absolutely
essential that we consider this and to address a precedent. When the
Covenant Presbyterian Church was rebuilt, one of the concerns that
Page 131
October 8, 2013
we as a community had was that the church -- that church traffic
wasn't going to suddenly start going through the middle of our
community to get to the other side.
And that was established as a condition. And we even had --
what are those little things -- Nick, what's the little thing, the counter,
you know the little doohickey? Yeah, you know, what -- we made
sure -- we actually, I think, for a year subsequent to the establishment
of that church, counted traffic to ensure that traffic, when church was
releasing, wasn't going through the neighborhood.
And I think it's absolutely essential that we do the same thing
here and basically provide a provision that, you know, other than for
people who live in the community and are volunteering, that
through-traffic is not going, you know, through the neighborhood to
get in and out of events.
MR. ARNOLD: Commissioner Hiller, I think that's probably
fairly easy for the organization, since they know each and every one
of their participants, to direct them to utilize the Goodlette-Frank
Road.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I'm sure -- and I'm sure you
can, and I don't care how you do it. That's up to you. I mean, you can
manage it.
And, like I said, I don't believe there would be a lot, but I don't
really care how much there would be. I think it's absolutely essential
that the neighborhood is protected from any such through-traffic.
So the condition would be to access the site, you know, so that
the traffic -- that user traffic will not access the site through adjacent
residential streets other than with an exception carved for those
volunteers that live within the Pine Ridge community. Is that
acceptable?
MR. ARNOLD: I can confirm with Kim, but I'm sure something
along those lines --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And you're welcome to confer. I
Page 132
October 8, 2013
mean, these are concerns which I think need to be addressed.
The other issue is that there shouldn't be any parking on the
street. You have very limited parking which, you know, limits the
number of cars, obviously, that will come to your site at any given
time which, in and of itself, is a very good restriction on, you know,
the volume of traffic.
But what I don't think anybody wants to see, with the exception
of your boogie barn dance, which I hope -- the neighborhood has
always, you know, tolerated, but I really think that it's essential that
it's understood that there won't be parking along the perimeter of the
property on either side, be it on Center or on Ridge, that that doesn't
suddenly become sort of unofficial expanded parking, because that
could be very problematic.
MR. ARNOLD: And I don't think that would be a problem at all
to agree to that type of condition, if warranted, because I think,
historically, when they've had volunteer events or something of that
sort, they open one of the paddock gates, and they have people direct
people to park on the grass.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's fine. I mean, you know --
and you can carve out, you know, the limited events, and I know it's
hard to manage. But, I mean, just on a regular basis, I just would hate
to see the sides of the road become expanded parking, if you will --
MR. ARNOLD: Understood.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- which would be very problematic.
MR. ARNOLD: Right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And again, you know, because you
have very limited parking, you, obviously, will have very limited
traffic, consequently, so that's a positive.
The other issue that I had a concern with is the lighting. I think
it's absolutely essential that the lighting -- and the same issue came up
with the church, that the lighting be directional lighting, and under no
circumstances shall any of the lighting trespass on any of the
Page 133
October 8, 2013
neighboring properties. And, obviously, you can't do it as a matter of
law because, you know, that's just civil trespass and is impermissible.
It's a nuisance.
So the type of lighting that would be acquired for these
improvements should be conditioned to be that directional downward
lighting that doesn't diffuse in any way. And they actually did that at
the church, and that worked out very well. I think it's the -- Leo, help
me. Is it the Musca, the dark side (sic) or the Musca?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Dark skies.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Dark skies lighting.
MR. OCHS: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's what we're looking for to
ensure that that, you know, doesn't become a problem.
MR. ARNOLD: If I might, Commissioner.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah.
MR. ARNOLD: One of the conditions that the Planning
Commission offered dealt with lighting. And your language said
outside lighting shall be limited to low-intensity bollards, and no
exterior lighting is allowed except as necessary for security or safety.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, I think that's fine, except that
even then I think what Commissioner Nance said, that it should be --
say that word again.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Dark skies.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Dark skies lighting because, you
know, even if you carve it out for security, you don't want to be in a
situation that, you know, now you've got a security light is shining
into a neighbor's property. That's just not an option.
MR. ARNOLD: I guess I just don't know enough about all the
dark sky criteria --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you explain that?
MR. ARNOLD: -- to know whether or not we could meet that
with the low-level bollard lighting that the Planning Commission was
Page 134
October 8, 2013
talking about because, honestly, you know, with their hours of
operation being limited to 8 p.m., there's only a small window of our
season when they would have anybody on site when it's dark.
So I guess the question is, we were thinking that, of course, the
riding pen would be lighted, and the inside would be lighted, but
outside we were talking really about having more of the landscape
level lighting. So I don't know how that fits in with dark sky, but --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Arnold, dark skies lighting is
being adopted by a lot of rural areas that don't want to have light
pollution. Light pollution is basically when you can drive down a
road and see a security light from three miles away. It meets your eye
and creates eye pollution visually.
When what you want to do is you want to illuminate what needs
to be illuminated for safety, like an intersection, without it going to the
eyes of the observer. So it lets you see -- you know, if you're in a
natural area, it let's you see that. It kind of-- it's also good for animals
and so on and so forth.
So even a low-intensity light, if you can see it from miles and
miles away, it's considered light pollution.
So dark skies lighting is not something that's made it to Naples
yet, but I've -- you know, I've been a constant advocate for it because
I've seen it in use, and I know how wonderful that it is.
So a security light that comes on, you know, it's a motion sensor
or something like that, as long as it illuminates what needs to be
illuminated and doesn't shine off site, is wonderful. And it's a little --
it's just a little bit different thinking.
But even a low-intensity bollard, you know, you can see for half
a mile if there's nothing between you and it, and that's not serving a
useful purpose.
So you can just -- have to get into dark -- the whole dark skies
light fixtures and what they do and what they don't do.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The point being is that none of the
Page 135
October 8, 2013
lighting should create a nuisance that in any way, you know, results in
trespass on any neighboring properties.
MR. ARNOLD: I think we agree with you 100 percent. I guess
the question is how do we write it, because I'm not familiar enough
with the dark sky to --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think we can allow the County
Attorney to figure that out; that's what he's paid the big bucks for.
MR. ARNOLD: Because I'm hearing things like our lighting
could be shielded and, you know, make sure that we don't have any
off-site glare and things like that, and those kind of things we've dealt
with on other applications, but the dark sky, I know the term and I
know they're trying to deal with it --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm not intending to define you as
dark skies, you know, but -- you know, you're on the -- I think you're
on the right track, sir.
MR. ARNOLD: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Now, what about the buffer between
Ridge and --
MR. KLATZKOW: Excuse me, because I don't know what you
guys want as far as the lighting goes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You know what, why don't we --
we'll go after -- we'll go over all these points afterwards.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sounds like a workshop.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's a workshop. What about the
buffer?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, we had a lot of discussion at the Planning
Commission hearing on the buffer on Ridge Drive, and your staffs
going to tell you that it's required to be, I believe they said, a
15-foot-wide Type B buffer which requires there to be a managed
hedge or wall/berm combination with also trees so that you don't have
lighting impacts that go through it.
And I believe that we have a condition that was simply written
Page 136
October 8, 2013
that we have to put in the buffer concurrent with our first work on site.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What is that?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, right now the language reads "landscape
buffers are installed with first vertical construction on these two lots,"
and that was intended so that we'd put up the buffer as we started
construction.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I understand, but what will the
buffer be?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, I've got my Land Development Code, and
I can read to you what it requires. But I believe it requires a hedge,
wall, or berm combination, it requires a double row of the hedge, if
you plant it, and it requires, I believe, a double row of trees. I know
Mike Sawyer, staff person --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can we please have -- I want --
MR. ARNOLD: Maybe he can tell you exactly.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I would like clarity on the record as
to what the buffer will be on both sides, both on the Ridge side and the
Center side, please.
MR. SAWYER: Good afternoon. For the record, Mike Sawyer,
project manager for the petition.
To answer your question, the Type C buffer comprises of two
rows of trees alternating 30 feet on center and a single hedge that's
five foot at installation and is required to become six foot within a
year and 80 percent opaque.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Eighty percent opaque?
MR. SAWYER: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And that would be on both sides of
the property?
MR. SAWYER: I believe that would be just along the
right-of-way. The other buffer adjacent to the other agricultural parcel
to the south, it would be a Type B buffer, which is equivalent to a
Type C except it only has one single row of trees.
Page 137
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, I think that the buffering
should be consistent along the entire frontage of Ridge.
MR. SAWYER: You could certainly make that one of your
recommendations.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I mean, I don't understand why you
would have -- and, in fact --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me read something to you --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- from our Land Development
Code. Existing landscaping which does not comply with the
provisions of this section shall be brought into conformity at the
maximum extent possible when the vehicle -- when vehicle use area is
intended or expanded or stripped lots -- maybe that doesn't apply.
Does it apply, the landscaping through -- the entire project has to
come up to code?
MR. SAWYER: Right. What would actually occur, once the
petitioner has the conditional use, is that they would be required to
come in and do a Site Development Plan. Part of that certainly is
going to be a landscape plan from a landscape architect.
And they would be required to bring the landscaping for the
entire site up to current code standards, as well as any conditions that
you're adding with the conditional use itself That's part of the reason
that we've got the conditional use is that because this is -- it's a use that
is allowed with conditions.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Correct.
MR. SAWYER: So depending on what that particular use is and
the conflicts that are seen with that use within the neighborhood, you
add additional conditions to increase the buffers, which is the case
here. Normally when you've got an ag use next to another ag parcel,
you simply have a single row of trees.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sure.
MR. SAWYER: A Type A. Here, because there's a residence on
Page 138
October 8, 2013
that adjacent parcel, you're actually required to have that Type B,
because you've got the residence there. Adjacent to the right-of-way,
you'd simply have a Type D buffer.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, my concerns is for the
neighbors across the street off of Ridge. So while I understand what's
required along the border of Lot 19 and the adjacent parcel, I want to
make sure that there's an appropriate buffer between the project and
the residences on the other side, to the west of Ridge. So can you
clarify that?
MR. SAWYER: Yeah. I can tell you that normally what would
be required adjacent to that right-of-way would be a Type D, which is
a single row of trees with a 3-foot hedge.
The condition that's currently in the resolution is for that Type C,
which adds another off Center, if you will, row of canopy trees as well
as bringing that hedge from three feet --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: To six feet.
MR. SAWYER: -- on up to six feet.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And to six feet and opaque.
MR. SAWYER: Eighty percent opaque.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Eighty percent opaque.
MR. SAWYER: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
And then the issue of noise, you have indicated that you're not
going to use loudspeakers what, in -- on Lot 19. And, again, we're
limited to the conditions on lots -- just Lot 19, really, because Lot 20
is already governed by the existing conditional use or no --
MR. ARNOLD: We're governed by -- for Lots 19 and 20.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sorry. So it's Lot 21 that already
has conditions.
MR. ARNOLD: That's right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So for Lot 20 and Lot 19, can you
just reiterate what you're doing to control noise?
Page 139
October 8, 2013
MR. ARNOLD: Staff had offered this, and the Planning
Commission thought it was a good idea, but Condition No. 9 says that
we can have no amplified sound equipment or systems allowed on
Lots 19 or 20.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I don't have any other comments.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I have a question for staff,
same I asked Mr. Arnold about. Is this considered -- what is this
considered when you have a conditional use? This particular
conditional use, is it considered commercial?
MR. SAWYER: It is still considered ag. It is --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's the zoning.
MR. SAWYER: Correct. It is a recognized agricultural use.
Many of the uses that you actually have in ag have certain aspects to
them that are commercial somewhat in nature, but you're still allowed
to have those uses in the ag district, and the code does allow you to
have these particular uses.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: As a permitted use?
MR. SAWYER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So why are we having a
conditional use if it's already permitted by right?
MR. SAWYER: It's permitted by right as long as you have a
minimum of 20 acres. They do not. And that's why they're here.
Because they have smaller parcels than those 20 acres, that's why
they're here for the conditional use. It's based on the size of the parcel
in this case. It's an allowable use, but because they've got smaller
parcels than 20 acres, that's why they're here for the conditional use.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Does that mean if they had 20
acres in aggregate it would be by right?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
MR. SAWYER: Correct.
Page 140
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's go -- I don't think we have any
further discussion on the board. Can we go to the public speakers?
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. Your first public speaker -- we'll
ask the speakers to come up to both podiums and please be waiting.
Ronald Brown is your first speaker. He'll be followed by Kevin
Kalb.
Are you Mr. Brown?
MR. BROWN: Yes, I am.
MR. MILLER: Please go ahead, sir.
MR. BROWN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Ronald Brown. I live at 163 Caribbean Road and have lived at that
address since 1987.
My family has owned property and enjoyed the Naples
Community since the 1960s, so I have witnessed a lot of change in our
county and community since my childhood.
I would give you just a brief history of who I am. I was the chief
operating officer of one of the state's largest behavioral health
organizations, and it was headquartered in Pinellas County. When I
took over the organization, I actually was brought in as a consultant.
The board then asked me to come in as CO and take over operation of
the organization.
When I came in, we were barely making payroll even at $20
million budget. The first thing that I did was to distribute the services.
It was a monolithic designed organization where we had one center of
service, and everybody that needed those services -- and, by the way,
we cared for people -- infants all the way up to geriatrics from, you
know, mental health, substance abuse, battered women, neglected and
abused children, children with behavioral problems in school,
second-chance schools, so I had the whole gamut of behavioral health
issues and services available, but all those people had to come into our
location. Even when they were court ordered, it was difficult for them
to get there and a lot of times did not.
Page 141
October 8, 2013
One of the first things that I did was I distributed the service.
And what we discovered, even though I had a duplication of
administrative costs, was that we started -- we serviced more than
double the number of people that we were able to serve. Our budget
grew from 20 million to $50 million, okay.
To talk to Mr. Henning's comment, this is in a commercial
activity. They have employees. They pay employee taxes. They
collect revenues. It is a business. Irrelevant if it's not-for-profit or not,
it is a business. And so I don't believe that it fits the zoning law or
conditional-use laws.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. BROWN: I have a lot more, but my time's over.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kevin Kalb. He'll be
followed by William MacMaster.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And just for the record, for those
who are not aware, you get three minutes to speak individually, just in
case someone has never spoken here before. And when the yellow
light turns on, that's the signal that you have one minute left.
MR. MILLER: Actually, I wanted to add the first beep you hear
is; it's actually a 30-second warning when the yellow light comes on.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm wrong.
MR. MILLER: I'm sorry.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What do I know?
MR. KALB: Well, first of all, thank you, County
Commissioners, for the work that you do for Naples in making it a
wonderful place to raise a family. We love it here, and we also
appreciate your sincere consideration of the case before you.
My name is Kevin Kalb. My wife and I, Alison, reside at 215
Caribbean Road on the corner of Ridge and Caribbean. We purchased
our land in 2009, and we built our house in 2010.
We came into this with our eyes wide open. Along with our two
children, ages nine and seven, we were always taken by the large lots
Page 142
October 8, 2013
and kind of the country feel that you had in Pine Ridge, and we were
drawn to it, having lived in a lot of gated communities. You know,
Pine Ridge afforded us that feel.
The two small horse farms -- and I emphasize small horse farms
-- that we envisioned and we saw when we first moved in here appeal
to us as well. We thought it was a very -- you know, it was very
quaint. And, you know, we thought that that was well and went well
with the neighborhood.
And it kind of-- in addition to the Pine Ridge Community
Association covenants, we had further assurance that we would remain
a quiet residential community.
We would like to laud the good work that NEC does and has
been doing for a number of years with children especially, and we
fully support the work that they do and the continued existence on
their current land, and that includes five acres.
This means that we would support the extension of a conditional
use to a second property that they currently own but which wasn't a
part of their original conditional use.
We would support expansion further beyond that to other areas
outside of Pine Ridge in areas that are closer to many of the people
that they, by their own admission, serve.
Make no mistake, NEC is a large and growing business. We
asked in the previous interactions that they self-limit further expansion
beyond the one that they're trying to purchase now. That was flatly
rejected. So that kind of points to what are the plans going forward.
We also talked to the issue of how many events would be
potential each year. As it turns out, they could have over two dozen
different events in a year.
So we've heard a lot of touching stories about, you know,
children helped by NEC's therapeutic riding and things like that. And
we stipulate that this is wonderful and that they do help people. We
further agree that a small footprint in Pine Ridge is not only
Page 143
October 8, 2013
acceptable, but it's desirable.
This is not the issue at hand. Some have attempted to paint
anybody who disagrees with this as somebody that doesn't support
children and helping children.
This is a strawman argument. We are here to support what they
do but to be against the further expansion in the community, and we
respectfully request rejection.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is William MacMaster. He'll
be followed by Yale Freeman.
MR. MacMASTER: Bill MacMaster. I live at 198 Caribbean on
the corner of Ridge. It seems to me I was here, whatever it was, 16
years ago, when a conditional-use thing was approved, and one of the
conditions was that the driveway entrance was to be off of Center. It
also appears to me that the current group have never honored that.
They have created an entrance on Ridge, and on two occasions I have
almost been hit, once by somebody coming in and once by somebody
coming out.
They plan -- site plan that is presented leaves still open a gate so
that it does not limit access to the property. The gate could be opened
and can be used and, because of the history of the organization, I
question whether what they say is going to be honored.
I also question whether -- why it was necessary for them to buy
10 feet of their own land when they put up their riding stable. They
owned the property. If you look at the --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Could you put it up? Can you put
up the picture, please.
MR. MacMASTER: They had to buy land because they
encroached on the second lot that they were not approved to have the
thing on. Did they come back to the county to get approval to do that,
or did they just do it?
I mean, this is a problem with Naples is that what was a
Page 144
October 8, 2013
wonderful, small organization has now become a big business. And in
the last 25 years, I myself have run the construction on Habitat for
Humanity, worked for Hospice, volunteered for seven years, worked
for Shelter for Abused Women, and I have watched each organization
get involved with making money and running things and changing
what their original plans were.
And by their own admission, you are being asked to approve
something today but that they came up and presented at least four
times as much activity as there will be, and none of their analysis
takes into consideration this expansion of the commercial activity of
the property.
I thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Yale Freeman. He'll be
followed by Caroline Martino.
MR. FREEMAN: Good afternoon. Thank you for the
opportunity of speaking here today. My name is Yale Freeman. I live
with my wife, Susan, at 153 West Street. We bought there 18 years
ago and raised our family in Naples, Florida, in Pine Ridge.
And as a good neighbor, the NEC came and was welcomed into
Pine Ridge. We were part of NEC. When the barn needed painting,
the people in our community was there to help. I was there when the
United Way gave them their first grant for 32 children for $60,000,
because our community wanted to see NEC grow, develop within their
mission.
What's happened is -- and Mr. Arnold used an interesting term.
He said things have changed. Things have changed; therefore, our
residential community, under his proposal, needs to change with it.
And the answer is no, it doesn't. For the 18 years that I've been
there and since Pine Ridge was created, we are a residential
community. We are not the commercial use envisioned.
And when the executive director stood up, there was two things
that I think you must remember she said. This is going to be a
Page 145
October 8, 2013
destination location and now is going to be an income-providing
opportunity. That is inconsistent with the conditional use that was
initially presented.
And I think you also have to look at one other key thing. As you
continue to let conditional uses expand -- and Mr. Arnold used a very
interesting analysis when he said, like senior living would be another
potential conditional use that could apply to these properties.
You have a group of properties off of Goodlette-Frank that are
these agricultural properties capable of getting new conditional uses.
And as you think about granting this conditional use, please consider
the properties on Pine Ridge, the three properties that have been
claimed not to be residentially suited that are part of our residential
community.
And as you expand conditional uses, you will give the
opportunity to other people, maybe nonprofits, to come in and raise
the same issues.
NEC has great goals. As previously mentioned, it seems like a
great opportunity to open satellite facilities. But to force now a new
model onto this new organization on an old community of Pine Ridge
doesn't make sense, and I request that you vote against this particular
position.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Before we get to the next speaker,
I'd like to ask Mr. Arnold to come back to the stand.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is anybody else cold up here, or is it
just me?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you clarify what destination
location means and what additional income-producing activity means?
MR. ARNOLD: I think, if I might, Kim Minarich is the one who
made that statement, and it was relative to some of the training
opportunities that they have with regard to I believe it's the PATH
training they can conduct.
MS. MINARICH: For clarification, it's for PATH instructor
Page 146
October 8, 2013
training, so there might be six people maximum that would come.
And it does -- they do pay the center for their expenses that we incur
to conduct those trainings.
Our participants pay $10 per participant per half hour during our
regular programming. I mean, it isn't as though we don't collect
income on a normal basis.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I see. So I guess Mr. Freeman's
concern is that, you know, your statement "destination location" is that
it will generate significantly more traffic than what's being represented
here today. So what you're saying is it's not like you're looking to
increase the level of activity in future years --
MS. MINARICH: No, no.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- based on the programming, which
seems very limited?
MS. MINARICH: That's correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And with respect to
income-producing activity, you're not running this like a business. I
mean, your primary focus is the assistance to the handicapped.
MS. MINARICH: We are a not-for-profit organization. Our
families pay a nominal fee. Some do not. We scholarship. I think
we're scholar-shipping over 50 of our participants currently. But the
others that pay a nominal fee of$10 per half hour per session is --
doesn't come anywhere close to covering the cost of-- which is about
$300 per hour under the arena during operation.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And so what are you doing to make
up the difference? You're getting grants?
MS. MINARICH: We raise money through grants, private
donors.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. And another reference was
made to 22 events. What are the 22 events that were referenced by the
speaker?
MS. MINARICH: This was -- I think maybe Wayne can clarify
Page 147
October 8, 2013
that, because that was a stipulation at Planning Commission.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What is that?
MR. ARNOLD: This issue did come up at the Planning
Commission. And as you mentioned, they host an annual barn dance,
and that's one of their large fundraising activities.
And the neighbors had expressed an interest in trying to limit
that. And the condition that got written into the Planning Commission
record addresses that. And it says, special events are limited to four
events per year and must follow LDC 5.04.05, temporary event
permits requirements.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So there will not be 22 events as
suggested by one of the speakers?
MR. ARNOLD: I don't believe I can read in 22 events into the
condition.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So it's limited to four events
per year?
MR. ARNOLD: It's limited to four events per the LDC.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And permitted per the LDC.
MR. ARNOLD: Right. And the LDC requirements that are
referenced are the temporary event procedures for handling those
events. And for many businesses, you know, for instance, during the
holidays, the Christmas tree sale is a special event, and they come in
and get a separate permit for that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. Got it. Can we have our
next speaker?
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Caroline Martino. She'll be
followed by Tom Peek.
MS. MARTINO: Good morning. My name is -- or good
afternoon, I'm sorry. My name is Caroline Martino, and I live at 179
Ridge Drive, across the road from the proposed expansion.
I'm a board member of the Pine Ridge Civic Association, but I'm
speaking to you today as a resident, not on behalf of PRCA.
Page 148
October 8, 2013
I'm here today to ask you to deny this request for conditional-use
expansion. I do not relish the position that I find myself in, and I've
said this before. I would not wish it on anyone, and it is not
somewhere that I ever thought to find myself.
My husband and I purchased our house in 2001 when NEC ran
on Saturday mornings and two lessons on Wednesday afternoon. I
was, for some time, volunteer president of NEC and helped the
program grow from grass-root beginnings to an established and
respected service for disabled individuals in our community.
I've continued as a regular volunteer since I resigned from the
board five years ago, and NEC has changed their mission to help those
with special needs, not merely disabilities. Merely; I'm sorry for that.
Over the past 15 years, my husband and I have donated time,
services, items, and money to NEC, continue to donate time and
dollars today, and hopefully far into the future.
When we bought our home, did we anticipate expansion to the
numbers we see today, let alone what is being proposed for the future?
Absolutely not.
