BCC Minutes 04/10/2001 R April 10, 2001
REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 10, 2001
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, and also acting
as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of
such special districts as have been created according to law and
having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:05 a.m.
in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
VICE CHAIRMAN:
JAMES D. CARTER, PH.D.
PAMELA S. MAC'KIE
JIM COLETTA
DONNA FIALA
TOM HENNING
ALSO PRESENT:
TOM OLLIFF, County Manager
MIKE McNEES, Assistant County Manager
DAVID WEIGEL, County Attorney
Page I
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
Tuesday, April 10, 2001
9:00 a.m.
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER
PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER
PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 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.
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".
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A
RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS 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.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS
PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
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, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE
COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (941) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING
DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1
Apfill0,2001
INVOCATION - Reverend George Lockhart, First Baptist Church of Golden Gate
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
APPROVAL OF AGENDAS
A. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA.
B. APPROVAL OF SUMMARY AGENDA.
C. APPROVAL OF REGULAR AGENDA.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. March 9 BCC Strategic Planning Workshop
B. March 13 Regular BCC Meeting
C. March 16 BCC Growth Management Workshop
PROCLAMATIONS AND SERVICE AWARDS
A. PROCLAMATIONS
1) Proclamation proclaiming April 27th and 28th as "Relay For Life Weekend",
to be accepted by Mr. Steve Wheeler, Executive Director, American
Cancer Society.
2) Proclamation proclaiming "The Conservancy of Southwest Florida as
Earth Day Headquarters in Collier County", to be accepted by Mr. Joe
Cox, Manager of the Naples Nature Center of The Conservancy of
Southwest Florida.
3) Proclamation proclaiming April 10th as "WORLD TENNIS CLUB, INC.
APPRECIATION DAY", to be accepted by Ms. Valerie Stolts, General
Manager of the World Tennis Club.
aw
SERVICE AWARDS
Five Year Attendee:
1) Robert Tweedie, Airport Authority
Ten Year Attendee:
2) Thomas Palmer, County Attorneys Office
Fifteen Year Attendees:
2
April 10, 2001
3) Peter Bolton, EMS
4) Walter Kopka II, EMS
Twenty Year Attendees:
5) William Peplinski, EMS
6) Deborah Lichliter, EMS
7) Ricardo Garcia, EMS
8) Jeffrey Page, EMS
9) Joseph Paul, EMS
C. PRESENTATIONS
APPROVAL OF CLERK'S REPORT
A. ANALYSIS OF CHANGES TO RESERVES FOR CONTINGENCIES.
PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request by Dyrel Delaney to have the BCC consider the matter of
home storm shelters.
B. Request for Public Petition by Kenneth B. Cuyler, representing Immokalee
Friendship House, for County contribution to cover fees.
COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Accept the final Community Character Plan for Collier County, approve a
Resolution endorsing the Plan's objectives, and direct staff to prepare
recommendations on prioritizing the Plan's objectives and develop
implementation strategies.
2) Approve commercial excavation Permit No. 59.778, "McDaniel Lake
Commercial Excavation" located in Sections 20, 21,28, 29, Township 48
South, Range 28 East, bounded on the north by vacant lot, on the south
by Randall Boulevard, right-of-way, on the west by occupied lot, and on
the east by vacant lot.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
3
April 10, 2001
1)
Discuss the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Consent
Order and authorize BCC Chairman to sign the FDEP Consent Order.
PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
Approve an amendment to the Collier County Parks and Recreation
Facilities License and Fee Policy related to the use of County boat launch
facilities.
Approval of an updated Land Management Plan for Barefoot Beach Park
Preserve. (DUE TO THE VOLUME OF THE CONTENTS, THE LAND
MANAGEMENT PLAN WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS PRINTING AND
gm
11.
MAY BE VIEWED IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OFFICE.)
E. SUPPORT SERVICES
F. EMERGENCY SERVICES
G. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Report regarding a ¼ percent Local Option Infrastructure Sales Tax
Referendum.
H. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Radio Road Beautification Advisory Committee.
B. Appointment of member to the Black Affairs Advisory Board.
C. Consideration of resolution supporting Citizens Right to Honest Government Act.
(Commissioner Coletta)
D. Discussion regarding exemption of not-for-profit medical facilities under impact
fee ordinance. (Commissioner Mac'Kie and Commissioner Fiala)
OTHER ITEMS
A. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
4
April 10, 200l
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
C. PUBLIC COMMENT ON GENERAL TOPICS
PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HEARD IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING STAFF ITEMS
12. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS -BCC
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
B. ZONING AMENDMENTS
C. OTHER
1) THIS ITEM IS BEING CONTINUED TO THE APRIL 24, 2001 MEETING.
Approve an ordinance amending the Code of Laws and Ordinances of
Collier County, Florida, amending Article VI, which regulates and controls
litter, weeds and exotics within the unincorporated area of Collier County
as promulgated by Ordinance No. 99-51.
13. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
B. OTHER
14. STAFF'S COMMUNICATIONS
15. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' 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.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Approval of the Mortgage and Promissory Note for a three hundred
thousand ($300,000) dollar loan to Habitat for Humanity of Collier County,
5
April 10, 2001
Bm
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
Inc.
Authorize the Collier County Natural Resources Director to apply for
current and future derelict vessel removal grants.
Satisfaction of Code Enforcement Board Lien/Saldana, Dagoberto and
Maria.
Satisfaction of Code Enforcement Board Lien/Zdravkovic, Trustee Grace
and William.
Code Enforcement Lien Resolution approvals.
Approve the release of purported lien for public nuisance Resolution
2000-386.
Accept a $300,000 Urban Infill and Redevelopment Grant from the Florida
Department of Community Affairs.
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Autumn Woods Unit Two".
Final acceptance of water utility facilities for Diamond Lakes, Units Two
and Three.
Award of Bid #01-3209 for artificial reef construction.
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Glen Eagle Golf and Country
Club, Phase Three".
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Villa La Palma at Bay Colony".
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Northbrooke Plaza".
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
Approve Bid No. 01-3202, purchase and delivery of organic and inorganic
mulch.
2)
Adopt a resolution authorizing the acquisition of land by gift or purchase of
fee simple title interests and/or perpetual, non-exclusive road right-of-way,
sidewalk, slope, utility, drainage and maintenance interests and/or
temporary interests by easement for the construction of the six-laning
6
April 10, 2001
Cw
improvements for Goodlette-Frank Road between Pine Ridge Road and
Vanderbilt Beach Road Project, CIE No. 65, Project No. 60134.
3)
Approve a construction agreement between Collier County and the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) for modifications to the signal and
street lighting system on US 41 East (SR 90).
4)
Accept a road right-of-way easement from Julio F. and Dina J. Ordonez,
required for the construction of a turn lane at 5th Street SW for the Golden
Gate Boulevard project, CIE Project No. 62 (ultimate four-lane roadway).
5)
Award RFP #00-3152 for an environmental consultant for Clam Bay
restoration to Turrell and Associates, Inc., and that the Chairman be
authorized to execute the contract documents upon Attorney review.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
1)
Approve the satisfaction of lien documents filed against real property for
abatement of nuisance and direct the Clerk of Courts to record same in
the public records of Collier County, Florida.
2)
Approve purchase of services from the Florida Geological Survey for
services to obtain continuous geologic cores to supplement exploratory
drilling related to reclaimed water aquifer storage and recovery, Project
74030.
3)
Approve selection and award contract with Youngquist Brothers, Inc., for
deep injection well construction, RFP 01-3193, Project 70054.
4)
Adopt a resolution approving the satisfaction of liens for solid waste
residential accounts wherein the County has received payment and said
liens are satisfied in full for the 1991 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Services Special Assessments.
5)
Adopt a resolution approving the satisfaction of liens for solid waste
residential accounts wherein the County has received payment and said
liens are satisfied in full for the 1994 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Services Special Assessments.
6)
Adopt a resolution approving the satisfaction of liens for solid waste
residential accounts wherein the County has received payment and said
liens are satisfied in full for the 1993 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Services Special Assessments.
7)
Adopt a resolution approving the satisfaction of liens for solid waste
residential accounts wherein the County has received payment and said
7
April 10, 2001
D=
8)
9)
12)
13)
liens are satisfied in full for the 1995 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Services Special Assessments.
Adopt a resolution approving the satisfaction of liens for solid waste
residential accounts wherein the County has received payment and said
liens are satisfied in full for the 1996 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Services Special Assessments.
Award negotiated annual contracts for professional utility engineering
services, RFP 00-3119.
Request a budget amendment of $675,000 to pay JC Drainfield invoices
for hauling wastewater from the North County Water Reclamation Facility.
Approval and execution of satisfactions of notice of promise to pay and
agreement to extend payment of water and/or sewer system impact fees.
Approval and execution for satisfaction of claim of liens for water and/or
sewer system impact fees.
Amend professional services agreement with Focus Engineering, Inc., for
engineering services related to Pelican Bay fire and irrigation water
system improvements, RFP-00-3051, Project 74023.
PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
Authorize the Parks and Recreation Department to operate Park Ranger
Camps this Summer, 2001.
2) Award of Bid #01-3196 for Arts and Craft Supplies.
SUPPORT SERVICES
1)
Approve a budget amendment to recognize revenues and expenses
related to the sale of personal computers to employees and to authorize
the transfer of items associated with the County surplus auction back into
the County's inventory.
2)
Approval of a resolution ratifying specific expenditures for employee
recognition meetings as serving a valid public purpose.
3)
Recommendation to Award Bid No. 01-3201, pump and motor repair for
County-wide maintenance of equipment.
8
April 10, 2001
Hm
4)
Approve budget amendments to transfer funds to cover cost of purchasing
two digital tape decks to broadcast Channel 54 programming.
EMERGENCY SERVICES
1)
Approve a standard County contract with Harvard Jolly Cless Toppe
Architects with Scharf & Associates for design services for the new Collier
County Emergency Services complex.
COUNTY MANAGER
1) This item has been deleted.
2)
Approval of Budget Amendment Report - Budget Amendment #01-238;
#01-242.
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1)
Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners serve as the local
coordinating unit of government in the Florida Department of Law
Enforcement's Anti-Drug Abuse Act Formula grant program.
2)
Approve an increase of eight sworn law enforcement officers in the
2000/2001 Sheriff's office budget for the United States Department of
Justice three year COPS in Schools grant program
3)
Presentation of the State of Florida Annual Local Government Financial
Report for the Fiscal Year 1999-2000.
COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Approve the settlement in Bonita Grande Sand v. Collier County, Case
No. 99-2081-CA, now pending in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for
Collier County, Florida, pursuant to which the County would pay $10,000
and convey to Bonita Grande Sand Company, Title to the sand currently
being stored at Bonita Grande Sand and all claims against the County
would be dismissed with prejudice. Said settlement was arrived at during
9
April 10, 2001
17.
settlement negotiations.
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 OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM.
Adoption of an ordinance to increase the tapping fee for potable water meters
with service line installations and to add a tapping fee for potable water meters
without service line installations.
B. THIS ITEM REQUIRES THAT ALL PARTICIPANTS BE SWORN IN AND EX
PARTE DISCLOSURE BE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS. Petition
VAC 00-023 to disclaim, renounce and vacate any and all of the County's and
the public's interest in the 12' wide Bay Colony Shores drainage easement and
the 10' wide utility easement along the lot line common to sites 10 and 11 and
the 12' wide Bay Colony Shores drainage easement on Tract "A" contiguous to
sites 10 and 11, as depicted on the plat of "Pelican Bay Unit Ten" as recorded in
Plat Book 15,, Pages 64 through 67, Public Records of Collier County, Florida,
located in Section 33, Township 49 South, Range 25 East.
THIS ITEM REQUIRES THAT ALL PARTICIPANTS BE SWORN IN AND EX
Da
PARTE DISCLOSURE BE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS. Petition
VAC 01-001 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and the public's
interest in the 10'wide utility and drainage easement located along the lot line
common to lots 23 and 24, Tract 5, according to the plat of "Olde Cypress, Unit
Three" as recorded in Plat Book 32, Pages 84 through 86, Public Records of
Collier County, Florida, and to accept a relocated 10' wide utility and drainage
easement on said lots 23 and 24, located in Section 21, Township 48 South,
Range 26 East.
THIS ITEM REQUIRES THAT ALL PARTICIPANTS BE SWORN IN AND EX PARTE
DISCLOSURE BE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS. CU-2000-21, William L.
Hoover, AICP, of Hoover Planning & Development, Inc., representing Dr. Loren L.
Hoffman of Rising Stars Preschool, Inc., requesting conditional use "4" of the "C-5"
Zoning District for child day care services per Section 2.2.15 ½.3 for property located on
the west side of Naples Boulevard, approximately 1000 feet north of Pine Ridge Road in
Section 11, Township 49 S., Range 25 E., Collier County, Florida.
10
April 10, 2001
Adoption of an ordinance repealing, in its entirety, Collier County Ordinance No.
2000-82, the Pelican Bay Services District Ordinance, and providing that Collier
County Ordinance No. 90-111, as amended, creating and providing for the
Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit and its advisory
committee, continue in full force and effect; providing for inclusion in code of laws
and ordinances; providing for conflict and severability; and providing for an
effective date.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO
THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
11
April 10, 2001
April 10, 2001
Item #3A, B, & C
CONSENT, SUMMARY AND REGULAR AGENDA - APPROVED
AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Nice and loud. Good morning, ladies
and gentlemen. Welcome to the Tuesday, April 10th, Board of
County Commissioners' meeting. It is now 9:05. Would you
please stand for the invocation by the Reverend George
Lockhart, First Baptist Church of Golden Gate, followed by the
Pledge of Allegiance.
REVEREND LOCKHART: I'd like to thank the county
commission for inviting me to come and to share with you this
morning. Shall we get to the Lord in prayer.
Heavenly Father, we have come today to do business within
this county, that we pray we will honor and glorify you. We pray,
Lord, for your leadership within us today, that you'll guide our
leaders, that you'll guide us as we seek to do what is best for one
another, to do what is best for this county, to uphold the honesty
and integrity within the county, and to know that you're our God
and savior.
We thank you for this season of Easter and all that it means
to the various different people around the county and ask that
you will lead us this week in community spirit and community
hope and in the knowledge of who you are. Be with us now, and
we pray this in Jesus's name. Amen.
(The pledge of allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning, Mr. Olliff. We'll start
with you. Do we have any additions or changes to the agenda?
MR. OLLIFF: Good morning, Mr. chairman, Commissioners.
I'll walk you through your change list this morning. The first item
is Item -- it's an addition. It's Item 9 -A, which would be in
Page 2
April 10, 2001
addition to your regular agenda. It's a settlement offer in the
case of Maxie D. Holmes versus Collier County.
The second item is a continuance of Item 10-D as in David.
It's requested that that item be continued indefinitely.
The third change on your agenda is an addition. It's an
addition of Item 10-E as in Edward. It's a reconsideration of
agenda Item 9-B from your meeting of March 27th, and it is the
issue regarding the Vanderbilt Beachcomer Resort.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm sorry as to where that's going
to be?
MR. OLLIFF: That would be Item 10-E as in Edward.
Next we will move from your consent agenda -- we're moving
Item 16-A-2. That item would become 8-A-3. That is a request
for the natural resources director to be authorized to apply for a
derelict vessel removal grant, and that's at Commissioner
Coletta's request.
And the other is -- is a companion to that, in essence, and it
is Item 16-A-10. And, again, Commissioner Coletta has requested
that be moved to regular making it 8 -- Item 8-A-4. That's award
of bids for artificial reef construction.
The next change is a deletion, Item 16-E as in Edward 3:
recommend -- recommendation this morning by your staff that
that item be deleted off your agenda.
The next item is an addition, Item 16-F-2. It's an item
requesting the county manager create separate pay grades and
classification groups for EMS field personnel. That's in addition
to your agenda this morning. That is part of the reorganizations
that were discussed with you yesterday.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I just didn't understand you.
The pay to create a separate pay grade?
MR. OLLIFF: Separate pay grades and classification groups
we're actually creating as part of the reorganization.
Page 3
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I see.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, that's all the changes that I have
for you this morning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Weigel.
MR. WEIGEL: No changes. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: None.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ms. Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to ask, it says move
16-L to 9-B also?
MR. OLLIFF: I think we've satisfied the questions that were
raised on that item.
Mr. Chairman, while I do have the floor, again, I forgot to add
that --just a note that there was a resolution that was handed
out this morning that was associated with Item 16-B-3 that was
inadvertently left out of your package. It's simply the resolution
necessary that authorizes the staff to go ahead and complete the
work that was included in 16-B-3, which was a -- an agreement
between FDOT and -- and Collier County. It's for some traffic
signal work on -- on east 41.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. No --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No, not a thing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I have no changes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I make a motion to approve the
consent, summary, and regular agenda with the changes as
noted.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a first; we have a second. As
always is my practice, are there any public speakers signed up to
Page 4
April 10, 2001
speak on either the consent or summary agendas?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. Actually, you have nine registered
speakers on one of the summary agenda items, and all of them
are registered for Item 17-E, the item regarding the Pelican Bay
ordinance.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: For any points of clarification on that,
all commissioners are -- they can vote, which are four, are in
agreement in repealing that ordinance and replacing it with the
one that is -- that was there prior to, and that is stated in the
summary agenda.
I have asked Dwight Brock to work with the community to
see what direction they would like to take in the future. And if
you read this morning's paper, their first meeting was covered by
Cathy Zollo, gives you a good indication of what the community's
doing and how they're working with Dwight. I understand that
he's going to have three additional meetings out there so --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If I may, I'm sorry that I forgot to
make a notice of my abstention on Item 17-E, but do I need to
make that record.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So if that helps anybody that's here to
speak, that's fine, but let's take them. Each person has five
minutes, as is allowed by our -- our rules.
MR. OLLIFF: The first speaker is John Domenie. Following
Mr. Domenie will be Robert Calder.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We always ask you to be on the on-
deck circle. Thank you.
MR. DOMENIE: Good morning. My name is John Domenie. I
have been a full-time resident of Pelican Bay for 14 years and am
a truly concerned citizen. I expressed this concern by attending
the monthly MSTBU meetings, am co-chair of the Community
Affairs Committee, a member of the Board of Property Owners
Association of North Collier County, a member of the Board of the
Page 5
April 10, 2001
Mangrove Action Group, a member of the Community Emergency
Response Team, and recently elected as vice president of the
Pelican Bay Property Owners Association.
I have appeared before this commission before in support of
the ordinance and offered my hand in compromise to the other
concerned citizens. In fact, it is this compromise which the
commission is now trying to achieve through the efforts of Mr.
Brock. And the other concerned citizens are now also
advocating an elected MSTBU. When the Pelican Bay property
owners first looked into the desirability of electing the members
of the advisory board of the MSTBU, we recommended that over
the next three years we elect three members to the MSTBU each
year. Thus, within 24 months we would have elected 9 members.
The other two would continue to represent WCI and the
commercial interests. It would provide for continuity and the
desired result. We were told by legal counsel that this would not
be possible.
We then asked how this could be done, and the result was
the ordinance which was approved by you on a 4-to-0 vote. As
responsible commissioners -- and for three of you, it was the first
opportunity to sit on this board -- you did your homework and
could find no fault in the ordinance which you embraced. Thus,
when the first other concerned citizens came to you stating that
the new ordinance dictated taxation without representation, did
you point out that in Florida nonresidents do not vote on
taxation? Did nonresidents elect you to your position? Did you
point out that under the ordinance Pelican Bay voters would now
elect seven supervisors to represent them? When the other
concerned citizens claimed that the supervisors could raise the
millage 2 mills, did you point out that under the present MSTBU
the millage could go up to 10 mills or 5 times as high? When the
other concerned citizens stated that Pelican Bay would
Page 6
April 10, 2001
henceforth have to hire a manager, did you point out that Pelican
Bay already has a manager, Jim Ward, who reports to Ed Kant in
the transportation division? Did you point out that this
commission must still approve the budget of Pelican Bay? And
when other concerned citizens were distraught that the major
work on the ordinance was done while they were in Vermont,
Michigan, Italy, or Aruba, did you point out that the county's own
budget process is also developed during the summer months?
And even now, where are the thousands of disgruntled citizens?
Mr. Brock has called for meetings in Pelican Bay. These
meetings were advertised in the Naples Daily News and on
Channel 44. But yesterday only 15 citizens deemed it of interest
to meet with Mr. Brock. And, also, at last week's MSTBU
meeting at which a preliminary budget with increased
expenditures was discussed, there were less than 20 citizens
present.
The other concerned citizens are worried that a new board
of supervisors may increase our taxes. But do you know that the
average Pelican Bay property owner yearly pays more to the
Pelican Bay Foundation than to the special taxing district and
that the foundation has increased its assessment 125 percent in
the last 3 years without a whimper from the other concerned
citizens?
I know that I am beating a dead horse, but I feel that it is
vital that all of us here in this room take a closer look at
ourselves and see where we have failed, failed in doing our
homework, failed in distributing timely information, failed in not
being honest in dissemination of information, and failed our
friends and neighbors.
On three occasions the advisory board to the MSTBU voted
in favor of the ordinance as they have felt the frustration of not
being able to do for Pelican Bay what they felt was right.
Page 7
April 10, 2001
I believe that all of us here would like to elect a board and
have a manager report to the board. It is up to all of us to join
hands and find the means to do so. I would recommend that you
do not repeal the ordinance, instead suspend -- suspend its
implementation for six months giving all concerned citizens a
chance in concert with Mr. Brock to present mutually acceptable
amendments, then submit the revised ordinance to the citizens
for formal and properly administered referendum. Thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Robert Calder followed by
Ray O'Connor.
MR. CALDER: Good morning, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning.
MR. CALDER: I'm a taxpayer and resident of Pelican Bay.
And recently I've had the privilege of joining a group which Mr.
Brock has encouraged. It's called the committee for harmity --
harmony and unity. And what I might say is a bit redundant, but
we are asking the commissioners and encouraging them to
continue in the good work and the conception that led up to the
passage of 2082.
And with reference to the previous speaker, whether it's
suspended or repealed, we feel our group is coming up with some
good alternatives, and we encourage the commissioners to keep
an open mind, and we would like to present some alternatives
during the summer months and go forward with the original
concept that you had.
We regret that perhaps that the delivery of your aims failed
and weren't properly communicated, perhaps, but we feel that
the work that our group is doing will help alleviate this problem
and we can move forward to elected representation. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Page 8
April 10, 2001
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Ray O'Connor followed by
Peter-- I think it's Gerbosi.
MR. O'CONNOR: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Raymond O'Connor, and I'm the president of Pelican Bay Property
Owners. I come before you this morning because I want to set
some of the record straight. The Naples Daily News is fond of
quoting an overwhelming majority of the people in Pelican Bay as
opposed to this ordinance. They've even gone so far as to
suggest that the Pelican Bay property owners were advancing
the cause of this ordinance without the approval of their
membership. With that in mind I sent out a card, postcard
referendum, to everybody in Pelican Bay that belongs to the
Pelican Bay property owners.
As of six days of returns on these issues -- and there are
five -- I think I had our secretary send you a copy of the -- of the
letter that I sent out in addition to the card with the questions
that were raised. And the most important question for our
consideration this morning is whether or not people want to vote
for their MSTBU. As of yesterday's mail, which I stated was the
sixth day of returns, we have 1158 people voting yes that they
would like to vote for MSTBU representation with 62 people
voting no. I brought the cards to your office. I had the secretary
bring them for you so that you can look to see that the numbers
that I am giving you are correct. I will leave them with the
attorney, and I'd ask you to look at them if you would like, and
then we would collect them back at a later date for our own
records.
When this ordinance was being voted on for repeal as -- as
brought forth by Commissioner Henning, he brought it forward
under the auspices of the -- the KISS proposal: Keep it simple,
stupid. Well, the KISS proposal has another part to it,
Commissioner. I'm a certified social worker from the state of
Page 9
April 10, 2001
New York, and we usually use the KISS proposal in treating of
very complex problems. And what it means is that you take the
problem and you divide it to its simplest components, and you try
to deal with them one by one. You don't bury them or dismiss
them. You don't put them underneath the rug or just throw them
out.