No one is asking NEC to leave Pine Ridge. As previously stated
on multiple occasions, I fully support NEC's continued presence in
Pine Ridge, re-optimizing the five acres that they own, and acquiring a
conditional-use permit for 194 Ridge Drive, their second lot.
I would ask everyone to remember that the issue at hand is not
about whether NEC does good work or not. We all agree NEC
provides a valuable community service, just as hundreds of other
Collier County charities do.
I understand NEC pulls at your heartstrings. It does mine, too.
However, please try to separate the mission of the charity from the
fact that they are a business. In fact, NEC is one of 700 PATH
international centers in the USA, nonprofit and for-profit therapeutic
riding businesses.
We have lived with NEC's slow but steady expansion over the
Page 149
October 8, 2013
years, and a giant wave of program expansion for the past 18 months.
We have seen NEC's daily activities progressively encroach on the
tranquility of our residential neighborhood. Additional noise. Without
leaving my garden, we hear the activity. Additional traffic driving in
and out of my neighborhood. We see Ridge Drive and Center Street
get busier by the month, inevitable results of a successful business
encroaching on our residential neighborhood.
NEC started in 1995 as a satellite of the Fort Myers Special
Equestrian Program because a group of dedicated volunteers
recognized how much better it would be for the riders and their
families if this unique and fun therapy was available closer to their
homes.
I believe that it is possible to support NEC's missions and its
beneficiaries without being compelled to agree with every board and
management decision. Denying this expansion plan before you today
will not inhibit NEC from continued growth and the ability to serve
many more deserving individuals with special needs throughout the
county.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: The next speaker is Tom Peek. He'll be followed
by Clay Brooker.
MR. PEEK: Commissioners, my name is Tom Peek, with my
wife, Nora, who's here in the audience. We've lived in Naples for the
last 50 years. We've lived in Pine Ridge at 90 East Avenue for the
past 30 years.
In the year 2000, we spoke against the conditional use for Naples
Equestrian Challenge at that time even though it was proposed to be
just a small organization. This year, today, we're speaking against it
again.
Voting against this conditional use does not put the Equestrian
Challenge out of business, but voting against it will help protect the
residential perimeter of properties in the Pine Ridge subdivision from
Page 150
October 8, 2013
being eaten away. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Clay Brooker. He's been
ceded time. I'd like to confirm these people are here. Alison Kalb?
Can you raise your hand. Elaine Wesnofske? I hope I got that close.
And Vincent Wesnofske. Thank you.
Mr. Brooker, you'll have 12 minutes.
MR. BROOKER: Thank you, sir.
Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Commissioners. My name is
Clay Brooker. I'm representing some of the owners that live across
the street.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can you state who you represent
specifically?
MR. BROOKER: Yes. With Cheffy Passidomo, address is 821
5th Avenue South. This aerial photo shows the location of NEC --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You know what, can you help me
again; who do you represent, these three properties here?
MR. BROOKER: I represent the Martinos here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. BROOKER: The Wesnofskes here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. BROOKER: And the Kalbs here. They are all in
opposition to the petition. I can also tell you that this property owner
opposes. And it's my understanding -- although I can't represent and
100 percent guarantee that this property owner also opposes the
petition.
So basically it's surrounded by opposition.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But you don't know that for sure.
You don't have representation from them?
MR. BROOKER: That's correct, that's correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And these are individuals who
spoke -- I believe Mr. Kalb spoke earlier this morning; is that correct?
MR. BROOKER: Correct. I've been delegated Alison Kalb's
Page 151
October 8, 2013
time and the Wesnofskes' time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's fine. I just am clarifying
who's already spoken of these three people.
MR. BROOKER: That's correct. So you had Mrs. Martino who
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Who just spoke.
MR. BROOKER: Who just spoke.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: She just spoke, right.
MR. BROOKER: Right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And she was the one who
previously worked as the president or executive director of NEC
prior?
MR. BROOKER: Exactly.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And the Kalbs were -- the
gentleman right there.
MR. BROOKER: Mr. Kevin Kalb.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And the Wesnofskes have not
spoken.
MR. BROOKER: That's correct, and they do not plan to speak.
They've delegated their time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. That's fine. And they're the
couple back there. Got it.
MR. BROOKER: You've got it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I just need to know. Go ahead.
MR. BROOKER: At the outset we understand -- well, please
understand that the Martinos, the Wesnofskes, and the Kalbs do not
oppose the admirable service that NEC provides. The Martinos are
past and current donors both in time and money to NEC.
The Wesnofskes have three grandchildren of their own who are
autistic, so they understand the value of the service being provided by
NEC. No one in this room opposes the service, but that's not why
we're here today. We're here to discuss whether, simply, this location
Page 152
October 8, 2013
is the appropriate location for the drastic expansion being proposed.
Here's LDC Section 10.08.00, conditional-use procedures. What
is a conditional use? I won't read it, but that's a direct quote from the
LDC. Essentially, summarizing, that is that a conditional use is
generally an inappropriate use for the district but, if possible, to
mitigate impacts to the neighborhood through conditions imposed that
possibly can be permitted. But the presumption is the use being
proposed today is inappropriate for this zoning district.
That didn't turn out as big as I thought it would. These are the
criteria by which a conditional use is considered. Essentially, it
cannot be injurious to the neighborhood, must be consistent with the
Growth Management Plan and the zoning code, ingress and egress to
property, traffic, the provisions must be made for that, effect on
neighboring properties is to be taken into account, and compatibility
with adjacent properties is to be taken into account.
And I notice there, just in those provisions, the neighborhood
adjacent properties, that is the reason why we are here today. It's not
what NEC provides. It's what impact will result to the neighborhood.
And you -- each of you must determine on your own that this is
compatible with the neighborhood to approve it.
Here's the Growth Management Plan. The Growth Management
Plan requires that the new development be compatible with and
complementary to -- so it's a new element -- complementary to a
single-family residential neighborhood. These are the criteria which
each of you must faithfully and honestly apply to this petition.
So let's take a look at where we are at today and the impacts
already being absorbed by the neighborhood. This is the proposed
expansion. This is what was approved in 2000.
Goodlette-Frank runs along the bottom of your screen here. You
have Center and then Ridge. If you'll notice a few things here, you
have an equestrian ring approved back in 2000, not an arena, but a
ring. You have 20 parking spaces here. You have access to those 20
Page 153
October 8, 2013
parking spaces solely from Center Street. You have here a house with
a driveway, but there are no limitations at the time placed upon this
property to speak of.
And that's an interesting point. Madam Chair, you brought into
-- you commented a few times. This -- Wayne mentioned, they are not
here to re-trade the deal that they have. That's the deal they have.
That's the deal that was approved. Nothing that commission does here
today can impose upon what they already have, been granted and
approved.
So when you heard about the special events -- I think it's 22 to 28
special events are permitted in the code every year -- that's what they
can put on that property, because what they have here today is just
Lots 20 and 19.
So when they say we agree to four or six special events, that's for
Lots 20 and 19. They're not suggesting that that's what we're going to
agree to do with respect to Lot 21.
So there weren't really --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let me just clarify, Lot 21 permits
unlimited events? Wayne?
MR. BROOKER: It wouldn't be unlimited. It would be what the
code provides, and I believe it's 28.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Wayne, is -- that's what -- is that
what is permitted? I mean, what is currently permitted on Lot 21?
MR. ARNOLD: For the record, Wayne Arnold.
Currently there are no restrictions with regard to a limitation on
special events other than what would be in your Land Development
Code which, under certain circumstances, I believe, can be for a
maximum of 28 days, but I believe there are some other restrictions.
And we can certainly pull the code language and look, but some of
those require County Manager --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What is the intent of the
organization with respect to the events?
Page 154
October 8, 2013
MR. ARNOLD: Well, I can let Kim mention it, but I don't
believe there's ever been an intent to have 28 special events there. It's
just right now, and as I said before, things evolved the way we look at
these conditional uses, and we get more sophisticated in the way we
manage our conditions. But they didn't have a condition limiting them,
really, in any way on the existing facility.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I understand. So what is the intent
of the organization? Is the intent to have more events just on Lot 21
and only four events on Lot 20 and 19?
MR. ARNOLD: The way the condition's written, we would be
restricted from using Lots 19 and 20 other than for four special events.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So, basically, whatever the code
permits is what Lot 21 can handle?
MR. ARNOLD: Correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And we can't do anything about that
because that already has been permitted.
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, no, no, no. If you want to grant this
conditional use, okay, you can condition this on some changes here.
Don't think your hands are tied here. I mean --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So we could actually condition the
number of events on Lot 21?
MR. KLATZKOW: One of your issues here is to make this
compatible with the neighbor? And if they want to increase their size
here, if you feel the way to make this compatible with the
neighborhood is to decrease the number of special events, that's a
condition you can put on this. If they don't want to take that, that's
fine. They can leave here today with what they have now.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Got it. Okay. Thanks for the
clarification.
MR. BROOKER: So as I mentioned, there weren't many
conditions imposed back in 2000, but we did get -- you can glean a
Page 155
October 8, 2013
little bit of what the issues were back in 2000. And here is the
Planning Commission's transcript from February of 2000, and you'll
see right away, Mr. Fred Reischl is the planner. He indicates --
without quoting it, he indicates that Center Street is going to be the
primary access, because that's the access to the parking spots.
And then there were discussion about traffic. How do we
measure traffic? This isn't really a category of use that fits into our
traffic book, manual. So what are we going to do about that? There
are some questions about it.
Mr. Don Pickworth, an attorney here in town, was representing
NEC at the time. He got up and spoke and said, don't worry about
traffic. We're operating there. We can tell you what the traffic is and
what it's going to be. It's going to be about 10 trips a day on a week
because we don't have any programs during the week. It's going to be
about 75 trips on Saturday because that's the only day we operate our
programs. So in all, that adds up to about 125 trips per week.
Then you had one last NEC rep speaking at the Planning
Commission meeting back in 2000, and they explain that we have 23
riders, a maximum of 34.
So based upon what NEC was representing at the time to the
county, this is the deal, using Wayne Arnold's terminology. This is
the deal they had, they were approved for; 23 to 32 participants, no
one coming on any day but Saturdays, 125 trips per week, and 20
parking spaces.
Now, let's watch what happens over time. Here's 2005, five years
later. Nothing really has developed. This is an aerial photograph.
You see there's still no arena on the property.
Here's 2008. The arena has been built now. The parking lot is
starting to take shape.
And, in here, 2010, it looks basically the same today.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I just want to clarify. While
this was going on, the lady who was the neighbor across the street was
Page 156
October 8, 2013
executive director and president?
MR. BROOKER: Until 2008.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: She was -- so basically she was
involved in all this expansion?
MR. BROOKER: Not the expansion of the participants that
you've been hearing of, but the building and the parking lot, yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, she must have been involved
with the participants. I mean, didn't she promote and encourage
additional participants to come to this site?
MR. BROOKER: I don't know the details, but I tell you, based
upon what I've heard -- and I think Kim Minarich can explain that the
vast majority of the exponential growth has occurred in the last 18
months.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I don't think so.
MR. BROOKER: That may not be right, but we are now -- I
hear 540 participants that she has a breakdown, per year. I would
invite you to ask her.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But the bulk of the expanded
development that you're highlighting has happened way before the last
18 months. I mean, I've seen the growth. I mean, it was over the prior
years. And the activity increased over those prior years, too, the
whole time, I guess, that she was the executive director or the
president, or for a large part of-- what period of time was she the
executive director or president?
MR. BROOKER: From 1999 to 2008.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Which is --
MR. BROOKER: And she would like to address the number of
participants, if you want to hear from her.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, no. I'd like you to continue,
but that seems to be the period of time that you had this growth and
this change that you're describing.
MR. BROOKER: The arena was built at the end of her tenure.
Page 157
October 8, 2013
That was it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, but she probably worked to
get it built, right?
MR. BROOKER: Probably, but you can ask her those questions
about participants.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. But like you pointed out, it
wasn't permitted as part of the conditional use. It was supposed to be
just an arena, not this covered facility and, yet, during her tenure, she
promoted and got it done.
MR. BROOKER: That is my understanding. Exactly when it
was built and what happened exactly when, I don't know. What I can
tell you, though -- the point of showing you the evolution of the
progress and the expansion on the site is just to demonstrate that this
has become far beyond what was ever approved by the county in
2000.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, what I see is you have an
evolution and growth encouraged by the person who is objecting, one
of your clients, but also in a community where no one objected to that
very obvious development and growth. I mean, there was no one who
protested this. There was no one who found exception to this. You
know, this was done openly, notoriously, with no negative remarks by
anyone in the community. In fact, very much the opposite as
evidenced by, you know, testimony that was brought here today.
The community was so excited about NEC that they were
involved in these activities, volunteered, participated, and helped this
growth occur.
MR. BROOKER: Up until 2008.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I think --
MR. BROOKER: In terms of the person I represent --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. BROOKER: -- who I, again, invite you to ask her those
questions.
Page 158
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Continue, continue speaking. But I
see a pattern here that's inconsistent with your representation.
MS. MARTINO: I would like to speak, if I may.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I'm sorry. You've had your
time. Thank you.
Go ahead, Clay.
MR. BROOKER: Okay. So I'd like to refocus again on the
arena itself. This was built, again, at the end of the tenure of Mrs.
Martino. But you see there -- and I can show it to you here -- it
actually encroaches over the lot line into Lot 20. That Lot 20 is not
approved for conditional use, so NEC just got a lot-line adjustment.
They added 40 feet to the lot to accommodate that expansion of the
arena.
Looking back at the 2010 aerial photograph, I direct your
attention to the parking lot. This is past when Mrs. Martino was a --
was president. Here is the lot line. You can see this driveway out to
Ridge, which was never supposed to be there in the first place, is on a
lot that is not approved for the conditional use.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So my question to you, Clay, is why
didn't Mrs. Martino come in in 2010 before the board? Why didn't she
go to code enforcement and complain about the encroachment? Why
didn't she come before this board and say, you know, there is
impermissible activity? No, she did nothing. I mean, we're in 2013.
We're towards the end of 2013. And from 2008 to 2013, she did not
complain.
MR. BROOKER: Thank you for the water. That's exactly what
they asked me. What can we do about violations of an existing
conditional use?
And the code says a violation of a conditional use is a code
enforcement matter. You can report that to the code enforcement and
see what happens.
So they have been in discussions -- over the last few months with
Page 159
October 8, 2013
me, they've been asking what their legal rights are with respect to
violations of their existing conditional use, and I have been advising
them on that.
So if they didn't know what their legal rights were prior to then,
shame on them. They should have consulted an attorney prior, I
guess. Is that what your point is?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, it isn't. It's definitely not my
point. I think you know exactly what the point is. But go ahead,
continue.
MR. BROOKER: Thank you.
So this entrance on Ridge Drive, which was never supposed to be
there in the first place -- and I trust I have more than the 12 minutes
since Wayne's been up and --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. You need to --
MR. MILLER: I've stopped the clock several times during the
questioning. And when Wayne came up, I had stopped the clock.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It is already 12 minutes?
MR. MITCHELL: It is -- well, now it's going again. It's coming
up on the end of his time, yes. We can maybe --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Give him some more time so he can
continue.
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am.
MR. BROOKER: Thank you.
Here's the entrance sign they hung up on Ridge Drive boldly
advertising that this is, in fact, the entrance that was not permitted.
When we pointed this out to them, they took down the entrance sign.
Now, there's been a lot of talk about traffic. And I must say, I
hear about being a good neighbor, and I received about 30 minutes
ago this traffic report for the first time in all of this. I actually emailed
Mike Sawyer asking him to give me any new stuff, new revisions,
new supplements yesterday, and he has received nothing.
I received this for the first time, and I submit to you that this is
Page 160
October 8, 2013
not being a good neighbor by hiring a traffic engineer and throwing it
onto us at the last minute.
Having said that, this is the numbers right in front of you that
were in their application. This is in the application part of the record.
This is their numbers. This is their prediction for the upcoming
season. You'll see it's broken down by week, and I've taken the liberty
-- everything in red and the numbers at the bottom are -- and the
letters, the sentences at the bottom are mine, but that tallies up the
total of trips per week that Naples Equestrian Challenge is placing
onto the residential streets.
You see -- I have 432 participants. We've heard 540, so I guess
in the last couple months they've increased by another 110. But this
432 number is straight out of their application.
Based upon 432 participants, that equates to -- add up those
numbers underneath the red lines -- 599 trips every week into these --
into this residential neighborhood.
We've also heard that there's projected 200 additional participants
with respect to this expansion. Using pure math ratios, 432 is to 599,
is 632 to what? 876 is the math; 876 trips per week is what they are
projecting into this residential neighborhood.
With respect to the traffic report, as I've read it in the last few
minutes the first time -- I wasn't able to read it word by word and go
all the way through it, but I find it interesting that the bulk of the
comments made by Mr. Banks was that the carrying capacity of these
roads is at a slight fraction given what they are proposing.
Is that the criteria you're applying today? I hope not. Ask -- I
would ask any of you where any of you live, except for Madam Chair
because she lives in Pine Ridge, but are your roads, your residential
roads that you drive in and out, at capacity?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You should see mine. Don't ask me.
They made a cut-through, so we have thousands every day.
MR. BROOKER: Right. And I'm sure that's an impact upon
Page 161
October 8, 2013
you, and that's the point, is that it's not a matter of what level of
service these roads are working at. It's not a matter of it working at 15
to 20 to 25, 30 percent carrying capacity. What the issue is, is that
compatible? That number of trips, is that compatible with the
residential neighborhood? Would any of you want that coming into
your neighbor? I suggest, personally, I would not.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's clarify. And I want the -- Mr.
Banks to respond, because I think you've, you know, raised issues that
need to be -- I mean, you've asked and they need to be answered. First
of all, the traffic as proposed would not go through the residential
neighborhood. In fact, that was one of the conditions that I stipulated,
that you wouldn't have through-traffic.
So the traffic will not impact the neighborhood. It would merely
impact that very short stretch -- the few -- I don't know how many feet
it is that this facility would have the access off Center.
So we need to clarify that. And also, by the way, Center Street is
not a through-street. It's blocked off, so there's no way for people to
go from, you know, one end of Center to the other to use this facility,
like you wouldn't have through-traffic between 41 and
Goodlette-Frank.
So if you don't mind, I'd like to ask Mr. Banks to address what
you have raised. And Brook (sic), why don't you stay -- Clay, not
Brook, Clay. Clay, right? Sorry. If you don't mind -- if you don't
mind staying up there. Just let him use the podium. But I want to
give you the opportunity to discuss it.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, forgive me, before we get into this
discussion, your court reporter is in --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Needs a break.
MR. OCHS: -- dire need of a break.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can we stop at 3 o'clock? It's 2:57.
And we'll take a break at 3:00 in three minutes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we have the other speakers.
Page 162
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And then -- oh, yeah, and then let
the other speakers come up, but he needs to finish. Go ahead.
MR. BANKS: I guess you have a question.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. Can you reconcile the
numbers? I mean, you've -- they've submitted certain numbers in their
report. How does that reconcile with your report?
MR. BANKS: Certainly. This is weekly trip estimates. The
information that I provided you was focused on p.m. peak hour trips,
and that's how we analyzed the impacts on neighborhoods. We don't
use weekly volumes, because that's not how we measure level of
service per road, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So can you explain what the
petitioner submitted as part of their application and whether --
MR. BANKS: Well, I didn't prepare this, but this is their
estimates of how many participants and volunteers will come to their
site on a weekly basis, not on an hourly basis. If you were to break
this information down and focus in on the 4 o'clock to 5 o'clock period
on a Thursday, you'll see that that correlates with the information that
I provided to you.
So the information that was presented to you by Mr. Brooker was
based on weekly information. My report is based on hourly. Again,
so if you look at this information, if you look at the 4 to 5 p.m. period
and you go across to Thursday, you'll see that they're saying that
there's going to be a total of--
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: 152.
MR. BANKS: No, no, no, ma'am. That's for the entire day.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. And what it says, like, for
example, from 8 o'clock -- at 8 o'clock there would be 13 cars -- or 19
trips.
MR. BANKS: And that's estimated. That was NEC's best
attempt to estimate what type of traffic they're going to generate. We
went out and actually obtained actual traffic counts so we could get a
Page 163
October 8, 2013
better correlation so we could present better evidence to the board.
Now, again -- so what you're seeing, that 152 at the bottom of
Thursday, that's for the entire day, and that's two-way trips. That's
somebody coming in, and that's somebody going home.
So you're basically talking 76 vehicles that would arrive to the
site and then leave the site in a 24-hour period versus the testimony
that I presented to you was focused on that 4 to 6 o'clock period for a
one-hour event which is typically their most critical period on a
Thursday.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So looking at the worst day, which
in their schedule is Thursday -- you've got, for example, at 9 a.m. you
would have eight vehicles or eight trips?
MR. BANKS: And, actually, some of these events, some folks
car pool and some actually come in a small van.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Which is evidence --
MR. BANKS: That's the way it was explained to me.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right, which is evidenced by noon.
Like, noon there's zero trips.
MR. BANKS: Yeah.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But you would think that there
would be one trip and seven participants. Okay.
Clay, does that reconcile, his report, to what you're stating? I
mean, if you look at this spread -- I mean, when I look at the details
here of this schedule submitted, the additional volume of traffic in any
given hour is not very high. I mean, you're looking -- if you look at
the worst day, which is 152 trips, the number of trips per hour is -- for
the various hours identified based on their different activities is quite
low. I mean, I'm just looking at that as an example of one day.
MR. BROOKER: I believe that the numbers here absolutely
reconcile, because I just added them up. It depends on how you are
going to measure what's compatible with the neighborhood. Are you
going to look at it from 12 to one or four to five, the peak hour?
Page 164
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No. But, again, it's not going into
the neighborhood. It's only going up to that entrance and then it turns
right back around and goes out to Goodlette. So you're looking -- that
traffic should not even hit the intersection of Ridge and Center.
MR. BROOKER: And I would love to have NEC guarantee that
outcome.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. Well, that's what I said. One
of the conditions was -- that's what I exactly said at the very beginning
MR. BROOKER: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- that one of the conditions would
have to be that, you know, no traffic -- that the traffic won't access the
site through the adjacent residential streets.
MR. BROOKER: And if there's a violation of that, what
happens?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, you can ask staff or the
County Attorney how, you know, they handled it with the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Knock on her door.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Knock on my door. Come and
knock on my door.
MR. BROOKER: We call on code enforcement.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Everybody knows where I live.
Leo -- and I don't want to put you on the spot but, you know, we
did that with Covenant, and you might want to ask staff how it was
handled with Covenant, because Covenant absolutely does not use
Pine Ridge as a community -- as a cut-through community. I mean,
they all egress, you know, to 41.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's a code enforcement issue. And, quite
frankly, to my knowledge we've never had this issue where people
have gone against the ordinance.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. I've not seen it. I certainly
have not seen it with Covenant. And, you know, we'll stipulate that it
Page 165
October 8, 2013
would be a code enforcement issue if they start abusing that and start
using the neighborhood as a cut-through.
MR. BROOKER: Okay. So we'll be in touch.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have to stop. We have to give
the court reporter a break. So 10-minute recess, and then we'll return.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, if you would please take
your seats. Thank you.
Madam Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. I believe Clay's time
has expired.
MR. MILLER: Yes. I did give him additional minutes, and that
has expired as well.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. Clay, your time has
expired. Thank you very much for your comments. You may be
seated.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Sandra Reid. She'll be
followed by Larry McKinney.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Did you want to speak more?
MR. BROOKER: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You got the 12 minutes.
MR. MILLER: Actually, it was 15 minutes in total, and that
includes pauses several times for when Wayne spoke and you spoke.
MR. BROOKER: If I could have 30 seconds, I will wrap up.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sure. Go ahead.
MR. BROOKER: I appreciate it.
MR. KLATZKOW: Twenty-eight.
MR. BROOKER: I asked you, 876 trips, is that complimentary
to the neighborhood per week? And I understand about Ridge Drive
being sealed off, but I'll believe it when I see it if no one bleeds into
the neighborhood.