With this ordinance we had four goals in mind. One was to
have an elected board that would expend our monies that we
decided to expend in Pelican Bay.
The second was to have a manager that would be reporting
back to that board so that we would have some control over
what this manager was doing and we would have monthly reports
as to the progress of some of the projects he was working on.
The third item on that agenda of ours was to have some of
the properties that the people in Pelican Bay pay for put it in the
title in the name of the Pelican Bay services district so that that
would show the ownership was to the people who actually paid
for them.
And the fourth item, unfortunately, never came about. That
was to have an election, and only seven people put their names
forward. Eight actually; one withdrew at the last minute. But we
had a community affairs committee that sent to every eligible
voter in Pelican Bay a packet telling them how they could run for
office, the -- the -- everything that they had to do to -- to be
eligible for election, which included either going out by petition
or paying the fees that were stipulated by the board of elections.
Unfortunately, nobody put their name forward. For whatever
reason, we don't know. But it certainly wasn't due to the fact
that they didn't get notice of it, in addition to what notices the
county itself put out. We felt that that would be a referendum as
to whether or not the people approved this ordinance, because,
in addition, what was to happen immediately after that was to be
Page10
April 10, 2001
a referendum on what the taxes should be in Pelican Bay, what
the millage should be, etc., etc. So without a board seating, we
couldn't have that referendum regarding the taxes.
In addition, the infamous Appendix C that was so derided at
the public meeting was to take place by negotiations between
the newly elected board of supervisors and the county itself so
that would be determined which items would be turned over to
this new board of supervisors and which would remain with the
county. So there could be no Appendix C until this process took
place.
So with that in mind, I ask you to look at the components
that were in that ordinance and when you -- it comes back before
you in -- in the fall that you consider the four ma]or things that we
wanted. The rest of the ordinance, as far as we're concerned,
was boilerplate language, what was drawn up by an attorney who
knows how to draw up ordinances. We had no concern with the -
- the bonding and -- and limits on taxes, etc., etc. We wanted
those four ma]or items brought before the public in Pelican Bay,
and that's still our goal, and we hope that that's your goal as
well. And I thank you for listening to me.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: Thank you. The next speaker, I'm -- I think the
name is Peter Gerbosi.
MR. GERBOSI: Close enough.
MR. OLLIFF: Close enough. Followed by Frances Barsh.
MR. GERBOSI: Peter Gerbosi, Willowbrook in Pelican Bay,
resident -- full-time resident.
I'm -- I'm hearing a lot of arguments, and we've heard the
same arguments before. Our argument is not that we're against
electing our own governing body. Our argument is many, many
issues with this ordinance that we find misleading, ambiguous,
and not to our liking. Yes, we formed the citizens' group,
Page 11
April 10, 2001
concerned citizens. And why is because we wanted to have this
brought out into the open so that all residents could be aware of
what's going on. This was voted on in December when most of
the residents were not here. They're asking for a six-month
extension so they can vote again, again when the residents are
not here. And we don't think this is right. And we -- we had a
town hall meeting, and we took votes there, and the votes
overwhelmingly says let's repeal this until we have a chance to
redo it and look at it. Now they send out another ballot. Now,
what are we going to do like election day? Keep counting until
we win? Now that's wrong. We've decided this, it was -- it was
decided by the board, by the commissioners to review this, and I
think we ought to stand by what was decided upon.
I find the fact that Mr. O'Connor says here -- and -- in the
Pelican Bay Post -- and it was quoted -- his words were -- and let
me find that. There was issue, he said, that outside of Mr. Carter
none of the other commissioners cared about Pelican Bay. Well,
I find this offensive for you people and for myself. I think you
commissioners are concerned about everything which goes on
within Collier County, and I think you should continue to be
concerned about it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. The next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Frances Barsh, followed by
Michael Biondo.
MS. BARSH: Good morning. I'm Frances Barsh. I'm a
resident of Pelican Bay. I'm a registered voter of Collier County,
and I am pleased to be speaking with the commissioners again
this morning.
First of all, I want to thank you for listening to the people.
The MSTBU has been functioning extraordinarily well. It is also
recognized as the most economical way of government services -
- delivery of government services. People are satisfied with the
Page 12
April 10, 2001
MSTBU. We are delighted that it is going to come back to that
format. The concerned citizens have always, always been for
election of the members of the board of the MSTBU. However,
we wanted this election to be with the right to vote of the
majority of the people in Pelican Bay, not the minority. The
majority are the property owners that are taxpayers and also the
registered voters. This is an internal thing. It can be done, and
there is no need for any reformulated ordinances. There is no
need for any change of government. It can be done simply,
efficiently, and well. And what can happen is that we can look
forward to -- and work together to effect elections to the MSTBU
board by the majority of the people in Pelican Bay.
It's been a struggle to be heard, but we have to thank
Commissioners Fiala and Commissioner Henning for listening
first to us. And now we thank the other -- and Coletta and
Commissioner Carter for listening to us now today. We hope that
this is repealed simply and well. We thank you for listening to
the people.
This has been a struggle, a struggle, for the people to be
heard. And I just want to quote Thomas Payne. And he said,
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must
undergo the fatigue of supporting it.".
We have just undergone that fatigue, and we have reaped
the blessings of freedom. Thank you. (Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Michael Biondo followed
by Harry Van Benschotten.
MR. BIONDO: My name is Michael Biondo. I don't intend to
be redundant. Frances has just done a very eloquent job of
stating our position. We need no -- we need no longer to waste
the time of the commissioners and those that have been been in
Page 13
April 10, 2001
support to continue this debate at this point of the process. I
simply wanted to thank the commissioners and in particular,
Commissioner Carter, our representative for Pelican Bay, for
acknowledging in a public way the mistake that was made in
November. We appreciate that, Commissioner. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. BIONDO.' That reinstall -- reinstills our trust because all
this has been is about trust and about the democratic process of
the people being heard. Again, our thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
(Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: Harry Van Benschotten will be followed by
Charles Popper.
MR. VAN BENSCHOTTEN: Yes. My name is Harry Van
Benschotten. I submitted my name to speak if I thought it were
necessary. I want to stand and commend the commissioners for
the position that they are -- have taken. I also want to commend
the commissioners for having -- Dwight Brock listen to the
various groups within the community of Pelican Bay, and surely
in a reasonable period of time we will come up with a solution
that will be satisfactory to everybody. But thank you for your
efforts.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: The next speaker is Mr. Popper who will be
followed by your last speaker, Lou Vlasho.
MR. POPPER: Good morning, Commissioners. Charles
Popper, a long-time resident of Pelican Bay, long-time participant
in these type of meetings.
I, too, want to thank the commissioners for their indulgence,
for their -- for the opportunity to come before you to tell our story.
And our story really started, very simply, with the right to vote.
Page 14
April 10, 2001
We have heard a great deal of commentary about the right of the
people to choose their own representative.
One of the things that I think has been really long-time
forgotten has been the right of Pelican Bay to vote and choose
the type of governance that they would like to have had. And I
applaud all of you for now giving us that opportunity, to be heard
and to listen to the people in Pelican Bay.
Not to leave an opportunity undone, I brought here 1426
petitions, and I thought maybe for the time that I have allowed to
speak, I thought we would count them just to make sure that
everybody here was satisfied that there was no skullduggery
here. And I am sure that by the time my time is up, we won't
have that opportunity. I do want to thank --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: In the -- in a court of law they -- in
a court of law the parties can stipulate, and I'd just like to
stipulate.
MR. POPPER: Thank you very much, Commissioner. I was
hoping that somebody would because it took a long time for us to
even count the petitions.
But I do want to thank you all for your indulgence. We've
had a very difficult winter. There's been a lot of acrimony
between both sides, and obviously you people have, the
commission, have been involved in this. And we're delighted that
it now seems that it's going to be over. The ordinance --
ordinance will be repealed. We have always been for the
election. Commissioner Carter, I think that was one of the first
things that we mentioned to you and the process by which this
could be -- take place.
We need a cooling-off period. We really do. I think the
people in Pelican Bay are tired of listening too, probably both
sides. Seventy percent of the people in Pelican Bay will
undoubtedly be leaving for the summer. We would hate to think
Page 15
April 10, 2001
that activity contravening your repeal will take place during that
time. Obviously, we're suspicious. We would like not to be
suspicious. We'd like to have peace and harmony in Pelican Bay.
And I think with Mr. Brock handling these meetings, these four
meetings, and perhaps other meetings, more information can
come out. Could I ask you, please, that -- you know, that we
need a cooling-off period. We need to have an opportunity to
vote for the participants in the MSTBU, and let's get on to living
the lives that we've all worked for, and that's for rest, relaxation,
golf and tennis, at peace and harmony. And with your help, I
think we can accomplish this. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Thank you.
The next speaker, please.
MR. OLLIFF: The last speaker is -- the last speaker is Lou
Vlasho.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's our last speaker?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir.
MR. VLASHO: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Lou Vlasho, 11-year resident of Pelican Bay full time. I am
currently chairman of the MSTBU, and yesterday I was elected to
my fifth term as president of the presidents' council, so I'm not
going anywhere in spite of what happens here today.
I'm speaking for myself. Everyone gets concerned. I am
who I am, and I represent what I am, and my comments this
morning are my personal comments.
As I thought about today, I really said I had three things I
could do with the commissioners: First, I could not show up, say
it's a done deal, why waste my time and your time. And maybe
that would have been the best thing to do. Or I could come as a
conciliator and say, well, we fought the fight, everything's fine,
let's get back together, go ahead, rescind the ordinance, you're
Page 16
April 10, 2001
on the right track. As the chairman knows, at least six, eight
months ago, I -- I initiated such an approach, and it was decided
that wasn't the way to go. And I -- I decided on the third course,
which is, if you think you're right, stay the course.
In thinking about the comments that I might make to you,
without being redundant and repeating everything, I thought that
my letter that I issued addressed all the issues. I thought that
my modestly -- I will say my presentation at the March 11th
Sunday meeting was a professional, concise -- and dealt with all
the points. Unfortunately, not very many people listened. But
the Lord will provide. And yesterday a gentleman that I know
casually through some associations gave me a copy of a letter
that he had sent to the editor of the newspaper on March 23rd. I
don't think it was -- it was printed. And I'd like to read his
comments. He gave me his permission. His name is V.A. -- Vito --
and I can't even pronounce his name. That's well I -- how well I
know him -- Sudeleezi (phonetic).
And it starts with, county comm -- county commissioners are
about to rescind the ordinance they unanimously adopted last
November. So much for political courage in the face of a vocal
minority aided by your editorials. For the past 12 years I have
been involved in condominium affairs at Pelican Bay and
hopefully gained some insight to the views of my neighbors. I
had no part in promoting Ordinance 2082. But, in my opinion, it
provides a better definition of the governing rules that the
current municipal services tax benefit unit -- than that particular
group. A stronger elected board of supervisors is preferable to
the presently appointed advisory committee. The ordinance does
not confer the power of unlimited taxation to the new board but
conversely the taxation cap would be reduced from the current
value.
A number of dedicated people in this community familiar
Page 17
April 10, 2001
with our district budgets and important issues have compri --
contributed to this document, and it was reviewed by the county.
None of these activities happened in secrecy, and many of us
who have an interest in the future of Pelican Bay knew about it.
It is well-known business ax -- it is well known as -- as a business
axiom that at least 20 percent of the people never get the word,
even with the best communication. And these folks usually
complain the loudest when some action is taken not to their
liking.
This ordinance is a realignment of existing functions totally
within the jurisdiction of the county government and is not the
creation of a new city. The town hall meetings -- the town hall
meeting about this matter on March 11th was attended by about
12,000 -- 1200 people constituting less than 10 percent of the
population and turned out to be a disaster with the county
moderator losing control to the loud opponents who continue to
plug their scared los -- Iogans (phonetic) leaving no time for
audience participation, end question. The final farce was a
straw vote with the opponents orchestrating their own ballots
with no logical basis either by registration or household unit.
Ordinance -- ordinance similar to 2002 -- 2082 will eventually
be enacted simply because it is what is needed. But with this
polarization of views, not many competent people will be
stepping up to the leadership as evidenced already by the
shortage of candidates for this proposed board.
I sug -- then the comment goes to the editor, so I won't read
that.
Today we have -- we heard about 1400 votes. We hear about
eleven hun -- 1158 votes, and what do we assume about the other
10,000 people in Pelican Bay? We can assume several things:
They might be in favor. They might be against. Or we could say
they deferred to the leadership.
Page 18
April 10, 2001
Over the last several months the concerned citizens have
presented a -- a lot of rhetoric, most of it geared at confusion and
not getting to the issue. One of the things that I do agree with
them on very strongly is the work of the MSTBU. It is made up of
capable and competent individuals, and they have served you
well as your advisory board. Your advisory board does and has
done a good job. Every time they have come to you with a
request and advice, this commissioner and -- this commission
and previous commissions have followed their advice. You
always follow their advice. Your advisory board on three
separate occasions has voted in favor of this ordinance. One of
the votes was a recommendation that you approve the
ordinance, which you did. Thank you for following their advice.
Their latest vote was a vote recommending against rescinding
this ordinance. Commissioners, please do not take the easy
political way out. Please reconsider the advice of your advisory
board, and do not let this be the first time that you don't heed
their advice. Thank you very much. (Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. All right. Commissioners,
you have heard -- that was the last speaker. MR. OLLIFF: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Are there any other speakers on
consent or summary agenda today?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Tom.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Tom?
MR. OLLIFF: No.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you. Commissioners,
you've heard all the deliberation this morning. You know the
work that Dwight Brock's doing. This issue has cause me
enormous pain and stress, not only on me but my family. I am
deeply involved in my community. My political senses would
Page 19
April 10, 2001
have said stay the hell out of it, let them struggle with it, let
them come up with some kind of conclusion. But I believe too
much of my community to allow that to happen. So I got
overinvolved. If that is an error in my judgment, then that's -- I
will publicly admit that. But I love my community, and that's all
of my community, not only Pelican Bay, but this county. And I
always try to do the best that I possibly know how. So I'm
hoping out of this we've all learned something. I learned an
enormous amount from this. I have a checklist now. Nothing
comes to me that doesn't go through all the divisions within the
county that are affected by it. And that means it goes through
legal counsel. It goes to the other constitutional officers
because I do not want to see these board members or future
boards to go through this kind of a painful experience. We need
to make sure that we have it all before we take action on it. So
that's a challenge to us. (Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So I thank you-all. You-all are strong.
You-all have what you believe in, and I admire all of you for it.
And with that, ladies and gentlemen of the board, I am going
to call for approval of the -- we have the motion to approve and
the second. I'm going to call it. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. The
motion carries, thank you very much.
Page 20
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
April 10, 2001
ADD: ITEM #9(A): Settlement offer of $10,000 in the case of Maxie D.
Holmes v. Collier County, Case No. 2:00-CV-262-FTM-2929DNF. (County
Attorney)
CONTINUE: ITEM #10(D) INDEFINITELY: Discussion regarding exemption
of not-for-profit medical facilities under impact fee ordinance.
ADD: ITEM #10(E): Reconsideration of a.qenda item 9(B) of the BCC March
27, 2001 Public Meetin_cl. Request for Board direction regarding Section
163.3215, FLA. Stat., verified complaint from Vanderbilt Shores
Condominium Association, Inc., Vanderbilt Club Condominium
Association, Inc., The Mansions Condominium Association, Inc., Gulf Cove
Condominium Association, Inc., and Vanderbilt Beach and Bay
Association, Inc., challenging the County's approval of SDP-2000-108 for
the Vanderbilt Beachcomber Resort as inconsistent with the County's
Comprehensive Plan. (Commissioner Carter)
MOVE: ITEM 16(A)2 to ITEM 8(A)3: Authorize the Collier County Natural
Resources Director to apply for current and future derelict vessel removal
grants. (Commissioner Coletta)
MOVE: ITEM 16(A)10 to ITEM 8(A)4: Award Of Bid #01-3209 for artificial
reef construction. (Commissioner Coletta)
DELETE: ITEM 16(E)3: Recommendation to award Bid No. 01-3201 pump
and motor repair for County-wide maintenance of equipment. (Staff)
ADD: ITEM 16(F)2: Direct and authorize the County Manager to create a
separate pay grade and classification group for EMS field personnel.
(Staff)
MOVE: ITEM 16(L) TO 9(B): Approve the settlement in Bonita Grande Sand
v. Collier County, Case No. 99-2081-CA, now pending in the Twentieth
Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, pursuant to which the
County would pay $10,000 and convey to Bonita Grande Sand Company,
Title to the sand currently being stored at Bonita Grande Sand and all
claims against the County would be dismissed with prejudice. Said
settlement was arrived at during settlement negotiations.
April 10, 2001
Item #4
MINUTES OF THE MARCH 9, 2001 STRATEGIC PLANNING
WORKSHOP, MARCH 13, 2001 REGULAR MEETING AND MARCH
16, 2001 GROWTH MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP - APPROVED AS
PRESENTED
We will now move to approval of the minutes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I make a motion to approve the
minutes of the workshop on March 9th, the regular meeting on
March 13th, and the workshop on March 16th.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie, a second by Commissioner Fiala to approve the
minutes. All in favor signify by saying aye. (Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. The
motion carries.
Item #5A1
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING APRIL 27TM AND 28TM AS RELAY
FOR LIFE WEEKEND - ADOPTED
It moves us to proclamations and service awards. So as all
the folks are exiting this morning and the news cameras and the
media jump to the hall for the last comments, we will move
forward with proclamations, the first being by Commissioner
Donna Fiala on the Relay for Life Weekend.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Steve Wheeler from the
cancer society, American Cancer Society, would you come up?
Page 21
April 10, 2001
I'd like to read this and then maybe ask you for a couple
comments.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Before we do that, ladies and
gentlemen, please, please, be quiet as you exit.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm going to wait just a minute,
Steve --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah. Wait just a minute.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- until the noise settles down.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: They can have their love fest in the
hall.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Whereas, on April 27th
and 28th of the year 2001, the American Cancer Society will hold
Relay for Life in Collier County as a money-raising team effort to
help prevent cancer and to support those battling cancer with
this life-threatening disease; and, whereas, dollars from Relay for
Life provide patients with programs and services in our
community in addition to funding cancer research; and, whereas,
participants from teams take turns on the track in shifts of 30
minutes to 2 hours; and, whereas, the Relay for Life opens as
cancer survivors walk or run the first lap, which is an emotional
time and sets the stage for the importance of the event; and,
whereas, during the Relay for Life, a luminary service is held to
honor survivors and to remember those who lost the battle
against cancer, and the luminaries are left burning throughout
the night to remind participants of the importance of this
contribution; and, whereas, Collier County government
employees will be supporting the Relay for Life with their own
team and encourage the community to loin in Relay for Life
activities.
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Collier County Board
of Commissioners hereby declares and proclaims April 27th and
28th, 2001, as Relay for Life Weekend and urges all citizens to
Page 22
April 10, 2001
become familiar with this very worthwhile event. Done and
ordered this 10th day of April.
And, of course, it affects my family very closely. Thank you,
Steve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do we have a motion to approve?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So moved.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The motion then being approved and
Motion approved.
seconded, all in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Congratulations.
(Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Thank you.
Step up here, sir. We have a
proclamation for you; then make a few comments. Turn around
and wave to TV-land and we'll see you. There you go. Okay. Thank you, sir.
Mr. WHEELER: I would like to make just a few comments.
And -- and, first of all, thank you so much for the jobs that you
people do each day. Being here this morning has made me feel
good about what I do in this community. And reading this
morning's newspaper has made me feel so proud to accept this
from you, Donna, knowing that this disease has touched
someone in your family.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hmm.
MR. WHEELER: Again, I -- I feel so proud about the job that I
do every day. We've provided services to 12,000 people in Collier
County last year with -- with cancer. This event is number one in
the State of Florida, and we're so proud of that, and we fight this
fight for people like you and your family member who's -- who's
fighting cancer and encourage all of you to join us April 27th for
Page 23
April 10, 2001
the survivors' walk where we honor those people that are
surviving with cancer and participate in the Relay for Life. Thank
you so much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for all the worthwhile
things you do in our community, Steve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, I think, everyone here probably
has personal stories about that. I currently have three friends
that are battling that -- that fight today. I have two out of three
that I know have won the good fight. The third one is standing
his own, so it's just a wonderful thing that we're all -- all working
on, and it's -- you're doing a great job. Thank you.
MR. WHEELER: Thank you so much.
Item #5A2
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING "THE CONSERVANCY OF
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA AS EARTH DAY HEADQUARTERS IN
COLLIER COUNTY" - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next proclamation is the Conservancy
of Southwest Florida as Earth Day Headquarters in Collier County
to be accepted by Mr. Joe Cox, manager of the Naples Nature
Center and the Conservancy of Southwest Florida, presented by
Pamela Mac'Kie.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I see some other Conservancy
representatives. I hope you'll all just come here and stand here
in front of the dais while we read the --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Stand and face the cameras and wave
to Mom and Dad.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This is a really fun one for me, so
I'll start the reading. Whereas, on Saturday, April 21st, numerous
Page 24
April 10, 2001
nonprofit organizations, area businesses, and government
entities will come together to celebrate environmental
stewardship and to promote a cleaner, greener Collier County
and a wealth of biodiversity; and, whereas, this day-long
celebration reflects a year-round commitment to protecting our
natural resources for today and tomorrow; and, whereas, Earth
Day activities will showcase educational exhibits, environmental
information, entertainment and fun; and, whereas, participating
organizations and individuals are to be commended for joining in
the celebration of Earth Day as a special time to unite people in
pursuit of The Conservancy's environmental conservation efforts;
and, whereas, The Conservancy of Southwest Florida is serving
as the host organization of this community-wide celebration and
for 37 years has taken the lead in protecting and sustaining
southwest Florida's natural resources.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that The Conservancy
of Southwest Florida be designated as Earth Day headquarters.
Done and ordered this 10th day of April, 2001, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, James Carter, chairman.
I would like to move that we accept this proclamation.
(A chorus of seconds.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We've got a pair of triple seconds. All
in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
(Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
seconded it.
Motion carries.
We will take -- Commissioner Fiala
MR. COX: Again, good morning. I'd like to thank all of the
commission -- commissioners very much for this. It definitely
means a lot for The Conservancy to be recognized as our Earth
Page 25
April 10, 2001
Day headquarters. Earth Day rec is important to everyone in
Collier County, everyone in Florida. And by doing this, we're
trying to bring together as many people as possible in one place
so the public can really get a feel, what's going on and learn
about how they can make a difference in our community.
The Earth Day event is going to be April 21st from 9 a.m. To
4:30 p.m. You can come to the Naples Nature Center for free, the
Briggs Nature Center for free. You guys are all invited. Everyone
in Collier County, Southwest Florida, is invited. It's going to be a
whole lot of different environmental groups there, an eco carnival
for kids. You can come and buy native plants, come and get an
environmental haircut, a very good deal on an environmental
haircut.
We're being sponsored by some great organizations, so
please come along on April 21st, 9 a.m. To 4:30 p.m. If everyone
is interested in participating, please call The Conservancy for
more information. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you.
Item #5A3
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING APRIL 10TM AS "WORLD TENNIS
CLUB~ INC. APPRECIATION DAY"-ADOPTED
Okay. I have the third proclamation this morning. It is World
Tennis Club, Inc., Appreciation Day. Miss Valerie Stolts is the
general manager. If she's here, would you come up this morning
all the way to the front if you would, Valerie. Turn around and --
MS. STOLTZ: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- face the cameras. Let them all know
who you are.
Whereas, the World Tennis Club, Inc., is a gated residential
community situated on approximately 83 acres with
Page 26
April 10, 2001
condominiums, villas, and single-family home offering 5 lakes, 16
tennis courts, 2 pools and a poolside cafe; and, whereas, the
World Tennis Club, Inc., is conveniently located in the center of
the Naples urban area; and whereas, the entrance road to the
World Tennis Club, Inc., includes a privately owned bridge which
spans a drainage canal; and, whereas, the county had an urgent
need to provide a pipe across the drainage canal in the
immediate vicinity of the World Tennis Club, Inc., bridge; and,
whereas, in addition to being a wonderful place to live and
recreate, the World Tennis Club, Inc., has also demonstrated a
spirit of community by their unselfish willingness to grant Collier
County a temporary easement for allowing the bridge to be used
to support a emergency sewer piping interconnect between the
city and the county sewer system.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that April 10th, 2001,
be designated as World Tennis Club, Inc., Appreciation Day and
that the gratitude and appreciation is extended to the residents,
members, guests, staff, volunteers, and the board members of
the World Tennis Club, Inc. Done and ordered this 10th day of
April, 2001, Board of County Commissioners, Collier County,
Florida, James D. Carter, Ph.D., chairman.