We asked everyone to write in from Pine Ridge for the Planning
Page 166
October 8, 2013
Commission meeting, and 37 lots wrote in. Of those 37 lots, 29 lots
are opposed. That's 78 percent of those who took time out of their day
to express their feelings to this county are opposed; nearly eight out of
10 of those who took time are opposed.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And the total neighborhood has
about, what, 600 homes?
MR. BROOKER: There's 517 lots.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, 517 lots.
MR. BROOKER: That's correct. But those who took time, eight
out of 10 are opposed.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Great. Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker Sandra is Reid. She'll be
followed by Larry McKinney.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: While the next speaker is coming
up, I just want to explain for the record again, there will be no
through-traffic into the community. Ridge -- Center Street is actually
blocked off, so you can't go from Goodlette to 41.
And because we would limit access only through Center Street,
the distance traveled will strictly be -- can you put the -- you can sit
down, if you don't mind.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I just want to ask a question.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Could I ask just a couple
questions? Maybe Mr. Arnold could also answer these, too. I just
want to make an inquiry. Has there been a history of complaints about
the Naples Equestrian Challenge in this community? Have there been
noise complaints and traffic complaints and code complaints and
event-related complaints? What's -- historically, what has occurred in
the community with this organization?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You can take that down.
MR. BROOKER: I apologize. I'm done. I just want to make the
agreement, the grant agreement, part of the record. This is the grant
Page 167
October 8, 2013
agreement between the county and NEC.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
MR. BROOKER: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead, Commissioner Nance.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. Could you tell me, Wayne, is
there a history of friction between this organization and the
community? Has there been a history of complaints with the sheriff
and code enforcement? I mean, have there been noise complaints and
odor complaints and -- I'm just trying to get a sense of--
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Shouldn't you ask Mr.
Casalanguida?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah. Mr. Casalanguida, any staff
member can respond. I'm just trying to get a little bit background.
And, you know, the petitioner and the -- and Mr. Brooker may not
know, but I'm just trying to get a sense of where we are here with this
organization.
MR. ARNOLD: I'll take a shot, Commissioner Nance. I'm
Wayne Arnold, for the record, again.
The history, I think, has been a good relationship with the Pine
Ridge community, so much that the Pine Ridge Civic Association
conducts meetings at this facility and also, I believe, signage is placed
welcoming you to Pine Ridge on their property.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So, I mean, there's not -- if I went
to the sheriff, the sheriff wouldn't say, oh, yeah, we've had 20
complaints in the last 10 years and it's been an ongoing battle?
MR. ARNOLD: I didn't do a public records request.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Please allow Mr. Casalanguida to
answer.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record, Nick Casalanguida.
I meet with the code director weekly and with the prior code
director, and we go through code cases and problematic areas. This is
not one that's come up at all, sir.
Page 168
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I understand the traffic discussion
and so on and so forth, but I'm just trying to see what it is that the
residents find objectionable.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: One of the things we monitor is
conditional uses and consistent code complaints --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sure.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- and this is not one that's come up on
the regular weekly meetings that I get briefed on.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. Thank you.
MR. ARNOLD: Could I correct my statement? Kim Minarich
just corrected me that the Pine Ridge association has not met there.
They've requested meeting time there, but it has not worked out to
have meetings there.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Got it.
MR. MILLER: All right. Sandra Reid, are you still here,
intending to speak?
(No response.)
MR. MILLER: Larry McKinney?
(No response.)
MR. MITCHELL: Okay. Then Merrylee Kandel.
MS. KANDEL: Yes.
MR. MILLER: She will be followed by Hans Muller.
MS. KANDEL: Good afternoon. My name is Merrylee Kandel.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Your address, please?
MS. KANDEL: 683 Hickory Road.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So you live in Pine Ridge.
MS. KANDEL: Pine Ridge. I am here today to provide my
support for Naples Equestrian Challenge. I think I am in a very unique
position to comment about this, as my husband and I have been
residents of Pine Ridge since 2001.
In addition, our daughter, Hannah, has participated in this
program for almost 13 years. I can say without any hesitation that this
Page 169
October 8, 2013
program has helped our daughter who has autism -- has helped her
emerge from her autism. Clearly, NEC has changed her life, our life,
and the life of everyone who meets our daughter.
NEC is not only effective for children and adults with special
needs but has been a wonderful community neighbor.
There have been a number of outstanding fundraisers, and they
have been the recipient of the Naples Wine Festival, as it has been
deemed to be a very effective and appropriate program for Naples.
This program should be allowed to expand to provide this
wonderful service to all children and adults who would benefit. The
individuals who run this program, the support staff, and the volunteer
staff, which is the largest and the best of any program we have ever
experienced in our 24 years in Naples, has been fantastic.
I cannot imagine a better representative for Pine Ridge than
Naples Equestrian Challenge. This is the kind of neighbor that is a
good neighbor and should be allowed to expand as they have
designed. I can't imagine there could be any negative connotations.
I really urge this board to proceed with a yes vote to support
Naples Equestrian Challenge.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Hans Muller. He'll be
followed by Holly Shapiro.
MR. MULLER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Good
afternoon, Donna. I've known Donna for about 40 years. My name is
Hans Muller. I live in Lake Park, so I'm kind of an outsider here, but
sometimes an outside insight is also good.
I am a volunteer at Naples Equestrian Challenge, and I have been
so since I retired in the year 2000. For the record, I am a retired
international airline captain.
I just returned from vacation over in Switzerland and France, and
these programs are over there. We have a lady that works with us,
lived in Singapore; this program is over in Singapore.
Page 170
October 8, 2013
I can tell you one thing, I have never met a group of more
professional and dedicated people than the people that run NEC.
These are all professionals, but they are volunteers and they do an
absolutely outstanding job, and they're all very, very conservative and
are more than willing to work with the community.
The main thing (sic) I do this is not for self-gratification or any
other reason. The main reason I do this is I feel I'm giving something
back to the community, and it always puts a smile on my face when I
see these kids and these elderly people ride who are handicapped.
They smile, they look forward to getting on that horse, and I think it is
a very, very good program.
And in closing, I would urge all of you to vote for the limited
expansion, which I don't think is going to create a problem. I come in
at 8:30, 9:00 in the morning with my wife, Carol. We see maybe four
or five cars coming in. We come in through Center Street. And I
really don't think that this would impact the neighborhood in a major
way.
Thank you very much for your time.
See you, Donna.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Holly Shapiro. She'll be
followed by Nancy Dauphinais.
MS. SHAPIRO: Is it okay if I speak over here?
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am.
MR. OCHS: Yes.
MS. SHAPIRO: Hello. My name is Holly Shapiro, and I reside
at 65 31 Bottlebrush Lane. I do not live in the area, but I'm speaking
because my son is in the program. He's been in the program for four
years. He has severe special needs and can -- everybody is in
agreement. It's a wonderful program.
I'm just trying to explain how it's helped my family and give a
voice to the other families that are trying to get into the program.
I do know people that are on a waiting list trying to get into this
Page 171
October 8, 2013
program. We go on Thursdays, which I did not know was the peak
day, and, honestly, it's not a lot of hustle bustle.
I don't live in that neighborhood. I do know people that live in
that neighborhood. And, you know, from what they've told me, they
don't see a lot of hustle bustle either. But, again, you know, I'm just
going from what I see when I'm there, and my son wouldn't tolerate
that really well either anyways.
So I just hope that you guys do consider the other families that
are on the waiting list. And it is a wonderful program. We've
benefited tremendously. It's a huge support system to our family, and
I'd like to see that for the other families of other different types of
special needs, not only just my son with autism, but we see a lot of
other people in different situations that have been helped as well.
Thank you for your time.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Nancy Dauphinais. She'll
be followed by Bill Swartz.
MS. DAUPHINAIS: I'm Nancy Dauphinais, 5105 Taylor Drive.
I'm here in my capacity as the clinical supervisor of the Crossroads
Program at David Lawrence Center.
We are one of the programs that has been benefited recently from
the expansion of services to reach people who are in recovery from
mental illness and substance abuse disorders, and Naples Equestrian
Challenge has become a valued community partner with the David
Lawrence Center in providing innovative health care, and it's
garnering national attention. We're getting media reports and
magazine coverage of this program, which is really exciting.
And we have even seen Naples Equestrian Challenge giving back
to our program by donating some of the services. They're clearly not
out for income, as they've subsidized their rates and even donated
some of those services back to our program so that we can continue to
participate.
Our participants come in one van, so it minimizes traffic, and
Page 172
October 8, 2013
they're supervised at all times. And it really is a great example of
collaboration in the community to ensure the health, well-being, and
safety of our community.
And we recently honored the Naples Equestrian Challenge in our
local celebration of the National Recovery Month last month and look
forward to continuing to work with them as community partners here
in Collier County.
So I'm here in favor and hope that you will also vote in favor.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Bill Swartz. He'll be
followed by Jeanne Ernst.
MR. SWARTZ: I am Bill Swartz. I live at 8473 Bay Colony
Drive, Pelican Bay, Naples.
I am here with several hats on. My first hat is I am on the board
of directors, and I feel that I speak for the group of Collier County
residents who serve on this board as a volunteer and dedicate their
time to trying to be sure that Naples Equestrian Challenge is operating
in good fiscal health supporting our dedicated employees who are
there every day trying to make life better for our riders and also to
guarantee to you, the commission and anyone else that is here, that as
a representative of our board of directors, our goal is to enhance and
improve our Pine Ridge neighborhood and that our commitment and
our integrity is such that I know that our riders and our volunteers will
be glad to comply with whatever restrictions we make on egress and
ingress to our facility from Center Street. Our goal is to go ahead and
be a good neighbor.
I'm also here as a veterinarian, and so in my profession I do what
I can to go ahead and watch out for our herd, the 10 horses that are in
the barn at this point, and I just want to emphasize that they're
specially trained. And as a veterinarian I see that they enjoy their
work. And it's wonderful to see their instinctive sense in the bond
with our participants.
Page 173
October 8, 2013
It's important to have that paddock time to socialize, graze, and
play. And that's why, as a board, in our regrouping of our plan going
forward, we've moved paddocks along Ridge Road and tried to shift
things toward Goodlette.
I want to go ahead and -- I would like to go ahead and be sure
that the commissioners know that there are so many people on our
waiting list. We would like to go ahead and be able to do as much as
we can to help them avail themselves of our service.
I'll show you just quickly some of the pictures of some of our
participants, but it just -- we want to do everything that we can to be
supportive and honor our commitment.
This is just AJ, a couple of the riders. The horse show is one of
our events each year. This is a lady with Parkinson's who is with Ted,
one of our horses. Friends of Foster Children. Paul is a rider who is
there every Monday and just, please, give us a yes vote.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You know, in advertising they call
that subliminal seduction.
MR. SWARTZ: Oh, but then your aide wouldn't know about it.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chairwoman, your final public speaker
on this item is Jeanne Ernst.
MS. ERNST: Hi. My name is Jeanne Ernst, and I live in Pelican
Bay, so I am not a resident of Pine Ridge. But I've been listening this
afternoon, and I just wanted to address some of the concerns that you
seemed to have earlier.
First of all, as I come as a volunteer, I would not know how to cut
through Pine Ridge. I come off of Goodlette-Frank, and I come in and
I go out. You know, sorry. I'm afraid that I'd get lost if I came
through, so we do not do that. And I've never seen a volunteer cut
through that way, unless maybe they live there or whatever.
And as far as the parking on the street is concerned, I would not
feel comfortable parking my car on your street. I park in the parking
lot, and I think that most of us do.
Page 174
October 8, 2013
But I also want to take this opportunity to tell you what a
wonderful event this is for me to come and to volunteer at the Naples
Equestrian Challenge, because I don't have this back where I live
during the off season. And these are all dedicated, wonderful people.
And as far as your neighborhood is concerned, there are
probably, what, five houses that are perhaps impacted, but I don't
think the rest of your neighborhood is impacted by us. And because
of the way that the NEC is located, it's not like we're going to become
a huge event. You're limited with the way that the spacing goes.
So take it and run with it and love it. It's a great place. Thank
you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Members of the board, do you have
anything to say? I have a few things I wanted to say, but I wanted to
give you the opportunity to speak.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Go ahead. And please start the
clock for three minutes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You know, he really does love me.
I know it doesn't seem like it, but he really does love me.
Would you like to speak, Commissioner Coyle? Go ahead. Start
the clock; three minutes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I shouldn't be the first one to speak.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, you should.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, it's times like these that
I wish I had the wisdom of Solomon, and I'll tell you right up front I
don't.
I'm not advocating for either of you. I'm here to listen and
hopefully learn and try to make the best decision.
The NEC is doing a wonderful job. You provide a very valuable
service. I want to see you expand. I want to see you do more of this
wonderful work, but I also understand that at some point in time, if
you're as successful as I know you will be, you will need more space.
And there is a limit that I think that this neighborhood can handle.
Page 175
October 8, 2013
I think your idea of teaming up with Florida Gulf Coast
University is an absolutely wonderful idea. You're barely scratching
the surface now. If you were to expand and create satellites throughout
Collier County and other places, I think you'd find more and more
people you could serve, you would get more and more volunteers, and
you would be able to do a lot more of the wonderful work you're
doing.
Now, I have some concerns about whether or not you can do that
at the current location. And I could assure you that I would be
extremely supportive of anything you could do to create satellites that
would be more convenient for other clients who could benefit from
your services. And I understand the difficulty in, perhaps,
coordinating those things, but it's something that has been done in
many, many businesses. Even hospitals don't just have one location.
They have emergency-care facilities at other locations.
And I think you could do that. And I have heard nothing from
the people who oppose you that would indicate they don't value what
you do and they don't have any problem with what you do now in the
community. Their only concern is that it's expanding dramatically,
and they don't know where it's going to end. And I can appreciate that
sentiment.
So my inclination is to try to look for some compromises here
because I can't give a clean yes vote to the need to get these -- this
additional zoning conditional use. But I certainly believe there's room
for some compromise that would be helpful for the community. So
that's basically where I stand.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. A fast question. Earlier, Kim,
you mentioned F l and F2, but I don't know what that is. You were
referring to something. But that's a code to me.
MS. MINARICH: I'm not really sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Programs or something?
Page 176
October 8, 2013
MS. MINARICH: Maybe our equine facilitated learning and
psychotherapy?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Maybe that's what it is.
Is that what those two are?
MS. MINARICH: We don't really refer to them as F 1, F2. I'm
not really sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Well, then I must have
misunderstood what you'd said.
MS. MINARICH: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's all right. I just thought I
heard you say Fl and F2.
Second thing is, we were talking about events, and they were
talking about it could be up to 28 events, but I defy anybody to try and
plan more than one event a month if they could. By the time you get
an event planned and you get the invitations out, it's hard to do that.
I mean, I belong to a lot of organizations, and, boy, we're lucky if
we can churn out one every two months, so that's just a comment. So
I don't think that's a fear for anybody to have to deal with.
And, three, if you ever think of expanding, we have lots of horse
land out in East Naples, and we'd love to have you expand out there.
Enough said.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I understand the conflict that
everybody's going through on this, but I will say that -- and those of
you that know me a little bit know that I am an advocate for small
agricultural uses and the qualities that they bring to our communities.
When I say that I mean places where you can keep horses, places
where children can experience small poultry, people -- areas where
people can have large dogs and let them actually run outside like a
large dog likes to run and so on and so forth.
So to me I would have to envision what would happen to this
property if it was not used for this expansion, and probably what
Page 177
October 8, 2013
would end up happening over a period of time is you'd have a couple
more mega-homes built, maybe each with a guesthouse, and maybe
each of them would have a couple horses in the back.
So I can't imagine that the intensity of the use that you're going to
see on your roads, that the amount of noise that's going to be created
by the people and the activities in the area are going to be
substantially different than what you're going to see by this expansion
which, in my view, seems to be planned fairly well, where most of
your intensity uses are out towards Goodlette-Frank Road.
And I can tell you -- I know. I've been through Pine Ridge all
my adult life -- and the expansion of Goodlette-Frank Road has done
more to put noise in that community than anything this place is going
to do. I can remember when it was a little tiny -- almost a trail, and
people used to ride horses all through this area.
So, you know, by definition, what you see in the county now is
an effort to cut down on vehicle miles traveled where mixed uses are
encouraged, and I think it's very difficult for me to envision any sort
of a mixed use that's more compatible with a Pine Ridge community
and it's large woodland lots than something of this nature.
So I -- you know, I just wonder what it would be like if those
agricultural lots were suddenly completely cleared from fence line to
fence line, which somebody could do. Somebody could go in on one
of these agricultural parcels, go down to the county, and declare that
they're going to do clearing and start an herb garden and open
everything up from Ridge Road to Goodlette-Frank, and they could do
it without even a permit, and they could build sheds without a permit,
and I don't think that would be desirable.
So I think having a well-planned and a dedicated group of people
that realize they have to be respectful in the community -- by all
testimony today, it's been a very good relationship so far. I don't see
that it can't continue and to flourish and everybody get the benefits
that they got.
Page 178
October 8, 2013
I would hate to see all of our agriculture pushed out east for the
simple reason that -- I know what's going to happen -- you're not
going to have the volunteers, you're not going to have the exposure in
the community that brings in the donations, you're not going to have
the readily accessible facility to the children that need it. Nobody
wants to drive an hour and a half to go take advantage of these
facilities.
So, you know, I just hope that my district in Golden Gate Estates
can find a methodology to create these rural agricultural zonings in
Golden Gate Estates. For those of you that are here, you may not
know, we don't have these in Golden Gate Estates. People can have
animals, but we don't have agricultural properties that have this sort of
potential.
So, you know, I would ask everybody -- and I spoke to many,
many people and had a lot of correspondence. I hope that everybody
can find a way to make this happen and that -- there seems to be a
little -- I think there's a little animosity here somehow, and I hope we
can set that aside and that everybody can find a new comfort level.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. This is your district. Would
you like to make the motion or shall I?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'd love to. Do you mind?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You go.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Since you made yours this morning
on the seawall.
Yeah, I would like to make a motion, but before I make the
motion, I would like to make a few comments that are important to
have on the record.
Clay introduced a document on the record, which was a grant,
and it should be disclosed that Naples Equestrian Challenge
independently applied for a grant. And is it a federal grant? Can
Page 179
October 8, 2013
someone help me with that? Was it a federal or a state grant?
MR. ARNOLD: Federal grant.
MR. OCHS: Federal grant. It's a federal grant.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's a federal grant. That federal
grant was approved by the Feds, and the funds would be used, I
believe, by Naples Equestrian Challenge to acquire the property in
question that has not yet been approved for this particular use.
The county acts as the subrecipient to administer the grant. This
is a federal grant; this is not a county grant. Those funds are currently
being held in escrow, and those funds will revert back to the feds. If
this does not pass today and they do not have the conditional use to
develop the land as they propose, they obviously will not acquire the
land, and then those funds will revert back to the feds.
So nothing that we're deciding here today is predicated on that
grant award from the feds. Our decision is independent of that, and
whether we vote it up or down will trigger whether the money actually
goes to the organization or goes back to the federal government, but
they are not recipients of it, and it is being held in escrow.
Is that correct, County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: That's absolutely correct.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
So I want that on the record so that everyone understands the
situation.
A great deal has come out of this hearing. I, personally, have
been educated beyond what I thought I would learn today. And I
would like to begin by addressing -- I do want to make a motion. And
I agree with Commissioner Coyle that in order to make a motion, the
motion has to be made with conditions. It cannot be made outright
accepting the proposal as it is presented here today.
So I'm going to make a motion to approve the conditional-use
permit with the following stipulations: That, No. 1, all the
recommendations of the Planning Commission are incorporated by
Page 180
October 8, 2013
reference and become a part of this conditional-use permit;
That -- No. 2, that all access to the facility be limited to access
via Center Street and that users, you know, whether they're guests or
employees, use only the Center Street access to gain entrance to the
community and that the Pine Ridge neighborhood will be unaffected
by any of the organization's traffic;
That Ridge -- that the Ridge access be limited strictly for
emergencies and that emergency be defined so it's clearly understood
as an emergency that there's no usage creep, if you will;
That there will be no parking on any side of this project, that
there won't be any parking on Center Street, that there won't be any
parking on Ridge abutting the property. In other words, the only
parking that will be permitted are those parking spots that have been
identified on the site plan as presented here today;
That the total number of events will not just be limited for the
two back parcels but will also be limited to the front parcel, and that
there will be four major events a year. And I'd like to have a short
discussion as to what a small event is and how many small events can
be had on the totality of the project. So if you could address that with
your client and come back to me with that;
That -- further, that this is not a commercial enterprise. Very
clearly it's not a commercial enterprise, that this entity derives the bulk
of its revenue from two sources, from grants and from donations and,
to a limited degree, from the events, which we will enumerate as I
mentioned in the previous comment.
Now, the balance of the income that is generated, the program
income is, from my understanding, very, very limited, and that any
program income that this organization seeks to develop should not
result in any traffic impact that is larger than what has been proposed
here today;
And that, further, the total volume of activity for this project,
again, be limited to a fixed number to consider all three sites, not that
Page 181
October 8, 2013
there is a cap just on the back two and an unlimited number of
participants on the first lot, but rather that, in total, we agree to a cap
for the three combined sites, which will be now considered as one. So
I'd like you to talk to your client about that.
And with that, I will make a -- oh, and then one last issue that I
want to make clear. This issue about the buffer, the hedging. The
hedging absolutely has to be the most protective. I want the highest
buffer across all of Ridge Drive to make sure that the neighbors across
the street are protected, and by that I mean the 8-foot-high hedge, you
know, that's 85 percent opaque with the double row of trees, but from
-- not only for the two lots in question, but for the existing lot as well.
So you basically have a consistent buffer that shields all the neighbors
on the back side of the property.
And -- yeah, I think with that you've got a motion. And I just
need a -- just two quantifications. One is the number of totals event
for all lots and the total volume of business that we're going to cap
these three lots to so everyone has a clear understanding.
And, by the way, all of this is subject to -- Clay questioned, you
know, how do we protect and ensure that enforcement of these
provisions actually takes place? Well, that's what we have code
enforcement for. So if there is a violation, then your clients, Clay, can
bring it to Code Enforcement Board attention, and code enforcement
will enforce absolutely everything that is included in here.
MR. ARNOLD: If I might?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
MR. ARNOLD: Commissioner Hiller, you don't have a second
to your motion, but --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Not yet.
MR. ARNOLD: -- we didn't really have rebuttal to some of the
speakers. And I would just like to remind you that opposition at our
Planning Commission hearing offered up a set of conditions, a lengthy
set of conditions that the Planning Commission took from those.
Page 182
October 8, 2013
Those were -- that were kind of zoning related and making this the
most compatible use it could be.
And the buffer that you've indicated, the access, as you've
indicated --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So the buffer has already been
accepted at eight feet?
MR. ARNOLD: It's, I think, six feet in the code. I mean, if we
need to manage a hedge at eight feet, I'm --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's whatever staff said. I'm sorry,
forgive me. You're right, it is. It's my bad. It's six feet with 85
percent opaque. So eight is incorrect.
MR. ARNOLD: And that was their condition as well, that all of
Ridge would be treated with the same landscape buffer, and in this
case it's 20 feet wide, Type C buffer on Ridge Drive.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, perfect. So that issue is
already -- has been addressed and is incorporated.
MR. ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Fantastic. So that issue doesn't have
to be included in my motion.
Is there anything else that I have said that's already been
included?
MR. ARNOLD: You mentioned the Ridge access for emergency
vehicles only, and that's one of their conditions as well.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is emergency vehicles defined?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think we defined it that if fire or
emergency services needed to come in and deal with a patient or
something --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So it's strictly going to be used for
emergency service vehicles?
MR. ARNOLD: Once we start the new program, yes, that's what
it was intended to be.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So let's just make sure that
Page 183
October 8, 2013
the wording in there is clear to that effect, that emergency isn't defined
as, you know, some car leaving through that back gate.