I move for approval of this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have an approval. I have a second by
Commissioner Mac'Kie. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed, same sign. The motion
carries.
Thank you so much for helping us.
(Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. You did not in any way
Page 27
April 10, 2001
extract -- extract a pound of flesh for doing it. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Just good neighbors.
Item #5B1
BOB MULHERE, PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTED PRESENTED
TWELVE YEAR AWARD
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Before we do the service
awards -- and we value all of our employees who have worked so
hard for us and we will recognize this morning -- I have a special
pleasure to recognize a gentleman who has been with us for 12
years in our planning services department. Ever since I have
been a commissioner, this gentleman has worked diligently in
that ]ob, been of enormous help to me, as I know he has to other
commissioners in guiding us and assisting us in this whole land
use agenda that's always in front of us, from the no -- from the
regular activities we have to work with in our growth
management plan to the challenges we have for -- had to deal
with because of the orders from the governor and the cabinet.
He has been there every step of the way for us and has given us
just 110 percent effort in these activities.
And Mr. Bob Mulhere, I would like you to come forward this
morning because in appreciation for your 12 years of dedication
and commitment to the Collier County planning services
department, it is my pleasure to give you this award and our
heartfelt thanks, and we're so sorry to lose you, but thank God
you're staying in the community.
MR. MULHERE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Bob.
(Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, sir. The microphone is yours
Page 28
April 10, 2001
after 12 years of service.
MR. MULHERE: Well, this is a huge surprise, and I'm almost
speechless.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Almost, Robert.
MR. MULHERE: I guess I -- I would be remiss if I just didn't
didn't take a quick opportunity to express my gratitude to all of
the employees that I've had the pleasure of working with over
the past 12 years. I was talking with Tom, and I mentioned that,
you know, there would be no way that I could afford to pay for
the education that I received over the past 12 years. And I know
how hard so many of these employees work, and I also know how
hard each of you work collectively because I've had pleasure of
working very closely with all of you.
We are really very truly fortunate in this county. And I would
just like to pledge that I would -- even though I'm leaving county
employment, I'm still available to -- to participate in -- in county
government in any way that I can from a private sector
perspective. And thanks again.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. And thank you.
(Applause).
Item #5B2
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS - PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. We will step to the floor as
our-- our policy. And we're going to do service awards. And
county manager, Tom Olliff, will read off the names, and I'll hand
out the pins and certificates.
MR. OLLIFF: Commissioners, as you're working your way
down to the floor, I'd go ahead and call -- our first recipient this
morning is Guy Hall with your domestic animal services
Page 29
April 10, 2001
department. He's been with the county for five years.
(Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I thank you so much.
MR. HALL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: A pin to add to your other pin.
MR. OLLIFF: Amazingly enough, Mr. Chairman, it has been
ten years. And Tom Palmer from the county attorney's office is
celebrating his anniversary this morning.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Boy, time flies when you're having fun,
doesn't it, Tom? (Applause).
MR. OLLIFF: We've got the pleasure this morning of having
some long-time veterans recognized this morning: Peter Bolton,
your EMS pilot, has been with us for 15 years. (Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Peter, it's been a pleasure. I've had a
chance to fly with Peter.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I don't know that I've ever seen
this one before, but we've actually got six 20-year recipients this
morning, and that -- that may be a first in the 17 years I've been
here. William Peplinski from EMS has been with us for 20 years.
(Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much for all your hard
work.
MR. OLLIFF: The next recipient is Deborah Lichliter from
EMS.
(Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Boy, they must love that division.
Thank you. Thank you so much, Captain.
MR. OLLIFF: The next recipient is Ricardo Garcia, also from
EMS.
(Applause).
Page 30
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
MR. GARCIA:
MR. OLLIFF:
(Applause).
Thank you so much, sir.
Thank you.
Also 20 years with EMS, Jeff Page.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Jeff Page, thanks so much.
MR. PAGE: Thank you.
0MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I also need to point out that all
six of your recipients, they are all with the EMS department. The
next is David Joseph with EMS. (Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No wonder we're first in the nation.
What -- thank you so much.
MR. OLI. IFF: And, finally, your last 20-year recipient this
morning is Tom McGuire also with EMS. (Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Tom.
MR. McGUIRE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If they all go out and decide to party
today, I don't know what we're going to do.
MR. OLLIFF: That's all your awards this morning. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you.
Item #7A
REQUEST BY DYREL DELANEY TO HAVE THE BCC CONSIDER
THE MATTER OF HOME STORM SHELTERS - PETITIONER TO
MEET WITH COMMISSIONER COLETTA AND BRING
INFORMATION BACK TO THE BOARD (CONSENSUS)
MR. OLLIFF.' Mr. Chairman, while you-all are getting seated,
the next item on your agenda this morning is -- is actually public
Page 31
April 10, 2001
petitions. I'll go ahead and ask Mr. Delaney if he would make his
way to the podium.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: How much time does each person
have, Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF: Under public petition your policy has been ten
minutes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. DELANEY: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Dyrel Delaney. I'm here this morning to address the matter of
what I call home storm shelters. It's a crusade I've been on for
now roughly two years, and I haven't been very successful. And I
thought this morning that I would just get the input of the
commissioners. To get a home shelter as -- as I envision, it will
require a variance. No one wants to give up a bedroom of their
house, not me nor anyone that I know of. But I still believe it's a
contribution to the community that's worth me plugging forward
on. And having laid that foundation, I'd like to ask Commissioner
Carter, could you talk with me a little bit? What is your thoughts
about a home storm shelter? What are your thoughts that in
case of a disaster, tornado, or hurricane or whatever, what
preparations that you've made to protect your family? Can I ask?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If you're having asking how I feel
about shelters in general in the home, I think it's -- it would be
hard for anyone to argue against it. I think I've taken personal
precautions of my own family, do the best that I can as far as
supplies, etc. I've been and listened to your presentation before.
I have met with you. I understand your -- your concept and what
you would like to do. Whether or not it is feasible and whether it
can be done, sir, I don't know. That would be the pleasure of the
-- of the board.
MR. DELANEY: Okay. I would to get each one's inpit (sic).
The things that I'm wondering, do you have -- if there's
Page 32
April 10, 2001
debris piled on top of your -- do you have a pry bar in your family,
a pry bar ?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could I -- could I just open here
and tell you, you know, God bless you. It's Para Mac'Kie, up here
at the front, sir. The speaker is behind you, so it sounds like a
voice from behind, but it's me.
I appreciate that you want -- you know, you are -- you have a
very important issue that you're bringing to people's attention.
And if you wanted to work with our emergency management
department and have them, you know, post on Channel 54 or
suggestions, ideas, you know, because your -- your mission is a
good one. As far as county commissioners, I will tell you having
been on the board for six years, we don't get to do anything
during an emergency but show up down here. MR. DELANEY: I understand that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we stay here, and we eat
stale sandwiches and do what has to be done down here. MR. DELANEY: I understand.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And -- and the arrangements I
make for my family is for people to get them out of town, if
appropriate. Frankly, we -- we don't have much of an opportunity
to do a lot of home storm protection planning because our duties
are here so --
MR. DELANEY: I understand what you're saying,
Commissioner, but may I make this point? The very essence of
government is the power in the hands of a few that control the
many. Now, I cannot get a home storm shelter because of the
power. The power has the power to stop men. There's nothing I
can do about that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, when we talked about this
before -- because you came before, I think, on a public petition.
MR. DELANEY: Yes, I have.
Page 33
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we encouraged you to go
ahead and work with staff. And what happened?
MR. DELANEY: The staff stopped me.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Why?
MR. DELANEY: Well -- okay. Let's -- let's --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Staff?
MR. DELANEY: -- address that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Maybe we could hear from staff
on why this happened.
MR. DELANEY: Not me. It's my soapbox.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes, sir.
MR. DELANEY: It's my soapbox, and the soapbox is still
more powerful than the gavel.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I want to help you, because
we told you when you were here before -- it was the former board
-- we thought this was a good idea.
MR. DELANEY: What is the great decision-making power of
letting people have the right to protect their own family? Now,
here is my rejection. I can get an accessory building if I detach
it 10 feet from my house. Here is my rejection: The standard
practice of requiring at least 10 feet of open space to the rear of
the residential properties is too important in terms of community
aesthetics to violate that space.
I contend that I do not want a horm -- storm shelter that I
have to go out the door in -- in a storm. I want to be able to enter
it from my house. All I need is 8 feet. I'd like to address
collectively the three new commissioners that we have. We have
a rare opportunity of the three of you being together. You have
the balance of power, you. Now, the people have elected you to
lead. They want you to give them leadership, something they
can follow.
One commissioner coming on it now at any time by himself
Page 34
April 10, 2001
does not stand a chance. And the -- all the nice things that you
say here are one thing. But you get out in that power, you get
out into that Horseshoe Drive, and you do not stand a chance.
Commissioners, I'm asking you to give the people leadership. If
you do what you always done, you will get what you always got.
Now, all it takes -- none of you can get a storm shelter until I can
get one. No one in this room can get one until I get one. All I'm
asking is a variance of 10 feet or 8 feet that I can build a storm
shelter connected to my residence on my property. If I wanted to
build a swimming pool, I can put concrete blocks, an elevated
swimming pool 10 feet high as long as there is a swimming pool
at the top of it. Does this make sense? Can you help us make
sense out of something like this? What is the big deal that we
have to go through every power before we can get something to
protect our own family? I asked to you give us leadership. I
would -- Mr. Henning, would you please make a nomination that I
get a permit to build a home storm shelter? And Mr. Coletta and
Fiala, please second it. You have the power. Let's do it and see
what happens.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Delaney, if I may interject a
couple of comments here, one, I do take a very personal interest
in emergency management even before I was a commissioner. I
was involved in different workshops and went to conventions
with Ken Pineau. And as a commissioner, I've been away already
for one week of training, plan to go back again in October so I
can have a meaningful part of emergency.
I know what you're talking about when you're talking about
emergency home shelters, but I don't think I can dialogue with
you in the few minutes you've got left. I'd like very much for you
to make an appointment, come to my office so I can talk to you
more about it. I know about the concept, and I was going to
mention that in our planning review sessions to see if we might
Page 35
April 10, 2001
be able to incorporate it in coastal homes, as far as a safe room.
MR. DELANEY: It's -- Commissioner, I appreciate what
you're saying, and -- and I -- and I'm very appreciative. It has
been studied and shelved to death. I just think that it doesn't
need all of this. If we want to build a storm shelter anyplace in
the country, a person can go out in their backyard and dig a
cellar. You can't do that here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're right, Mr. Delaney. You
can't. You got to go through the government process. Maybe we
need to make it a little user friendly. But as far as me coming
out and supporting you to be able to do it over staff's
recommendations, it won't happen at this meeting.
MR. DELANEY: And this, again, is -- is it's your chance. You
have three new commissioners to put your stamp -- this is where
you want the county to go. The people have elected you so that
they have somebody to follow. And that's what they're asking. It
does not need -- I have a site -- a plan. I've invested money. And
I just think that things like a pry bar, a backboard, a gas-powered
generator, a chain saw would be immensely helpful in a disaster.
Who is going to come out and do all of these things if your family
is laying under debris? And I submit to you that this is worthy
now of taking action on.
I can tell you now it will die right here unless I have beat it
to death for two years. I request one of you make a motion to
give me a permit. If I can get one, we can crack that. Anybody
then, all it takes is to start getting pry bars, chain saws,
backboards, and we don't need anymore county government.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But we need you to go through --
we need you to go through the process of applying for a variance,
and then we'll have the opportunity to vote on --
MR. DELANEY: I've already tried, and I can't get any -- I
can't get any satisfaction. This is my last stand. I believe it's
Page 36
April 10, 2001
worthy of attention.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I need to hear from staff about
whether or not an application for a variance has been submitted.
MR. MULHERE: No, ma'am. Bob Mulhere for the record,
planning services director. No application for variance has been
submitted. I have not met directly with Mr. Delaney; however,
staff has. There's really no argument here with the concept and
the benefits. The question is whether or not we wish to
indescriminately across the board allow for these structures to
be placed within the setback -- the 10-foot setback, rear-yard
setback, that applies to principal and accessory structures.
That's your -- basically your clear area back there. We don't
think that's good public policy.
There probably are ways to resolve this, either through a
land code amendment with specifications or on a case-by-case
basis with variance. I don't think the variance process is the
best way to address this issue. And I also feel that the planning
staff would be at a disadvantage without having had input from
emergency management. And -- and I'm not sure where -- you
know, where we stand with that. I'd be happy to coordinate --MR. DELANEY: What is the rationale -- what is the
rationale that I can get an accessory building if it's 10 feet out?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Delaney, public petition allows you
the opportunity to present your case first -- MR. DELANEY: I understand.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- then -- then we can give staff
direction. We won't make a decision on this this morning. I will
not entertain a motion or support a motion because I can't. So -- MR. DELANEY: And, Commissioner Carter, I appreciate -- I
can't get it approved?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All I can tell you is you got to -- Mr.
Delaney, you've had an offer of one commissioner to meet with
Page 37
April 10, 2001
you privately. The director of planning services has said, you
know, we will meet, and we'll discuss it. Maybe it takes a land
development code change. We don't have an input from
emergency management services. Until we have all of that, sir, I
don't know what -- I know what you want. But we can't give that
to you this morning.
MR. DELANEY: Then I -- and I -- and I appreciate the
deadlock we're in. But this is -- the real world is out there. You
try getting through the power, and you don't do it. I mean, I
under -- I sit here, and I watch you, and you do a nice ]ob. And
it's fed to you. But it's not the real world when you go out and
start dealing with the power structure. They -- the first ]ob of
theirs is to say no, period. I don't understand the rationale that I
can build a -- an accessory building 10 feet away, but I can't with
an engineer's drawing and a plan. I live in over a million-dollar
house. Certainly I'm going to build a structure that will blend in
with the roof line, that it will have two means of access. It will
have an access from the outside and inside. It will have facilities
in it that will withstand any storm. I want to be in on developing
the code for a storm shelters. It's not something that I just want.
I have set on almost any -- every commission in the county.
I've been coming here since 1975. Commissioner Fiala, I sat
right there where you're sitting for almost a year on the board of
code enforcements. And I have watched the people struggle
against the power, and they're helpless.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sir, that -- that may be your valid
opinion that you're sharing with us this morning. I could find a
lot of people who would disagree with you, and that is not the
point of your presentation this morning.
I think we have heard you. We will take a look at -- you can
have private meetings with commissioners. We can look at Land
Development Code changes. You can meet with planning
Page 38
April 10, 2001
services staff, but we cannot do anything further but to say thank
you this morning. We have heard you, and you have a course of
action that you may take.
Any commissioner who would like to volunteer to do
anything further, but I have to say as the chair and having set
here with other chairs, it's -- it's -- a petition is a petition.
MR. DELANEY: Mr. Fi -- Mr. Coletta, would you speak to me?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir.
MR. DELANEY: Do you have anything -- I mean, what are
your thoughts?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'd like very much to meet
with you to talk to you about it, because I -- I did do some study
about safe rooms, and I would like to see what your concept is
and share with you what I know.
MR. DELANEY: Commissioner Fiala, do you have any
thoughts ?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just wondering why -- you
know, I'm the kind of a person who always has to research
everything, I'm sure as every other commissioner on this board.
And so I've only heard one side. I need to hear the other side. I
need to understand it more before I could go further. And, of
course, I -- I couldn't make a motion for anything without
knowing -- .
MR. DELANEY: I understand. Well, I -- I want your --
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I would hope that you would
meet with Commissioner Coletta who has had some extensive
training and interest in public safety.
MR. DELANEY: Does it sound like something --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And -- may I finish, please.
MR. DELANEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if Commissioner Coletta
Page 39
April 10, 2001
wants to bring this back to us for discussion, I'm here with open
ears.
MR. DELANEY: But the idea that there's not a backboard,
there's not a pry bar, anything to dig people, I just think it's
something that is waiting to happen, and that's my -- I appreciate
your time. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you, sir.
Item #7B
KENNETH B. CUYLER, REPRESENTING FRIENDSHIP HOUSE,
REQUESTING CONTRIBUTION TO COVER FEES - CODE
ENFORCEMENT DIRECTED TO STOP ALI. ACTIVITIES FOR FOUR
MONTHS TO GIVE FRIENDSHIP HOUSE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
OBTAIN A DONATED ALTERNATIVE IMPACT FEE STUDY
(CONSENSUS)
The next petition, Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLIFF: The next public petition is from Ken Cuyler
representing the Immokalee Friendship House.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is that -- Mr. Coletta, that you will
meet with Mr. Delaney and coordinate?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I will be more than happy to.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I -- and we will look for your direction
to bring this back to the board, and I -- I personally thank you, as
the other commissioners do.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Cuyler.
MR. CUYLER: Good morninging, commissioners. I'm here on
behalf of the Friendship House, which you know is located in
Immokalee. I am not -- they are not a client. I am not an
attorney for them. I'm here pro bono. And if you want to know
what that means, you can ask Commissioner Mac'Kie. But I am
Page 40
April 10, 2001
very happy to be here on behalf of the Friendship House. There
are a number of volunteer board of directors members; I'm one of
those.
Friendship House has run into an issue and -- and for us a
serious challenge. You may know that the Friendship House is
located right on Immokalee -- Main Street in Immokalee. They
have purchased the property next to them. The board of
directors decided that it would be appropriate to purchase that
property and put a thrift shop there. There were really two
purposes, one of which is the existing building is in disrepair. It's
a bit of an eyesore. The Friendship House board of directors
committed to the county, because it was under code
enforcement review and -- and code enforcement was being very
kind in -- in providing some time. But once the Friendship House
purchased that piece of property, they took on the responsibility
of carrying those code violations which they didn't cause, but
they -- they did want to cure them. We have a volunteer
contractor that's come in. There's been a lot of volunteer work.
Everything's being done at cost. We had a volunteer architect
come in and -- and do some plans at a very reduced price. We
came in to get a permit for the renovations to that property in
order to make it a thrift shop, and although we're willing to and
able to pay the building permit fees, we've been told there's
$8,000 in impact fees, EMS, jail, and road impact fees. That's a
serious problem for the Friendship House. We really don't have
the funds to do that. As you know, Friendship House provides
temporary emergency homeless shelter, which is obviously a
social service and is a help to the community and is one thing
that the government doesn't have to worry about, at least with
regard to the Friendship House. There is no contribution to the
Friendship House. They work on private funds that are donated,
as well as whatever grants they can get from -- from the state.
Page 41
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May -- may I interrupt you?
MR. CUYLER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I -- does Friendship House also
provide something in the way of hurricane shelter for -- would you
please elaborate on that, too, because I want to establish a -- a
community need, a community service that's here. You might be
able to go into that also. We just got through talking about
hurricane shelter.
MR. CUYLER: Right. In -- in addition to the other community
service that it provides in terms of -- of the emergency day-to-day
homeless shelter, it has also been -- I think it's the only facility in
the county, if I'm not mistaken, that has been certified as a -- an
emergency shelter for hurricanes and -- and the like.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So people from the coastal
region, you know, would be able to go in case of a hurricane?
MR. CUYLER: Correct, correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And how much money did they
receive from the county for this hurricane shelter? Do you know?
MR. CUYLER: I believe they received zero.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How much have they received to
help out with the homeless people that come there for aid? MR. CUYLER: I belive zero to date.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What has the county given to
Friendship House in the past to perform the services that they do
do?
MR. CUYLER: I don't be -- believe there's been a monetary
contribution. There probably have been county staff members
that have donated some time out there from time to time, just as
we all have. But I don't think there's ever been a contribution in -
- in terms of money. And I've spoken to your manager briefly, and
I think managers will take the position that -- even though Mr.
Olliff, I think, is an excellent manager and does -- does a very
Page 42
April 10, 2001
good job, I think managers take the position that managers take,
and that is, you know, you need to budget this as part of your
normal budgeting process, and all good managers will tell you
that. But you know and -- and, frankly, I'm not talking to new
commissioners. You've all been through your trials by fire. It's
now April, so there are no new commissioners on board anymore.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right. Great, we're all old.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We're older than others.
MR. CUYLER: You -- you know that -- that things come up,
both in terms of county business and in terms of private things.
And, you know, they're not budgeted. We're talking about $8,000.
We -- we understand there's not any line item for this. But
emergencies and -- and things that are not planned do come up.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could I -- could I lump in here
because I -- I would love to, you know, abolish impact fees for
social service agencies? I'd love to see the county fund --
frankly, probably a more appropriate way to fund some of the
social service functions that are performed in this county would
be to fund them directly rather than whoever happens to be
building something gets an impact fee waiver. That troubles me,
because I'm not sure why today Friendship House should get
$8,000 and St. Matthews House should not get $8,000 or
something similar. That piece worries me.
But even setting that aside for a moment -- and please hear
me. My emphasis is on that we should be supporting these
agencies, but we should be doing it in an across-the-board, more
well-reasoned way than just who happens to be building
something. But if the board is going to consider any kind of an
impact fee waiver, you know, what that really means is that the
general taxpayer pays the impact fee. We don't have the
authority to waive it. It doesn't go away.
And in this case if -- if a majority is looking at this, I wish
Page 43
April 10, 2001
that we would first do an alternate impact -- impact fee study,
because I can't imagine that there's $8,000 worth of traffic
impact by a -- a shelter's shop, thrift shop right next door, where I
could only imagine that most of the traffic's going to be the
volunteers who work there. I bet we could get some kind of a
stipulation from them that they would park in the parking lot of
the Friendship House and, you know, leave -- you know, there
would be ways to work around -- if -- what I wish you guys were
doing was getting some con -- some consultant out there to give
you a free impact fee study, an alternate calculation study. And
then I think what you'd come in here with is maybe a request for
a couple thousand dollars or maybe you could get a private donor
to pay a couple thousand dollars, and then maybe we could get in
the business of, you know, providing some of the underwriting for
social service agencies.
But if we're going to do this, I don't think 8,000 is the right
dollar number. That's not the right check to -- to write because I
don't think that's the real impact.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala is next, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I --- I just had a fast
question. I thought impact fees were only delivered to new
construction. I didn't realize something that was old and in
disrepair would -- would have an impact fee imposed upon them.
MR. CUYLER: What -- what the staff does is they will take
whatever the prior impact fee category was, and they will take
that fee, and then they'll take whatever new category. And,
unfortunately, as Commissioner Mac'Kie pointed out, a thrift
store is not a, quote, retail enterprise in the normal sense of that.
But they nevertheless get that high impact fee charge because
that's the only category there is to -- to fit them into.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And that's maybe how we --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The impact on the community
Page 44
April 10, 2001
with it -- with its disrepair and -- and seedy outside look that has
been now replenished -- replaced with a better look and -- and
those code violations have been eliminated, I think it is -- is a
great impact to the community and should be worth something.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And, if I may --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- Commissioner Mac'Kie, I -- I
agree with you on some -- some aspects. I don't think we want
to return back to the days when we just made outright grants to
other organizations. I see this as something where we should
pick and choose where the needs are. As far as impact fees go, I
would propose that if we direct staff to go back and look at this
to present it to us, that we do it where it has a life to it that as
long as Friendship House is in -- has the capacity that they're
forming now and they don't sell the building to another
organization that remains in effect, the day they sold to another
organization, that impact fee would have to be paid.