Anything else?
MR. ARNOLD: No. I think we -- I need to talk to Kim about
the number of events and the total participants, because the Planning
Commission limited the new number of participants that could utilize
this proposed facility to 200 annual participants.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, I understand that, but the
problem is is that you have an unlimited number, as, you know, one of
the individuals here pointed out in their presentation. I believe it was
you, sir, who pointed out that there was no limit on the first approval
on the first parcel.
And I think everybody has to have a clear understanding of what
the total volume of activity for that site will be, and that's only fair.
MR. ARNOLD: Kim may have to do some number crunching
on that for a moment to determine what that number is, because I don't
know the programming as she does, obviously.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. ARNOLD: But I think with regard to the special events, I
guess I would just -- you know, with you, I'm not sure what a major or
minor event is. I think --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, you can -- that should be
defined. Like, I think that barnyard boogie dance is a major event.
MR. ARNOLD: I would concur with that, and I think that one of
the other distinctions -- we had a little bit of that discussion at the
Planning Commission is when they host a luncheon for their
volunteers, is that considered a special event that rises to the attention
of this? And I don't think it would be.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I don't think it would be either.
Why don't you consult -- let's take, you know, five minutes. We'll
take a five-minute recess. If you could consult with the County
Attorney on, you know, the definition of, you know, how to define
Page 184
October 8, 2013
events, you know, large versus what isn't really an event versus what's
a small event, and then please come up with the numbers on what the
total activity would be, you know, for the three parcels combined.
MR. ARNOLD: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And just -- and that will be my last
comment. Go ahead, and then we'll be back in five minutes.
MR. ARNOLD: Can I take one more second before you break --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sure.
MR. ARNOLD: -- to just address a comment that Commissioner
Coyle made.
And, Commissioner, I think we've tried really hard to
compromise and, in fact, I mentioned that to Mr. Brooker at the start
of the meeting that, are there other conditions that you'd like to try to
limit, impose, different restrictions, modify in some way to do this,
because, you know, in my opinion and I think staffs opinion and the
Planning Commission's opinion, when you take any of the traffic off
of Ridge Drive and you put in a superior landscape buffer that is
absolutely required by code and you push the improvements, you
know, several hundred feet away from the residences and then you
limit the sound to you and me talking voices and you limit the
lighting, the neighborhood impacts seem to disappear with regard to
that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: They do. And I just want to add to
that, you know, going back to the use. This is an existing permitted
use, and so we're expanding the land of a use that has been deemed
compatible and under no circumstances has been deemed offensive by
anyone in the neighborhood ever.
And, in fact, all the expansion and growth and development has
been encouraged and supported by Pine Ridge as a community, even
the neighbors across the street. So let's take the recess, and if you
could address that because we need to close this.
MR. ARNOLD: Okay.
Page 185
October 8, 2013
MR. KLATZKOW: This is going to take more than five
minutes. May I suggest --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: We can work through some of
these other items.
MR. KLATZKOW: May I suggest I have my staff work with,
you know, his staff--
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's fine. Well, why don't you
work it through, and when you're ready, come back and we'll
reintroduce you.
MR. KLATZKOW: And if we can get that list of conditions, that
might be helpful.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Mine?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well --
MR. KLATZKOW: I mean, I'm assuming if there's a second to
the motion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Give me --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. I have a -- let me go
ahead -- court reporter, can you provide them -- did you write down
my conditions? Can you just --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's the same thing except for
Center Street.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, basically -- let me again
repeat what I said, that we would incorporate the Planning
Commission's recommendations, that we would limit access to the
facility exclusively to Center Street and that no users or employees of
the facility will run their traffic through the adjacent neighborhood.
MR. KLATZKOW: They had an office off of-- can they use
that still?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, you know -- can you put that
site plan up. I don't -- did they have a --
Page 186
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They have a little office here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Where is the site plan? But I
thought that office was accessible through their --
MS. MINARICH: We're going to be taking that driveway out of
the plan.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. So they're going to
actually take the driveway out of the plan --
MS. MINARICH: No, not the 206. The 194. We're taking that
out. This one.
MR. ARNOLD: This driveway remains, because it only services
the garage on the back side of their office. They have some incidental
storage and their own things there. It doesn't serve the public in any
way.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So then if you can limit that access,
it will not be for the public off of Ridge in that one drive. So, again,
limit the access so there's no public access to that. That's strictly for
employees for storage.
Then the next issue is that there will be no parking on the streets,
neither on Ridge nor on Center; that events will be limited to only four
large events, and that's for the three parcels combined. And then in
terms of small events, we'll define the number of individuals for a
small event and how many, and you'll come back on that; that the --
they are not engaging in commercial activity but rather their revenues
are being derived by grants and through donors, and any program
income that they generate will not be such that it will increase the
traffic beyond what has been proposed; and that there will be, for all
three parcels --
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't know how to enforce that, ma'am. I
mean, we're not going to be auditing their books and records.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's fine. Well, then, it just
should be noted that, you know, they're not primarily deriving their --
MR. KLATZKOW: That they'll remain a noncommercial
Page 187
October 8, 2013
enterprise.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Correct.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's the fair way to describe it,
that they will remain a noncommercial enterprise; and that the total
volume of participants and -- what do you call your --
MS. MINARICH: Participants.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That there will be a cap on the total
volume of participants for all three parcels combined. So you'll have a
total limit on how many you have the ability to serve on that property.
MR. KLATZKOW: Is that per week?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: However. I mean, it has to,
obviously, be linked to their parking and to traffic. So, you know,
whatever you come up with is reasonable, and then bring that back for
our consideration. You can do it by week. You can do a maximum
volume by week.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And that's it.
MR. ARNOLD: Can I clarify one thing?
MR. KLATZKOW: Did you want to do anything with the
lighting?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is the lighting being -- that lighting
was addressed by the Planning Commission, if I remember correctly.
MR. ARNOLD: Lighting was. It didn't mention the dark sky
lighting, but we could add some additional language if you -- we're
okay with adding some shielding and non-glare surrounding the
property.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We're basically creating an
environment where the neighbors across the street will not have any
traffic impact, there will be no noise impact, there will be no visual
impact, and there will be no sound impact, and that is the effect of
what all of these conditions provide and, you know, that the traffic, by
Page 188
October 8, 2013
limiting access through Center Street, will not affect the neighborhood
as a whole, and that this is a noncommercial enterprise.
MR. ARNOLD: And just to be clear on the condition regarding
the Ridge Drive and Center access points, we were proposing to
continue to use the existing access on Ridge until the improvements
for the riding pen.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And when is that going to happen?
MR. ARNOLD: I don't know the exact timing.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Hang on a second.
MR. ARNOLD: I don't know that exact timing. I think that's a
fundraising effort for them.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What -- you were thinking of using
which access point?
MR. ARNOLD: And I thought I'd made that clear, but the one
that's proposed to become the emergency only that's currently their
access point.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But here's the problem with that.
That was actually never permitted. So I have to agree with the
residents that it can't be used because it's illegal as it stands right now.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'm calling enforcement in the
morning.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's okay. You don't have to do
that.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I have to do it because you told
me I have to do it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: All right. You got it. But I'm taking
care of it for you right now.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: They're in violation, and I'm
calling and going to have it enforced.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Wayne?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes, I'm sorry.
Page 189
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We're going to -- you guys can --
we're going to continue with other agenda items. Work with the
County Attorney, and please come back. And, no, I have to agree
with the constituent. It is not a permitted access point at this point. So
I don't see -- Mr. Casalanguida, I don't see how they can continue to
use it.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Not unless you grant that right on a
temporary basis as part of this conditional use. That's what I went up
to speak to Wayne about. Some of the residents spoke to me and said,
you know, we'll file a complaint. I said, you're -- I'll have to have
them remove it.
So unless you specify as part of this conditional use that they can
keep it for a certain period of time while they build the other access
point --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, how long would that be?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That would be something they're
going to have to tell us.
MR. ARNOLD: I don't think we have a definitive date that we
can tell you. It's tight.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's really -- that becomes an
open ended --
MR. ARNOLD: We'll talk about that on recess, too, because I
understand that's an issue.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. You can bring that back.
But if it's illegal and you don't have a definitive date of construction,
we just can't perpetuate that.
MR. ARNOLD: Okay. We'll deal with that, too. Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we finish up commissioner
comments while they're talking?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, we're on 10.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We're moving to another one.
Page 190
October 8, 2013
Commissioner Henning, did you want to say something?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, you mean commissioner
comments on this one? Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. OCHS: Are we ready to move on?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Public comments.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, you have still remaining public
comments, and you have another public hearing that was under Item 9
that was moved from your summary agenda, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have to take -- the next item is
the public hearing. We're still in that.
Item #9A
ORDINANCE 2013-59: RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2013-25, THE
COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER ORDINANCE —
ADOPTED W/AMENDMENT
MR. OCHS: That would take you to Item 9A, which was
previously 17B, and that was a recommendation to adopt an ordinance
amending Ordinance No. 2013-25, the Collier County hearing officer
ordinance, and Commissioner Fiala had moved this to the regular
agenda for discussion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you very much. And I
just wanted to -- the reason I wanted to discuss this is when we
discussed it originally, I was thinking -- and I thought the way we
were headed was that we were concerned that everything would be
turned over to the hearing examiner and nothing to the Planning
Commission; however, if everything should go there, because they
were small items, then that's great. But if there's something that's
important that we feel in our district that should be sent to the
Page 191
October 8, 2013
Planning Commission, we could do that.
I talked with Mark Strain, because I don't know that I would have
anything, but I just wanted to make that offer. But the way it turns out
in our book, it says anybody can turn it over to the Planning
Commission. I don't think that's such a good idea.
I think it's the commissioner for that district, and that is my point.
The commissioner for that district, if they -- because they should
know their projects better than anybody else, and if they have a
concern with something on that particular project, that then they ask to
have it turned over to the Planning Commission, and that's the
stipulation I wanted to make.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you want to make that
change?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, from how it's written. I don't
know --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think Commissioner Fiala is right.
I think it should be the commissioner of the district that makes the
decision to move it to the Planning Commission, because if you're
concerned about something in your district, you should have the right
to do that.
MR. KLATZKOW: In anticipation of this, I amended the
proposed ordinance to reflect what I think you're trying to get at.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't know if the board wants this change
or not, but that's what it would look like.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think it's great.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve with the
amendment.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. All in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 192
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries 4-1 with
Commissioner Coyle dissenting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Madam Chair, I would really
appeal to the board to let the -- there's about six or eight people that
have been here for six hours just waiting to make a couple comments.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I know. Unfortunately, that's how it
happens.
Item #7 — Continued from earlier in the meeting
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. OCHS: We can move on to public comment.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let's come back to public comment.
MR. KRASOWSKI: You do it on purpose.
MR. MILLER: Your next public comment will be John Lundin.
He will be followed by Dona Knapp.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And someone, I believe it was Bob,
made a comment that it's on purpose. It isn't. We have time-certains
that are established. Public comment is not at a time certain. We have
to respect the time-certains. And once those are done, then we can go
back to whatever issue we were in the middle of when a time-certain
was interrupted. In this instance, it happened to be public comment.
Go ahead.
MR. LUNDIN: I'd like to speak about the new Florida legislative
law on public speaking, which you referred to earlier. The essence of
Page 193
October 8, 2013
this law is that the public must have a reasonable ability to speak in
public meetings. The key word is you have to give people a
reasonable attempt to speak at public meetings.
Unfortunately, what you suggested earlier today is the exact
opposite of the intention of this new law. In fact, your new rules are
totally unreasonable in allowing the public to speak here.
Let me explain this -- why. County commission meetings, there
is no time limit on agenda items or the length of your meetings. If
your meeting does not finish today, you could come back tomorrow or
the next day; therefore, it is unreasonable for you to put any
restrictions on people to speak at public meetings.
Now, if you look at the cover of your agenda, it says, all
registered speakers will receive up to three minutes unless the time is
adjusted by the chairm -- or chairwoman, sorry. What that means is
you can either decrease or increase the three-minute stand. What you
cannot do is force the public before they speak to say if they are for or
against an item and force the public to choose a person to represent a
group of people.
This violates the First Amendment of the United States
Constitution, and it inhibits people from speaking even before they are
up here speaking.
Now, if I was a new person here, I would be totally inhibited by
what Commissioner Hiller has been trying to do to the people here.
Also, it seems like the intent is to badger the public, harass, and
inhibit the public. And this is -- try to understand this. The key word
in the new state law is you have to give people a reasonable attempt.
What you are doing is totally unreasonable. I mean, I've been
speaking at public meetings for about 20 years. I've never been in any
government where any elected public official tried to inhibit free
speech like this. It's shocking what is happening here.
And the reality here is, Commissioner Hiller, this is a state law
where you have to let people -- the whole idea of the legislature was to
Page 194
October 8, 2013
allow people to speak at public meetings because there's never been a
law in the state of Florida allowing people to speak. It's all -- each
government agency can choose what they want and do what they
want.
So I know you really haven't instituted this new policy yet, but if
you do -- you know, I want to help you be good elected officials, but
you may be violating this law, and you may be charged with violating
this law.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: County Attorney, your opinion on --
MR. KLATZKOW: I've been directed to come back to the board
with proposals for the board for policy, and that policy will be within
the four corners of SB50. This board has conducted itself at all times
within the four corners of SB50. You know, we could talk about that
when it comes back in a -- at your next meeting.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you, which is what we
directed you to do. Thank you again.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Dona Knapp. She'll be
followed by Bob Krasowski.
MS. KNAPP: Hi. My name's Dona Knapp, and I live in Pine
Ridge Estates. And I'd really like to thank you, the way you handled
the last situation with the Naples Equestrian Center. I've lived in Pine
Ridge since 1990, and I've never seen any problems there with the
neighborhood and traffic.
However, I don't understand why the same standards do not
apply to the residents of Golden Gate Estates that are having an oil
well put not -- about a thousand feet away from their home.
You mentioned noise, the lighting; this is with Pine Ridge.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And all of that is going to be
addressed. What they're going to do is develop ordinances and
standards, like, through the Land Development Code, and we'll look to
all of those issues and bring that back to us. We haven't got there yet.
Page 195
October 8, 2013
Staff has to do the work --
MS. KNAPP: I see.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- and then we're going to evaluate.
We're going to evaluate the full impact through various different
means.
MS. KNAPP: The trucks --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Everything.
MS. KNAPP: -- going in and out?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We're going to look at --
MS. KNAPP: The noise?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- lights, noise --
MS. KNAPP: Because it just --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- risk.
MS. KNAPP: -- seems to me that the same consideration has not
been offered to the residents in Golden Gate Estates.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sure. And it should be considered
in every --
MS. KNAPP: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: In every land-use decision we make,
we look at those issues, so you're right.
MS. KNAPP: Absolutely.
My other concerns are actually with the water quality that we're
facing at the moment in Florida. Lake Okeechobee, the discharges,
and -- I mean, it seems that on both sides of our state we're -- you
know, there's pollution on both sides.
And the drilling of Golden Gate Estates and on the wetlands out
there, I see that would only further impact it. There have been some
recent studies done by Duke University that near drilling and fracking
sites the level of radiation is extremely high. It is 200 times that of the
so-called normal level, and so that's a big concern.
It also -- that radiation then travels into the groundwater. So
that's a very big consideration to me and obviously the residents out
Page 196
October 8, 2013
there. And I'm wondering what kind of testing you will do for this,
because radon is everywhere on the planet and becomes exposed
through drilling and through fracking anywhere.
So what is going to happen with that? What kind of tests will be
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we get through the rest of
the speakers? Maybe that's an "email your commissioner" type thing.
MS. KNAPP: Well, I'm sorry, but I waited here since 9 o'clock
this morning to speak to you guys.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, ma'am. I will tell you this --
and I talked to Jamie and a couple of the other people. I would ask
you to please look at the workup that Mr. Summers did under this
agenda item, and there's several pages of items. And I've asked
everyone to look over those. If they have additional things -- and
yours is certainly a reasonable request.
MS. KNAPP: Radiation definitely is very, very considerable.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Right. And we also have -- I will
tell you that Mike Finn, who's the assistant to Representative Carlos
Trujillo over there, has probably done more journeyman's work than
anyone on this issue. He's compiled absolutely every question that's
been asked at any of these public meetings through the record, and
he's compiled all the information to answer those questions out of the
public record and out of the testimony that we've got. So, I mean,
there's a big body of information that's available.
But if you'd like to add on to those concerns -- and I think Mr.
Summers did a journeyman's work in defining some of the basic issues
that we've talked about here for months, please address your
comments to those, because those are the things that we're going to be
trying to make sure that we get across, and we're going to have to
define who takes care of that.
Is South Florida Water Management going to take care of it? Is
DEP going to take care of it? Is Collier County going to take care of
Page 197
October 8, 2013
it? Is that going to be a requirement that's going to be imposed on the
drillers or the landowners? Who's going to do the different things that
are deemed necessary so that everybody can address all the safety
issues and challenges going forward?
So if you have additional concern to add to those, please take a
look at that and get back to me, and I'll make sure that we get back to
Mr. Summers.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: County Attorney, could I give her
the things that we received this morning? Would that help any?
MR. DURHAM: Ma'am, we have a stack of them over here. So
if anybody wants the materials Dan Summers put out, there's extras
copies over here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do you want a copy?
MS. KNAPP: Yes, I would. I would like a copy.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I've got everything that we had this
morning, if you'd like.
MS. KNAPP: Thank you, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You're welcome.
MS. KNAPP: I would like to finish by saying please, please give
careful, very careful consideration. Oil companies do lie. They do
use chemicals.
And, as we know, we're still suffering in the Gulf of Mexico. I
used to be a shrimper. I'm not anymore. I lost my job, thanks to BP.
I now own a vacation business and might be in danger of losing that,
too, because no one wants to come to Florida and wallow in oil and
mire and see oil rigs and smell the odor and have polluted water.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much.
MS. KNAPP: Thank you for having me.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Bob Krasowski. He'll be
followed by Pamela Duran.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Hi. Once again, Bob Krasowski, for the
record.
Page 198
October 8, 2013
You know, I said that this is the way it's set up. It's done on
purpose. It is the way the agenda is set up. You could have a sliding
afternoon time-certain at 1 o'clock or whenever you're done with
public comment. I think it's horrible to keep these people here for so
long.
I'm speaking now because I'm concerned about your efforts in
particular, Madam Chair, to control public input. I don't know what
you were taught under the kings' and queens' law while you were
growing up in Canada, but the standard here is to allow and to even
defend free speech.
I am sympathetic with your desire not to sit around and listen to
repetitive comments, but more often than not each individual speaker
has a point or two to make from their own perspective. Many of them
are not experienced government presenters, so they're not experts at
addressing you, but each and every one has an individual right to
redress their government.
Canada's a great place with great culture, I'm told, but it is where
many of the colonialists retreated to during and after the American
Revolutionary War.
As we here in America lose ground --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you -- Bob --
MR. KRASOWSKI: Excuse me. It's my time. Don't interrupt.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That is so --
MR. KRASOWSKI: Congratulations to -- we lose ground to the
concentrators of power and wealth serving fewer and fewer interests.
We're losing the opportunity that the American experiment provided
us to be a government of, for, and by the people. There can be no
representative democracy if you are not willing to take the time to
listen to the people and their unencumbered free speech.
A government that restricts public input with the excessive
controls and sides with the concentrators of this money and power --
you've got your beach renourishment interests, you have your oil
Page 199
October 8, 2013
interests -- to develop -- to the detriment of the people and to nature
creates a sad situation. You can't be telling people what to say or what
they can't say.
And you do this all the time, Commissioner Hiller. Lining them
up to the wall so they have to stand up for 20, 25 minutes while they
wait for other speakers to talk is inappropriate at best and a sign of a
tyrannical over-control issue. There is something very odd and
un-American about that to me.
Now, do you have something to say to me, Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure, I do.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The only attempt that we were
trying to do this morning is to comply with the new law. Okay.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good. We'll see what the attorney brings
back, right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. I'm sorry you're
angered.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I am not angry; it's just -- I'm not a
professional speaker either, and so I'm not very good at this.
But I give it an effort because these matters are important to me.
And I try to relate to you, and you're so smug and so unsensitive to
people, and you treat them so poorly, it's just pathetic.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I thought you were done.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I thought you were done.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Geez.
(Applause.)
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Pamela Duran. She'll be
followed by Joe Mule.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Before we speak -- allow the next
speaker to speak, I just want to read, again, for the record, the statute
was amended, and consistent with the statute, it provides under -- and
Page 200
October 8, 2013
this is Section 1, Section 286.0114, Florida Statutes, and this is about
public meetings reasonable opportunity to be heard.
Under 4A, it provides that -- provide -- okay. Let me just read in
total. Rules or policies of a board or commission which govern the
opportunity to be heard are limited to those that, A, provide guidelines
regarding the amount of time an individual has to address the board or
commission; B, prescribe procedures for allowing representatives of
groups or factions on a proposition to address the board or commission
rather than all members of such groups or factions at meetings in
which a large number of individuals wish to be heard.
And then C is prescribe procedures or forums for an individual to
use in order to inform the Board of Commission of a desire to be heard
to indicate his or her support, opposition, or neutrality on a proposition
and indicate his or her designation of the representative to speak for
him or her or his or her group on a proposition if he or she so chooses,
or designate a specific period of time for public comment, and that's
D.
And, finally, five provides if a court -- I'm sorry. If a board or
commission adopts rules or policies in compliance with this section
follows such rules or policies when providing an opportunity for
members of the public to be heard, the board or commission is deemed
to be acting in compliance with this section.
All of this is in light of the First Amendment and fully supportive
of it as adopted by our legislature, and we are going to set procedures
accordingly.
And for those of you who think that -- merely that because I'm
from Canada I don't support the First Amendment, it's very much to
the contrary. I'm unfortunately, not really from Canada. I wasn't one
of those immigrants who came from the states and sort of fled from
down here.
My parents were immigrants from eastern Europe, and so I'm
first generation. And if anybody understands the First Amendment --
Page 201
October 8, 2013
and you should know this, Bob -- I do.
So your words of disrespect are really unfortunate. I wish you
would retract them.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Contrary to your opinion, that's all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could we get onto the next speaker,
please.
MS. DURAN: I'm Pamela Duran. I live at 4880 24th Avenue,
and I'd like to thank you and Mr. Summers and also Mike Finn for all
the work they've done.
I'd like to tell Mr. Summers that he made one mistake when he
said the EMs haven't gone to any of the wells, and the reason is
because there was a death and an injury at Raccoon Point, and they
were taken by helicopter. So no EMs did respond to any wells, but
that doesn't mean there hasn't been a death or an injury.
And I know what the DEP's going to say, I know what everybody
else -- it wasn't a civilian, but it was a death and an injury. And to
dismiss the hazards of this kind of job is crazy. They're human beings.
It's not acceptable.
I also am worried about -- Mr. Nance said that he -- out in the
Estates we have animals. I have animals. I have 14 chickens, and I'm
concerned about air quality.
You break our road, and my chickens don't lay for three days. So
I know animals react to noise pollution. I know this. I have watched
-- for three years I've had chickens. So to say that animals aren't
affected is crazy, that people aren't going to be affected. This is a
neighborhood.
I heard you talk about barriers and lights and things, you know.
Hopefully you'll do the same for us.
I'm also worried that Total Safety, which was the company that
did the evacuation plan, has been fired, and they haven't been replaced
by another company. A safety company just doesn't do the evacuation
plan. This is another level of safety that, when they start drilling,
Page 202
October 8, 2013
there's somebody there to oversee the hydraulic gauges, to see that
everything is running safely.
I find it really worrisome that the DEP says they don't have to
name them till after they start drilling. I find this totally -- it's not
acceptable. How do we know what the company's like if they don't
even name them before they start drilling?
Another thing is the air emissions. Nobody's addressed air
emissions, and I would like to see that also addressed in the report.