Think about the direct benefits: We do nothing to support
these organizations, and they do very well on their own from the
outside help that's there. So now we're at the point where we're
not only going to not contribute to their greater needs, but we're
also going to tax them for the services they perform. I -- I kind of
miss the point. And, yes, there are many out there that probably
are deserving, and there's many that aren't. And I propose to you
that this is a call for the commission to make on a case-by-case
basis for whatever it may be worth. You know, not everyone is a
deserving one. I mean, Friends of the Fishermen, they're going to
put a $500 scholarship up once a year, that's a different story
altogether. I even propose that hospitals which came to us -- and
they wanted consideration to have an automatic exemption --
should come to us for review each time too. This should be a
call by the commission, the community for what the actual needs
Page 45
April 10, 2001
are. And what I would like to see us do here today is just direct
staff to go back and present something to us at a future date.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I agree that we should be seeing
this on a case-by-case basis. And I think what we're asking here
is direct staff to bring back an ordinance of waiving impact fees,
and I'm in favor of that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Have you -- have you solicited or
has Friendship House solicited an all -- an engineering firm to do
an alternate calculation for free?
MR. CUYLER: We haven't done that only because of time.
If -- if we had no other alternative, then we would try to go do
that. We've already got some costs, obviously, associated under
the best of circumstances with renovating the structure. We --
we basically told -- told code enforcement we would get our
permit six weeks ago, and we're -- they've been very good
working with us, and we're trying to move as quick as we can.
As a matter of fact, I was going to ask you to go ahead and do
the contribution today, but I understand that if you need to put it
on an agenda, then obviously we'll -- we'll live with that,
although, you know, the -- our volunteer contractor is ready to
move on this, and the whole deal is just dead in the water until --
until we can get this resolved so --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If it -- it sounds like the majority
of the board is going to support it going back. I mean, what I
would hope is -- going to staff. What I would hope is that
conditions would be put on it that we -- I would rather give a
longer waiver for getting your building permit than have the
taxpayer pay $8,000 if only $2500 is actual -- would compensate
the county for the actual impacts of the renovation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But we -- we could have that as
an alternative when the staff comes back to us with a report.
Page 46
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's what I -- that's what I
would at least hope, because we're not waiting. We're writing a
check, and it's real money.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're absolutely right, Commissioner
Mac'Kie. I have been here long enough to know that if you do it
for one, in all due respect, Commissioners, you're going to get 50
in here asking the same thing. And who are you going to say yes
to and who are you going to say no to? I think we need to send it
back to staff and look for alternate fees or changes. If you want
to reset a direction or a policy change, that is fine. But
remember, it all costs money, and you will be going through
budgets shortly, and you're going to find the real reality at the
end of the day is you got Y number of dollars to deal with X
number of projects. And every time we make a change here,
Commissioner Mac'Kie is absolutely right. All your taxpayers pay
for it, and I'm not against making those changes, and I'm not
against helping social service agencies. But I want a solid policy
and direction that will give us an opportunity to deal with all the
people that come in front of us. And case by case may operate
within that, but be very careful that if you deny one and approve
another, you'll cause an enormous amount of hard feeling in your
community.
MR. COLETTA: I -- I understand what you're saying,
Commissioner Carter, and I'm willing to stand up for what I think
is right, and I can make that judgment decision when the people
come before me. And I'd like to make a motion to send this to
staff to be presented to us at a --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Before we do that, maybe, Mr. Olliff,
you would like to hear from the county manager.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, being a good county manager, I -
- I can't let this one go without saying something to you. And in --
in this particular case, you need to recognize it for what it is.
Page 47
April 10, 2001
And then while I think Friendship House is probably one of the
best social service-providing agencies in this entire community,
what you are faced with today is a request to waive the impact
fees on a thrift shop, and that's the question in front of you. It
is -- it is not having anything to do with providing social services.
This is a thrift shop being built with which you are being asked to
waive or pay for out of general fund the impact fee. And you
need to recognize the precedent that you set with every decision
that you make and recognize the number of thrift shops that --
that you drive by each and every day and recognize the number
of thrift shop construction projects that will be at this podium
each and every Tuesday after this asking for impact fee waivers.
And -- and waivers, again, are payments out of your ad valorem
tax pot of money where we actually have to make the transfer.
So I cannot recommend that you proceed down that path. If
the board wants to do something in terms of funding social
service agencies like I think this board wants to, again, I -- I
would recommend to you that we look at some other policy and
some other means. But picking those that happen to have a
construction project as the way to fund them probably is not
good policy.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are you saying that we're going
to be setting precedence of all thrift shops --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- whether not for profit or for
profit?
MR. OLLIFF: I'm saying when the next one comes, you're
going to have to find some definitive reason why you granted this
one and you're not going to grant the next one. And then every
time you make a decision like this, you are making a decision
that is going to be looked back on and will be precedent setting.
So you need to keep that in mind as you make these decisions.
Page 48
April 10, 2001
MR. CUYLER: Mr. Chairman, if I could have 90 seconds, just
real quick. I know you have an agenda you need to get to beyond
this.
First of all, this is not just a thrift shop. I mean, these funds,
in fact, will go to the Friendship House, and that is aside from the
fact that --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But all the -- most of the thrift
shops are affiliated -- my church has a thrift shop. Conservancy
has a thrift shop.
MR. CUYLER: And I will grant that. But in terms of setting a
policy for the future, frankly, that doesn't help us just because
the time will go by and it's just not going to work for us. There
are times that I've sat over here and ordinances have come to
you, and there's been some glitch in the ordinance and somebody
standing in front of you -- I'm not saying we're in this position, but
somebody stands in front of you and says, well, I get to do this
because of this glitch. And what you will hear normally from your
manager and your attorney is, let them go ahead and do that,
they're correct. That's the way it reads, but we want to change
our policy or we want to do whatever we want to do, and, you
know, let's get that ordinance back in front of us, but let's take
care of today and -- and move on. I would indicate to you that
this is a present need. You know, we really don't have the time
or the funds to go get an alternative impact fee, and I want to
just point out one more quick thing. And that is, if you read my
letter, I didn't say a waiver of impact fees. I know where the
money comes from.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I know you do.
MR. CUYLER: But I talked to the manager's office. And they
said, be up front, stand up at the podium and ask for a
contribution from the county that would go to pay those impact
fees. And you can do that today. That's something that's within
Page 49
April 10, 2001
your discretion. You -- you have the monies in your general fund
or in your surplus to do that. I'm not asking for a waiver of
impact fees, but I'm not naive enough not to know where those
funds come from.
So what I'm asking is that you make that contribution, let us
go forward, let us clean up Immokalee even a little more than all
of the tremendous efforts that are now in place to try to do that,
and, you know, try to help out the friendly -- Friendship House,
and then go about and -- and set your policies and change your
policies and take six months to do that if that's what you need to
do.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So you're asking for a contribution to
Friendship House today, if I'm understanding your last statement
correctly.
MR. CUYLER: Correct.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Members of the board, what would you
like to do?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Looks like Tom wants to make a
comment.
MR. OLLIFF: The -- the furthest I would go in terms of some
sort of a recommendation for you in this kind of a case would be,
if you are serious about trying to do something because of the
immediacy of this or something, I would direct the staff to go
back and work with Mr. Cuyler and the people from Friendship
House. But at best, I would recommend that we structure some
sort of a repayment plan where Friendship House over a period of
time would repay to the general fund the impact fee, and -- and
that's probably as far as I would go and also also direct the staff
to come back with some sort of a policy, if you will, at a later
date as part of the budget workshops to deal with these type
issues in the future because I promise you, if -- if we do anything
in this regard today, we're going to deal with it every single
Page 50
April 10, 2001
week, and we need a policy to deal with it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I just am going to say, you
know, I don't even think we take motions on these items. I think
a majority of the board will direct staff -- CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- to either consider it or not
consider it. My -- my input is that I do not support sending it to
staff with a great reluctance. I'm a huge supportor of Friendship
House; they know that. But I don't think this is the right way to
address our funding of social service agencies in this county.
And I want -- I would rather -- I would support sending to staff
direction to develop a policy for how we address these matters,
but I can't support waiving this fee. I just don't think it's fair that
on a -- you know, because you have a construction issue, we give
you a donation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I -- I don't quite see it that
way. I see the thrift shop that we're talking about as an integral
part of Friendship House. It's a fund-raising mechanism to
support what we're not doing now as a county.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I'd feel the same way, Jim, if
it were to construct new beds for the shelter. You know, so it
isn't for me because it's a thrift shop. For me it's because I don't
think it's fair to make a decision on which social service agency
to support based on which one has a construction project
pending.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, just taking it literally --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- oh, so sorry.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. No, you go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just taking it literally, being that
this place is already built -- it's not new construction -- they're
improving the appearance of the place, which is good; they're
Page 51
April 10, 2001
certainly not going to use much of any sewage or anything
because it's a thrift shop. They're -- they're only going to have
people there at certain hours of the day because, again, it's a
thrift shop. Is there some way to offer them a reduction in this --
it's -- 8,000 seems very high for a building that's already there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I doubt that the building costs
$8,000 to put it up when they originally put it up back twenty-
some years ago, and it's been empty for many, many months.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But, Commissioner Coletta, that's
what we'd find out if they did an alternate calculation
application. And what I'm saying is, I'd be willing to direct staff
to -- to hold the code enforcement case for another three or four
months while some wonderful engineering firm in the county
stepped up to the plate and donated a free alternate calculation
study so that then they could come back to us and pay their
$2,000 impact fee, and -- and, you know, I'll help you fund raise
for it. You know, I just don't think this is the right way to --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And in the interim, I think you're also
sugg -- along with that I thought I heard you say you would like
an overall policy developed --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- for social service agencies. And I
can -- could support you on both of those issues. But that's -- we
need to know, we've got two -- I know two who would go -- you
and I would go there. I don't know about -- I need to poll the
board.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta, Commissioner
Fiala, Commissioner Henning, you need to weigh in which way
you want to go, whether you want to support Commissioner
Coletta's thoughts or whether you want to support Commissioner
Mac'Kie's thoughts.
Page 52
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't support either one. No,
I'm willing --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's another --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm willing to take a look at staff
going for a policy decision on helping out social services in -- in
Collier County as far as the construction impacts.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So you're supporting Commissioner
Mac'Kie's thoughts?
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
Okay.
So if that's the case, that's
three votes that go there; that's what we need for direction.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Now, let me be clear what my --
because I want to give them some break here, some relief. They
don't have time right now. Even if somebody would give them a
free alternate calculation study -- is that what you call the thing?
MR. OLLIFF: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If somebody would give them
that for free, we -- we have code enforcement on their backs and
we're telling them pull the building permit right now. So let me
be clear: The direction that I'm asking for support for is that
code enforcement told stop all code enforcement activities for
four months to give Friendship House time to get a donated
alternate impact fee calculation study. And at that time they
would pay the impact fee that is -- results from what their actual
impacts are. The alternate calculation study -- I don't know if
new board members are familiar enough with it, but it's -- instead
of paying the standard checkmark, you know, the standard
impact fee, the engineer will actually tell us what the real down-
to-the-nickel impact of this particular use will be. And I think
what we'll find is like you were saying, Commissioner Fiala,
there's not going to be a huge impact. Homeless people don't
drive cars. The volunteers who go there to work at the thrift
Page 53
April 10, 2001
store can park -- maybe they can work out some arrangement
that they park at the Friendship House so that that's not a new
traffic impact. There's probably one toilet. How much sewer can
there be? You know, we can reduce this --
MR. CUYLER: Just FYI, there is no water or sewer, but the
jail -- I'm not sure -- can be reduced, and that's probably half the
fee. So we're probably going to be looking at a minimum of four
months.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You -- you know, reluctantly,
maybe there is some -- I mean, you know -- MR. CUYLER: Not from a thrift shop.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Not from a thrift shop. But that's
what I'm asking, that we give them time to go and get a free --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Impact fee.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- impact fee calculation and then
they pay whatever their actual fee is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I -- I think that's a fair direction
to go, Commissioner Mac'Kie. But there's something I would like
to suggest. In the next couple of weeks if possibly any of the
board members could find it in their schedule to go to
Immokalee -- and, Commissioner Henning, I want to thank you for
taking the time to go there -- if they could go and actually see
what this thrift shop's all about and actually tour through it.
Immokalee's a little bit out of the way, but I think they would be
very, very pleased if the commission would actually show up
there and show an interest, personal interest, in it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I don't think any part of
Collier County is out of the way for -- for us here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And you'll probably want to ask
them how many times I've been there because -- .
Page 54
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I know you care deeply. I know this
has been tough for you, tough for everybody because we all care.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Is that sufficient direction that
will help everybody get where we need to be? If that's so, I
thank you-all.
We need to take a break, and then we are going to the Item
8-A-1. Thank you. We'll be back in ten.
(A break was held from 10:55 a.m. To 11:00 a.m.).
Item #8A1
RESOLUTION 2001-125, ENDORSING THE COMMUNITY
CHARACTER PLAN FOR COLLIER COUNTY - ADOPTED WITH
CHANGES
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. We're back in session, ladies
and gentlemen. Please take your seats. If you have cell phones,
turn them off.
And we are now moving to the next agenda -- agenda item,
and that is on the recommendation that the Board of County
Commissioners accept final community character plan, etc., etc.
I would say that when we finish this -- I don't know how long it's
going to go, ladies and gentlemen, but we'll play it as it goes
here. But probably at the end of this we'll break for lunch, and
then we'll be back to deal with the rest of our agenda so that you
will get a chance to do a little planning. This is Item 8-A-1.
Miss Taylor.
MS. TAYLOR: Good morning. For the record, my name is
Amy Taylor. I'm with the comprehensive planning section.
Before you today for your consideration is a resolution
accepting the Collier County community character plan and
endorsing its general objectives, as attached, as in Exhibit A, and
Page 55
April 10, 2001
a -- a recommendation to direct staff to prepare a
recommendation on its implementations of those objectives.
The select committee on community character unanimously
approved the plan on Tuesday, April 3rd, and recommends that
the board accept the plan, endorse its general objectives, and
direct staff to prepare recommendations on its implications.
The consultant team led by Dover, Kohl and partners are
here today to present those general objectives known as setting
the course and answer your questions regarding the plan and its
implications.
But before we begin, I would like to make a point of
clarification. Stan Litsinger is passing out a revised resolution.
This reflects the change that actually is consistent with the
executive summary and staff's true intent that instead of the
words "to approve the plan," the language now in the resolution
asks to accept the plan and endorse its general objectives.
So today you are not being asked to approve the plan. The
board is being asked to accept it and endorse its general
guidelines. The purpose of endorsing the objectives is to provide
guidance to your staff in their evaluation over the next 55 days
prior to a previously scheduled community character plan
workshop scheduled for June 5th. Endorsing the objectives will
give clear direction to staff and the board the opportunity at a
later date to further explore the options available to them prior to
setting in motion any implementation measures.
The community character plan has developed rather -- over
the course of two years with the oversight of the select
committee on community character. This was an ad hoc
committ -- committee appointed by the board. And the
committee is made up of community leaders as well as experts
on architecture, land use planning, land development, mobility,
and green space.
Page 56
April 10, 2001
The board's intent on establishing this highly skilled
committee was to develop a plan that would guide the county on
how it can maintain and enhance a vital quality community as it
meets the challenges of rapid growth.
To that end, the select committee chose the consultant
team that you will be hearing with you in just a few minutes.
Based on -- and they chose them based on their unrivaled
qualifications in the areas of mobility, green space, urban and
rural design, and lan -- land use planning. They are not only
world-recognized leaders and experts in those fields, but we
have also the benefit of their being from Florida and
understanding and appreciating the challenges of -- of a rapid-
growth communities.
I would like to -- to close my -- my few remarks with an
introduction of our chairman of the select committee, Mr. Jim
Rideoutte. Mr. Jim -- Mr. Rideoutte has been a highly skilled and
effective leader of -- of our community character committee. The
entire committee has worked diligently on developing the
community character plan with Dover, Kohl Associates and staff,
and I would like to personally thank him for having the
opportunity for working with him. It has been for me personally
and professionally a very rewarding experience. And so Jim will
make some background remarks and also lead into the
presentation led by Victor Dover.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Miss Taylor. As he
approaches the podium, I, too, would like to say that I think he's
done an outstanding job, as has the committee. I had the
privilege of being the liaison from the board to that committee
and participated in a number of meetings. And they work very,
very hard to bring us to where we are today. So, Mr. Rideoutte, I
compliment you and your group for all the hard work that you
have done and hope that you will continue to assist this
Page 57
April 10, 2001
committee to advise us in the future.
MR. RIDEOUTTE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Jim
Rideoutte and was pleased to have the privilege and opportunity
of chairing this committee. It is -- and I will deny my normal
inclination and keep my remarks brief.
As you will recall, about two years ago, this commission,
different members, but unanimously approved the select
committee. And that was an outgrowth of what the community
told all of us relative to the -- and -- and the process of the focus
effort, which was a grass-roots-visioning opportunity that was
presented to the county. And what the commission told us at
that time, that they wanted us to select -- recommend a planning
outfit that could give us specific directions as to how we might
implement the -- what the community desired by way of planning
from the -- the focus effort.
Dover, Kohl was the one that we recommended to you.
Again, we got unanimous support for that. We think that they are
a world-class outfit. We are pleased with the report that they
gave us.
I would be, of course, incorrect if I told you that everybody
agreed with everything that's in the report or everybody agreed
with everything that's not in the report. But -- but on par, we
thought -- we think it is an excellent report, a good road map for
this county to use to go forward in the future and try to -- and it
gives us a good opportunity to retain those things that most
people here, citizens, said they wanted to retain and to try to
minimize those adverse impacts that came out of both the focus
effort and -- as well as the workshops that Dover, Kohl and those
conducted to, in essence, verify what folks had said back on to
the focus effort.
The main thing I want to say to you this morning, though, is
we now come to the real hard part, and that's the
Page 58
April 10, 2001
implementation. I -- I don't really know whether the -- there's a
will in this community to fully support this thing. It -- it --
everybody's telling us what they want. My analogy is they're
saying they want to drive a Cadillac or a Lexus. Now, but if
they're only prepared to pay Chevrolet prices, I don't know how
far we're going to get. But, hey, it's time -- frankly, it's time that
we found out. You keep telling us you want this stuff. Now let's
give them the opportunity to see if they're -- they're willing to.
And I know that's -- that's not going to be easy. It's going to be,
in some cases, costly, not necessarily financial costs, although
there are some costs associated with it. And I've said before,
every group that I've addressed -- and I've addressed a few of
them, Rotary and stuff like that, during the past few years. And
I've told them two people that I don't want to have anything to do
with, that is, those who say, well, stop people from coming here.
That is not an option. This is the United States of America.
Anybody that thinks that, I don't have any time for them, and
anybody that says, well, we can do it at absolutely no cost, then,
just -- if we arrange this thing right. I don't want to have anything
to do with those two because I think that's a -- an idiot mission.
Anyway, the one thing that I would like to say in closing --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I wonder how strongly he feels about
that.
MR. RIDEOUTTE: Yeah. Hey, you knew when you selected
me, I think you -- you knew that I express my -- my views rather
clear and distinctly. I -- I never have used the greatest of
discretion sometimes in expressing my views, but I do feel
strongly. And I think that -- that we do have a rare and probably
the last best opportunity in this regard.
The one thing I will add to it, in the dozen or so years that
I've been here and been involved in maybe 15 different nonprofit
and civic associations, I have never worked with a better group,
Page 59
April 10, 2001
all of them from diverse interest -- most of them from diverse
backgrounds and interests and all like that. I have never worked
with a more dedicated, brighter, conscientious group. It was
really a pleasure to -- to serve with them.
And with that, I would like to now introduce Victor Dover
who is the head of the planning group that developed this plan.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Before he comes, Mr. Rideoutte,
are there other members of your committee here today that we
could just ask to stand maybe and --
MR. RIDEOUTTE: Yes, we would like -- we have about a half
a dozen of them. A couple of them are out of town.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: If you'd come here, I wish you'd
stand so we could just express our appreciation to you for all of
the hard work.
(Applause).
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Take it one step further, Mr. Rideoutte.
While they're on their feet, back on their feet, point out who they
are in case people don't understand how hard this group worked
and the hours and hours they put in trying to bring this, as you
said, from the focus group out to where it is today, and this is
where you're going to have to put the meat on the skillet and get
down to business and go to work.
MR. RIDEOUTTE: It -- it's no question; that's where it is.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, up on your feet. Let's -- let's
introduce you. Let the community know who you are.
MR. RIDEOUTTE: Is this -- Sally -- Sally Barker, right here;
Peter Van Arsdale --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ellin--
MR. RIDEOUTTE: Ellin Goetz-- .
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Ellin Goetz.
MR. RIDEOUTTE: Ellin Goetz. Mimi Wolok, Norm Trebilcock.
Who else? We had one other one here, didn't we? Maybe they -- I
Page 60
April t 0, 2001
think they had a prior commitment. We did have one more. But
anyway, we thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thankyou.
MR. DOVER: Good morning. I -- yeah, I wish Tim wouldn't
sugar coat it all the time and tell us how he really feels. It would
make this a lot easier. It's good to be back. I'll tell you the -- for
the past year, every morning --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Your -- sir -- .
MR. DOVER: Victor Dover for the record.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. DOVER: Dover, Kohl and Partners. Sorry about that.
For the past year, I've read your newspaper every morning,
and I've read your commission agendas every meeting. And I've
attended a lot of -- of public and private meetings here in this
county, and people are always talking about growth and change
and development. Now, the truth is -- this is the bottom-line thing
about the character plan -- the growth in change and
development have been threatening the character of the
community but not because of pace of change or the number of
people but because of the physical form that the development
has taken. And there is a better way; that's the good news.
The character plan describes how to redirect the inevitable
growth into forms that will enhance and -- and protect and
upgrade the things you cherish about the county. That's what
we're trying to do.
Now, I'll quickly walk you through the presentation, but the -
- I should say I get the -- I've gotten to be the spokesperson and
leader of an interdisciplinary group of folks from a number of
different professions who are the best in their fields. So we've
been very fortunate to do that.
This plan was created in a -- a very public manner. Literally
hundreds and hundreds of your citizens in one way or another
Page 61
April 10, 2001
touched the plan or monitored its development and progress.
Those selection committee -- the select committee on
community character meetings were attended by as many people
that were not on the committee who are interested as there were
committee members and sometimes more.
There was a visual process, in addition to the usual words
that go on with discussion about growth, change, and
development. And people gave us answers about what they
preferred, and those preferences are built into the plan.
And this committee -- I should tell you as the consultant and
out-of-towner's perspective, it's been the hardest-working
citizens' advisory committee with which we have ever worked.
They haven't been a rubber stamp group or anything like it; quite
the opposite. They studied every syllable of this plan to a degree
which we're very grateful and to a much greater degree than
we've ever seen elsewhere. They met -- sometimes it was
grueling; sometimes it was fun. But they met again and again
and again until they had something ready to bring to you.
And so here it is. This is the cover of the book. As the
newspaper pointed out, it is an inch thick. There's a lot of
material here (indicating). However, there is also a four-page
executive summary which really has the most important pieces.
Why the big difference? Well, the thick one has a lot of
background material and primmer and visuals and how-to
manual-type tools that the technicians who want to go use the
plan will need and the folks who have to judge projects in terms
of whether they meet or don't meet the objectives of the plan will
need.
But the summary captures what it's all about. These
documents are available, of course, from Amy's office, Amy
Taylor's office, in development services. They're also available
on line on the website. And we've just published also a CD-ROM
Page 62
April 10, 2001
version which is significantly lighter than the -- than the book and
portable and copyable and easy to navigate around. And so folks
should have many -- many ways to get at the plan and study it.
Now, today we're going to look at the three main pieces of
the book: The -- the manuals on community design,
transportation plan -- we call it mobility -- and green space
planning. Then at the end we'll summarize what's supposed to
happen in the next 55 days or so between now and your June 5th
workshop.
Let's start with the community design manual. And we'll --
we'll go fast and can always return to any of this. But for the
next 45 minutes or so, the folks from Glatting, Jackson and
myself are going to walk you through the book to get to the
important implementation pieces.
The community design manual is the heart of the document.
It describes this new and improved model for how to build
communities. Essentially the difference is this: In the kind of
communities you once built as a matter of course in Collier
County and you need to begin building again. The public realm
between buildings was that the spaces between buildings was as
important as the spaces inside buildings. That is the difference
that -- that this plan suggests how to -- how to effect. The
pieces -- the ingredients in that recipe for a high-quality public
realm are great neighborhoods and buildings in them, great
streets, memorable centers. And so I'll walk you through those
pieces.
There's an assumption here, which is that because so many
policies and habits have made it difficult to build the great
neighborhoods that have all those ingredients people have been
building a different way. But when you make the changes you
need to make as county government to make it legal and
encouraged, once again, to build those great neighborhoods,
Page 63
April 10, 2001
people will begin to do so. And the conventional sprawl
development about which we heard so much complaint will begin
to recede and no longer dominate all the discussion in the
county.
The book described these great neighborhoods in terms of
things they always have; essentially the -- the kind of
neighborhoods recommends be built and rebuilt are very diverse.
They have -- they are walkable and connected.
There's a discussion in the -- this part of the manual on how
to design such things, how to lay out a network of connected
blocks and streets, how to think about the parts of the
neighborhoods in relation to its neighbors, set aside important
public spaces, sites for civic buildings, and so on. Then it takes
this building block, the great neighborhood, and moves up a
scale and -- and looks at how these neighborhoods go together in
a bigger layout, groups of neighborhoods around centers. And
there's a discussion of the whole spectrum of places where folks
come together for shared human activities at a variety of scales,
starting at the smallest, the rural crossroads; and then the
intimate hamlet; the village the size of one neighborhood; the
group of several neighborhoods with its -- with its own town
center; and the biggest of the scales, the activity centers.
You've labeled ma]or activity centers this last ten years or so.
Then it takes that working philosophy or model and shows
how it's applied to a variety of Collier County site-specific types
of places, typical situations, the first of which is older
neighborhoods that are not aging as gracefully as they should
and need revitalization, a new energy and a new thought about
how to preserve what's good about them and enhance and add
what's missing. We used Naples Park as an example because
Naples Park is a lot like some other important areas of the
county, and so we thought this would be a transferrable study.
Page 64
April 10, 2001
The suggestion here is that these kinds of older
neighborhoods should have site-specific plans of their own which
are in considerably greater detail from an urban design point of
view and also trees and other items like that from, say,
conventional policy planning like the comp. Plan has. Naples
Park, the suggestion is that that this big undifferentiated area
should be conceptually broken down into four neighborhoods,
each of which should have its own plan, a good strategy for how
the neighbors in that neighborhood want to make it more
walkable, functional, and livable, traffic calming, adding street
trees. These kinds of ingredients are depicted, then, in an
example of such a -- such a plan. It's not by any means
complete, and it's not meant to suggest that you're done with
Naples Park when you have this plan in place but, rather, to set
the course for how Naples Park neighborhoods and
neighborhoods like them around the county can be upgraded.
There are a lot of lost spaces in these maturing
neighborhoods that could be captured and made into wonderful
places, private and public. Here's a suggestion, for example, of
how a vacant lot looked before and after. Before and after, could
be made into a public space for a neighborhood that doesn't have
much public space. And so there's the depiction of how that
might work.
Now, as you go through the book, at the end of each little
subsection there's a green box that looks like the one on your
screen. Just -- here's the green box (indicating) for revitalizing
maturing neighborhoods. These green boxes have two pieces,
the first one a blurb of text called setting the course which is
built into today's resolution. It's the basic policy or idea for what
to do in this kind of situation to implement the character plan.
And then after that there are, in each green box, a series of
recommended strategies for implementation, what to change
Page 65
April 10, 2001
about your growth management plan, your administrative code,
standards and policies for county operations, land development
codes, financing issues, and so on, whatever was appropriate to
the box. In today's resolution, you're really only looking at that
header, the top part. You're not tying your hands to the specific
things that are iljustrated here in the part that follows below.
From maturing neighborhoods basically it brings up this idea that
you should have detailed community plans for each one that are
created with hands-on involvement of the citizens that live there.
We also looked at the -- the conventional subdivisions, the
mini PUDs, some built, some not built, that don't meet the
objectives of the character plan, and studied what you might do.
These typically are not diverse, connected, and community-
oriented kinds of layouts but, rather, like the diagram on the left,
disconnected and not diverse. And so we did these little
diagrams, describe all that you might do to update such a plan
over time. The results of the study basically tells us that it is
exceedingly difficult to go back and retrofit conventional sprawl
development when it's already built, not impossible. I'm not
going to say never, because we -- after all, we have a few
millenia ahead of us, but hard to do it now. However, there are
lots of--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can you just go past that?
MR. DOVER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I have to say on two slides before
that how thrilled I was to see that you were able to show us a -- a
design that's significantly different from our traditional what we
have been seeing and incorporates the items that we find as a
community to be important and doesn't reduce the density so
that, you know, the developer is still going to make a return on
his investment that's reasonable. I thought -- I was afraid it was
either/or.
Page 66
April 10, 2001
MR. DOVER: Oh, no.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I'm thrilled to see that. I just
had to point that.
MR. DOVER: There is no either/or. The private developer
partners and investors, builders, property owners, and so on have
to have a lucrative bottom line to make any of the things you see
in this book take place. So there's -- by no means I'm suggesting
that you have to do away with that in order to implement the
character plan. Quite the opposite, because character-rich
neighborhoods are worth more, both when you sell them initially
and over time.
The -- the box here is really, though, focused on the plans
that are not yet built, Commissioner, because you have a number
of these planned unit developments or PUDs that are approved
but not yet built. Some of them will expire, and you'll -- you'll
have applicants before you asking for them to be reissued. And
what this part of the plan is devoted to, what should be changed
and updated about those plans before they're reissued.
It -- it kind of points out the fact that minimizing the number
of additional such disconnected and unlivable unwalkable
neighborhoods, how helpful that might be to implement the plan.
Then we move to probably where -- where the real action is.
The most important piece of the book, I think, is about how to
grow new neighborhoods that do meet these criteria. And
there's discussion here about the conventions of traditional
neighborhoods; I described it to you earlier. Here's a depiction of
how a couple of neighborhoods come together on a main street
that they share, as well as open space.
The significant policy shift is that you need to make
traditional neighborhood development, smart growth
development, as described in the plan, legal, encouraged, and
the norm. You need to make it a buy-right thing, not something
Page 67
April 10, 2001
that applicants have to come to you and say, please, may I have
an exception from all the rules that force me to build
conventional suburban sprawl. Do it the other way around, and
that's what the growing your neighborhoods part is about.
Now, there's a lot of discussion -- and it seemed worth
building into the booklet -- about gated communities. The -- the
practice of gating a very large area of the county behind a single
entrance -- say if we took that thing out I just showed you and
drew one big line around it and having one perimeter with one
road in and one road out, this is at the root of your traffic
problems. It's the reason why you have this much development
or growth and it feels like that much impact on traffic. This is
the bottom -- this is the root of it, a disconnected street network,
a -- a sparce network of arterials as the only alternative. That
doesn't work.
However, does this mean you can't have gates? No, quite
the opposite. There -- now, there was -- there -- there's lots of--
there are lots of examples in affluent communities with climates
like yours that -- where people offer home buyers exclusivity and
the feeling of security and privacy but still have connections.
And that can be done. There are depictions here of -- of Florida
communities where that's the case.
But we recognize that this is a very important thing to a lot
of the industry folks. They feel like marketable, particularly out-
of-state buyers, gated communities are important. So the plan
suggests this. It does not say do away with gates and they
should be prohibited and you shouldn't have any more gated
communities. What it says is if you must gate, gate a much
smaller area and allow the streets that need to connect to do so.
You can secure a block in the traditional urban way with garden
walls and fences and maybe the alley is gated or you can secure
a quarter of the neighborhood, as long as you have that
Page 68
April 10, 2001
interconnection minimally every quarter mile and preferably more
often than that. It's certainly feasible, within the traditions of
Florida architecture and real estate development, to have street-
oriented, community-oriented ways of building homes, even
grand and fancy ones, that are still high in status and still
secure. And there are diagrams on how to go do that.
So the -- setting the course box here says use multiple gates
and secure individual blocks or neighborhoods, but don't block
access between neighborhoods, or that will be part of the
problem instead of part of the solution.
Now, all of this emphasis on streets. We need to
differentiate between streets the way people have come to know
them and streets the way they ought to be.
The goal is to make the streets the backbone of the
community, whether the large ones or the small ones, great
addresses, things that are -- are places of pride that you -- that
are amenities to the
neighborhoods that front them. Just compare a little cartoon
here to shows two ways to build the same street. That is the
solution. You can have streets that connect, but they have to be
streets that people feel good about facing. So obviously the
design of the stuff inside the public infrastructure and right-of-
way becomes really important, and you'll hear more about that in
a few minutes from the engineers.
The corridors that the major arterial corridors are not all
created equal. Some of them are quite urban in their character,
some of them are like rural parkways or should be, and so the
plan suggests a number of different ways they'd be handled. But
it also looks at places like blighted areas such as this spot where
Naples Towne Center is on the Trail and suggests that when
those are redeveloped, they make wonderful locations to
demonstrate the approach you saw in the previous picture. Infill
Page 69
April 10, 2001
development, that is more lucrative for the bottom line but
restores the street as a positive public space. I think you've all
seen this picture which we called which post card would you
prefer to send regarding the difference in possibilities between
such corridors, before and after.
So in the -- in the box it says, make partnerships with the
adjoining landowners and convert these blighted corridors to
premiere public places, something that adds to the tourist
experience, for example, instead of taking away.
Now, for ten years you've been channeling commercial
development into ma]or activity centers. Good idea. The original
idea, however, was to make these mixed use environments that
had not just retail buildings and parking, but also places to work,
places to live, places to be entertained, and civic life. And you
haven't achieved that objective. And so the recommendation of
this part of the book is how to -- to use this change in the way
you do streets and corridors and also the way you regulate the
private development to activate the activity centers.
Now, the -- the sort of dramatic before and after here goes to
the fact that there's lots of room to build and accommodate
growth in Collier County, growth of your commercial and -- and
employment enterprises and growth in your population without
just paving more of the Everglades to do it. But the answer is, to
capture some of this lost space, converting your activity centers
from big parking lots with one-story buildings popping out of
them here and there into real town centers where things are
deliberately close together.
So the setting the course objective here says get back to
the objective of mixed use development, encourage the
inefficiency of those buildings poking out of parking lots to be
converted to an efficient format.
Then there's Golden Gate Estates. North Golden Gate
Page 70
April 10, 2001
Estates is a very unusual situation, and it -- it's been given its
own special piece of the plan. We had special meetings just on
this subject. It's -- and it's -- it's a very interesting case. For
comparison, we superimposed in that blue diamond all of
Washington D.C.'s original 10 miles on a side-square plan
superimposed over north Golden Gate Estates just so you can
sense the sheer size of it.
We know you're updating the Golden Gate master plan and,
hallelujah, that's a great idea. That needs to be done sooner
rather than later, and that's great. This plan doesn't attempt to
update it ahead of time. It knows you're going to go through a
deliberative process with community involvement. So instead,
the character plan just outlines a series of things as food for
thought for the citizens that will work on that.
Process-wise it does suggest that that plan be undertaken
through a method by which folks in a given area can effect their
area or have a say in what goes on in their part of the estates,
and -- and folks in another part can have a say about their part.
Basically to keep good ideas or even possibly good change, if
there is such a thing, from being held hostage by someone who
objects who lives 10 miles away. That's a problem, and it -- it
just has to do with the fact that you've got a city out there the
size of Washington D.C. But we're treating it as one thing from a
planning point of view.
The estates is changing very, very quickly. Lots of folks
talked about how they want to preserve rural character. But the
subdivisions are there and being filled in. So although it's
changing more slowly on the east and more rapidly on the west,
it is changing. And although the large lot and disconnected
street network combination are meaning you're getting a lot of
traffic impact and other impacts for a relatively small number of
houses.
Page 71
April 10, 2001
This diagram kind of dramatizes the difference between how
developed the western side is from the east. Good news in that
is that that big north south band of the estates is still relatively
undeveloped, and there are huge opportunities to affect change
there without necessarily using the same methods farther west.
There is a little bit in this part of the book on how to group
homes together and transfer development rights from a larger
area so that some places can remain truly rural and others can
become hamlets or rural crossroads. There's suggestion that if
it's done at the right scale, which means small, at the small
scale, that you could introduce commercial uses into the estates
on the community's terms in a format with both building types,
the positions, type layout -- that is reasonable given the
character of the place.
The plan also recommends that you need to exercise the
opportunity to create some additional road connections in the
estates. It suggested that those be narrow, tree-lined and not be
straight shots that go for 10 miles without an end but, rather,
that they are inherently traffic calmed and livable for those who
are there so you see an iljustration that have idea here.
So in setting the course box, it tells us -- it reinforces what
you've done recently since this was drafted, which was initiated
the Golden Gate area master plan update, and it says do it in
consultation with the folks who live there and use this chapter as
food for thought as a starting point.
Now, we're going to switch. Tim Jackson from the Glatting,
Jackson firm who is leading the transportation planning side of
this, is going to talk about how everything you just heard fits into
another way to think about traffic and transportation. Tim.
MR. JACKSON: Thank you, Victor. And for the record, I'm
Tim Jackson with the planning firm Glatting, Jackson from
Orlando. And we're going to review -- we're going to review both
Page 72
April 10, 2001
the mobility manual and the green-space manual.
First, I do want to say thank you for hiring us as part of the
team to work for you, with your staff, and with the committee. It
was a wonderful experience for all of us.
The both green space and mobility are integral parts of
community and community character. They're not separate;
they're integral. And these two manuals identify long-range
improvement opportunities that necessarily are long range, and
they are system-wide. So with that, Tim Palermo is going to
review the mobility manual, and then Victor is going to review
the green space manual. Thank you.
MR. PALERMO: Thank you, Tim. I'm Tim Palermo, Glatting,
Jackson for the record.
The mobility manual draws upon five principle ideas. Two of
them are associated with connecting, connecting roads at the
regional level, the other connecting roads at the neighborhood
level, designing great streets, trying to rethink how we think
about congestion and balancing community character goals like
Victor spoke of with the needs to move cars and, lastly, how we
plan roadway corridors. So to review, the first item, connecting
neighborhoods insures that we take advantage of existing
neighborhoods, incorporate traffic calming principles on
connected neighborhood streets so we don't continue to close
off roads and put pressure on arterial intersections and provide
multiple ways in and out of new development. As you can see on
the diagram, the prototypical development on the left has the
same number of lane miles as the one on the right. However, one
adds capacity to the overall system, whereas the one on your left
provides further pressure on the arterial network.
Traffic calming: two-pronged benefit to traffic calming. The
first is managing the behavior of the cars on the neighborhood
streets in a manner that's appropriate for a neighborhood. And
Page 73
April 10, 2001
the second law, it adds an aesthetic value to neighborhood
streets. These are different tools that are outlined in the mobility
manual for calming traffic, either sharing pavement, narrowing
the street, deflecting vehicles. In the Naples -- Naples Park
example, a -- with the widening of U.S. 41, the closing of those
medians, there is some concern with cut-through traffic.
Enhanced character, but also diverting and governing the
speed of that traffic.
Setting the course would be modifying the Land
Development Code to insure these multiple connections. When
they're adjacent, ensure stub-outs and have an integrated system
and neighborhood streets.
At the regional level, we have to make sure, as Victor said,
this small increment of development doesn't result in this larger
increment of traffic, much -- much more magnified level of traffic.
And to insure that the county has a thoroughfare plan in place,
not just a roadway plan for arterial -- arterial roads, but to
develop land development policies so the regional network grows
at the same rate as the county grows. You know, we can no
longer afford to have development preclude mobility.
Throughout the public involvement process last spring, we
heard constantly one uniting theme on all transportation issues I
heard of. No more -- we don't need really bigger roads, but we
need more of them going more places. So planned not just for --
plan for thoroughfares, not just major arterials. And this is a
conceptual thoroughfare plan that was developed.
The advantages of having a denser network of collectors or
arterials that will give traffic an alternative number of routes to
get from place to place keeps local traffic on local roads so the
arterials are freed up to serve their primary purpose, which is to
intraregional traffics. It's trained to support this large
investment the county recently made in their -- their starter
Page 74
April 10, 2001
transit system. Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is -- is there a map somewhere
that you guys have that shows -- I understand this is just a
sample of -- of an alternate -- a network enhancement system.
Do you have an overlay with current land uses?
MR. PALERMO: We have an overlay with current existing
and vested planned unit developments.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that in our book?
MR. PALERMO: That is --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MR. DOVER: That is page 3.18 in my draft.
or two of that.
MR. PALERMO: That's built and --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. I would like -- I'd really
like to see something bigger and more identifiable about what
the existing land uses are.
MR. PALERMO: Okay. We -- we did check these, a lot of
aerials. It does run adjacent to some golf courses and some
neighborhoods, but it's -- it runs -- primarily runs along section
lines. And many of these -- these thoroughfares in the concept
plan have been -- been studied in the long-range planning needs
plans and their -- their extensions of existing roads.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You know, this -- this is so
important that, you know, it -- it's one of the most important
features of the whole deal. We need to know how feasible it is.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I agree, Commissioner. I think
here they're trying to demonstrate, and we don't want to confuse
the community that this is an actual. We got to look at the
regional and sectional impacts and what it really means to a
neighborhood. And I agree with you, but we don't want to
confuse -- I think they're trying to give us an example --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Of course.
Victor's coming up to help.
It's within a page
Page 75
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- if I'm following it correctly.
MR. PALERMO: Yeah. The -- the direction of the community
character plan is to do a study potential for the secondary
roadway network. And the recommendation is, when that
network is developed or the potential for it, would be included in
the -- the county's comprehensive plan in land development
regulations updated accordingly.
The -- the third big idea of the mobility manual is designing
great streets. And that's to expand the choices to augment the
sections the county already currently has developed to a wider
range of street types to serve, not only the movement of cars and
commercial places, but to enhance neighborhoods, get an idea of
what types of roadways are going to be used to connect these
networks. And I'll click through these cross-sections real quickly
which are intended to augment the currently adopted arterial
cro -- cross-sections.
The alleys for neighborhoods, lanes for -- for the fronts of
those homes in the neighborhoods, parking facilitated on most of
these cross-sections, streets, divided connector streets which
would be the building block for this connector network
connecting neighborhoods and some of the thoroughfare links as
well, with and without medians, major arterials, parking, no
parking, peak-hour parking. But the primary thing is that the
street is still dignified public space and becomes not just --
becomes address value as well. So that's another choice for how
we design our arterial roads. Six-lane flavors, as well as
parkways, facilitate the movement of cars between activity
centers; the six-lane version of that as well.
Also in the designing great streets sections, we have to
expand the envelope beyond just the pavement when designing
streets to include bridge elements, signs, lighting, transit
facilities, utility location, and such. And there's a discussion on
Page 76
April 10, 2001
what's appropriate for that -- for that.
This is setting the course. You should adopt this pallet of
street types to -- as they go through the roadway planning
process.
The next one's a little bit of a pointy-headed sections, but
the main point of balancing character with congestion is to make
sure staff and decision makers have the flexibility needed to
approve or not approve the location and timing of new
development, as well as capital improvements. Also, to insure
that the development is able to locate in the places necessary to
supply the county with the needed collector network.
And we're recommending here that the county adopt some
kind of aggregate approach for measuring adequate facilities for
transportation, be that districts, parallel facilities, or the such.
The last thing is planning roadway corridors, starting to
think more -- whoops -- more about how roadways function
beyond just the movement of the cars, beyond the pavement, by
when the need is found or maybe before or maybe on some of
these thoroughfare links that the county develop a highly public
thoroughfare master plan to integrate the three big components
of the roadway, just not within the right of way. The roadway
improvements, number of lanes, turn lanes, how the
intersections would be, of course, but also the nonroad --
roadway improvements, the public-design elements: streets,
landscaping, signage, signal control and the such.
And, lastly, land development. And that would evolve from
just, as you can see the -- the broadening approach on this one
graphic from just worrying about the pavement all the way to
land uses and how those buildings are arranged on the land in a
way that both maximizes the efficiency of that roadway, but also
maximizes the value that that roadway is an address.
And we're suggesting that the county acknowledge this link
Page 77
April 10, 2001
between land use and transportation by expanding its
involvement in such corridor master plan.
I'm now going to introduce Rick from our West Palm Beach
office who is going to quickly go through the green space
manual. Thank you.
MR. DURR: Good morning. For the record, my name is
Richard Durr. I'm with Glatting, Jackson.
The -- really the backbone of the green space manual is the
philosophy or the model that says what's desirable in Collier
County is a linked system of green space going from the very
smallest pieces and parts of the system, neighborhood parts, for
example, all the way up to the largest conservation lands. And
all of those in some way, shape, or form are linked together. So
the very smallest of the pieces and parts of the system are both
urban open spaces and neighborhood parks. These, for lack of a
better way of putting it, really -- they really are the building
blocks of communities, both in shopping areas or in -- within
neighborhoods.
So our vision for the -- for these particular spaces is that
everyone should have access to them, and they're really
accessible by walking. Most people use -- use these spaces by
walking to get there. So whether it's a quarter of a mile space or
half a mile space, that is really the service area that these
particular spaces serve.
So the first step, if you will, is to take a look at the existing
facilities within Collier County. It's real hard to see on your
monitors, but basically they're marked by these yellow squares.
The next question we ask to test the vision is what
neighborhoods do not have access to those particular facilities,
and slowly the map starts to change and starts to say something
about neighborhoods and the places where we live and work.
In addition, new development currently as it stands, some of
Page 78
April 10, 2001
them are providing these particular types of neighborhood
spaces. Some do not necessarily have to.
So if we look at setting the course, the first thing we do is
we say, we need to make sure that new development is providing
neighborhood type facilities, within whether they're gated
community or any other type of community that these particular
services are provided as they are constructed. And then,
secondly, and this is really good news, you do have a
neighborhood parks program that is already underway. And what
we're saying is continue to fund that, continue to bring
neighborhood parks to those communities that need them.
The next step up in facilities community and regional parks,
those are your ball fields, larger facilities generally that draw lots
of people and you generally access them by the car. So the
vision for this says that you shouldn't necessarily have to travel
across the county to go to a ballgame or across the county to
access these types of public facilities. So you should be
somewhat within an easy driving distance, if you will. The real
important part about these that we'd like to approximates on
about character is that we don't want to overdevelop our
community parks. There's the temptation to continue to develop
facilities as they're needed and basically use up all of the land of
that park. Quickly that park loses its character as being a park.
It just becomes a collection of facilities. So almost as a rule of
thumb, we said do not overdevelop the park, that passive space
is still important in our community facilities. So, once again, if
we look at our existing facilities, the county has done a
wonderful job of not only constructing new facilities as they're
needed, but they're also really good-quality facilities.
However, there are elements and there are places within the
community as they continue to develop that are underserved.
Now, once again, there is good news as far as setting the course.
Page 79
April 10, 2001
One particular site for a future community park has already been
identified. We said, as part of this particular manual, that there
are probably a need for three more. And as the land continues to
develop, it becomes increasingly important to identified those
sites. Once again, the good news is the parks department is
already having discussions with the school board on how to
identify sites and work together to do that as opposed to working
as separate entities.
Linkages, how people move around the community, and
we're not necessarily talking about cars. We're talking about
how everyone can move about the community. People that are
on bikes, people that are walking. And I, once again, cannot
emphasize enough the idea that seniors and children here are the
groups who we specifically target. These are people that aren't
necessarily out in cars every single day. They need to be able to
move in and around neighborhoods, be able to have access to
shopping and parks.
So our vision says is that no one should be left out of this
mix, that an important part of liveability in Collier County, if you
will, is the ability for people to access from their -- from their
place of residence any of these things throughout their
community and be able to do it safely and be able to do so at
least comfortably. So several things that we've identified, for
example, that says you should look at on your ma]or arterial
streets of being able to make sure you provide for bike lanes, be
able to provide wide, shaded sidewalks. In certain areas where
there may be wide right's of ways. There may be opportunities
for multipurpose trails like this one, for example through the
development and using already public property, being able to
make connections throughout the community.
In already urbanized parts there's these forgotten swabs of
land, such as utility corridors, that could link communities
Page 80
April 10, 2001
together with nothing more than just the addition of some trees
and a wide multipurpose path.