DEP said they won't do it, so --
MR. MILLER: The next speaker is Joe Mule. He'll followed by
Amber Crooks.
MR. MULE: Thank you. First of all, I know it's late in the day,
and you-all look like you're tired. You've gotten a little bit of a
beating. I don't know whether it's all deserved. I'm kind of new. This
is my second time here. I know that you're trying to do the right thing.
And I'd like to laud you, personally, Commissioner Hiller,
because I heard you earlier today mention that you will not tolerate
any kind of violence in the home and you would make sure that there
would -- you would ensure the safety of every home in Collier
County.
And I take that to mean not just in the case of domestic violence
that we all abhor, but also in the fact that the safety that we're talking
here of the residents of Golden Gate Estates as well.
And I know that's why you asked, and I appreciate all of you
having approved Mr. Summers to go ahead and do the study. And I
think that's a good foundation, what he did. But it's a start. Now we
need to build the walls, and we need to build the roof to that.
In the meantime, we've heard that there are some time frames
involved between now and the next meeting in order to be able to get
information. And we all know that it's going to take time to put a plan
together for this thing.
In essence, since it will take time, what I'd like to ask, first of all,
Page 203
October 8, 2013
is that you direct the County Attorney to, before Friday at 4:30, file
with the FDEP your plans that you do have some health concerns with
regards to -- and the safety of the residents of the area, and that you try
to stop this permit as we are as well. So I urge you to take that
recommendation and try to go ahead and notify them and let them
know.
I would like to see us, the people, also be a part of this. I know
that there's a lot of different groups. I made some suggestions, some
positive recommendations last time I was here that I saw were taken to
heart and that were incorporated into what Mr. Summers presented
today. So I feel good about the fact that we were able to provide some
very constructive ideas towards this.
To that effect, I'd like to volunteer and offer that we get a group
of residents from the community that Mr. Nance could select or
you-all can that would help within -- with this task force in being able
to make some recommendations, because I know that the folks who
are working on this thing and are trying to get the job done, they're
doing the best that they can, but they have a lot on their plate right
now. And this is just one more thing for them to take on.
So if you'd like, again, I volunteer to be able to do that and to
meet with them and provide suggestions that come directly from the
residents of the area.
So to that end, again, I'd like to -- I just read this, be brief, be
brilliant, be gone. I've got 25 seconds. I'm done. I don't know about
the brilliant, but I will be gone.
Thank you very much. Have a great afternoon. And for your
patience, again, once again, thank you.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Mule, please, if you would
remain, I would just like to address a couple of things that you said.
Remember what it was that we talked about that everybody is
engaged in doing at present, and that is three things. Number one is,
we are going to meet with the petitioner, the applicant, for the drilling,
Page 204
October 8, 2013
for his vendors, and we're going to discuss an interlocal agreement to
discuss some of the concerns that are on that list.
Second thing we're going to do is we're going to try to move
ahead as rapidly as we did can to identify which specialized response
capabilities that we need that we don't have.
And, finally, that we are going to look and discuss legislative
changes which will regulate DEP and South Florida Water
Management District or at least address the shortcomings that you and
others have identified and we have identified through our evaluation
of their permit.
So that's a pretty -- I mean, that's a big bite right there that we're
asking these people to do. And I think it goes right to the heart of
what everybody has stated is their concern was that a -- practical
applications of all these discussions. In other words, what does it mean
to Mrs. Duran's chickens, for example, so on and so forth.
If you'll look in there and see, please review those items, and
that's the framework that we've hustled to this point, really, in
response to this permit.
And I think -- I'm proud of the support that we've gotten from
this board, because I think it's been universal. But we have -- we're in
a situation where we had to wait for the regulatory agencies and
permitting agencies that are in charge of this to do something before
we could do anything.
So I believe we're at about as breakneck a pace as we can
possibly be in response to that to make things better, and I think --
that's certainly my intent, and I think it's everybody's intent.
MR. MULE: And I appreciate what you're doing. And, again, I
understand everything, and I heard everything that you said, and I
agree with what you said.
It still doesn't change the fact that because you're working at
breakneck speed and there's so much to accomplish, that you should
file with the FDEP a petition before Friday at 4:30 saying you guys
Page 205
October 8, 2013
need to really hold off on this permit while we locally evaluate
everything that's going on.
So this is something that maybe he could do in a simple letter
would probably suffice. We're trying to do the same things ourselves.
So, again, I don't disagree with everything -- anything that you've
said. I have looked in detail at what's been put together. And, again,
like I said, I think it's a great foundation, but you-all specifically added
to that. I heard you-all say that there's more that needs to be done. I
agree with that as well.
So in the essence of it, if while we're doing all this -- and while
we're working on it, we need to be able to ensure the safety of people
and make sure that this permit doesn't go through.
So all I ask is that you say, hey, guys, wait. We're going to
challenge this because we have issues with this. We have things that
we have to consider in order to be able to address this well that is the
first that comes up so close to a residential area.
So, again, we're in no disagreement with anything. We're in full
agreement. I think that we can work well together. I have -- I know
that I have your support. You have my support in trying to get done
whatever's necessary to accomplish this.
I don't see us at being -- as being at odds with each other at all.
You and I have had this conversation on more than one occasion. I
see us as people who are working together to accomplish something.
That's what I think -- what makes us a great place to live here in
Naples, and in Collier County in particular.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, realize this -- and the reason
that the legislative approach has been suggested and that I've talked to
our lobbying professionals to do that is the DEP at this moment has
declared, through issues of this permit, that none of the safety
questions that have been posed to them rise to the level so that they
can deny this permit. That's where we're at.
So it doesn't make any difference that Collier County says, you
Page 206
October 8, 2013
know what, we're going to be a lot more comfortable applying some
additional criteria when we get inside this envelope. But DEP at
present states emphatically through their action that that's not the case,
and they have told that to their -- our legislators.
They stopped talking to our legislative delegation. If you talk to
the legislators, they will tell you that they stopped talking to them.
So in short of going to the legislators at this point and saying,
hey, there's a gap here that we're uncomfortable with, we can't really
do anything. We cannot stop them from doing anything. They're
saying that they do not have reason to deny the permit and that the
permittee is entitled to the permit according to the law that exists
today.
So unless we go in there and we work through this legislative
process, we're not going to get very far.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam Chair, can we get
through the speakers? We have other items. People want to speak on
other items. We have a carryover.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, sir. Commissioner Nance,
would you care to speak with --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, we will converse.
MR. MULE: Yes, we will converse. And, again, thank you all
very much. I appreciate your time.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Amber Crooks. She'll be
followed by Barbara Maher.
MS. CROOKS: Thanks. Amber Crooks on behalf of the
Conservancy of Southwest Florida, which is located at 1495 Smith
Preserve Way.
I'll be brief today because we're pleased with the direction that
was given earlier this morning, and some others have touched on some
things that we're going to talk about.
Page 207
October 8, 2013
But there were a few things that were important enough that I
wanted to put on the record for me to stick around all afternoon, and
that is the staffs come up with some really great recommendations for
additional protective measures, and that these recommendations, in
conjunction with a local ordinance and the related changes to the
Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code, will help
ensure that the county has a mechanism to require more stringent
measures over and above those provided by other review agencies
such as FDEP, if necessary.
We have many recommendations for the ordinance and
recommendations for potential changes to the GMP. The safety and
emergency protections that staff have fleshed out, they often dovetail
with protection of environmental resources, such as their aquifers,
wetlands, and wildlife. So we plan to work directly what staff to share
these suggestions and detail.
One specific thing that I did want to bring up at this time is the
need for a mechanism to address cumulative effects of past, current,
and future drilling projects. FDEP has advised us that they do not
currently account for cumulative effects of drilling projects in their
rules but that they should; however, without a change in the state
rules, we doubt that they would look at projects in regards to a
cumulative impacts fashion.
This is very important, as the Danny Hughes Company has
leased 110,000 acres for exploration throughout Southwest Florida,
mainly Collier County. This could be something that the county
would help address at the local level through its ordinance as well as
advocating for such at the state legislative level. So this is one
example, perhaps, of something that could be addressed legislatively.
We look forward to working with staff on these matters. Thank
you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Barbara Maher, followed
Page 208
October 8, 2013
by John Dwyer.
MS. MAHER: Dear Commissioners, I thank you very much for
this opportunity to be able to speak to you. I have spoken to Mr. -- I
mean Commissioner Nance over the telephone when I was in Ohio
this summer, and I'm just so impressed by what you have done for the
citizens this morning and this afternoon in caring about them and
being so respectful of their rights.
I'm a resident of 24th Avenue Southwest where the drilling will
occur; well, hopefully not. I would like to propose an amendment or
an ordinance to completely eliminate the drilling on our street and/or
anywhere in Golden Gate Estates or Naples.
We need a bill of rights which we have certain inalienable rights;
the right to a safe place to live without the fear of harm to person,
environment, and wildlife.
We have rights to protection, not -- no matter where we are and
what powerful entity that exists to prevent us from having those rights.
Please protect us. Please protect the panthers. Please protect the
bears. That's why we moved there. It's beautiful.
You-all are welcome to come visit our street, you're all welcome,
just like I felt I was welcome when I moved to Naples.
Thank you much for listening and respecting us. Please help us.
Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, your final speaker, John Dwyer,
did have to leave. He did submit a written statement, which I
provided to the court reporter, and that was your final speaker for this
public comment.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Great, thank you.
Item #10A
RESOLUTION 2013-232: REAPPOINTING ANTHONY J.
Page 209
October 8, 2013
BRANCO, DAVID C. LARSON AND JENNIFER D. TANNER
WITH TERMS EXPIRING OCTOBER 1, 2017 TO THE LELY
GOLF ESTATES MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes you to Item 10 on your
agenda. 10A is appointment of members to the Lely Golf Estates
MSTU Advisory Committee. Recommendation is for reappointment
of--
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I move to reappoint Anthony
Branco, David Larson, and Jennifer Tanner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any discussion?
There being no discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #10B
RESOLUTION 2013-233: REAPPOINTING MARGARET E.
HARRIS AND PATRICIA SPENCER WITH TERMS EXPIRING
OCTOBER 6, 2017 TO THE GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION
ADVISORY COMMITTEE — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: 10B is appointment of members to the Golden Gate
Beautification Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Move to reappoint Margaret Harris
and Ms. Patricia Spencer.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'll second that.
Page 210
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that the Golden Gate City?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, the first one is in District 1,
too, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is there any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (No verbal response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (No verbal response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #10C
RESOLUTION 2013-234: REAPPOINTING CRAIG R.
WOODWARD TO A TERM EXPIRING OCTOBER 1, 2016 TO
THE HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION
BOARD AND TO RE-ADVERTISE THE AT-LARGE POSITION —
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: 10C is appointment of member to the Historical
Archeological Preservation Board.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'd like to reappoint -- I'd like
to make a motion to reappoint Craig Woodward and then to
readvertise the at-large position according to committee
recommendation.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'll second that.
Is there any discussion?
Page 211
October 8, 2013
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no discussion, all in
favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (No verbal response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you, Commissioner Henning.
I'm just assuming that, right?
Item #10D
RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO HOLD A
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER VACATING A PORTION OF
MAMIE STREET AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT A, BEING A PART
OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 53 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,
CHOKOLOSKEE, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — MOTION
FOR STAFF TO DELAY ANY FURTHER ACTION UNTIL
ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED ARE RESOLVED —
APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, 10D, before I read the title, I did
have a discussion yesterday with Commissioner Nance, and I don't
know if he wants to pursue a formal reconsideration or has an
alternative motion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'll make a very quick summary. I
placed this here rapidly right at the end of deadline for publishing on
the agenda a reconsideration of this item, because it seems that there
are a -- were a great outcry of additional public concerns and perhaps
Page 212
October 8, 2013
even additional litigants to this settlement offer that we thought that all
the board -- all the information led us to believe was clean and
everybody was in favor of
So I believe that it's going -- it's heading towards resolution.
There's an extended meeting in Chokoloskee to meet with citizens, all
the litigants; Mr. Klatzkow's going to be there, Mr. Casalanguida.
So I just make a motion that we -- that we continue this item until
we can come back to the board with something.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I'll second that. And if I may
make a comment. I think the solution to your problem is really
simple. I think it's identical to what we have in Pine Ridge. And if
you simply, in the settlement, include wording that you say that you
limit access to the Smallwood Store so that Smallwood traffic does not
pass through the adjacent neighborhood areas, I think you probably
might have a resolution.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: It's a complicated --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- deal.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But just consider that.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: And they are -- yes, ma'am. They
are -- everybody's trying to work through it, but it's -- there's a lot of
cooks stirring the soup right now.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So we have a motion to continue,
and it's been seconded.
Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Legal question. Can we
continue an item that is being reconsidered?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We're not reconsidering the item.
We're not doing --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What are we doing?
Page 213
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Just a motion to continue it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Continue what? This item?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: The item -- not this item. The item
that was previously brought forward, that had a deadline for
advertising. And what Commissioner Nance is asking is that, in our
advertising we had set a definitive time, and he's just asking that that
be extended until they resolve this dispute.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the motion should be to
deny that continuance and give staff direction on advertising the item.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's true.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'll change my motion. I basically
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Deny the reconsidering?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. Wish to withdraw the
reconsideration and request that staff just delay further action on this
item until we can come back with a recommendation from the County
Attorney.
MR. KLATZKOW: And just for clarity, your next meeting we
were going to have the vacation petition. We'll put that over until this
gets resolved.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Continue that one.
MR. KLATZKOW: I understand.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'll amend my second.
Is there any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
Page 214
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #11E
RESOLUTION 2013-235: RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE
AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRWOMAN TO SIGN A FIRST
AMENDMENT TO JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND COLLIER COUNTY TO RECEIVE
REIMBURSEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ON THE
FDOT RESURFACING PROJECT ON SR951 FROM FIDDLER'S
CREEK PARKWAY TO SOUTH OF SR90, ALONG WITH THE
COUNTY'S US-41 AND SR/CR-951 INTERSECTION PROJECT;
EXECUTE A RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING THE BOARD'S
ACTION; AND TO AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us next to your add-on
item, 11E, which is a companion to 11A. 11E is a recommendation to
approve and authorize the chairwoman to sign a first amendment to
joint participation agreement between the Florida Department of
Transportation and Collier County to receive reimbursement for
construction services on the FDOT resurfacing project on SR951 from
Fiddler's Creek Parkway to south of SR90 along the county's U.S. 41
and SR/CR951 intersection project, to execute a resolution
memorializing the board action, and/or authorize necessary budget
amendments.
Mr. Casalanguida will present.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you, County Manager.
Page 215
October 8, 2013
Commissioners, it's been a long day, and this is a good-news
item. We were very fortunate to work with FDOT last week. We
watched their bid item get lower. Ours came in a little higher. I asked
to set up a conference call with DOT secretary Billy Hattaway. We
had about an hour -- half-hour-long discussion about the projects and
working together, asked if there would be some additional funding he
could put towards this 951 project.
When we hung up the phone call, he said he'd get back to us.
And within 24 hours he sent over a note that he would add $2.3
million to this project, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That was a great return on a phone
call.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Great return on a phone call, yeah.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Congratulations.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Very well done.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: MPO meeting is Friday. So I'd ask if
you're there, just express our gratitude to Billy, Secretary Hattaway
himself, for working with us.
So unless you have questions, it's a great-news items.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one quick question. Would you
mind if we wrote him a letter as well as a board to thank him?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I think that would be great. I think
he'd appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
Page 216
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #1 l A
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD A CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNTOF $19,065,912.12 TO
COMMUNITY ASPHALT, FT. MYERS AND RESERVE
$1,623,088 ON THE PURCHASE ORDER FOR FUNDING
ALLOWANCES, FOR A TOTAL OF $20,689,000.12 FOR ITB
#13-6134 "INTERSECTION CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS
(SR90/ US41 & SR/CR951) AND SR 951 3R IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NO. 60116 — MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S
RECOMMENDATIONS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 11A, then, is a
recommendation to award the construction contract in the amount of
$19,065,912.12 to Community Asphalt of Fort Myers and reserve
$1,623,088 for the purchase order funding allowances for a total of
$20,689,000.12 for Invitation to Bid No. 13-6134, intersection
capacity improvements, U.S. 41, CR951, SR951, 3R improvements.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a motion and a second.
Is there any discussion?
MS. MESSAM: There is one important fact, Commissioners.
Page 217
October 8, 2013
Good afternoon. My name is Marlene Messam, Growth Management
Division, transportation engineering department.
And the reason I am speaking here after you have agreed to
approve the item, one stipulation of the JPA requires that the
recommendation on this item be changed. Because of the JPA, DOT
is asking that the contract not be executed until both the FDOT and
county has fully executed the JPA.
So for this item I would like to read into the record the
recommendation from staff.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. Go ahead. And we'll modify
our motions accordingly.
MS. MESSAM: The recommendation reads: To award Bid No.
13-6134 to Community Asphalt, Fort Myers, in the amount of
$20,689,000.12 for the construction of U.S. 41/Tamiami Trail, and
SR/CR951/Collier Boulevard, intersection improvements from south
of Eagle Creek Drive to north of Triangle Boulevard and resurfacing,
restoration, and rehabilitation, 3R, of SC951/Collier Boulevard from
south of Fiddler's Creek Parkway to Tower Road, to authorize the
chairwoman not to execute the attached contract with Community
Asphalt, Fort Myers, until after the county and the FDOT have fully
executed the first amendment to the JPA and final review by the
County Attorney, and to authorize the necessary budget amendment.
So that is the change.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: As amended.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Can I have an amended second?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
County Attorney, please note what the recommendation has
been.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. I mean, I don't know why we're
doing it this way. I'd just hold it in escrow, too, but whatever.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: If you would.
Page 218
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's crazy.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It is.
MR. KLATZKOW: But that's fine.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. If there's no further
discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries 4-1 with
Commissioner Coyle dissenting.
MS. MESSAM: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #1 1 B
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AN INFORMATIONAL
FACT SHEET TO BE INCLUDED WITH PUBLIC OPINION
SURVEY TO BE MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE
ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE DISTRICT — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 11B is a recommendation to
approve an informational fact sheet to be included with public opinion
survey to be mailed to property owners in the Isles of Capri Fire
District.
Ms. Len Price --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is there any discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I never get to -- yes, there's
discussion. I never get to make motions on my own district.
Page 219
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Could you let Commissioner Fiala
make this motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's all right. I'm just horsing
around.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, no, no.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I withdraw my second. You'll at
least get a second out of it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Let Commissioner Henning
withdraw his first.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You should commiserate with
Commissioner Coletta. He went through a whole year of that, so --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to make a motion.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning, would you
allow Commissioner Fiala to make it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Absolutely.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to make a motion to approve
this. I sat in the meeting while they discussed it, and they all -- and
we hammered through it, and everybody came to a conclusion that
these were all correct. So I make a motion to approve.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have -- we have a motion and a
second.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no discussion, all in
favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 220
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thanks for your patience.
Item #11C
RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT THE INFORMATION
COLLECTED FROM THE PUBLIC SAFETY AUTHORITY,
COUNTY MEDICAL DIRECTOR'S OFFICE, COUNTY
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES AND PHYSICIANS
REGIONAL HOSPITAL REGARDING ISSUES RAISED IN
AGENDA ITEM #10I AT THE MAY 14, 2013 BCC MEETING
RELATIVE TO MEDICAL PROTOCOL — MOTION TO ACCEPT
THE REPORT — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Item 11C is a recommendation to accept the
information collected from the Public Safety Authority, the County
Medical Director's Office, County Emergency Medical Services, and
Physicians Regional Hospital regarding issues raised in Agenda Item
10I on May 14, 2003 (sic), BCC meeting relative to medical protocols.
Commissioners, as directed by the minutes of that meeting of
May the 14th, I was directed to gather information and compile that
information from these stakeholders and to present it back to the
board, which is what I've attempted to do in this executive summary.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to accept.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. I reviewed the -- is there any
discussion on the part of the board?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a fast question, if you don't
mind.
Page 221
October 8, 2013
You know, in one section here, way back down on Page 893, it
was talking about paging and, you know, you have to advise people
when your tablets or your pages do not activate, but how do you know
if they don't activate if they don't activate?
MR. OCHS: We've got Chief Kopka here, ma'am, who can
respond to that for you.
CHIEF KOPKA: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
The pager system is a one-way system, so when the tone goes out
to the pager, it's just received. There's not any communications back to
the dispatch center to let them know it was received or not; that's why
we have redundancy in the dispatch system. We have not only the
tablets but the pager as well as an 800 megahertz system which
communicates both ways with the dispatch center.
And moving forward to a system that is a two-way system called
Locution that the sheriff is working on which will be in the stations
that will constantly monitor the station to let us know -- or let the
dispatch center know if that's being received or not.
So there's new technology, new advances that we're working
toward with sheriffs dispatch center to make sure we close that loop.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I did read that part, because
I've got that lined in red -- I mean, in orange here, but I thought, now
when do you start that so that we know that that's in full force?
CHIEF KOPKA: Yeah. I don't know if he has an
implementation date set yet, but we've also done some other things
with the dispatch center to notify us if the crew doesn't go responding
quickly enough to page them out or page another unit out or notify
your supervisors as well.
So we've done some other things in the meantime to get that
repaired.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. I'd like to make a few
comments. We did receive a letter from the Collier County Public
Page 222
October 8, 2013
Safety Authority, which was addressed to Mr. Ochs and was intended
to address the concerns raised. And I read it very carefully, and the
results or, I should say, their conclusions don't seem to support the
facts.
The first is with respect to the opportunity for review. And here
what happened was the PSA literally played with words, because the
-- what was clearly intended by the issue that was raised during the
board meeting was the ability for the various service providers to
provide input before the protocols are presented so that they can
review, provide comment, and then have their input considered in
what is finally proposed.
That didn't happen. You know, for example, North Naples Fire
District didn't get the protocols before they were formally presented,
as I understand, nor did Marco. So the first response is not correct.
The second response goes to the issue again -- it was a
manipulation of the wording on -- and the interpretation of the
wording in the request for this to be analyzed. And, essentially, what
the PSA concluded was that nobody was hurt as a consequence of the
protocol, which was erogenous.
It is undisputed that it was deemed not to be correct, and that's
evidenced by the minutes that reversed the protocol that was adopted
when it was identified as not being in the best interest of whoever the
victim might be.
And then, lastly, on the issue of the question of that 40 percent
market share being adjusted, as a consequence -- or lost, if you will,
by NCH as a consequence of the stroke protocol not being adopted, or
I -- let me just restate that.
The statement that Tober had made with respect to the NCH
losing 40 percent of their market share if the stroke protocol was
adopted actually has been produced as a result of public records
requests that I made. I mean, it's pretty black and white. The wording
is right there.
Page 223
October 8, 2013
If anybody would like to see the public records that I received, I
would really encourage you to do so. So that statement is pretty
unequivocal. It's pretty black and white.
In fact, what's really concerning when you go through those
public records is the communications about this matter between
members of the PSA. And I think that needs to be analyzed and
evaluated to make a determination as to whether or not there was
possibly a Sunshine violation given that the members of the PSA were
communicating about a matter that came before them, not once but
multiple times, for a vote, through these emails. And, again, that's all
for public viewing. Anyone that would like to see what I have is
welcome to do so.
With respect to the Minard case, yeah, the report that was
presented by the County Attorney -- I'm sorry, not the County
Attorney, but the County Manager was absolutely concerning. I
mean, concerning is an understatement. It was -- it was really -- I
mean, it highlights that the system is broken in a very clear way.
I mean, basically you had every single system fail. You had the
tablet system fail, you had the recorder -- the radio system fail, you
had the megahertz system fail, and then on top of it, after the alleged
first signal went out, the second signal, which should have been
released by the dispatcher when the dispatcher saw that the trucks
were not rolling, that didn't even work.
And it was not till four minutes after the first signal that the
second signal went out, and that should have occurred two minutes
after the first signal was not responded to.