And then, lastly, in some areas out east, there's a potential,
as development continues to -- to grow, as -- as it continues to
happen throughout the county, to take areas such as canals,
backyards of -- of places, if you will, and either develop a system
of sidewalks, pedestrian friendly places, or even in some areas it
may already be protected for natural lands to maintain access
and enhance access through trails and so forth.
So, once again, it's another good news on the setting the
course. There is a pathway plan already in place. So continue to
fund that. Continue to make sure that shade trees are a part of
that. Wide sidewalks out in the exposed heat don't really do
much good for anyone. They need the ability to be able to -- to
move about the -- the county comfortably.
And then, lastly, to make sure that what we're forming here
is not pieces and parts of a system, but that we really are making
connections countywide, that people do have the ability to move
around the county in something other than an automobile.
And then last but not least we get to the largest piece, if you
will, of the green space plan. And that deals with natural lands.
We -- we like to say this tells the story of Collier County. The
environment here is a big reason why people have come to
Collier County, both being on the waterfront and both the natural
lands story of -- within the Collier County.
So our vision is -- is that we believe that there are other
places within the county that need some sort of protection. We --
we've got a wonderful inventory of natural lands already within
Collier County. However, there are still some needs. It's part of
trying to identify where those needs may exist. We looked at a
number of things. We wanted to make sure that we were looking
at are there areas that need protection for wetlands, buffers for
Page 81
April 10, 2001
rare and unique habitat. And there's a whole list on the screen of
things that we looked at.
Now, the way we looked at these things were almost
conceptual in nature. We wanted to see were -- are there larger
pieces within Collier County, that there may be some telling
signs, if you will, as we continue to look at a map. Maps of
Collier County has done, maps that other agencies have done,
and try to see if there's some synergy in these lands that have
been located. So, first off, looking at South Florida Water
Management district's wetlands map and all the existing public
land within Collier County, which is sort of the darker green area.
Looking at historic and existing flow-ways, looking at
threatened and endangered species. And all these red dots are
panther telemetry hits, if you will. Looking at already approved
nerper (phonetic) boundaries, nerper study areas, looking at
other lands such as the KARL boundaries and so forth, and trying
to piece all those things together to see what results, if you will.
And what you've got is, when you piece all those things together
is -- at this point what we're saying is, it's a conceptual map.
That says there are natural -- there are needs for additional
protected lands within the county, and they will either be
protected by a number of different ways, that we outlined in the
book, whether they be easements, whether they be outright
purchase. But these are some particular hot spots that have
been identified by either Collier County or a number of other
groups that really deserve almost a second look at in more
detail.
And, once again, please note, we had to throw in the big
disclaimer. This was a conceptual way of looking at it. We
haven't drawn par -- parcel boundaries, if you will, to figure out
which parcels need to be acquired -- which needs -- which one of
them needs to be thrown away, if you will, but that this was done
Page 82
April 10, 2001
as a study to see, is there some consensus on larger systems
that may need to be addressed as we continue with the process.
So it's basically what the -- what the setting the course
starts to say. A lot of people have identified that this is a, if you
will, a real hot button issue, that there are lots of different lands
to look at. And what we've said in setting the course is, let's
move forward. Let's allow some groups to move forward with the
idea that some additional lands could be purchased, could be set
aside, you name it, and could, for example, the -- the initiative
that's taken is letting the voters decide how important it is to go
ahead and purchase those additional lands.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Excuse me.
MR. DURR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In the committee's workshops,
did you get into discussion about passiveness of walkful through
nature trails --
MR. DURR: Correct, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and stuff like that?
MR. DURR: Yeah. There was a -- a point of -- there was a
recommendation that says these lands should not necessarily be
set aside, and they -- and just put away, that there should be
some sort of public access to these particular lands. So I could --
I'll -- I can flip back a few slides if you want. The -- on our vision
it actually -- one actual point of that said that public access to
these lands is important.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And -- and how do you address
the maintenance of these lands?
MR. DURR: That would all have to -- once again, we're
trying -- we're trying to set the course. That almost is done on a
parcel by parcel -- if, for example, you accumulated a number of
properties that -- and it's a question of who accumulated the
properties, who's going to manage them. All that stuff needs to
Page 83
April 10, 2001
get work out as we go.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
MR. DURR: Right.
Is it--
At a workshop.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right, Commissioner. Let me just give
you a quick example: On Vanderbilt between Bluebill all the way
up to Bonita Beach we set aside 250 or so acres. Those are all in
imperpetuity, can never be developed. But from the maintenance
side, how do you get to what the gentleman is saying? Passive
trails and all that will be a subject we will have to discuss and
figure out the land management owners of that, how will they
work with the county in terms of developing that? So we've got
the land. We just don't have it cleaned up and in a way to make
it accessible.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We don't -- we don't have to
reinvent the wheel. I mean, we're going to be approving the land
management plan for preserved area later today. So there --
there is a way to do it.
MR. DURR: Correct. Just a few words regarding letting the
voters decide, if you will, that there's been some -- at least some
interesting facts have come out in the last several years about
the success of voter-approved issues, for example, in 1999, for
example, 90 percent of 102 different referenda were approved
throughout the county. 1998 saw similar success with 84
percent. And just in Florida alone, 8 particular instances, several
of them in -- in adjacent areas, such as the Broward County bond
referendum, Boca Raton, West Palm Beach --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You don't have Lee County on
there.
MR. DURR: Lee County's another one.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Lee County--
MR. DURR: There's nine.
Page 84
April 10, 2001
MR. DOVER: We were told we're not allowed ever to refer to
Lee County; is that not correct?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, that's not correct.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. But they did it too.
MR. DOVER: No. Honestly, that -- that piece of research is
there because we are fully aware that there has been a previous
attempt to do a land acquisition referendum, and it was soundly
defeated. And so the question is, why do we think people might
support it now if a sound proposal comes forward. And part of
that depends on what the proposal is.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Exactly.
MR. DOVER: And part of it depends on recognizing that this
is a different time. And proposals which were being defeated
before are winning now in other jurisdictions.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We're going to get it right next
time.
MR. DURR: So to sum up, really, once you take all the
pieces and the parts that we've talked about within the green
space manual and put those together, we developed what we
call the conceptual green space master plan, which, once again,
goes all the way back to have we identified the ability for
everyone within Collier County to be able to have access to local
facilities, to be able to move around the county in any -- in
something other than an automobile and have access to other
larger ball field areas and larger conservation areas, and
hopefully this particular graphic starts to depict that particular
vision,
Now I'll turn it over to Bill Spikowski to tack about
implementation.
MR. SPIKOWSKI-' Good afternoon, Bill Spikowski, Spikowski
Planning Associates in Fort Myers.
Before Victor closes the presentation, I wanted to say a few
Page 85
April 10, 2001
words about implementation. As Amy said in the opening, the
resolution says you would accept the plan and endorse its
general objectives and direct the staff to begin implementation.
I want to talk about what that means and what you would see.
The -- within the document is -- in each of those green boxes
that says setting the course not shown on the screen, but in the
printed document is a very detailed list of the steps that Collier
County can take to go from where you are today into the
direction that the community character plan suggests. We
haven't talked about that because time is so limited, but that's in
your plan.
The -- if you'll go ahead with the resolution today, on June
5th you'll have a community character workshop. And one of the
things that the staff will bring to you under the direction of the
county manager is a specific suggestion on how the
implementation would go. What's most important? What can be
done in-house? What would be done this fiscal year and this
budget year and what would have to be put off because you have
other priorities this year? And they will be bringing that forward.
Excuse me. But as far as what the steps would be, we've taken
great trouble to do that, and that's because the select committee
was very adamant from day one of this project that this study
was going to say exactly how to carry it out so that if the county
commission wants to do it, they aren't left with, well, what do we
do now? Well, maybe if we just think about it for awhile, then
nothing will ever happen.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' This is really what distinguishes
this from RUDAT and all the other thousand of vision statements
we've had in this county before because now you're giving us a
how-to. And -- and I want to say this is -- these are examples of
how to. These aren't the only examples of how to, but they are
certainly good ones and -- and I appreciate that they're there
Page 86
April 10, 2001
because we haven't had that in the past. That's the distinction.
MR. SPIKOWSKI: Yes. Now, those specific steps will have
to come back to you because they're changes to your growth
management plan. They'll require public hearings. They're
changes to your Land Development Code, changes to your
budget. All of this will come back to you piece by piece. But on
June 5th you'd have a plan as to what's likely to come forward
and in what order and how it would be done.
Now, in the document itself the very -- there's a chapter
called implementation, and it's Chapter 5. All of those small
detailed recommendations are compiled. And you probably will
never read Chapter 5 from front to back because it's organized by
type. It's like if you want to find all the financing items, they're
in one place. And if you want to find the Land Development
Code, they're in one place, which really helps the people who are
implementing it. The context is easier if you look at them as part
of the plan.
However, on the very first page of -- of Chapter 5, there are
two items that aren't anywhere else in the plan, and those are
the ones I want to comment on. The first one, of course, is
within 60 days the county manager will bring you back
suggestions on where to go from here. That's the June 5th
workshop.
The second one has to do with a second resolution that you
would adopt shortly that would extend the life of the select
committee on the community character. As has been said
earlier, this is an outstanding committee. And when we first
suggested that maybe they would stay for another two years,
they gave us that look like you -- oh. You'd be very lucky if they
would agree to continue serving because they've been a great
watchdog and -- and a method of community involvement that's
helped us so much.
Page 87
April 10, 2001
We're not going to go into any of the more detailed
recommendations now. But after Victor's closing comments, if
you have any questions, I'd be happy to or anybody on our team
would be happy to respond.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' Actually, I have a comment on
the advisory committee itself. I would absolutely like to see a
resolution at our next meeting that it continues the committee.
But maybe in a couple of phases because what I'd like to see
eventually come out of this is that we -- we recharacterize or
perhaps more specifically define, for example, that our Planning
Commission, it more functions as a zoning board, it doesn't do
long-range planning. We need a community character
commission that would grow out of this group that would be our
long-range planning advisory board that would, as we look at our
staff reports, in addition to environmental advisory council and
Planning Commission, we'd see community character
commission recommendations or -- or analysis of whether or not
this proposal comports with the big-picture items in -- that -- that
we are endorsing in this community character plan. And I just
want to put that out there today because I think it's not
something we will necessarily take action on today, but as we
talk about it and as we think about this before our -- our
workshop, I think that's a -- an essential piece that just maybe
takes this advisory committee one step further so that we know
that the community character commission will continue to tell
us -- give us advice on the long range planning implementation of
the community character study.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I had the same thought,
Commissioner. I think we need to discuss that at the workshop --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- along with the -- we're talking about
having a hearing officer and how that would all play into this
Page 88
April 10, 2001
picture and how we would be structuring a planning council and
an environmental advisory council, so I think we have a number
of pieces to pull together here. Interesting thought. I think our
workshop would be a great place to discuss it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I wanted to put it out here since
this is the only opportunity we have for communication.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I understand.
MR. DOVER: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, before I -- I close, I'd
like to remind the people who might be watching at home that
they can go to the website and download the documents and
actually look at the pictures, the diagrams, read the text itself in
greater detail. But the -- the setting the course things and your
resolution and, also, the -- the detailed recommendations Bill
described are in the fine print of the document. And we
encourage people to do that.
I -- I'd -- I'd like to wrap up, since I see we are within the
time limit which is--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Amazing.
MR. DOVER: -- for all of those who thought we couldn't do it.
Just read new -- two -- two paragraphs from the implementation
chapter which I think are probably among the most important
pieces in this book. It says this: The process of building
communities of character will be the ultimate public private
partnership, individuals, developers large ones and small ones,
and a whole bunch of government agencies will all make
investments. So private dollars expended, however, will greatly
exceed the public ones. For their part, the development industry
here will need to seize this opportunity to regain the public trust
and confidence, that there is a way to have growth change and
development that makes things better rather than worse, by
building better places and more functional communities as the
norm.
Page 89
April 10, 2001
Their part, if the citizen activists, the political leaders, and
the environmentalists, want communities of character and the
other things you saw in the pictures, they will need to either
work collaboratively with the developers that are already active
in Collier County, to get them to try something new, or recruit
developers from elsewhere who have demonstrated their skill at
creating better places, or both. But this will be much, much
easier if the adversarial relationship between developers and
everybody else, which we've sensed has steadily escalated
during the sprawl era -- thank goodness that millennium is over --
we can do it the other way now. If that adversarial relationship
can be replaced by a mutually reinforcing culture of community
building, something that is normal and feels good, if the role of
coordinating the efforts by so many groups on so many fronts
falls to local government. You are the county-wide master
developer. The county is the enabler, the catalyst, and the
keeper of the vision.
So the leadership and these partnerships are particularly
important, because realizing the goals in this plan are about a
significant ship upon the part of developers and government,
away from a whole series of habits that created character less
sprawl. Therefore, the whole process begins with the county
which wields enormous power over the outcomes through
regulations, public works projects, in coordination with the other
agencies. The county is the leader and has to act first. And
thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Victor. I think it was an
excellent presentation, and I couldn't -- I would concur a hundred
percent with your -- all of your statements because I've always
defined it as livability, which is the quality of life, environmental
sensitivity, and economic feasibility. And you have put all three
legs of that stool there. And we need representatives from every
Page 90
April 10, 2001
one of those factors to be at the table to discuss this and guide
and help county government set the pace to achieve the
objectives that you have outlined for us today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Do we have speakers?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do we have speakers, Mr. Olliff?
MR. OLLLIFF: We do, Mr. Chairman. You've got six
registered speakers, and then one member of the committee who
was just here will be able to answer questions if you have them.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let's see, if we might, go to registered
speakers.
MR. OLLIFF: The first speaker is Sally Barker followed by
Brad Cornell.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sally waives.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sally Barker waives.
MR. OLLIFF: Brad Cornell then followed by Nancy Payton.
MR. CORNELL: Hi. I'm Brad Cornell. Whoops, sorry. I'm
here on behalf of Collier County Audubon Society, and I just want
to make a couple of comments. I'm very, very impressed by the
work of both the select committee and the consultants that you
have hired. I think this is a -- a remarkable report that you have
in front of you.
I want to make a couple of notes from our perspective and
from my perspective personally. I think it's interesting that -- you
know, we all have recognized the phenomenal growth that is
happening here in Collier County and the -- the problems that that
presents us with. I think that it's a very parallel situation, from
our perspective, to some of the environmental issues that we
deal with in relationship to development where, if you look at it
project by project, piece by piece, you lose the -- the
comprehensive vision that we're all striving for and the
cumulative impacts which we are all familiar with will do us in.
And this is an opportunity for all of us to grab the bull by the
Page 91
April 10, 2001
horns and take a very comprehensive look at what goes on here
in this county on every front. And I would heartily recommend
that you embrace these recommendations. And I think this
would bring us to a much better place in -- in every neighborhood.
I also want to say that we -- Audubon recognizes certainly
that for the health of our natural resources and natural
communities, it's inextricably connected to the vitality and
health of our human communities. And, therefore, not only are
we interested in the -- the green space plan, but we're interested
in the entire report. We think there are some very important
measures here that will bring us some -- bring us to better
places. And I do want to make one comment about something
called Tech Memo No. 3. And this is something that we have all
had in discussion, and I would hope that this commission would
take this up as discussion today and in the future, in the very
near future, that we need to incorporate in our comprehensive
planning and, indeed, as part of this whole process that these
recommendations are coming to us, the -- the two issues of the
urban boundary, which we would heartily recommend stay where
it is, and also the issue of cjustering and golf course
communities in the rural area. Development is happening
everywhere in the county, and the -- the problem of golf courses
being fit -- cjustering being used to justify a golf course
community, we don't feel, is appropriate. And we've said so
many, many times, and that's been an ongoing discussion, and
we believe it's appropriate at this point to register the -- that
position, both upon the part of the county, certainly that is our
position, and the urban boundary, as I said, should stay where it
is.
So, again, we -- we heartily recommend that you embrace
this report, its recommendations, and we look forward to working
with you on this because this actually mirrors what we saw
Page 92
April 10, 2001
asked of this county by the governor and cabinet. So I think
we've got for ourselves some very good options. Thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Brad. Next speaker,
please.
MR. OLLIFF: Next speaker is Nancy Payton followed by
Bruce Anderson.
MS. PAYTON: Nancy Payton representing the Florida
Wildlife Federation and the National Wildlife Federation. I'm here
today to support the community character plan objectives, and
specifically we're pleased to endorse the greenbelts in northern
Golden Gate Estates, the land acquisition referendum, the
deintensification of the remotest areas of northern Golden Gate
Estates, revisiting the Golden Gate Estates master plan with an
emphasis on natural resources and rural character, and
expanded protection of natural resources as iljustrated by the
greenways map. And also we suggest as a companion effort to
purchase those green ways and the land acquisition effort that
the county seriously look at a long-range mitigation plan, to use
your mitigation monies, impacts from roads and others, for
wetland and wildlife impacts, put that into designing a long range
master plan that would be a large habitat park or an opportunity
to purchase out in Golden Gate Estates some of those very
wonderful cypress heads that could be natural parks, passive
parks in -- in northern Golden Gate Estates, so you begin to be
creative with that money rather than just looking for the
cheapest quickest way to meet that mitigation obligation.
We support the passive nature parks in the urban area,
planting of trees throughout the urban area and hopefully
elsewhere, and a strong urban boundary and the promotion of in-
fill within the urban boundary.
Also, we have concerns about Technical Memo No. 3. And
Page 93
April 10, 2001
we ask, first and foremost, that it get on the county's website so
all folks in the community can have the opportunity to read it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's not there now, Nancy?
MS. PAYTON: It wasn't as of last night. I've been informed
at some point that it's going to be on the county's website. It is
on Dover, Kohl's website. And that's where, indeed, I went to
look at it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It needs to be on the county site.
MS. PAYTON: And the county site doesn't have the plan on
it yet for the --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There's not a link -- there's not a
link to the Dover, Kohl -- that's what I was looking for. MS. PAYTON: I'm -- I'm not--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think there has been, yeah.
MS. PAYTON: If it was there, it wasn't obvious to me. But
I'm going to address those a little bit further.
Technical Memo No. 3, as referenced by Mr. Cornell, deals
with the removal of rural land. It deals with recommendations
on rural lands regarding golf courses and gated communities.
The February 22nd, 2000, executive summary, the one that
you acted on with the contract for Dover, Kohl, specifically talks
about urban and rural settlement plan. And it says comparisons
will be drawn between desirable scenarios and growth scenarios
under current legislations. Recommendation for future land use
will be made. So it was an appropriate recommendation to be in
the plan, and we ask that it be put back in the plan, quite frankly,
because it is at the essence of the discussion that is going on
now, and it needs to be on the table for the assessment as well
as the community character effort.
We ask that the recommendations receive their proper and
necessary public discussion, and we'd like to see the documents
in the library. A $50 plan is not an economy plan for most of us.
Page 94
April 10, 2001
And it needs to be put into a format that -- that's easier for the
public to -- to read, to have access to. Not everybody has a -- a
computer that can download it and print it out. I just urge that
there be creative ways found to get the plan out to more people
in the community. One way is I know at the library I go, and
when I check out my book, there's a display of -- of books that
they're promoting. And why can't the plan be there with a one-
week checkout for people to look at it who -- who don't want to
download it, don't have $50, or don't have $10 to purchase the
economy one. Let's be creative about how we can -- can get it
out there.
I also have a statement from the National Wildlife
Federation, which I believe you-all received by e-mail that I'm
going to put into the record. Plus, I also would like to put the
Technical Memo -- Memorandum No. 3 into the record as part of
today's hearing.
In closing, we urge the commissioners to endorse setting
the course, the objectives that you've heard today. And we look
forward to being involved in the implementation and the June
workshop. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Nancy.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I ask a quick question of
staff for the next week or -- I don't know who to ask but Tom. I
haven't seen Technical Memo No. 3. I know it what I've read in
the newspaper. My question is, if it were still in -- if that -- those
recommendations or whatever that verbiage is, if it were in the
plan, would it fall under the category of these setting the course
items that would be included -- thank you.
MS. PAYTON: You're welcome. I'm sorry you don't --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: In our resolution today? In other
words, would that have been in front of us today for adoption as
a part of this resolution but for its exclusion, or is that something
Page 95
April 10, 2001
that is in the smaller details that are -- we are going to be looking
at in our workshop?
MS. TAYLOR: There -- there is a general objective setting
the course item for tech -- for memo -- Memorandum No. 3. And if
it had been -- if it had remained in the community character plan,
it would have been brought before you today.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's troubling to me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I didn't even know there was one,
by the way, until I got a call from a reporter asking me about it,
and I -- I was kind of dumbfounded. And, of course, being that it
isn't in here, you don't know that it -- that it's excluded.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So I felt that -- I was glad to have
the heads up.
MS. TAYLOR: Where -- where you will find it is on the
second page of-- I can hand these out to you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You're going to show us now
where it would have been?
MS. TAYLOR: Where -- where it would -- what the language
is that it would have been in -- .
MR. DOVER: The next-to-the-last paragraph titled "Intent"
would have become the setting the course header in that green
box,
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Let me just read it out loud.
"new suburban and urban development should be kept within the
current urban boundary rather than being allowed to creep
further into the countryside. Redevelopment and vacant acreage
inside the urban boundary should be used to accommodate most
anticipated growth.".
I am confounded about why -- I mean, it -- you know, I have
been as involved as anybody in the order with the governor and
the cabinet, and I am confounded to know -- I wish Nancy
Page 96
April 10, 2001
Lenanne were here because she's our attorney, and she's
advised that we shouldn't adopt this. But I'm confounded about
why that would be an inappropriate statement. I -- it doesn't say
thou shalt not have urban development in Immokalee or in the
eastern Collier area. I just don't understand it. I wish -- I hope
the lawyers, somebody, can tell us why that was taken out.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA.' I was going to say one thing,
though, Para. Maybe we could ask them to bring this back when
we have our land development workshop for serious
consideration. If we're ever going to do anything, that's the
place where we're going to have some teeth in it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I know. I -- and you're right. It's -
- it's largely ceremonial today. And -- and, frankly, I don't want to
get bogged down in that discussion because we have so many --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. We do.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- bigger fish to fry on our plate
today, but -- but at some time I want to understand why that had
to come out, because I don't.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we're -- and we're not even
asked to adopt. We're only asked to accept; right?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Which says and which allows you --
you know, the committee has some other things that will be
incorporated in here. This is an item that can be incorporated.
I'd say this is a framework. Maybe the language there is
troubling to legal counsels. I don't know the answer to that. I
think what they're trying to tell us is let's make sure we've got all
our I's dotted and Ts crossed before we something that may
imply that you're going to do all -- anticipated growth within the
urban boundary line. Think about that. Can that feasibly be done
in total for all the models that we have to look at?
Page 97
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It says most anticipated growth
should be.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't know. I'm not a lawyer, and I'm
not against it. And I'm saying I'm waiting for legal counsel to
comment, and perhaps we -- you know, we can work this in a
workshop and have further discussion about it.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, for -- for today, why don't we
just -- we will provide you a written memorandum from Nancy
Lenanne that would give you the background for that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That would be most helpful.
MR. OLLIFF: And then when we get to the workshop, should
the board want to do something in terms of that technical
memorandum, we can at that time.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And the only other question I
have is, we've been -- I loved -- Victor said to me on the break
that what we're really doing today is pulling back the pinball, you
know, and sending the ball out in the pinball game. And for the
next 55 days staff will be doing some work as a result of that
kickoff. What will staff not be doing that they would have done if
this three lines had also been included?
MR. OLLIFF: I would tell you absolutely nothing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, that's what I want to hear.
MR. OLLLIFF: We will come back to you as part of the
workshop. And that workshop will primarily be an
implementation plan for you. Nothing in that implementation
plan will change as a result of either your accepting or not
accepting this portion of the technical memorandum.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The next speaker is Mr. Anderson.
MR. OLLIFF: Followed by Kathy Prosser.
MR. ANDERSON: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. Let me briefly address, because I am a lawyer
and play one on TV, about the Technical Memorandum No. 3 and
Page 98
April 10, 2001
why, in my view, that it wasn't appropriate for that to be part of
the goals and objectives in your -- in your master plan. And, by
the way, I -- I appear here on behalf of the intervenors who are on
the same side as Collier County, in the pending comprehensive
plan challenge that was recently appealed to the first District
Court of appeal.
The final order in the comprehensive plan amendment
adopted to implement that final order require that the rural area
assessment process be the route that is followed by the county,
by environmental groups, farmers, developers, and all property
owners to consider ways to protect natural resources and private
property rights in the rural area. And one of the specific methods
called out for consideration in the final order and the
comprehensive plan is cjustering. By resolutions and by
ordinances the two rural assessment committees were
established to carry out the requirements of the final order. But
the community character committee was not assigned any
responsibility in the assessment process.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Bruce, there's nothing in this
three lines about cjustering. There's nothing in these three lines
that prohibits cjustering.
MR. ANDERSON: But the complaint was about language
being taken out of the draft plan and being put in the technical
memorandum.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And so my question, though,
today has to do with what about -- what about these three lines
on intent contravenes the governor's instructions to us? And I
have to say -- and I'm going to say this. And you're probably
going to get a lot if this is going to start being something we talk
about. What the governor's orders said is the hallmark of the
new plan shall be public participation. And this is part of the
public participation. This counts toward that goal. This is a
Page 99
April 10, 2001
huge public participation. And just because we have step 1,
which is to gather data in Immokalee doesn't mean that that's
the only way or the only bit of information we're going to
consider. That was one step, and this is at least as equal, at
least as important as, in my judgment, because the hallmark is to
be public participation, and that's what this is. So it's not -- it's
not like the Immokalee study, the rural fringe, and the eastern
Collier properties is the way and the only way; it's part of the way
that we get to where the government and cabinet are telling us
to go.
MR. ANDERSON: I don't disagree with that, but there need --
there -- there hasn't been any coordination with those
committees.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, there was supposed to be.
We asked there to be.
MR. ANDERSON: Just generally, the -- the community
character report is a step in the right direction, and it is
refreshing to have another set of eyes from the outside to come
in and look at what we have going on here. We may not agree
with everything, but it causes us to -- to pause and to think and
to consider something different, and that's a good thing. It's
important that we carefully work through the details of the
implementation, and I look forward to -- to doing that.
And, lastly, I want to applaud Victor's closing comments
about the need for the environmental community and the
development community to work collaboratively for the
betterment of the community. I always endeavor to do that, and
I think that's the way to go. We need to be able to sit down and
Thank you.
Does that -- that conclude
talk and quit demonizing one another.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
our public?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
One more,
Page 100
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, wait. One more. I'm sorry.
MR. OLLIFF: Kathy Prosser to be followed by Bob
Krasowski.
MS. PROSSER: Good morning, Commissioners, planning
staff, members of the public, I'm Kathy Prosser, president and
CEO of The Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
First, I would like to commend the county commission for
exploring ways for intelligent growth in Collier County through
the community character plan. Your commitment to this process
speaks to your frustrations with the current growth in this
community and the development patterns here. Maybe more
importantly, it speaks to your desire to make positive change for
all of us. So on behalf of The Conservancy, we applaud your
efforts.
And on behalf of everyone who is coming to Collier County,
we share your frustrations as the area's liveability continues to
be eroded by sprawl, traffic, and congestion.
Today with the executive summary of the community
character plan completed, you have a wonderful opportunity
before you to take the next step in furthering your commitment
to doing a better ]ob of managing growth.
The Conservancy asks you to, number one, embrace this
plan; number two, continue to provide the will and the guidance
to ensure that county staff propose stuff measures to reduce
loopholes in the Land Development Code and in the county
comprehensive plan making it easier for you to say no to sprawl
and to say yes to smart growth.
We ask you to apply smart growth techniques to planning
decisions through changes in the Land Development Code and
the comp. Plan, and we call upon you as commissioners to enact
and enforce rules that regulate golf course development beyond
the urban boundary so that such development, if necessary,
Page 101
April 10, 2001
occurs in a thoughtful and a forward-thinking way. And we ask
you to reauthorize the select committee on community character
to ensure that specific measures are taken to implement the
recommendations in this plan, and The Conservancy asks that
we continue to be a part of what we believe to be one of the
most important things occurring in Collier County today.
But even before full implementation of this plan, we ask that
you officially endorse a county-wide referendum for a
conservation lands acquisition program like 24 other Florida
counties have already done.
Finally, Commissioners, we can sustain things that
contribute to the quality of life here in Southwest Florida, even in
the face of unprecedented growth. But we need your buy-in to do
that. So we thank you, again, for focusing on growth problems
here in this county and for your commitment to finding solutions.
The Conservancy welcomes the opportunity to work with you in
finding those solutions. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thankyou. Next--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just one question that concerns
the -- is The Conservancy working on a -- a green tax initiative
study, polling and --
MS. PROSSER: Well, we don't like to call it a green tax
initiative, but we certainly are looking at ways to fund a land
acquisition referendum. We are in the process of getting a poll
ready now to find out the willingness of the community. We
believe there is a willingness.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Would -- would you share that
with the -- the board members?
MS. PROSSER: Poll results? Sure.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We will be covering that in a
Page 102
April 10, 2001
workshop, as I understand it, and we will be sharing that with
commissioners as soon as it is ready.
MS. PROSSER: Correct. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you.
MR. OLLIFF: The next and last registered speaker is Bob
Krasowski. As Bob is making his way to the podium, I'll just
mention that both Sally Barker and Norm Trebilcock from the
committee were here and available to answer questions, as well
as I'm sure Jim Rideoutte is if you have any. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, I'm Bob Krasowski. I was here on another issue today
but would like to take the opportunity as a citizen, resident of
Collier County, to speak representing just myself.
At first blush here -- I haven't read the entire document but
plan to do so if the opportunity is available. I'd like to say that
I'm very much -- much impressed with this presentation, and I
find it in inspiring. I think that the values that were presented
here are resident-driven values. Too often it's been the
perception, probably the reality, that much of what's
accomplished or done in this town now are developer driven. It's
primarily just to -- in the business to advance the cause of the
business of development, and we've been in great need of the
resident values to -- to be to be presented.
I -- I like the way -- the appearance that this committee and
the consultants seem to present themselves in an academic type
of setting. We don't have salesmen here trying to sell us a
position. We have educated people evaluating the overall -- what
our overall options are. I -- I really like the idea that -- of thinking
outside of the box. And when you use academians and educated
professionals in a broad application, you get a lot of this thinking
out of the box. That's the essential core element of design is to
Page 103
April 10, 2001
brain storm and come up with creative, innovative ideas and then
to bring them down to the application mode.
As far as this committee goes, please don't let these people
go. You know, use your powers to detain them and maybe put
them to work on other issues that need this level of
sophistication. And, of course, I have to suggest that they
become involved in our solid waste plan. Poor Mr. Mudd here is
being asked to do so much all by himself, and he can use a little
help. You should pay him double for all of the things you've
assigned to him.
I have questions of the committee. And -- and when I sit
down, I'll -- I'll listen to -- to their response. I'm curious to know if
in this plan there are included in their designs, community
designs, the avail -- the -- the structures, the infrastructure for
using the gray water that comes as a result of our waste
treatment. Is that addressed in the plan? And then also, is the --
is the structure of these communities more favorable to the
handling of waste as far as, you know, recyclables and -- and all
of that stuff that we have to deal with? Nice talking with you,
and see you in a little while.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Bob. You know, in regards
to your asking about putting the meat on the skeleton, and I
think that we have the skeleton, and it will be up to us to look at
all those issues as we go forward. I think within this framework
it would be an opportunity to achieve those specifics, but I don't
think that they are specifically outlined here, but Mr. Victor, you
can answer that.
MR. DOVER: Just a comment on water. The plan does get
into some specifics about storm water management, particularly
overcoming some obstacles and the conventional methods or
best practices that work against great neighborhoods, but the
nature of these neighborhoods that are described and the better
Page 104
April 10, 2001
model in the plan is that they are in every way more resource
efficient. So it's very much in keeping with the theme that the
gentleman mentioned and would be a very appropriate place to
introduce meth -- innovative methods like the gray water reuse
and so on. That's consistent with the idea of minimizing the
amount of travel and the amount of -- of footprint on the earth for
a given development. So I see why -- no reason why not.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Victor. Our water
symposium in January, and we'll also deal with that issue that
we're just currently starting to plan, so it will not go unnoticed or
not be eliminated from all our discussions.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I attended most of the
workshops that the --the Dover, Kohl people put on. I thought
they were fascinating, by the way. And it was amazing how
much you learn when all of a sudden you think out of the box, as
Bob said. And I hadn't before. Everything I'd been told I just
believed. And here they're telling us, you know, that you can --
you can increase density, and I heard that you shouldn't, and
then you -- and that you don't have to cjuster. I -- they've -- what
they've done is helped us to learn from our mistakes. And, as
Victor said, now is the time to firmly look at smart growth,
because what we want to create is harmony within the elements
of our community and we need to create a community character.
I -- I really feel we need to accept this plan, and I'd like to add
the Tech Memo No. 3 to accept as well, if we can do that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But if we were doing it, we would
only be accepting those three lines -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- because that would be the only
piece that's relevant out of the memo. I -- you know, I can't see
why not. But the lawyer's told us not to, and it's such a touchy
and legal process.
Page 105
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The lawyers told us we can not?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think we're going to
discuss this during our workshop.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Do the lawyers tell us that we
should or should not?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I want to hear from the lawyers.
I think that's the question, and I really want to know. And this is
the thing that should have been anticipated. I expect counsel to
tell me when I sit here on the dais that this is coming up and this
is what our position is.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And it would be nice not to read
it in the newspaper.
MR. LITSINGER: Mr. Chairman, Stan Litsinger,
comprehensive planning manager. First of all, I'd like to
apologize for the fact that you were surprised by Technical
Memorandum No. 3. And I'd like to make another comment
relative to the decision not to include it, and it is relevant to the -
- the comments that Mr. Anderson made in his conflict with the
tools that were given to us by the governor and the cabinet in
their final order as a way to deal with difficult private property
rights and leave some tools in the toolbox for allowing use in the
areas outside of the urban area which provide protection of
natural resources and habitat and wetlands, and we have so far
very few tools left that we felt that if we eliminated cjustering
before we ever got to the recommendations of the committee,
that we would be eliminating a specific tool that we need to
address.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But, Stan, be clear. What
Commissioner Fiala is talking about is the three lines under
"intent" on the second page. It doesn't say the word "cjuster" in
there. It says "preserve the urban boundaries.".
MR. LITSINGER: And I'm going to address that right now.
Page106
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. So, please, don't talk to us
-- if I may say, please don't tell us, because it's distracting to
hear about cjustering when that -- we're talking about these
three lines.
MR. LITSINGER: Yes, ma'am. And I was going to add, on the
second page, the three lines of intent would have been included
in setting the course. And as you were previously told as part of
setting the course, it included implementation strategies which
we were to come back to you on June the 5th and discuss. And
immediately below that, having included the intent in
communicate -- excuse me, in Technical Memo No. 3, the
direction to staff on June the 5th would be to come back to you
to discuss amending the description of the agricultural and rural
designation so that suburban and urban development can no
longer occur in the desig -- this designation by cjustering, one
unit per 5 -acre of rural density in the suburban development
patterns. The allowable density in this category would not
change, but new golf courses would not be permitted
categorically. I added that emphasis. And cjustering of
allowable -- allowable dwelling units would be allowed only to the
extent that it allows increased protection of native lands and
rural character. Now, the definition of how that would protect
native lands and rural character is part of the process that's
taking place in your assessment committees. Therefore we --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Please don't tell us that if we
adopt this resolution you put in front of us we are actually
adopting more than what's on the piece of paper. MR. LITSINGER: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, help me, Tom, because it's
AorB.
MR. OLLIFF: Start, is there any opposition to the three
sentences under intent?
Page 107
April 10, 2001
MR. LITSINGER: Staff has no opposition at all.
MR. OLLIFF: So if -- if that's the policy direction from the
board and you want to at least send that message, that is a
general broad policy intent, and we can talk about details as we
work our way through this, I think that's fine.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Unless Nancy LeNan has said
this puts us in trouble with the government and the cabinet. I
read that in the newspaper, so is that true or not true?
MR. OLLIFF: My impression was it wasn't those three
sentences under intent. It was those -- issues about the
agricultural lands below that. And if you're talking about those
three sentences of intent, I think you ought to move that as part
of your motion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So is that what you intended in
your motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question: The resolution, the
changes, can you show me where those changes are because --
MS. TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What paragraph?
MS. TAYLOR: In -- in the opening title, it had said approves.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are you comparing the resolution
in our packet with the one that came in yesterday.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm -- I'm sorry.
MS. TAYLOR: In the opening title it had said endorse the
community character plan, okay, and the general objectives. It
was changed -- the opening title was changed to -- to accept the
community character plan and to endorse the general objectives.
The operative language in the last paragraph was to also
make that consistent with the title and the executive summary,
Page 108
April 10, 2001
which was to accept the community character plan and to
endorse its general objectives. Those are the only changes in
the resolution.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner, it is in the last
paragraph under the resolution unrevised one, 8-A-1 this morning.
It says last paragraph, the Board of County Commissioners
hereby accepts the community character plan and endorses the
general objectives.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And -- and what I read here,
whereas the general objectives of the community care --
character plan will be implemented.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, that is up -- and that -- thank you.
That's in a paragraph before. I was going to suggest to the
people making the motion, Commissioners, that whereas the
general objectives of the community character plan, instead of
they will be implemented, I say may be implemented through the
growth management plan which says it's like a menu. I think
Commissioner Coletta used that term that I heard, and not
everybody is going to pick the same things off the menu. It just
gives you flexibility to review all of this in a workshop. That was
my only concern.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I make just a -- an alternate
suggestion to that that I think accomplishes maybe the same
goal, that it would -- that that whereas would read, whereas the
method for implementation of the general objectives of the
community character plan is through growth management plan,
Land Development Code, and other amendments.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't have a problem with that.
Counsel?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't like may. May is too soft.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well --
Page 109
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Say it one more time.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The method -- I'm going to just
write it down. The method for adoption of the general objectives
of the community character plan is through growth management
plan, Land Development Code, and other amendments. MR. HENNING: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA.' That -- that basically says about
the same thing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: A little more.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It says a little more. It tells a
methodology, and I know we're probably playing with words, but
I'm going to go to my planning and corporate experience. When I
see the word "method for," that gives me a lot of opportunity to
get to where I need to be versus, and it may be -- it may be too
soft and will be is like an almost --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thou shalt.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- thou shalt. This gives me a
compromise position which I feel comfortable in.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I amend my -- my motion to --
to use those words.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The language that I suggested?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The language you suggested on the
adoption part. Well, I don't have to amend my motion, come to
think of it. That wasn't in my motion. I just mean to accept this -
- this amend -- or the resolution --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Accept the resolution with the -- the
revisions of accepts and the statement -- the method for adoption
is through the growth management plan, land development, etc.,
and other amendments.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second agrees.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All right. Any further
Page 110
April 10, 2001
discussion? All in favor signify by saying aye. (Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. Motion
carries 5-0. Thank you very much, everyone. We will now recess
until 12 -- 1:45.
(A lunch break was held from 12:45 p.m. To 1:51 p.m.)
Item #8A2
COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION PERMIT NO. 59.778, "MCDANIEL
LAKE COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION", LOCATED IN SECTIONS 20,
21, 28, 29, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, BOUNDED ON
THE NORTH BY VACANT LOT, ON THE SOUTH BY RANDALL
BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAY, ON THE WET BY OCCUPIED LOT,
AND ON THE EAST BY VACANT LOT - APPROVED WITH
STIPULATIONS
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Welcome back to the afternoon
session, Board of County Commissioners. Welcome, Mr. McNees,
to our afternoon session.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Welcome, Chairman Carter.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, thank you, Commissioners. We
have a quorum. We are going to go forward. We are on Item --
we're right here. We're item -- on A -- 8-A-2.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm
Stan Chrzanowski. I'm with the Collier County development
engineering department. The item you see before you has been
before the commission before. Lamar Daniels has an excavation
that he's doing on Randall Boulevard approximately halfway
between Everglades and DeSoto right along the canal that runs
halfway between Everglades and DeSoto, north/south.
The petition was brought up before, and one of the problems
that the commission had was they wanted to know how -- how
Page 111
April 10, 2001
Mr. McDaniel's neighbors were feeling about the excavation. So
Mr. McDaniel went out, and if you look at the visualizer, if you
look at the screen, he went and contacted about 18 of his
neighbors. Fifteen of them, I think, appear on this drawing. I
don't know if you can see the yellow that's highlighted.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, sir.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. I can't see it from here, but my
eyes ain't what they used to be when I was young. Anyway, he
contacted those neighbors. Of all the neighbors, the two in
orange had an objection to the excavation; the rest of them had
no objection to the excavation. One of the people had an
objection and then -- or had no objection and then changed her
mind, and now she's concerned only that Mr. McDaniel build a
house when he's done and make sure the lake looked pretty
when it's done. The other is -- unfortunately for Mr. McDaniel, it's
one of our inspectors who lives right across from where he
intends excavating. And I'll read the letter Eric Shram asked me
to read to you.
'1 reside at the above res -- residence which is 3280 Randall
Boulevard and observed the progression of this excavation with
the knowledge of the agenda and knowing that certain approval
through credible sources.".
That's before we actually had the challenge by
Commissioner Coletta as to whether or not we'll continue doing
excavations in the estates. When this excavation first came in a
long time ago, we were allowing excavations. And Eric was
under the impression that excavations were just going through
the commission.
"1 didn't want to proceed with a negative response to this
particular excavation site. However, when Commissioner James
Coletta wanted to reconsider the excavations in the Golden Gate
Estates, I thought this would be an excellent opportunity for the
Page 112
April 10, 2001
Collier County Commission, having an expert who lives across
the street, to express my opinions regarding the proposed
McDaniels site. A respectable contractor wouldn't even have
equipment on site before approval from the County Commission.
However, this same ethical approach wasn't the process that Mr.
McDaniel felt he needed to adhere to.".
Eric did take some pictures of the site. "safety is my
highest concern regarding this project. I have two children
attending Big Cypress Middle and Elementary School. I asked
them how many bus stops are along Randall Boulevard, and I was
told approximately 15. This particular section of Randall
Boulevard between Everglades Boulevard and east to the first
bridge is the only section that hasn't been improved. The south-
side lane from edge of road to center of street is 8 1/2 foot wide.
The north side of the road is 9 foot wide, and the dump truck is 8
foot wide. With approximately 15 bus stops, this is not adequate
safety for our children. And there's the smaller concern of
damage to the road which is inevitable with a plan for Mr.
McDaniels of 50 to 60 truckloads per day. Roads can be
repaired, but it shouldn't be at the taxpayers' expense when
someone is making a profit. You can replace the street but not a
young child's life and the devastation it will cause to their
family.".
The street in question, Randall Boulevard, I respect Eric's
views, and knowing that he's across from Mr. McDaniel, I'm sure,
will keep Mr. McDaniel more than honest. The street you're
looking at, if you look at the number of lots on here, and I -- I
heard that community character presentation. At present, Peggy
Jarue who keeps this list up to date of street numbers has 75
lots shown on that I mile of street. That's a lot of homes.
Randall Boulevard is one of the main roads coming in and out of
that section. It has the bridge that goes across the street,
Page 1t 3
April 10, 2001
across the -- across the canal. So you can expect a lot of traffic.
I think a lot of the people realize that as the trucks coming to Mr.
McDaniel's site approach this site, they will be slowing down.
It's the through traffic that I would be more concerned with, and
I'm con -- sort of amazed that children would be walking along
Randall Boulevard to school. I don't know how that works out in
the estates. I imagine when we get more houses on this street
that something will have to be done like a sidewalk.
Mr. McDaniel is here to answer any questions you have. If
you need a deep presentation as to the character of the
excavation, it's 32,000 cubic yards, 2,000 truck loads. If he does
50 trucks a day, it will be done in 8 weeks. If he does 25 trucks a
day, it will be done in -- in 4 months, 16 weeks. We don't
consider it a long excavation. And the amount of road impact fee
he'll have to do, he'll have to pay, would probably more than
cover any damage to the road. He will have to get a right-of-way
permit and repair or harden the entrance off the road so it -- it
seems like a fairly wide open site. There shouldn't be much site
hazard.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is he going to have to carry the
bonds that we talked about with the previous excavators? MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that bond is for how much
again?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: $10,000.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I -- I tell you what. I'd like to
hear your presentation, and we'll -- we'll have some more
questions probably.
MR. McDANIEL: Okay. Well, he pretty well explained it all.
I'm just trying to dig a lake, 2.4 acres. And I just want to move
the dirt down Randall, because, you know, I was asked to move it
back toward the DeSoto, which I'm sure some will go that route,
Page 114
April 10, 2001
but probably more than likely I'll be the closest one in. So if I
route all my traffic back south or east, you know, I would
probably lose -- be there longer, more or less.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question or two, if I may. The --
what -- what do you estimate the -- the length of time will be for
your excavation on the very -- the longest period you would need
to do this?
MR. McDANIEL: Jim, I really can't say. I'm figuring probably
five to six months, if that. It may not take that. It may go over
that because I have never done one this big. So I'm thinking four
to five months.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The concern for the children
along the -- at the bus stop, how would you address that or
answer that?
MR. McDANIEL: Well, I -- I've been out there personally
myself. I see dump trucks running from Everglades to DeSoto,
and they're moving quite rapidly. I feel like any truck that leaves
Everglades going to my pit, which will be less than a mile, they
will be slowing down to turn in. So I feel like they will be safer
because the traffic will be slowing down. You know, even if
someone is going faster to go to another pit, he's going to have
to slow down for my truck to turn in.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is -- is this the last one
that's in the system now, or is there one more?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: There's one more. You have the one
that was submitted partial but paid their fees and all before the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: -- deadline.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And when will that be coming
before us?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Two weeks.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Life will be a lot easier once we
Page 115
April 10, 2001
get through these. We'll have some set guidelines to work. I
have some reservations but no real objections to what he wants
to do, considering the fact that this paperwork all started before
we started our move to change the ordinances and we just got
one more after it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING.' It looks like to me that Mr.
McDaniel is -- is going to be using -- utilizing digging up this pit
during the summertime when the kids are out of school.
Therefore, this shouldn't be a big concern about kids at a bus
stop. Mr. McDaniel, I've known him for a few years and know
that he's a responsible person and the people that he works with.
So, Mr. Coletta, if you have no objections, I'll go ahead and make
a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And I'll second the
motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Henning. We have a second by Commissioner
Coletta to approve. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. Motion
carries.
Do we have any public speakers? I forgot that, Mr. McNees.
MR. MCNEES: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
HCOMMISSIONER COLETTA: You got lucky there.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I got lucky there.
MR. McNEES: I'd keep you honest.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
MR. McDANIEL: Thank you.
Item #8A3
Page 116
April 10, 2001
COLLIER COUNTY NATURAL RESOURCES DIRECTOR TO APPLY
FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE DERELICT VESSEL REMOVAL
GRANTS - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The next Item is A-3 and 4 that were
moved from the consent agenda this morning to talk about the
county natural resources director to apply for a derelict vessel
removal grant and to use it then for artificial wreath -- reef
construction.
MR. DUNNUCK: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, John Dunnuck, community development environmental
services interim administrator.
If I can answer any questions regarding these two issues, I
believe the question was regarding the first one on the derelict
vessels why can't we take these derelict vessels offshore and
actually use them as part of the artificial reef. And under our
current permit with the Department of Environmental Protection
and the Army Corps of Engineers, we can't take projects that are
fiberglass or wood based offshore to use them as reefs. These
vessels are wood and -- and -- and fiberglass.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And, of course, that would take
care of the one after that. The fact that we're going to be
spending money to build reefs out there in the gulf.