So, you know, it highlights that there are very serious issues.
And it's hard to see how the system didn't fail in that particular
situation. It's somewhat concerning.
Furthermore, it -- I'm sorry to report that in the last investigation
by the state, which was recently finalized and we paid a fine on, our
staff was found to be in noncompliance with Chapter 401, Florida
Page 224
October 8, 2013
Statute.
And, essentially, I'm going to read that, you know, by failing to
timely respond to a communication requesting emergency transport
services -- so the problem is is that as a consequence, now, I believe
we have received a notice from, I believe, the family of the deceased
notifying us of their intent to sue; is that correct, Jeff?
MS. GREENE: (Nods head.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. And it's part of the statutory
requirement that you have to file notice. Is that correct?
MS. GREENE: (Nods head.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And I have confirmation from the
County Attorney that that's the case. So --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So let me ask you, if there's a
pending litigation, why are we talking about this on the dais?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm not talking about that case. I'm
talking about -- this is -- the case that -- the pending litigation is with
respect to the final order, and all I'm doing is reading what is stated in
the final order. There's no discussion on that.
With respect to the Minard case, County Manager, would you
like to give us an update on that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Including the medical examiner's
report.
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am. I don't have any further update than
what I provided. I gave you all a copy of the medical examiner's
report, and all the other information I have on that is part of your
agenda packet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But the audience didn't hear what
we saw. Right? I mean, you gave it to us, the report. I don't know if
the audience heard that, or is that better not to say?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do you really want to publicize
that, is the question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
Page 225
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I mean, the family has
suffered enough.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So with respect to the outcome of
this internal investigation, I mean, the only thing I can conclude is that
the internal investigation, if you will, has revealed that I believe we
have serious issues with respect to the emergency management
services system, and I think this probably ought to be discussed in a
workshop.
If the County Attorney doesn't think that's appropriate, then I
think somehow -- you know, I guess I would still have to recommend
that, in light of everything, you know, requesting the state investigate
us would be a good idea to make sure that, you know, we're not doing
things wrong, or that if we are, that we get guidance on what the
corrective action should be.
MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, with respect to the response on this
particular case, I can tell you -- and I've shared individually with the
board members, that the State Department of Health through their
EMS division has made an inquiry and has asked for information, so
they have an investigation ongoing. And we have complied with their
request for information, and we're awaiting their determination.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So, then, what we can state as of
right now for the benefit of the public is to let the public know that the
state is investigating our emergency services system, that we've
complied with their request for any information, and any further
questions they may raise, we will continue to comply?
MR. OCHS: Oh, absolutely, ma'am. My only clarification is
they're not investigating our system.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. OCHS: They are investigating a single response --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. OCHS: -- case that they've asked for specific information
Page 226
October 8, 2013
on, which we've shared.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Got it. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I forgot what I was even going to
ask anymore.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Must be my turn then.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It is your turn.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we are on this particular
item, which is 11C. The motion was to ask the County Manager to
collect information from the Public Safety Administration, the medical
director, EMS, and Physicians Regional to respond to allegations
which were made by Commissioner Hiller in an executive summary
prepared by her.
They have responded, and they have found none of
Commissioner Hiller's allegations to be true. And that is pretty much
across the board for all of the agencies that have reviewed it.
So now we have a dilemma. Do we accept the report of the
County Manager, the Public Safety Administration, the medical
director, EMS, and Physicians Regional, or do we accept
Commissioner Hiller's recitations of the allegation?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's a motion and a second
on the floor.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And it was to accept the report
submitted by those agencies; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, the County Manager's
report.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then I'm voting aye for
that. Are we going to call the question?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm going to.
All in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 227
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed? Aye.
Motion carries 4-1, with Commissioner Hiller dissenting.
And, again, the documentary evidence is available in my office.
Anyone that would like to look at the public records is free to let me
know. In fact, you can get copies of everything from Mike Sheffield,
our communications director, who can give you the full disk of what I
have, although I've printed it out so it's easier for viewing. You can
view the minutes where they changed the protocols, you can view the
communications on the 40 percent market share, and the internal
communications.
I'll also have available for your review the orders -- the final
order on the case. And can I also have the notice that we received
from the victim's family on the litigation on 2011 -- on the 2011
ruling?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In that case, be sure to include the
medical examiner's report.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, it's not that case. That's the
Minard case is the medical examiner's report.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's about time we let our secretary
-- I mean, our stenographer --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do you need another break? Can we
-- let's take a 10-minute break.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Only three items to go.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but then there's commissioner
comments as well.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We'll take --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Not from me, there won't be.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We'll take -- we will take a
10-minute break. When we return, we'll go back to the Naples
Equestrian Challenge discussion.
Page 228
October 8, 2013
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman, you have a hot mic.
Item #8A — Continued from earlier in meeting
RESOLUTION 2013-236: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD
OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
PROVIDING ESTABLISHMENT OF A CONDITIONAL USE
TO ALLOW THERAPEUTIC EQUESTRIAN RIDING AND
STABLING ON PROPERTY LESS THAN 20 ACRES IN SIZE
IN A RURAL AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT
TO SUBSECTION 2.03.01.A.1.C.19 AND 2.03.01.A.1.C.24 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD AND CENTER STREET IN
SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — ADOPTED W/STIPULATIONS
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. We'd like to
reconvening the hearing. Wait, where's the County Attorney? County
Attorney, since we swore everyone in earlier, we should be in good
shape to continue; is that correct? We don't need to swear people in
again?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, you're good.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
Wayne, can you please read into the record the modifications to
the conditions of approval that have been written up so that we can go
ahead and vote on this matter.
MR. ARNOLD: Do we -- for the record, I'm Wayne Arnold, Q.
Grady Minor & Associates. Do we know whether or not Mr. Coyle --
there he is. Thank you. I was wondering if he had left for the day.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sure.
Page 229
October 8, 2013
MR. ARNOLD: We had a productive meeting in your County
Attorney's Office. And I put on the visualizer Page 1 of 2 with the
changes highlighted in red. And I'd like to go over those, if we could.
I'll start with -- I'm only going to go over the ones that were
modified. So on No. 3 it talks about no participant programs are to be
held on Sunday, and that's for Lots 19 and 20. And --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What are the lot numbers again?
Can you --
MR. ARNOLD: Nineteen and 20.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Twenty-one is existing.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Twenty-one is the existing?
MR. ARNOLD: Twenty-one the existing.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. ARNOLD: Special events open to the public will be limited
to four events per year for all three lots that would be owned by the
Equestrian Challenge. And I think that there was some
miscommunication, I guess, between all of us what may have
constituted a special event, but them hosting a volunteer luncheon
doesn't rise to the occasion of a special event.
So these are the four community-wide events that are open to the
public for the facility. So they'll limit those to four for the entire
facility.
On No. 7, this is where we added some language regarding
lighting, and we added language that says lights shall be shielded or
directed on Lots 19 and 20 to avoid light overflow onto adjacent
properties.
Number 10 was adjacent to Ridge Drive on Lots 19, 20, and 21, a
Type C landscape buffer will be provided, and a Type B landscape
buffer will be provided to Lot 19. And that reflects the commitment to
put in a 20-foot-wide buffer all along the frontage on Ridge.
On No. 16, this is where we added language about no street
parking on the -- or on the perimeter of the lots.
Page 230
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That should be -- that's not correct.
It should be Lots 19, 20, and 21 .
MR. ARNOLD: That's fine.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. ARNOLD: We'll make that change.
The second page -- I'll come back to the note I wrote on the
bottom. But No. 17, it says that the southerly access on Ridge Street
shall be closed within 120 days of approval of this conditional use
except for emergency access for emergency vehicles.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And that's Ridge Drive.
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. That's for Ridge.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's not street.
MR. ARNOLD: The -- Number 18 -- I'm going to go back to my
other page because I wrote at the bottom that says -- this gets to the
idea of how big can they be as an organization. And we had language
that talks about this in terms of trips and things like that. And the
easiest thing for us to measure is, really, how many programming slots
they have currently. And right now they have 220 programming slots
for any given week. That's how many therapeutic riding sessions they
can conduct. And on the new facility, that maximum is 180 slots.
So what we've tried to do is now we're going to say that we're
going to limit our participant capacity per week for Lots 21, 20, and
19 to 400, and that would reflect the actual capacity how they
currently use the facility and how they propose to use their smaller
riding pen.
So hopefully that addresses a lot of the concerns because --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Nineteen needs to be clarified that --
you know, except for residents of Pine Ridge.
MR. ARNOLD: Okay. Let me go back to that. That's regarding
access.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right.
MR. ARNOLD: And it says, access to the equestrian riding and
Page 231
October 8, 2013
stabling facility shall be limited to Center Street. No participants,
volunteers, or guests shall use the local streets in Pine Ridge
subdivision --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: As through-traffic.
MR. ARNOLD: -- as through-traffic to other areas of Collier
County.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Except for --
MR. ARNOLD: And I guess we need to write a provision for --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Except for residents.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Except for residents.
MR. ARNOLD: Except for residents.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right, "except for residents of Pine
Ridge" needs to be added.
MR. ARNOLD: And then No. 20 was, this approval is for a
not-for-profit therapeutic equestrian riding facility.
And I didn't catch all your conversation about that. I know that
you mentioned about some noncommercial activity, and we would be
limited to this. So this is how we wrote it. And I don't know if it
needs more attention or more discussion, but --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think it should state this approval
is for noncommercial, not-for-profit therapeutic equestrian riding.
That was the recommended wording by the -- yep.
MR. ARNOLD: Okay. So that reflects the changes that we
made in response to your motion and second. And I think that
addressed all the concerns that were raised.
And, again, I know that there are many, many folks in the
neighborhood who are concerned this remaining a good neighbor, and
I think we've certainly shown that we're willing to go a long way to
proving that we will, and I hope you can find a way to approve it.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Is there any discussion, members of
the board?
(No response.)
Page 232
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a -- I'm going to amend
my motion to reflect the changes as presented.
Commissioners Fiala, would you amend your second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I will, and I want to say that I
was happy to see that everybody worked together to come out with a
conclusion that benefits everyone and that everyone can live with and
accept.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: They're legalizing their --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm sorry. You can't speak without
being called up to the mic. I apologize.
With there being no further discussion -- Commissioner Henning,
is there anything you'd like to add?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you so much for your support.
Appreciate it.
Item #11F
Page 233
October 8, 2013
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD BID (ITB) #13-6136,
FOREST LAKES MSTU PHASE II & III SIDEWALK, LIGHTING,
LANDSCAPE AND TURN LANE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF
$948,353.43 — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us back to Item 1OF on
your agenda. It was previously Item 16D12, and that is --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: You mean 11F?
MR. OCHS: Excuse me. 11F, yes. That was 16D12, and that is
a recommendation to award Bid 12-6136 for Forest Lakes MSTU,
Phase 2 and 3, sidewalk, lighting, landscape, and turn lane
improvements to Quality Enterprises in the amount of$948,353.43.
And Commissioner Henning asked this item be moved to the
regular agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I recognized that the
ordinance for this MSTU provides for expenditures for sidewalks,
lighting, and landscaping; however, you have a lot of flooding in this
community that still needs to be addressed.
I also want to point out in our budget book that it doesn't
recognize any capital improvements for 2014.
And looking at the executive summary, this has always been
contemplated for the sidewalks, lighting, and landscaping when we
were discussing the budget, and probably even prior to that when the
budget was being formed.
I don't like to do budget amendments. I don't like to do interim
budget cuts unless it's absolutely necessary, and this should have been
reported, what was reported, that this money was going to be used in
-- to be transferred from the operating to the debt service fund, okay.
That's what was reported to us.
But still, I think this community, for such a long time -- and I
Page 234
October 8, 2013
know you spent a lot of money on drainage. We need to come to
finality on the flooding issue over there, because this will take you at
your very limits of your spending of the bond that was approved in
2006.
So I don't know how long we can continue this item to come
back to us and tell us what you're going to do about the drainage, to
fix the drainage, and come back with a scaled-down version and
assure that the board, we're going to have enough money to service the
bonds until your assessed values start to increase.
I have a report that shows that the increased assessed values in
this area has not kept up with the rest of the county, and I would
imagine that has something to do with the flooding over there.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Would you like to continue this,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. I'll make that motion.
MS. ARNOLD: Can I speak to that?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, of course.
MS. ARNOLD: The MSTU -- for the record, Michelle Arnold,
alternative transportation modes director.
The MSTU has discussed all of those concerns that you've raised,
and they're very sensitive to the budget, the drainage systems, and
they have taken actions to address the flooding.
This MSTU was created predominantly for the drainage systems.
They've expended quite a bit of money to improve the drainage.
There was, unfortunately, some mismanagement of a portion of that
system, and that has been corrected.
There was an emergency meeting. That was -- that took place,
and the MSTU did take action to address that drainage.
The improvements have been -- show some very significant
improvements to drainage in the area. And, fortunately, we haven't
experienced much rain after that action was taken, but our engineers
with the MSTU are pretty confident that what they did was a good fix.
Page 235
October 8, 2013
They are looking at -- to explore whether or not taking additional
measures would prove any more success.
A part of the problem is Forest Lakes is an older community; it's
lower. They're going to continue to have flooding problems, and there
is no guarantee that any dollars that are thrown at this particular
community will stop all flooding within that area because of the nature
of the fact that they're so low.
The engineers are committed to evaluating it, but there may not
be anything else that they can do above what we've already done.
There is a safety concern that the community has. That's why
they want to pursue this sidewalk project. And they did take -- have
some discussion with the community at their last meeting and ask the
question, do we stop this project, or do we move forward with it? And
the majority of the community wanted to proceed with the sidewalk
project because of the safety issues and concerns that they have in that
particular community.
We are willing to speak with our budget office and, you know,
our finance committee to see whether or not there is any long-term
issues with regards to the finances for the committee. But at this
point, we feel that we want to proceed with it, because if we do not
proceed today there's a risk that the -- if we prolong this project, we're
not going to see the same types of costs that we're receiving with this
particular proposal. There's a risk of increasing it, and it's going to
cost them more in the long run to proceed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So you're saying that
there's some maintenance issues that address the flooding?
MS. ARNOLD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the engineers feel that
that's going to fix the problems?
MS. ARNOLD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I understand what you said,
it is low, and I understand that, but the days of cumulative effects of
Page 236
October 8, 2013
not draining out there was horrific, so but that's going to be --
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. Part of the problem was the swales were
not maintained, and we went out -- the swales on the golf course is a
major part of the drainage system in that community, and the swales
weren't being maintained.
The community -- the MSTU gave funding towards clearing out
a couple of the major swales, and within a day of that happening, the
lakes that were backed up drained significantly.
And they also gave additional funding to clean the rest of the
swales within the golf course, and we believe that's going to take care
of the issue. What, essentially, it's done is made the drainage system
function the way it should have to begin with.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there any way that you could
come back with a scaled-down version to stay within budget? We just
approved the budget.
MS. ARNOLD: If we do not do this today, we would have to
reject this bid, and we would have to come back and rebid the whole
thing. So there is a risk of not getting the same scope for the same
price. There's a risk of us coming back with a scaled-down version
and having to spend the same amount of money that we're asking you
to spend today.
MR. KLATZKOW: Why would we have to rebid it?
MS. ARNOLD: Because the way it was bid, there's no breaking
it apart. It has to be done in full.
MR. KLATZKOW: But why can't we continue it? You just said
if we don't continue it, it has to be rebid.
MS. ARNOLD: No. He asked whether or not we can bring back
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A scaled-down version.
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah, a scaled-back version. And you can't
break it apart the way it was bid.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So what would you like to do,
Page 237
October 8, 2013
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would like to have some
assurety from the budget department, based upon what Michelle said,
and the drainage being fixed, that we're not going to have a problem
with -- the MSTU has enough money to pay down the bond.
MR. ISACKSON: For the record, Mark Isackson, director of
corporate finance.
Commissioner, you have two years worth of debt service reserve
sitting in the debt service fund. We did that specifically in order to try
and project the debt service side of the equation.
Here is your dilemma, and this is something that I spoke with
you on the phone about. You have a four-mill cap right now, which is
generating about $520,000 a year based on $130 million in taxable
value.
Your debt service is $550,000 a year. Now, how are we covering
that gap is because I've set up that debt service reserve plus I have
sufficient funds now sitting in the operating account.
Doing what we're doing here is going to draw that down
significantly in the operating fund. The committee knew that; the staff
knew that. They made a conscious decision to go ahead with it.
I have the ability to levy four mills. What's going to happen
going forward if taxable value doesn't change is there's going to be a
significant amount of millage applied to the debt service fund and less
applied to the operating fund.
What the implication of that is I won't know. But in 2016, which
is coming up rapidly, we'll find that out.
There's no worry on the debt service side. I worry more on the
operating fund in terms of maintaining the asset, and that's what we
conveyed to the staff and to the MSTU, and I think they go into this
with their eyes wide open.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there enough funds for the
new capital improvements and cleaning out the swales, Michelle?
Page 238
October 8, 2013
Obviously, somebody wasn't paying attention to that. Have you taken
-- took a look -- taken a look at the operating and the maintenance?
MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. I think Mark is absolutely right in terms
of the debt service side. There's no issues. The operating side, we
may have to, in the future, after 2016, look at the millage to cover
some of the operating side.
In terms of the swales, we plan on maintaining that on a continual
basis and not rely on how it was being done before.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's not my district, but I -- you
know, I really hate to read this neighborhood continually flooding and,
yet, I know that there's a special taxing district to cover that, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Whose district is it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mine.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Coyle's.
MS. ARNOLD: I think we have a public speaker for this; do we?
MR. MILLER: Yes. Ken -- I'm sorry, we do. I'm sorry. Excuse
me, Ken Bloom.
MR. BLOOM: Hi, Commissioners. My name is Ken Bloom,
and I am a member of the Forest Lakes MTSU (sic) Advisory
Committee.
I'm here today as both a committee member and a homeowner in
Forest Lakes for over 20 years. At the recent meeting of the MTSU
(sic) on October 1st, the MTSU addressed the drainage issue.
The discussion, with approximately 50 homeowners in
attendance, was how to fix the issue. It was discovered that the swales
were not being maintained properly, and the discussion then became
how to move forward.
The committee decided it was in their best interest to begin
maintaining these swales and then ask the engineer to look at the terms
-- you know, a long-term solution.
And the next discussion was, then, the sidewalk project as the
next agenda item. Knowing this was an important project to the
Page 239
October 8, 2013
committee, the committee asked the homeowners their thoughts on
which was more important.
I actually stood up in the meeting and explained to them that we
have, roughly, a million dollars that would be spent on this sidewalk
and front entrance project. I explained to them that we have to make a
decision as to one or the other. And the possibility of losing the
landscape/sidewalk project would mean that this project, which has
already been two-and-a-half years to three years going, would now be
put back farther and not knowing when we would be able to do it or
have the funds for that.
We then asked for a show of hands of the owners that are there at
the meeting. We had almost 95 percent participation that they felt it
was more important for the sidewalks to be put in place as a life-safety
issue, because the area of the sidewalks that are not -- that have not
been installed are on the front area of the community.
Due to easement issues and other things, we were not able to do
the front part of the project first and had to do the single-family homes
as the first project.
The committee, five of us, unanimously voted that that was the
way that we wanted to go with this project.
The drainage has been -- the drainage was addressed in prior
years. Mr. Henning, I have lived there for over 20 years. Prior to the
MTSU and me getting on the MTSU board, that area flooded on a
normal rainstorm.
We have not had significant flooding to this nature at any time
until this year.
One of our board members does a calendar and logs in rainfall
inches over years. He recorded 93 inches of rain this year in the
community. Our average rainfall is 60 inches of rain. So we
significantly had a major storm.
Even when we have heavy rains, the community does flood,
minor flooding, but it does drain off properly. The system will work
Page 240
October 8, 2013
with maintaining of the swales.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I appreciate that. I really do.
MR. BLOOM: And, you know, we've done -- the committee
feels that we've addressed the problem with a solution that will keep
the flooding to a minimum. Unfortunately, that community is that
low. And I explained it to the homeowners as a committee member. I
understand this; I have to drive through it. But we will still have
flooding regardless of what we do. If we take it and put it off, I don't
think that community will ever completely fully drain.
I ask that you consider to, you know, approve the funding of the
sidewalk project. As an MTSU member I understand what the issues
are with that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What would you like to do?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I defer to Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What would you like to do?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think they've got their priorities
straight.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a motion and second. Any
further discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. If I see budget
amendments on the agenda on the consent, I am going to question if
it's like this. I think it's -- you know, adopting a budget and then
having to amend it, that's poor management on somebody's part.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, but there are instances that you
have no control over, and you must address those. That's the reason
there are budget amendments in the first place.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, when you've been
working on a sidewalk project, Commissioner Fiala, for two years, not
anticipating having it on the budget, I think there's a little problem
Page 241
October 8, 2013
there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't think that's the case.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: If there's no further discussion, all in
favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
***Commissioners, Item 11F -- excuse me -- 11H was
previously 16F1.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How about G, 11G?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: G was continued, sir.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, that was the contract.
MR. OCHS: We asked you after lunch if you wanted to continue
that.
Item #11H
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE SELECTION OF AWARD
FOR CONTRACT RFP #13-6129, PROFESSIONAL STATE
LOBBYIST SERVICES, TO FOWLER WHITE BOGGS PA IN THE
AMOUNT OF $80,000 ANNUALLY — MOTION TO APPROVE
AND DIRECTING STAFF TO EXPLORE LOBBYING FIRMS
THAT OFFER SPECIALIZED SERVICES AND WORK TO
DEVELOP AN RFP — APPROVED
So 16F1, that is now 11H, is a recommendation to approve the
selection of an award for Contract RFP13-6129, Professional State
Page 242
October 8, 2013
Lobbyist Services, to Fowler, White, Boggs, P.A., in the amount of
$80,000 annually.
Mr. Sheffield will present. Chairman Hiller moved this to the
regular agenda.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I did, and the reason I did was
because -- we've received very good service from our current lobbyist.
My concern is that -- well, two issues. One is if our lobbyist has a
conflict on a particular issue, I think it makes sense to have two
lobbyists so that if one is conflicted, the other can handle the issue and
vice versa. Like, for example, if there's something that we want to
advance and they have a client that, essentially, is in opposition to the
position that we want to advance and -- you know, what do we do?
That's issue number one.
And issue number two is by having more than one lobbyist on
these state matters, we open our pool up to a greater number of
contacts. And I think anything we can do to enhance our ability to
access the legislature is a good thing. And on a particular issue, one
lobbyist might have a contact that the other lobbyist doesn't have.
So it certainly is not intended, on my part, to eliminate Keith
Arnold as the lobbyist, because I think he's done an outstanding job,
but rather to recommend that maybe somehow we apportion or, you
know, reconsider the budget for lobbying to allow for two
representatives and, you know, look to the strengths of each.
And Burt Saunders, having, you know, been involved with the
county at the level he's been involved with and having the
understanding of the county that he has, I think, would be an asset as
that second lobbyist.
So that is what I wanted to bring to the table. It certainly was,
under no circumstances, to eliminate Keith, because he's outstanding,
but to really supplement what we have to bolster our ability to get
things done and get more done.
So that's my suggestion.
Page 243
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- I would never want to replace
Keith either --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right, I agree.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- because -- you know, and I was
happy to hear you say that.
He's never run into a conflict of interest before, but maybe if you
wanted -- and there's always people in his office, of course, to take up
where he leaves off.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: But it's the whole office.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But if-- you know, and I wouldn't
want to -- I wouldn't want to present to Tallahassee the feeling that we
weren't behind one and, you know, and we're kind of spread out.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, no, we're behind -- no, no, no.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But if we had somebody -- like Lee
County, what they did was they put somebody in Position 2, as a
backup. But everything was -- everything goes to the main lobbyist,
and then if there's something that didn't work out, you know, then
maybe that's different.
I don't know if that can be handled that way, but I sure don't want
to change in midstream, in any case.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. And it's not -- we're not
midstream, and the intent is not to change Keith.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good. I'm glad to hear that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: It's merely to supplement. It's to
supplement. Definitely it's just to supplement. And, again, I'm
throwing the idea out for discussion and to see what support we get
from the board on the idea, because I think anything that we can do to
enhance our ability to effectively lobby is a worthwhile investment.
I mean, if we can get, you know, more grants, better legislation
and so forth, you know, better response, if we need assistance with,
Page 244
October 8, 2013
like, permitting issues at the state level, or whatever the case may be.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You might be giving an impression
that we're going this way.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No, no, we're not.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I mean, that's the impression I
would get if I were in Tallahassee --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- and we're having somebody, you
know --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No. Most organizations have a lot
of lobbyists. And, in fact, you know, if you look at different entities, I
mean, they'll have different lobbyists for different issues, because
lobbyists have different relationships. Like, some are concentrated in
one aspect of legislative business versus another.
And, you know, you want to capture people for their strengths, so
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Burt already has Lee County, right?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So, you know --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do you have Lee? What do you
have, actually?
MR. SAUNDERS: Burt Saunders with the Gray Robinson law
firm. Just for the record, I've had the pleasure of working with Keith
in Lee County. What Lee County did is they selected -- actually, they
selected three lobbyists.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay.
MR. SAUNDERS: Gray Robinson is the lead lobbyist. Nabors
Giblin and Fowler white Boggs are two other lobbyists that were all
working together. And what they did is they had their staff kind of
divide up some of the subject areas. They, for example, concluded
that Nabors Giblin, because of certain finance and tax expertise they
have, those types of issues are being handled by Nabors Giblin.
Page 245
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Nabors.
MR. SAUNDERS: And they divided up other areas between
Keith Arnold and myself.
Keith does a great job, and I would never want to suggest
supplanting him in any way whatsoever. But I would suggest that you
are correct, we do have different strengths. We do have different
contacts. And I believe if you put us together as a team, we can really
accomplish a lot for Collier County.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How much does that cost us?
MR. SAUNDERS: Just so you know, in Lee County the budget
was $120,000.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: For three firms.
MR. SAUNDERS: For the three firms. They apportioned it
60,000 for Gray Robinson, 30,000 for Nabors Giblin, and 30,000 for
Fowler White Boggs.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I actually like Nabors Giblin, too. I
mean, I don't know if they bid on this. Did they bid on this?
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am, but remember through the County
Attorney Office, he has a number of standing contracts with specialty
outside counsel, Nabors Giblin being one of longstanding use. There's
others.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. So, Jeff, you have a
relationship with Nabors Giblin? Because they're good in certain
areas.
MR. KLATZKOW: We were their first client.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, really? How funny is that?
MR. SAUNDERS: I'll have to remind you, when I was the
County Attorney, I hired Nabors Giblin --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, did you?
MR. SAUNDERS: -- as our bond counsel back before some of
the people in this room were born.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we taught them everything they
Page 246
October 8, 2013
know?
MR. SAUNDERS: We sure did, sure did.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. Or they cut their teeth on us,
and we have the marks to show it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would prefer not to dilute his -- the
amount of money we are dedicating to that particular firm.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And we should do the same --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Especially if we don't need
somebody else. I don't know how to handle that.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, we went out for an RFP to select
one firm for your state lobbying work. As you know, you have a
separate contract with the Ferguson Group for your federal lobbyist
work. I guess, you know, the policy -- and we are comfortable with
the staff recommendation.
I guess the policy decision for the board is to determine whether
you think that there's enough work to parcel out or, if you'd make that
policy decision, then how do we split that work up.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There should be -- there should be a
lot of work to parse out. I mean, we should be doing a lot with the
state. I mean, we should be working on grants, and we should be
working on changes in legislation, and we should be working on, you
know, getting assistance to expedite permits or make sure that permits
MR. OCHS: Sure.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- are, you know, properly
negotiated.
MR. OCHS: And I think the capacity of all the firms was
evaluated in that regard, and the rankings are what they are from the
staff selection committee. So we stand ready to do whatever you
want, but we're comfortable.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: What do you think, Leo? What
would you recommend?
Page 247
October 8, 2013
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, you have our staff recommendation.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So you wouldn't recommend doing
what Lee County has done, which is have a primary and a secondary
and, like, basically build the team, like the Nabors Giblin, Gray --
MR. OCHS: Well, if you want to give me $120,000, and we can
try to parcel out, you know, who's the expert in each area of--
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, we've already got Nabors
covered in the County Attorney's budget --
MR. OCHS: Right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- as you pointed out.
MR. OCHS: Right.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: So let's focus on, you know, what
are we -- what's the budget currently for --
MR. OCHS: Eighty thousand dollars annually for all of our state
lobbying work.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the idea is very noble.
Burt Saunders is very -- has a lot of contacts up there, being -- you
were in the legislation for what, 12 years?
MR. SAUNDERS: Yeah. I was in the House for four years and
in the Senate for 10 years.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For 10 years in the Senate.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: In the Senate for 10?
MR. SAUNDERS: Yep.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Wow.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Besides legislate -- former -- or
legislators existing today, also staff members up there.
What we could do is make this a one-year contract and be able to
sort out what the specialties are from the two groups, two firms, and
dole it out that way.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: One year for what?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For this lobbying contract.
Page 248
October 8, 2013
MR. OCHS: And during the year, you mean, develop --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And during the year develop
where the expertise is between these two and say, okay, we're going to
allocate this much.
MR. SAUNDERS: And that's exactly what the Lee County
Commission did, but they relied on their staff, their legislative liaison.
You've got a very good legislative liaison to help ferret that out. So
it's not an issue that you have to deal with in terms of the minutia. But
we can make this work as a great team for Collier County.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Didn't we already vote on this once
and approve this?
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No?
MR. OCHS: No, this -- the previous contract expired. We went
out for an RFP, and we are -- then had a selection committee, like we
do on all our RFPs, made the top-tank firm selection, and are bringing
that forward to the board for --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, wasn't it on the last agenda?
MR. OCHS: Yes, and it was continued.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Because Keith was not well, and we
didn't want to bring this agenda item forward when he could not be
here to talk to it. So it was just continued from the last agenda because
he was not able to attend.
MR. OCHS: And you may want to hear from Mr. Arnold in --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Absolutely.
MR. OCHS: -- terms of what he thinks the capabilities of his
firm are or aren't.
MR. ARNOLD: Well, thank you, Madam Chairman, for the
accolades.
For the record, Keith Arnold, with Fowler White Boggs.
Two years ago I made the decision to transfer to a very large firm
because of the changing nature of the legislative process. Term limits
Page 249
October 8, 2013
has changed drastically what the legislature really is and what it looks
like.
So, for example, in the Florida House, the average length of
service right now is three to four years, and that revolving door really
meant that myself, as a small boutique office trying to meet 120
members that rotate in and out every two, three, four years, was really
getting more and more problematic.
And so I decided to affiliate with a very large law firm that is one
of the most reputable firms, not only in Tallahassee, but in the state of
Florida.
We at Fowler White Boggs have a former chief of staff for a
Democratic governor, we have a former chief of staff for a Republican
governor, we have a former secretary of DCA, we have a former
secretary of DOT, we have a former secretary of DER, we have a
former legislator in myself, and former staff members from the House
and Senate.
When you put out your RFP, you ask for one firm that could
probably address all of the issues associated with Collier County, and
we believe we can do that. We have done it for many years, and we
believe we can do that.
Having said that, certainly, we're open always to other
suggestions and other ideas. I would suggest to you, though, that what
you asked us to do is to submit a bid to you based upon a scope of
business which you delineated in your RFP, and we responded to that
and we provided a price for that as well as an indication of which
members from our team might handle which issues for you.
More recently and, in fact, over the summer -- I'm particularly
familiar -- or an issue particularly associated with Chairwoman Hiller
is the economic incubator which we're working on right now on behalf
of all of you.
And so in this particular case, you needed someone to be able to
act quickly to hire your consultant to be able to work on that, and our
Page 250
October 8, 2013
firm agreed to do that. We did that, by the way, at zero price to you,
not a price increase for Fowler White. We did that, and we used that
-- the consultant services of your consultant in -- had that consultant
piggyback on our contract, and we passed through those dollars 100
percent to that particular consultant on this particular project, which
we're working on for you.
I would suggest that if you want to hire a second, third, or fourth
lobbyist, which some communities do, you're going to have to
seriously think about doing the same thing that I did or we did for you
with respect to this economic development initiative for Collier
County, and that is you're going to have to make the bucket larger.
It would be very difficult, I think, for a firm of our size to do
what you want to do for a whole lot less, particularly in light of the
fiscal requests that you're going to have before the legislature this
year. This one issue, the economic development issue, is a
two-and-a-half million dollar project to this community. It's one that
has been initiated by the chair, embraced by all of you and will have
significant long-term impacts to Collier County.
And so I would recommend to you that if you do decide that you
want to hire more lobbyists, which is appropriate and it can be done, I
think you have to be realistic about expanding the size of the bucket
which pays for those lobbyists.
In any event, I certainly have had the pleasure of representing
each and every one of you for a number of years. I think the world of
this community. As you know, my family homesteaded here about
150 years ago, and so these issues that you've identified are issues that
are important to me as well, and we're going to continue to work on
them in whatever capacity you should decide.
So thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes, sir.
Page 251
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER COYLE: May I?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Oh, I apologize. Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I guess I misunderstood
why this was coming forward. I thought the two of you might have
gotten together and decided that it was worth talking about a
partnership on this contract.
I think there are a couple things we have a moral obligation to do.
Number one is, we asked for a response on an RFP for services, we
evaluated them, and we selected a contractor for that. To, on the fly,
change the RFP and cut the price and expect to get the same
commitment, I think you're absolutely right. You know, if you cut the
price, we're going to get a corresponding reduction in services, I'm
sure.
And so I cannot see the logic in splitting up our current 80,000
budget between two people; however, there are things that we need to
do that would encourage me to entertain another RFP for more money
to do some other things, and they might -- you know, everybody's
open to bid on that.
And -- but let me tell you what I think that thing is before
everybody starts to agree with me, because I suspect you might not.
I think the place where we can get the biggest bang for the buck
is to get somebody concentrating at the state and federal level with
respect to permitting beach renourishment projects and eliminating all
of the red tape, getting legislative changes if necessary to make sure
that we don't have to go through the delays in expense that we have to
go through to get a permit to renourish our beaches when we know
they're going to be -- have to be renourished almost every year.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you've got people like
Bob Krasowski that's going to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we can hire somebody from
Chicago to take care of that. But honestly, you know, we've never
tried that. We've never tried to get lobbyists involved with legislators
Page 252
October 8, 2013
to say, this process is insane. They're wasting millions and millions of
dollars at the federal and state level, and we're wasting millions and
millions of dollars trying to jump through their hoops when everybody
knows that our beaches will need renourishment again in a year or two
after we finish this one up. It's an ongoing constant process.
And I would be very amenable to saying let's increase this budget
if we've got somebody concentrating on projects like that.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I agree.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But I think the proper way to do
that is to go through another RFP.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We could do that, too. Yeah, there
are --
MR. OCHS: We could do that rather quickly.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Right. And I threw the idea out for
any hybrid approach, you know, without any --
MR. OCHS: Sure.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: -- fixed idea. I just thought that
there was an opportunity there to bolster our ability to get things done.
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. Actually, I had approached
Mr. Ochs with the same thought at an earlier time.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: About the beach renourishment?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, about -- talking about having
-- you know, I've talked quite a bit about developing vendors and
having a primary vendor and a secondary vendor. I still think that's a
good thing. I don't know that I'm ready to support changing this at the
time, precisely for what Commissioner Coyle mentioned. We've gone
through this.
That having been said, if you told me that you wanted to get
more aggressive with our legislative approach and you wanted to go
out and you wanted to really get into this and figure out -- you know,
what we're talking about was we're talking about gaining influence.
Page 253
October 8, 2013
And you want to talk about doing some of that in a focused way, I
certainly support it as well.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So, you know, at this point I think
we need to follow through on what we've already started. But I would
certainly support rolling up our shirt sleeves and looking at what we
can do. I have no problem with that at all.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm done.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay, great.
Then, Leo?
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. If that's the will of the board, we
could begin right away and be out again, you know, within 30 days or
less with a supplemental RFP that has more focus on some specific
areas where some additional lobbying help may be of great service to
this board, not only at the state level, but at the federal level.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I'm going to make a two-part
motion. One is to approve the contract to Keith's firm as
recommended and, secondly, to direct staff to evaluate where our
lobbying needs are that are focused and develop an RFP with an
appropriate budget to put those out to bid.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Both good ideas. Second, second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. Double whammy.
Great.
MR. OCHS: I'll work with, obviously, with --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sure.
MR. OCHS: -- Mr. Saunders and others that are experts in the
field to get their feedback on where they think those pockets of
influence would be best served.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: And also lobbying for grants.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I think it's really important. There
Page 254
October 8, 2013
are just -- the other area that we need is an expert on aviation. We
talked about that. Things along those lines.
MR. OCHS: Sure.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. All right. So there being no
further discussion, all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are we supposed to say "aye, aye"?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Okay. Motion carries 4-1 with
Commissioner Henning dissenting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because we had two motions, right?
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No. It's, like, just one combined.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Point A and B, one motion.
Item #12A
RESOLUTION 2013-237: RECOMMENDATION THAT THE
BOARD ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT
NO. 2 TO THE UTILITY WORK BY HIGHWAY CONTRACTOR
AGREEMENT (UWHCA) BETWEEN THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) AND COLLIER
COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT (UAO) AS AMENDED BY
APPENDIX, CHANGES TO FORM DOCUMENT, AMENDMENT
NUMBER 1 DATED APRIL 23, 2013 — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us -- thank you. That
takes us to Item 12A, which was the add-on this morning. It is a
Page 255
October 8, 2013
recommendation that the board adopt a resolution approving
Amendment No. 2 to the utility work by highway contractor
agreement between the State of Florida Department of Transportation
and Collier County Water/Sewer District.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Scott?
MR. OCHS: As amended by appendix changes to Form
Document Amendment No. 1 dated April 23, 2013.
MR. TEACH: Scott Teach, deputy County Attorney.
The board earlier this year in January approved an agreement
with FDOT whereby FDOT would bid out the county's utility
relocation as part of their project in an effort to save money.
And as part of that original agreement, we had to deposit $4.5
million in escrow, which would later be offset as the work was
completed and paid out.
The bids came in. They were slightly higher, about 16 percent,
and so additional funds were needed to be deposited into escrow.
The Clerk had some reservations about depositing some
additional monies into escrow.
Conversations were had with the chairwoman, Clerk's Finance
Department, the County Attorney's Office, and I took the feedback
from that initial conversation with Secretary Hattaway and worked
with FDOT's attorney, and they agreed that the additional monies,
about $700,000, would not have to be paid by the county in advance.
They would pay that up.
And then 30 days after the utility relocation was completed, they
would bill us, and the same time they would provide us with invoices
so the Clerk's Office could review those invoices. And, in fact, I had a
conversation this morning with their FDOT operations person, and
they're going to provide us with invoices all the way through so the
county staff and the Clerk's Office can at least be reviewing these
ongoing throughout the entire utility relocation project.
This is for Phase 1 of the project. We're still having
Page 256
October 8, 2013
conversations regarding Phase 2, because we have another agreement.
I'm optimistic that we will be able to resolve that. Going forward after
that, this is a situation that FDOT has indicated, at least in informal
conversations, that they would be less inclined to want to do it as part
of their project so that we could get the advantage of a larger project
bid award. But we're going to have ongoing conversations.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
MR. TEACH: And so I would ask that you approve the
resolution approving the amendment.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion to approve.
MR. KLATZKOW: And before this --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Sorry. Go ahead.
MR. KLATZKOW: And before this, we prepared a complaint
for a declaratory judgment action we haven't served yet because of
these discussions. This deal was brokered by the chairwoman, by the
way.
It is our hope that this will end the issue, but we've been dealing
with the lower FDOT people who don't like change. We're hopeful
that the higher-level FDOT people will agree to this on a permanent
basis, and that will end our issue with the clerk.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So this really isn't the final
solution, right?
MR. TEACH: This addresses Phase 1 and hopefully Phase 2 of
this current project. That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, but something will change next
time, and it will be slightly different, and then you'll go through some
more hoops. There -- isn't there something that you can do to get this
thing resolved once and for all?
MR. TEACH: Well, we did have an action pending, a
declaratory judgment.
MR. KLATZKOW: I can proceed with a dec action, but there's
Page 257
October 8, 2013
no case in controversy now with this. There is no open issue with this
right now. And --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But there will be the next time you
come in here.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have to wait for that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I mean, we've been fighting this for
over a year now.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, we have to wait till there is an
issue and where it's ripe to be heard.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that's the point.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There is no issue.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We don't want there to be another
issue.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We understand. The precedent has
been set, and I think that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The precedent was set in January.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, it was. We did it, and we put
the money in escrow, and the Clerk approved of it. So now we're
sitting here in September talking about the same project but an
extension of the project, and we're doing it differently.
And so you do this, and sometime in January next year, we'll
have another state project, and guess what happens? It's always the
same. It never changes. It is predictable. You never reach the end
with this department.
MR. KLATZKOW: We've been asking FDOT to let us know
whether this procedure would be good on a going-forward basis. If
they say yes, we're done as far as the Clerk goes (sic). If they say no,
at that point in time I will have a case in controversy. I'm waiting
back from FDOT.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if you have a case in
controversy and it is decided by a judge, are you certain that is going
Page 258
October 8, 2013
to be the end of it?
MR. KLATZKOW: I assume that the clerk would abide by a
lawful court order.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't make that assumption.
But nevertheless, you know, in that case, what you should do is
encourage FDOT to refuse to do this thing so you can get it resolved
in a court.
MR. TEACH: Commissioner, I think both the Clerk and our
office would like a court determination because it would give some
finality to this.
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Hiller, could I --
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yes.
MS. KINZEL: Commissioner Coyle, we've worked very, very
closely with county staff. We've worked through these legal issues.
The Clerk's made his position clear at each and every turn.
We believe that we have a longer-term resolution here. No one, I
don't believe -- actually, Scott, I don't think either of us wants legal
action. We want to resolve this with the powers that be at FDOT and
FP&L and get a permanent solution and resolution.
And we've been working with them. But I do agree with Scott; I
think perhaps we were reaching some staff that might not be
agreeable. I think we've got some higher-level opportunity. The
Clerk, Commissioner Hiller, dealt with them directly. We're making
headway.
You always have that opportunity, but I think this is a good thing,
and it's a solution, and it works for both Clerk's Office and the county
to get their project accomplished. And I think that should be our goal,
and we'll continue to work in that direction.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I will have this same conversation
with you the next time it comes up. I know that's going to happen.
Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
Page 259
October 8, 2013
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There's a motion and a second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #14A1
RECOMMENDATION TO DIRECT THE COUNTY MANAGER
TO THOROUGHLY REVIEW ALL CONTRACTS WITH LEASES
AT COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT FACILITIES INCLUDING
IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT, MARCO ISLAND
AIRPORT AND EVERGLADES AIRPORT TO ENSURE LEASE
TERMS ARE BEING MET BY BOTH THE AIRPORT
AUTHORITY AND TENANTS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: That takes us to Item 14A1 ; this is a
recommendation to direct the County Manager to thoroughly review
all contracts with leases at the Collier County airport facilities,
including Immokalee Regional Airport, Marco Island Airport,
Everglades Airport, to ensure lease terms are being met by both the
airport authority and the tenants.
Page 260
October 8, 2013
This item was placed on the agenda by Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think the executive summary
explains itself.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- that we need any
conversation.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have a motion and a second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: There being no further discussion,
all in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. OCHS: Move to Item 15, staff and commission general
communications.
I have nothing for communications today, Madam Chair.
MR. KLATZKOW: Nor I do.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nor I do.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
Page 261
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I want to just say that with the
length of some of these subjects on our meeting today, I think the
worst offenders of time consumption is us, not the people in the
audience.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Well, it's -- the only forum we have
to debate and deliberate and evaluate situations is when we're at these
meetings, and we have a lot of issues that come before us.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I think we talk too much about
each one and go on and on and on. That's what I'm trying to say
nicely.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: We have to, though, you know, to
make the right decision.
Go ahead. Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I have two items. One of
them is a very positive item. I don't know if all of you have heard. A
few of you might have. But within the last week the University of
Florida IFAS, meaning vice president Jack Payne, announced a
180-degree shift in his position on Southwest Florida Research and
Education Center announcing that that education -- research and
education center would remain open in the IFAS system. They
indicated that they -- not only were they -- were they going to
completely re-purpose it together with the industry and input from
others, but they were going to -- they were seeking a legislative budget
amendment to bolster the facility, and they were beginning a national
search for a full-time director, which we have not had in many, many,
many years.
I think this is a wonderful thing. It wasn't really anticipated by
me, but I think it was a tremendous reaction from the agri-business
industry, and I think that the industry and this board had a significant
-- maybe not a huge impact, but we're part of the cumulative impact
that made this change possible.
In response to that, I've also talked to Bruce Register and John
Page 262
October 8, 2013
Cox with the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce about working
together to work with the University of Florida to help re-purpose it
and maybe have some expanded capabilities and a better relationship.
So I think that's very positive.
The second thing I would like to say is also I'm aware that staff
has worked diligently all throughout these high-water events to try to
identify long-standing issues. And I would like to get support on the
board for staff to go out to give staff some direction and some support
and allow them to go out and produce an action report on the different
chronic areas that we have in the county so that we can go ahead and
get these codified so -- I know that I have some in my district.
We know we -- you know, Commissioner Henning and
Commissioner Coyle talked about Forest Lakes. I have some in
District 5 that have been going on and on and on over wet periods of
time for five, six, seven years, and I think we owe it to some of these
situations and some of these citizens to get focused and try to do
something between now and next May before we're facing the next
rainy season, at least have a plan of action.
So I would really hope that they could put together a summary of
their work and maybe, perhaps, an action report and some
recommendations as to what we can do so that when we come up on
the next budget year we start to dedicate some funding to fixing some
of these chronic problems that we do have.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Thank you. Commissioner
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I am -- getting
information on the county's business is something that we get to enjoy.
And, quite frankly, I think that's a great project. I don't think it -- I
know you have a lot of things to do, so I don't think it's a priority, but I
think we need to know where the hot spots are and what we can do in
the future in that --
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
Page 263
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and take monies away from
lime rock roads and start funding those stormwater problems.
MR. OCHS: I know where we have some.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll vote for that.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I've got one more thing I
wanted to mention, and that is in response to our emergency road
mechanism to work with MSTUs, I'd also like to get some support to
have staff go ahead and continue to work with the people on Platt
Road, and perhaps Commissioner Fiala's got maybe a couple down
there they'd want to work at. But they need some staff time to work
on this emergency road MSTU program out there. I think we're -- I
think we've already established some contacts with the people that are
ready to step up and do something for that private situation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right, and I do, too. I think Chief
Kingman Schuldt has already been out to the gullies over there by 6L
Farms.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So that's something that we also
need to allow staff some latitude to go ahead and bring something
back to us on that MSTU.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not only I think; I was there with
him, so I know he was there.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: That's it.
MR. OCHS: Will do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: I have nothing further to say.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Gone.
CHAIRWOMAN HILLER: Yeah. Motion to adjourn. I second
it. Thank you very much.
Page 264
October 8, 2013
**** Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Nance and carried unanimously that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item #16A1
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR VERONAWALK PHASE 4B-1, PL2009-
0000106, AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS
DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL OBLIGATION BOND IN
THE AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR
THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT — AFTER A FINAL
INSPECTION STAFF DETERMINED FACILITIES WERE
SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A2
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR VERONAWALK, PHASE 4B-2 AND 4B-3,
PL20100001150, AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER,
OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL OBLIGATION
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO THE PROJECT
ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT —
AFTER A FINAL INSPECTION STAFF DETERMINED
FACILITIES WERE SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR VERONAWALK PHASE 4C-1,
PL20110000396, AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER,
OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL OBLIGATION
Page 265
October 8, 2013
BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO THE PROJECT
ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT —
AFTER A FINAL INSPECTION STAFF DETERMINED
FACILITIES WERE SATISFACTORY AND ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A4
RELEASE OF TWO CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS IN THE
COMBINED AMOUNT OF $703,650 FOR PAYMENT OF
$625.71, IN CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS ENTITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS. LINNETTE
BARRETT, CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE NUMBERS
CELU20080016064 AND CEPM20080015499, RELATING TO
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4408 18 PLACE SW, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA — FINES ACCRUING OVER A PERIOD OF
1,577 DAYS FOR BROKEN WINDOWS AND DAMAGED
FASCIA WITH PROPERTY BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON
AUGUST 19, 2013
Item #16A5
RELEASE OF LIEN IN THE AMOUNT OF $198,281.15 FOR
PAYMENT OF $25,331.15, IN CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION
ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS.
RICHARD L. AND SANDRA F. RATHJEN, CODE
ENFORCEMENT CASE NUMBER CESD20100017996,
RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4866 21ST AVENUE
SW, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — FINES OF $198,200 ARE
BASED ON NON-COMPLIANCE FOR 991 DAYS FOR AN
UNPERMITTED STORAGE SHED AND LANAI WITH
PROPERTY BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON JULY 31, 2013
Page 266
October 8, 2013
Item #16A6
CHAIRWOMAN TO SIGN AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND AND COLLIER
COUNTY FOR UTILITY WORK IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT
OF $136,736.05 AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF "INTERSECTION
CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS (SR90 (US41) & SR/CR 951) AND
SR951 3R IMPROVEMENTS," PROJECT NO. 60116 — UNDER
ITB #13-6134 THE COUNTY WILL ASSUME THE UTILITY
REMOVAL AND/OR ABANDONMENT OF THE CITY'S
EXISTING 12 INCH, 14 INCH AND 24" RAW WATERMAINS
AND WILL SUBSEQUENTLY BE REIMBURSED BY THE CITY
Item #16A7
INVITATION TO BID (ITB) #13-6152, "STOP SIGN AND
RESIDENTIAL STREET NAME REPLACEMENT PROGRAM,"
TO MUNICIPAL SUPPLY AND SIGN CO. FOR SIGN WORK IN
THE AMOUNT OF $238,664.93 — STAFF HAS DETERMINED
1,975 STREET NAME SIGNS AND 1,122 STOP SIGNS ON
ROADS WITH SPEED LIMITS OF 30 MPH AND BELOW DO
NOT MEET CURRENT MINIMUM STANDARDS
Item #16A8
RESOLUTION 2013-223: AMENDING RESOLUTION 84-79 TO
CORRECT A SCRIVENER'S ERROR FOUND IN THE LEGAL
DESCRIPTION OF THE VACATED PORTION OF PLATTED
TENTH STREET EAST IN IMMOKALEE, FLORIDA, LOCATED
IN SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Page 267
October 8, 2013
Item #16A9
AWARD ITB #13-6153, I-75 IMMOKALEE ROAD LANDSCAPE
IRRIGATION INSTALLATION TO HANNULA LANDSCAPING
IN THE AMOUNT OF $416,484.32 AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRWOMAN TO SIGN THE CONTRACT AND NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT — FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) HAD ALLOCATED $400,000 IN
STATE CONSTRUCTION DOLLARS FOR LANDSCAPING
THROUGH A JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT (JPA)
Item #16A10
CONTRACT #13-6139, LELY AREA STORMWATER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (LASIP), CROWN POINTE AND
HALDEMAN CREEK WEIR REPLACEMENTS TO KELLY
BROTHERS INC, IN THE AMOUNT OF $530,550.51, PROJECT
NO. 51101 — FUNDS OF $339,267.00 WILL BE REIMBURSED
BY FLORIDA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION IS EXPECTED WITHIN
180 CALENDAR DAYS
Item #16A1 1
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF LAKOYA - PHASE II,
(APPLICATION NUMBER PL20130001254) APPROVAL OF THE
STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE
PERFORMANCE SECURITY — W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16Al2
Page 268
October 8, 2013
RESOLUTION 2013-224: FINAL APPROVAL OF PUBLIC
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE
FINAL PLAT OF NORTHGATE VILLAGE UNIT TWO WITH
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS MAINTAINED
BY COLLIER COUNTY AND AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF
THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE
PLAT DEDICATIONS
Item #16A13
RESOLUTION 2013-225: AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRWOMAN
TO EXECUTE AN AIRSPACE AGREEMENT (W/ATTACHED
ADDENDUM) BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE
COUNTY TO LEASE EMERGENCY ACCESS RAMPS ON AND
OFF 1-75 AT EVERGLADES BOULEVARD AND APPROVE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16A14
AN EXTENSION TO COMPLETE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH A PROJECT KNOWN
AS BUCKS RUN MULTI-FAMILY (AR-7934) PURSUANT TO
SECTION 10.02.03 B.4 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE — EXTENDING THE COMPLETION
DATE TO FEBRUARY 10, 2014
Item #16A15
AWARD RFP #13-6056, "COLLECTION AGENCY SERVICES
FOR COLLIER COUNTY" TO MINTEX, INC., AND
AUTHORIZE CHAIRWOMAN TO EXECUTE THE COUNTY
Page 269
October 8, 2013
ATTORNEY APPROVED AGREEMENT — AN INITIAL 2-YEAR
CONTRACT TERM WITH ONE (1) ADDITIONAL 2-YEAR
RENEWAL OPTION AT THE COUNTY'S DISCRETION
Item #16A16
RESOLUTION 2013-226: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
SUPPORTING THE COUNTY'S APPLICATIONS TO FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (FDEP)
FOR LONG RANGE BUDGET PLAN REQUESTS FOR BEACH
RENOURISHMENT PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014-2015.
MAINTAINING COUNTY ELIGIBILITY FOR STATE COST
SHARE FUNDING FOR FUTURE PROJECTS
Item #16A17
INVITATION TO BID #12-5886R, RIGHT OF WAY/MEDIAN
MOWING MAINTENANCE FOR RURAL MOWING, TO
CHUCHI BUSH HOG AS PRIMARY VENDOR, CARIBBEAN
LAWN & GARDEN THE SECONDARY VENDOR AND
SUPERIOR THE TERTIARY VENDOR; FOR URBAN MOWING
TO A&M PROPERTY MAINTENANCE AS PRIMARY VENDOR,
EVERYTHING GREEN AS THE SECONDARY VENDOR AND
CHUCHI BUSH HOG THE TERTIARY VENDOR — FOR
SERVICES PERFORMED ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS WITH
APPROXIMATELY $900,000 IN ANNUAL EXPENDITURES
Item #16B1
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC) ACTING
IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY
Page 270
October 8, 2013
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO (1) EXTEND THE
DISSOLUTION DATE OF THE IMMOKALEE BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT CENTER (IBDC) FROM DECEMBER 31, 2013
TO MARCH 30, 2014 SO THAT THE IBDC CAN CARRY OUT
ITS PREVIOUS OBLIGATION TO CONDUCT A USDA GRANT-
FUNDED FEASIBILITY STUDY RELATED TO THE CENTER'S
VIABILITY WITHIN THE IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY, AND
(2) ACCEPT A $35,000 RURAL BUSINESS ENTERPRISE
GRANT (RBEG) FROM US DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE (USDA)
AND APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT — NEEDED FOR
THE GRANTS ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS
Item #16B2
SHORTLIST OF FIRMS UNDER RFP #13-6012, THOMASSON
DRIVE AND HAMILTON AVENUE STREETSCAPE
IMPROVEMENTS DESIGN AND DIRECT STAFF TO BRING A
NEGOTIATED CONTRACT WITH THE TOP RANKED FIRM TO
THE BOARD FOR SUBSEQUENT APPROVAL — WITH THE
FIRM ATKINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. FOR THE SECTION OF
THOMASSON DRIVE FROM ORCHARD LANE CONTINUING
THEN TURNING INTO HAMILTON AVENUE GOING SOUTH
Item #16C1
SELECTION COMMITTEE'S RANKINGS AND STAFF TO
ENTER INTO CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH TKW
CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC., FOR REQUEST FOR
PROPOSAL #13-6020, NORTH COUNTY WATER
RECLAMATION FACILITY DESIGN SERVICES FOR
ELECTRICAL RELIABILITY AND MECHANICAL
OPERATIONS UPGRADES PROJECT NO. 73950 — A
Page 271
October 8, 2013
CONTRACT WILL BE BROUGHT TO THE BOARD FOR FINAL
APPROVAL FOR SERVICES THAT INCLUDE PRELIMINARY
AND POST DESIGN SERVICES, QUALITY ASSURANCE,
PROJECT MANAGEMENT, BIDDING, PERMITTING,
MAINTENANCE, MANUAL UPDATES AND OPERATOR
TRAINING
Item #16C2
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL #12-5871 FOR WELL DRILLING,
TESTING AND MAINTENANCE CONTRACTING SERVICES
TO ALL WEBB ENTERPRISES, INCORPORATED; NAPLES
WELL DRILLING, INC; YOUNGQUIST BROTHERS, INC; AND
LAYNE CHRISTENSEN COMPANY — AN INITIAL 2-YEAR
CONTRACT WITH TWO (2) ADDITIONAL 1-YEAR RENEWAL
OPTIONS AT COUNTY DISCRETION FOR WORK ON RAW
WATER WELLS, AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR)
WELLS AND DEEP INJECTION WELLS
Item #16D1
EXTENDING THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE
CITY OF MARCO ISLAND FOR MANAGEMENT OF THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER OTTER MOUND PRESERVE FOR
AN ADDITIONAL 5-YEAR TERM — STAFF REVISED THE
AGREEMENT TO REMOVE COMPLETED OBLIGATIONS AND
MADE MODIFICATIONS THAT CONFORM TO CURRENT
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Item #16D2 — Continued to the October 22, 2013 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Page 272
October 8, 2013
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF SWFL, INC.
Item #16D3 — Continued to the October 22, 2013 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
THE FY12/13 AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND NAPLES EQUESTRIAN CHALLENGE FOR THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
PROJECT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE BOARD ON
MAY 14, 2013 (FISCAL IMPACT: $0)
Item #16D4
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE TEN (10) SUBSTANTIAL
AMENDMENTS TO THE PREVIOUS ANNUAL ACTION
PLANS FOR UNSPENT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) AND HOME
PARTNERSHIP INVESTMENT (HOME) FUNDS IN THE
AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF $1,936,188.50 — AS DETAILED
IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D5
RESOLUTION 2013-227: SUPERCEDING 2009-266, TO REVISE
THE COLLIER COUNTY DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES FEE
POLICY EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 1, 2013 TO REFLECT
RECENTLY ADOPTED REVISIONS TO THE ANIMAL
Page 273
October 8, 2013
CONTROL ORDINANCE
Item #16D6
CHAIRWOMAN TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
BOARD, INC. AND COLLIER COUNTY TO PROVIDE SNACKS
AND/OR SUPPER FOR AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAMS — PARKS
AND REC WILL PROVIDE CATERED HOT MEALS AND/OR
SNACKS TO CHILDREN AT THE IMMOKALEE SPORTS
COMPLEX AND COMMUNITY CENTER
Item #16D7 — Continued to the October 22, 2013 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE SUBSTANTIAL
AMENDMENTS TO THE FY09/10 AND FY 10/11 ANNUAL
ACTION PLANS TO CLARIFY THE PROJECT SCOPE AND
FUNDING FOR GOODWILL INDUSTRIES MICROENTERPRISE
PROJECT AND IMMOKALEE HOUSING & FAMILY SERVICES
SANDERS PINES PLAYGROUND UPGRADES
Item #16D8
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA)
IMMOKALEE TO UPDATE TEMPLATE LANGUAGE AND
EXTEND THE COMPLETION DATE — AMENDING HUD
GRANT #B-10-UC-12-0016 TO EXTEND COMPLETION UNTIL
MAY 31, 2014 AND CHANGE FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR THE
Page 274
October 8, 2013
FIRST STREET PLAZA (ZOCALO) PROJECT AT THE CORNER
OF FIRST STREET AND MAIN STREET IN IMMOKALEE
Item #16D9 — Continued to the October 22, 2013 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A HOME INVESTMENT
PARTNERSHIPS (HOME) PROGRAM DEVELOPER
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND BIG
CYPRESS HOUSING CORPORATION (BCHC) FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL HOUSING
PROJECT CONSISTING OF A MINIMUM OF (10 ) TEN SINGLE
FAMILY RENTAL UNITS (FISCAL IMPACT: $1,144,000)
Item #16D10
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A HOME INVESTMENT
PARTNERSHIP (HOME) PROGRAM SUBRECIPIENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
COMMUNITY ASSISTED & SUPPORTED LIVING, INC. FOR
ACQUISITION OF A MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL HOUSING
PROPERTY (FISCAL IMPACT: $405,564) — AN AGREEMENT
ENDING OCTOBER 7, 2015 FOR THE PROJECT THAT WILL
ADMINISTERED, IMPLEMENTED & MONITORED BY
HOUSING, HUMAN AND VETERAN SERVICES (HHVS) AT
3028 SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD AS OUTLINED IN THE
FY13/14 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN APPROVED BY THE
BOARD DURING ABSENTIA AUGUST 13, 2013 AS ITEM #11A
Item #16D11
RESOLUTION 2013-228: ESTABLISHING APPLICATION
Page 275
October 8, 2013
SCREENING CRITERIA FOR COUNTY ADMINISTERED
FEDERAL AND STATE GRANTS — ADOPTED W/CHANGES
(PER AGENDA CHANGE SHEET)
Item #16D12 — Moved to Item #11F (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16E1
BUDGET AMENDMENTS APPROPRIATING $2,270,255.72 OF
FY13 CARRY FORWARD FOR APPROVED OPEN PURCHASE
ORDERS INTO FY14 FOR OPERATING BUDGET FUNDS — AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16E2
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC.
FOR THE SENIOR NUTRITION PROGRAM — EXTENDS THE
LEASE TO DECEMBER 31, 2015 FOR SPACE IN IMMOKALEE
AT A $1,123.82 CURRENT MONTHLY RENT BUT WILL
INCREASE 4% ANNUALLY AND ADDING CHARGES FOR
TELEPHONE AND ELECTRIC THAT GOODWILL WILL BILL
THE COUNTY FOR QUARTERLY
Item #16E3
LEASE WITH GULFSHORE ASSOC. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
FOR CONTINUED USE OF OFFICE SPACE FOR PELICAN BAY
SERVICES — RENEWING THE LEASE THAT WILL END
DECEMBER 31, 2013 IN THE SUNTRUST BANK BUILDING
AND RELOCATING PELICAN BAY SERVICES FROM THE
SIXTH TO THE THIRD FLOOR TO ACCOMMODATE A
Page 276
October 8, 2013
TENANT WHO WILL BE LEASING THE ENTIRE SIXTH
FLOOR; THE LANDLORD IS PAYING ALL COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE MOVE, OFFERING A FIRST YEAR
REDUCED RENT OF $27,137.88 AND IS PROVIDING $10,000
TOWARDS THE DESIGN OF THEIR NEW SPACE
Item #16E4
FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY SENIOR
RESOURCE CENTER GROUND LEASE TO CONTINUE
PROVIDING SOCIAL AND REFERRAL SERVICES TO SENIOR
CITIZENS — FOR SPACE IN THE FORMER GOLDEN GATE
CITY LIBRARY FOR AN ADDITIONAL 3-YEARS WHILE THE
CENTER CONTINUES EFFORTS IN CONSTRUCTING THEIR
OWN FACILITY ON THE COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY
Item #16E5
ACCEPT REPORTS AND RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED
CHANGE ORDERS AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS — FOR
THE PERIOD AUGUST 21, 2013 THRU SEPTEMBER 17, 2013
Item #16E6 — Moved to Item #11G (Per Commissioner Hiller and
as recommended by the Clerk's Office during Agenda
Changes)
Item #16F1 — Moved to Item #11H (Per Commissioner Hiller during
Agenda Changes)
Item #16F2 — Continued to the October 22, 2013 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Page 277
October 8, 2013
RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT CRITERIA DEFINING AND
CLASSIFYING ACTIVITIES USING TOURIST TAX REVENUE
THAT "PROMOTES TOURISM"
Item #16F3 — Continued to the October 22, 2013 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO
TOURISM TRAVEL EXPENSE RESOLUTION 2006-40
RELATED TO COUNTY PURCHASING CARD LIMITS
CONSISTENT WITH COUNTY PURCHASING POLICY AND
MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM
Item #16F4
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S TO REVIEW AND
APPROVE THE PROPOSED FY2013-2014 ACTION PLAN FOR
THE COUNTY MANAGER
Item #16F5
CHAIRWOMAN TO EXECUTE FY14 TOURISM AGREEMENTS
FOR CATEGORY "B" GRANT AGREEMENTS TOTALING
$50,000 AND CATEGORY "C-2" GRANT AGREEMENTS
TOTALING $40,000, WAIVE THE MULTIPLE YEAR FUNDING
LEVEL AND RECEIPT OF FINAL REPORT (PER AGENDA
CHANGE SHEET) GUIDELINES IN THE FY14 CATEGORY "B"
AND "C-2" GRANT APPLICATION DUE TO THE PAST
PERFORMANCE OF THE EVENTS AND IMPORTANCE TO
THE COMMUNITY AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THESE
EXPENDITURES PROMOTE TOURISM — FOR CATEGORY "B"
GRANT AGREEMENTS WITH ARTSNAPLES WORLD
Page 278
October 8, 2013
FESTIVAL, INC. AND OLD NAPLES WATERFRONT
ASSOCIATION AND CATEGORY "C" AGREEMENTS WITH
THE SWFL HOLOCAUST MUSEUM AND NAPLES ART
ASSOCIATION, INC. D/B/A THE VON LIEBIG ART CENTER
Item #16F6
RESOLUTION 2013-229: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2013-14
ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F7
AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE,
AND COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE AN ORDINANCE
FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION THAT WOULD AMEND
CHAPTER 74 OF COLLIER COUNTY'S CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES, COLLIER COUNTY'S CONSOLIDATED
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE, PROVIDING MODIFICATIONS
DIRECTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
RELATED TO CHANGES IN TIMING OF PAYMENTS OF
IMPACT FEES TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY AND INCLUSION OF WATER & WASTEWATER
IMPACT FEES ELIGIBLE FOR THE IMPACT FEE PROGRAM
FOR EXISTING COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT AND
INCLUDES ADDITIONAL MINOR UPDATES/CORRECTIONS
RELATED TO ADULT ONLY COMMUNITIES, OBSOLETE
REFUND PROVISIONS, REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS
AND THE FORMER GOODLAND WATER DISTRICT
Item #16G1
Page 279
October 8, 2013
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING IN ITS
CAPACITY AS COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY,
APPROVE A THIRD 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 MARCO
ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT — ADDING SEVENTY (70)
SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE AND AMENDING OTHER
PROVISIONS WITH THE TENANT PAYING THE AIRPORT
AUTHORITY $18 SQUARE FOOT PER YEAR FOR SPACE
CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT APPROVED RATES AND
CHARGES FOR THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT
Item #16H1
THE BOARD'S REQUEST TO ATTEND A FUNCTION
SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE — TO ATTEND
FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES (FAC) LEGISLATIVE
CONFERENCE & POST CONFERENCE WORKSHOP BEING
HELD NOVEMBER 13-15, 2013 AT THE HILTON DAYTONA
BEACH
Item #16112
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE ATTENDED EAST NAPLES CIVIC
ASSOCIATION LUNCHEON SEPTEMBER 19, 2013. $18 TO BE
PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET —
HELD AT HAMILTON HARBOR, 7065 HAMILTON AVENUE
Item #16H3
Page 280
October 8, 2013
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE WILL ATTEND THE 60TH ANNIVERSARY
GARDEN CLUB LUNCHEON ON NOVEMBER 4, 2013. A SUM
OF $45 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL
BUDGET — HELD AT WINDSTAR COUNTRY CLUB, 1700
WINDSTAR BOULEVARD, NAPLES
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. SHE WILL ATTEND THE HEART OF THE APPLE
LUNCHEON ON NOVEMBER 19, 2013. A SUM OF $33 TO BE
PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET —
HELD AT THE HILTON NAPLES, TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH
Item #16J1
PROVIDE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THE
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT'S OFFICE AUDIT REPORT
2013-10 CONCERNING THE PARKS AND RECREATION
DEPARTMENT — IMMOKALEE ISSUED ON OCTOBER 2, 2013
Item #16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF SEPTEMBER 13, 2013
THROUGH SEPTEMBER 19, 2013 AND FOR SUBMISSION
INTO THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J3
Page 281
October 8, 2013
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF SEPTEMBER 20, 2013
THROUGH SEPTEMBER 26, 2013 AND FOR SUBMISSION
INTO THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE BOARD
Item #16J4
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACCEPT AND
APPROVE CAPITAL ASSET DISPOSITION RECORDS FOR THE
TIME PERIOD OCTOBER 1, 2012 THRU JUNE 30, 2013 — AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16J5
REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ORDER THE EXTENSION OF THE TAX ROLL PURSUANT TO
SECTION 197.323, FLORIDA STATUTES — TO ALLOW ANY
CHANGES MADE BY THE VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD
Item #16K1
MEDIATION SETTLEMENT IN THE LAWSUIT OF ELAYNE
JACKSON V. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, FILED IN THE TWENTIETH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CASE NO. 12-1316-CA FOR THE SUM OF $75,000
AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRWOMAN TO EXECUTE THE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT — FOR A FEBRUARY 29, 2012
ACCIDENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD AND U.S. 41 INVOLVING A BICYCLE AND A
COUNTY TRUCK THAT WAS PULLING A TRAILER
Item #16K2
Page 282
October 8, 2013
FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,466.92 SETTLING
ALL CLAIMS FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 199DAME,
INCLUDING ATTORNEY'S FEES, IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. LLEVATT, INC., ET AL, CASE NO. 2011-
CA-3176 FOR OUTFALLS 3 & 4/LASIP (PROJECT NO. 51101)
(FISCAL IMPACT $2,836.92) — FOR A 5,700 SQUARE FEET
PERPETUAL NON-EXCLUSIVE DRAINAGE, ACCESS AND
MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
Item #16K3
RETENTION AGREEMENT WITH THE LAW FIRM CARLTON
FIELDS, P.A., FOR OUTSIDE LEGAL SERVICES ON AN "AS
NEEDED" BASIS — A CONTRACT ENDING OCTOBER 27, 2015
Item #16K4
RECOMMENDATION TO ESTABLISH INITIAL TERMS FOR
MEMBERS APPOINTED TO THE RECONSTITUTED COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
****Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Nance and carried unanimously that the following items under the
Summary Agenda be adopted ****
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2013-230: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD
OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 5.06.04.F.4 OF
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCREASE THE
Page 283
October 8, 2013
NUMBER OF SIGNS ON THE BUILDING TO ALLOW AN
ADDITIONAL SIGN PER UNIT UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 36
TOTAL SIGNS FOR THE ENTIRE DEL MAR SHOPPING
CENTER LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DAVIS
BOULEVARD IN SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE
26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA [SV-PL20130000818
Item #17B — Moved to Item #9A (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2013-231 : APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND
SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2013-14
ADOPTED BUDGET
Page 284
October 8, 2013
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:10 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPEC • L DISTRI TS UNDER ITS CONTROL
GE •R A ILLER, CHAIRWOMAN
ATTEST:
DWIGHT . BROCK, CLERK
blA v. *kJ-
-Attest a • I, S
signature only. ''
These m. utes approved by the Board on NO\16Moer 12,201 , as presented
or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT
REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 285