MR. DUNNUCK: Absolutely. We're only allowed to use steel
and -- and concrete.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So this really becomes a DEP
directive, and we really don't have any control. MR. DUNNUCK: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The reason I pulled it was
because it wasn't obvious when you looked at it that there would
be -- it seemed like the two were parallel to each other. It made
no sense at all. On one hand, we were spending money. In the
Page 117
April 10, 2001
other hand, we're hauling stuff to the landfill.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. Well, I concur, Commissioner
Coletta. I think it was a good poll, and the right questions were
asked.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So I make a motion that -- do I
have to do each one separate, or can I do them together?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think you have to do them separate.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Separate. Okay. I make a
motion that we pass the first one which is the -- the --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Authorize county natural resources --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right -- to apply for the grant for
the -- be able to haul the boats to the landfill. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Mac'Kie. Any discussion? Any
public speakers? All in favor signify by saying aye. (Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. Motion
carries 5-0.
Item #8A4
BID #01-3209 FOR ARTIFICIAL REEF CONSTRUCTION - AWARDED
TO MC CULLEY MARINE, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$45,000
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I make another motion that we
go forward with a grant to build the reefs out in the gulf with the
C and D material.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's a motion by Commissioner
Coletta, second by Commissioner Mac'Kie. Any discussion? Any
Page 118
April 10, 2001
public speakers? Hearing -- seeing, hearing none, all in favor
signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.) .
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Motion carries 5-0. Thank you.
Item #8C1
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
CONSENT ORDER - APPROVED
That takes us to C-1, public utilities. Mr. Mudd.
MR. MUDD: For the record, I'm Jim Mudd, the public utilities
administrator, Collier County. Commissioners, I gave you a copy
of the consent order this morning. It's at your -- at your table,
and I'd like to take you through that process a little bit so that
you can see it. I'd like you to turn to page 2, if I could, and we'll
start at paragraph 6.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Are you basically going to point
out to us what's different from what we previously approved?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. And what I'm also going to try for
the audience to do is put up this --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There you go.
MR. MUDD: This Powerpoint slide so they can see it, too, at
home.
First under paragraph 6 is to -- to put the 5-million-gallon-a-
day expansion to the north facility and place the facility into
operation by I December, 2001. That is not a change.
Paragraph 7 is to insure that at least half of the capacity
aeration basins for the 5-million-gallon-a-day expansion to the
north facility is available for flow equalization by December 1,
2001. That is a little bit different than the original which said it
had to be on line by I October. It's -- it's part of the plan
expansion, and I have pretty good reassurances that we'll have it
Page 119
April 10, 2001
on I October and meet the -- the I December deadline and be
able to do that process, so that's a little bit different than the
original.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And is that supposed to be
referring to the north facility? MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: All right. I'm confused then
because --
MR. MUDD: Part of the -- part of the 5-million-gallon
expansion is aeration tanks, and what they're basically saying is
we have to have the ability, when that aeration tank comes on
board, to use half of it as an equalization tank and use the other
half for aeration. Now, you can do that because the flows won't
be 5 million gallons a day when it comes on line. They'll be
something far less than that. They'll probably only use about a
million gallons of that 5-million-gallon expansion.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. Thank you.
MR. MUDD: If we could turn to the next page, page 3,
paragraph 8, says that we will~ within 60 days, modify our north
facility to insure that the expansions to the north facility have
adequate effluent disposal capability. That's reject water and
effluent. That means that we're going to have to bring some of
the customers that are on the wait list -- we have to bring them
forward. We're doing that right now with letters to see if they're
still interested in connecting up to the effluent system. And
we're probably going to have to think about deep injection wells
within the next two years in order to make sure that we have
adequate reject water facilities to take it if -- if in case we get
high turbidities, things like that, and we can't keep the reclaimed
water to standard to put it out to irrigation.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Can I ask you what the
Page 120
April 10, 2001
difference is between reject water and effluent?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. The effluent is basically reclaim
water, okay. But when I can't -- when -- when we can't make the
effluent reclaim water standard, okay, to put it out to irrigation,
like we had some problems this year with it because we had high
organic loads and the time in the -- the time in the plant needed
to be increased but yet the flows were forcing us to move it out
so that we couldn't keep it in there longer, then you get into
reject water, and it's not reclaimed any water. And it's a fine line
as far as the standard is concerned.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's not quite as clean as
reclaimed water.
MR. MUDD: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So what do you do with reject
water?
MR. MUDD: You have to dispose of it. And that's what those
perc ponds we had -- that's why we had some overflows this
year. And that 1.6 million gallons that went over the reject pond,
it made -- it made secondary standards as far as the Florida --
Florida Statutes are concerned, but it didn't make the reclaim
standards. So it had to go out to the perc ponds. And we either
have to evaporate it or it has to perc it out. In that particular
case we started hauling it out with a truck to take it down to the
south plant in order to be treated.
But -- but it is a problem. We only have about -- about a day
and a half's worth of capacity out in those ponds for reject water.
Now what do you do if you're out of compliance for more than a
day and a half? You have to figure out what you're going to do
with it.
Part of the process -- and as we go down here, we're going
to talk about modifying our permit to go to the north water reject
ponds not only in the wet season but to do it in the dry season.
Page 121
April 10, 2001
That's part of this consent order so that we can take an
additional 4.5 to 6 million gallons out of the north plant and drop
it down the deep injection wells at the north water plant that's
just east of 951 on Vanderbilt Beach Road. So it's quite a
distance to take it, and that when we're rejecting we're also not
sending water out to the reclaim facilities, so we'll have about a
nine-hour hiatus as we change the -- the system over.
What I'm basically saying is the water now in the plant
meets re -- we're rejecting, and there could be an instance where
we now have to go back to reclaim because it meets the
standard. It's going to take me nine hours to clean out that pipe.
I'm going to have to give it chlorine shock as it goes down that
deep injection well to meet standards so I can turn on the
reclaim water irrigation system.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the difference between the ASR
and the deep water is -- deep well injection is once you put it
down deep well injection, it's never again to be used; right?
MR. DUNNUCK: That's right, ma'am. We never see it again.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's gone forever. I mean, we only
have one supply of water on this good earth that God gave us,
and that goes down there never to be used again; is that right?
MR. MUDD: Well, when you set it down there, you put it in a
briny aquifer, and it's basically salt after that, salt, saltwater. It
We're not pumping
It's too far down. Did I
mixes with it, and we never see it again.
anything out of that deep injection well.
answer your question, ma'am?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Mr. Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Mudd, are you going to be
able to submit the application within 60 days ? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Then after that what kind of
Page 122
April 10, 2001
requirements are going to be to have that --
MR. MUDD'. Once the application is there, it will be a time
line of when those things have to come on line, and that will be
part of that application. And once that application is there, there
will be a requirement to bring those things on line based on that
time line -- in order to -- in order to stay in compliance with our
permit at the north plant.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We don't know what that time
line is at this point.
MR. MUDD: I need to run that through. We got to do some
A/E work, architect/engineering work, some engineering work on
this process to make sure exactly when it needs to come on line
and look at the entire system that we have.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: I wish I had that answer right now.
So we'll meet -- so we'll meet that 60-day window on -- on
that particular requirement.
Number 9 is a modification of the north facility to
incorporate secondary effluent disposal down that -- down the
water plant deep injection using the -- the reclaim water
irrigation system main that runs out that way. We're in the
process of -- of doing that permit right now, and we've got to
basically show them -- we've already done a test with one well.
We were able to put 4.6 million gallons a day down that well, and
that was only with one -- when the second well comes on, we'll
be able to get close to 6 million, because part of that well still
has to be there for the reject water out of the water treatment
plant, so it has to be a shared thing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can I just comment there that I
understand that, you know, while we don't have ASR -- that
during the rainy season we are going to have to dispose of some
of this, right, obviously we can't -- we don't have enough of it in
Page 123
April 10, 2001
the dry season and in the wet season we've just got to get rid of
it since we don't have a capacity to store it. MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Something that I hope is
something that can be put on our long-range agenda for looking
at is the possibility of duplicating what I think the City of Naples
is doing, and that is putting in a dual water system in
neighborhood by neighborhood and financing it by having the
neighborhoods pay for it by paying potable water rates for
irrigation until the capital is repaid. And I -- I just wanted to get --
say that in a public meeting because I think it's such a good idea.
I hope it's something that the board would agree we should at
least research.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, Commissioner Mac'Kie, if
you -- at our -- I think it is water resource workshop, is that
Commissioner Coletta said that we want to mandate future
developments to go to the dual system.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, yeah. But I'm talking about
retrofitting existing neighborhoods, how we might be able to
finance that.
MR. MUDD: There are -- there are lots of developments right
now that have the dual system and are just down -- and are just
down the list, and they -- and they don't have -- we don't have the
water yet, so a lot of the new developments are taking that on as
a -- as a mandate, yes. And -- and we plan to have the ordinance
changed so that new developments will have a dual -- dual
system.
We -- we also have 71 customers on a wait list already ready
to do exactly what Commissioner Mac'Kie has to say. As soon as
that water comes on line, we have close to 9 billion gallons a
year that's on that wait list.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. That's the challenge: Get more
Page 124
April 10, 2001
of it so we can use it.
MR. MUDD: Well, with the expansions and -- and more
people using the -- the facilities, you'll have more water to -- to --
to get rid of and that way in the irrigation system.
I'd like to move to -- and, oh, by the way, any construction
that needs to transpire -- and there's a couple valves that we
need change for that -- that reject water permit to the -- to the
north water plant -- need to be done by I December, 2001. We'll
be able to -- to make that time line.
Number -- paragraph No. 10 is to submit an application for
modification to the facility for a temporary interconnect of the
reclaimed waterlines between the north facility and the south
facility. We've got to be able to submit that application within 60
days. We're working on it right now. We'll make that time line.
This application shall include provisions for disposal of a portion
of the north facility effluent in the Class I injection well. And the
construction needs to be complete by December 1, 2001. We can
do that.
Not only are we going to do that but we're also looking at
another interconnect. We're looking at three sites trying to
determine the best one where this permit will be in plus we'll
have other connection permit in and the interconnect there so
that if we're doing reclaim water out of the north and the south
needs it, then I'll be able to ship reclaim water instead of doing it
as sewage. You're darned if you do, and you're darned if you
don't in this particular instance. But if I -- if I can keep that
system open for reclaim water instead of using it for sewage, it
would help us in the long run. And then if I can use the -- the
other sewage interconnect between the north and the south, we
can just keep that open.
You have to understand the north system is under about 40
PSI pressure. The south system isn't under that kind of pressure.
Page 125
April 10, 2001
So it's kind of like the city interconnect. They don't have that
kind of pressure because the north system's all manifolded
together. So when you hook it to the south side, it's going to go
from higher pressure to lower pressure, no problem. It's trying to
get it to go in the other direction that you need that pump
facility.
Paragraph No. 11, we have to submit an application for
modification of the north facility to install adequately designed
flow equalization surge tanks at the north facility within 60 days
of the date of this consent order.
And then paragraph 12 is that equalization surge tanks need
to be in the ground or on the ground by November 1, 2002.
We can do that, and I'd like to stop and digress just a
second. Last time we talked about the zeon nanofilter system.
It was a 1.25-million-gallon-a-day facility. What we're doing right
now is we're balancing: Do we need that or we -- can we bring
the equalization tanks on earlier and use them in a manual
mode? You know, 25 years ago we were working equalization
tanks in the -- in the sewer business by the manual mode, okay.
And it wasn't by some computer-driven thing, okay. So using it in
the manual mode for one season isn't -- isn't a show stopper.
And that seems to appease the -- the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection a little bit more than that zeon
nanofilter system. So we're weighing that.
I don't want to get the county into spending money, $4.8
million for a nanofilter system, when, if I've got to bring
equalization tanks on, if I can get the equalization tanks on and I
can get them here in the December time frame of this year in a
manual mode and we can put all the motors in after the high
season next year and be ready to go fully automated for the
season after next, we're weighing that possibility.
It probably is a good -- it's a good counter to make sure that
Page 126
April 10, 2001
we're good stewards of the taxpayers' dollars and we just don't
jump on something that's technology in order -- in order to go
that way.
Now I am in a meeting this week with Orange Tree to talk
about if we did get the nanofilter would they be willing to buy it
from us as a used product so that we could recover maybe some
of our costs. So we're doing all of those options, and we're doing
that cost benefits analysis to make sure we make the right
choice.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Mudd. For the --
for the taxpayers' benefit of --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, that's the purpose of a cost
benefit analysis. That will take us where we need to go. I agree.
That's great.
MR. MUDD: Paragraph 13 is the respondent shall submit a
comprehensive review of the respondent's current collection
systems and facilities. This is basically the master plan. It --
and -- and the requirement is to have that to them by I October of
this year. We will do that, and we will make that -- and then
there's some stipulated requirements that we have annual
capacity analysis reports that have to be submitted to the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection on -- starting on July 1,
2002, and ending on -- I July, 2005, will be the last one. Now, I
want you to pay attention to that one, July 2005, because that's
when that consent order is over, okay, when I submit that last
report.
Paragraph 14, a rather lengthy, but it's basically saying that
next 10-million-gallon-a-day add-on at the north plant, the design
for it, has to be -- the application has to be at the -- at the
Fort Myers office on 16 January, 2002. And then when you go
down to paragraph 15, it says that that expansion needs to be in
operation by January 1, 2005. We'll be able to meet both of those
Page 127
April 10, 2001
requirements.
Paragraph 16, respondent shall complete an expansion of
the south Pacific -- the south facility to 16 million gallons a day,
maximum monthly flow by November 1, 2003. The plan is in
place. In order to do that, we should make that with no problem.
And I talked with the -- with the construction firm that's doing the
design build -- and that was Montgomery Watson -- on Friday, and
they're raring to go in this process, and they understand the
suspense dates and the things that need to be done.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you're talking about not only the
3 million you were going to do but then the additional 5 million;
right?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. This is -- this is to do it one time
and one time only and not put that poor community through
about ten years' worth of construction. And we're going to talk
about that on Thursday at a -- at a Lely community get-together
at seven o'clock. So we're scheduled to do that with Mr.
Chisholm and his group of folks.
Paragraph 17, respondent shall insure the modifications to
the north facility that include temporary connections to the south
facility do not cause violations of the department rules at the
south facility. In the event that the south facility is unable to
comply with department rules due to contributions from the
north safil -- north facility, the department shall assess stipulated
penalties in accordance with paragraph 21. The stipulated
penalties are $10,000 a day.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And what do you think about -- I
mean, what -- what's your opinion on whether or not what we're
going to be shipping south is going to affect -- because I know
the south is on the edge already.
MR. MUDD: And that's why we're talking about those flow
equalization tanks when I talked about bringing those on in
Page 128
April 10, 2001
December. It's just not at the north I'm talking about flow
equalization. It's also at the south.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay. And -- and flow
equalization really just means someplace to store it so that you
can process it at off-peak times.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. What -- what basic -- this is a give
and take. What you -- what you want to do is you want to have
six hours plus in the aeration basins with a surge so that you get
it to settle out. When you're getting those peak flows, you're
pushing the system really hard. And in some cases you're taking
that stuff out two to four hours. And if you had the equalization
tanks, you would hold it. Then off of nonpeak, you would bring it
in on off-peak hours. And you'd be able to process it, and you'd
keep it at a nice continuous flow. You've got to -- you've got to
quit having Thanksgiving dinners from six o'clock to eleven
o'clock every day. They don't do well on it. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Easter.
MR. MUDD: And so you -- you upset the plant. What the
equalization tanks prevent you from doing is getting those peaks,
upsetting it. And it then takes days to bring the plant back into
compliance, to keep it a steady flow, and -- and then you never
upset it, and you stay in compliance. And that's that process.
We've got to be very careful with 17. And I asked that --
Dr. Ahmadi today about department rules, and -- and he, in his
conversation, said those department rules have to do with the
plant operation and the plant operation only. And, you know -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And does that mean the -- the
permit for the plant?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Paragraph 18: Every calendar quarter after the
effective date of the consent order respondent shall submit in
Page 129
April 10, 2001
writing to the department a report containing information
concerning the status and progress of projects being completed
under this consent order, information as to the compliance or
noncompliance with the applicable requirements of this consent
order, including construction requirements and effluent
limitations and any reasons for noncompliance.
That's basically a quarterly report to them telling them how
things are working out as far as our construction is concerned
and our plan telling them if we're -- if we're on time, if we're
ahead of time or we're behind a little bit and how we're going to
catch up. And we'll be able to do that without a problem.
Paragraph 19, in the event of a sale or conveyance basically
says if you sell -- sell it to them, you've got to let them know
about it. That's -- that's normal procedure.
Paragraph 20, within 30 days of the effective date of this
consent order, respondent shall pay the department $160,000 in
settlement of the matters addressed in this consent order. This
amount equals 130 in civil penalties with -- for alleged violations
of Section 403.161, Florida Statutues and of the department
rules, 25,000 for economic benefit and 5,000 for cost and
expenses incurred by the department during the investigation of
this matter and the preparation and tracking of the consent
order.
What I -- if you -- I'd like to draw your attention to the last
line. The amount of 155,000, if we want to do in-kind services,
you multiply it by I 1/2, and your civil penalties become
$232,500. You tack on the $5,000, and the amount of settlement,
if you want to do in kind, will be $237,500.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And when will we -- will we make
that decision based on projects that you propose to us, or do we
make it today?
MR. MUDD: For the consent order, you're either -- signing
Page 130
April 10, 2001
the consent order, you're saying you're going to pay the $160,000
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh.
MR. MUDD: -- or you can have the one thir -- or the two
thirty-seven.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
LIS.
And that option remains open to
MR. MUDD: That remains open. And -- and I've already put a
proposal to -- to take the Port Au Prince area off of septic and put
them onto the sewer lines, because you got a lot of sewer
systems over there that are old, they're leaking, and they're --
they're really getting into the environment a bit.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And, again, this is money all
coming out of user fees, not ad valorem taxes. MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And if we pay the larger number,
we get to do something with it besides just write a check.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. And it's a habitual problem that we
have in the county, and we get to fix it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That certainly makes sense.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: More money for something is
better than less money for nothing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's nice that they give us that
option.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh.
MR. MUDD: Now we get to -- now we get to paragraph 21.
And -- and there's one thing that we need to add to the consent
order in -- in writing. And I've got the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection to -- to agree to it. Respondent
agrees -- and I'll get -- when -- when I get to it, I'll tell you what
that is. Respondent agrees to pay the department's stipulated
Page 131
April 10, 2001
penalties in the amount of $10,000 a day for each and every day
respondent fails to timely comply with any of the requirements of
paragraph 6, which is the 5-million-gallon expansion, has got to
be on line by I December.
Paragraph 7, which is to have the aeration tank ready to go
for equalization on I December, 2001.
And paragraph 17, thou shalt not upset the south plant by
your interconnects with the north plant.
Of this consent order, respondent agrees to pay the
department's stipulated penalties in the amount of $2500 per day
for each and every day respondent fails to timely comply with
any of the requirements of paragraph 8 through 12. And I think
we can -- we'll get those in on time, and that shouldn't be a
problem.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Those are just your filing permit -
- filing deadlines; right?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. Respondent agrees to pay the
department's stipulated penalties in the amount of a hundred
dollars per day for each and every day respondent fails to timely
comply with any of the requirements of paragraph 13 through 20
of this consent order.
And this is the place that you need to add bowlegs after that
sentence. It's -- it's excluding paragraph 17 of this consent order
where they're -- they're double dipping on fines on 17.
And then that's pretty much -- that's pretty much the
consent order. I -- I was able to get paragraph 22 in which
basically says in the event of administrative judicial challenges
by third parties unrelated to respondents, let reasonable
likelihoods of -- of delays -- and it goes on and basically talks
about natural disasters and things like that. That's what we
wanted to have so that we weren't held to a fixed date. And if
we had something that was unforeseen, we had his -- we could
Page 132
April 10, 2001
notify the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and
we could get those additional days added to the suspense days
without having to pay the fine.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Very good.
MR. MUDD: Subject to your questions, I pretty much have
the consent order, and we went through it. I need some kind of a
motion so that the chairman can sign the consent order.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA.' I make a motion that we
approve the consent order.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta makes a motion
that we approve the consent order.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I'll second this. And I want
to be sure I understand paragraph 22 because that's -- it's really
important. Basically we had wanted them to say that they
might -- they may impose fines up to $10,000 a day. It says,
"they shall," but paragraph 22 is sort of "unless," unless we
agree that there is a reason beyond our control that they accept.
And if they do accept it, they will not charge the --
MR. MUDD.' For instance, if they had a hurricane -- and
knock on wood we won't --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. MUDD: -- and it -- it -- it caused everything in Collier
County to shut down for 14 days, we would go to the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection. I can call them from
my cell phone, wherever I was --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because you'd have to.
MR. MUDD: -- tell them I need a day, I need a second day,
the third day, and get them to agree to those 14 days. And then
we could tack those 14 days on to those particular items that
cause us stiff penalties.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So it basically does -- even
though we did change the words "shall" to "may," we've got it by
Page 133
April 10, 2001
adding paragraph 22.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second by Commissioner Mac'Kie.
Any discussion by board members? Any public speakers? All in
favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0.
Thank you very much, Mr. Mudd, for a tremendous job well
done along with the rest of the county staff and all those who
helped us get there, World Tennis Center, City of Naples, etc.
Thank you.
MR. McNEES: And a thanks for Mr. Mudd from this office for
his efforts in bringing this all together.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We're doing good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He had his marching orders.
Item #8D1
RESOLUTION 2001-126, AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY PARKS
AND RECREATION FACILITIES LICENSE AND FEE POLICY
RELATED TO THE USE OF COUNTY BOAT LAUNCH FACILITIES -
ADOPTED; STAFF AUTHORIZED TO ADVERTISE AN ORDINANCE
AMENDMENT REGARDING COLLECTION PROCEDURES
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. That takes us to Item D under
8 -D as in David, public service, approve an amendment to the
Collier County parks and recreation facilities, license and fee
policy related to the use of county boat -- boat launch facilities.
MS. RAMSEY: Good afternoon. For the record, Maria
Ramsey, parks and recreation director.
This afternoon we're bringing forward a recommendation to
Page 134
April 10, 2001
do two amendments to our current fee policy. The first issue is
in regards to providing consistency, the way the fees are charged
at our public boat ramp facilities. Staff is recommending a $3
launch fee at all facilities. Currently we charge parking fees, no
fees, or launch fees. And this would bring it into consistency.
The second issue that we have for the amendment to the fee
policy in regard to the commercial use of the county boat launch
facilities. Currently Ordinance No. 8670 prohibits commercial
use without specific approval from the Board of County
Commissioners. Staff and parks and recreation advisory board
recommend an annual permit per launch vehicle -- vehicle of
$100 and a $3 launch fee per boat.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Motion to approve staff
recommendation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Can I get a second, then, to the
question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
Question by Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What are we doing now about
the fees, the launch fees? Would you say we're not charging?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Some places we do; some places
we don't.
MS. RAMSEY: We have 951 boat-launch facility; we have no
fees currently. And at Caxambas we charge a launch fee. At
Bayview and Cocohatchee we charge a parking fee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So what do you -- what are we
going to do with the parking fee at Cocohatchee and Bayview?
MS. RAMSEY: We'll actually turn them into launch fees. One
of the advantages that we see for that is that a lot of times
people are parking outside of the park instead of inside the park
Page 135
April 10, 2001
in order not to pay the parking fee in this regards. There would
be no advantage to park outside the park, and we would fill the
park first.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And -- and that's a really
negative -- the current situation is very negative for the
surrounding neighborhood. We want to discourage that parking
outside as long as there's a place to park inside.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And how are we -- how are we
going to enforce the -- the charges? Is this --
MS. RAMSEY: The -- the third element on your executive
summary is to give staff authorization to publicize -- or a public
meeting, an ordinance amendment, to utilize the existing parking
ticket procedures to enforce nonpayment, if any, of a $3 launch
fee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's going to be added ranger
time?
MS. RAMSEY: Not necessarily added ranger time. It would
just expand their existing responsibilities to be able to write a --
a ticket, a $35 ticket, for a noncompliance as far as the boat-
launch facility goes as well as a parking fee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So there won't -- there won't be
any added cost as far as overtime or another person or any --
anything of that nature?
MS. RAMSEY: I think you'll probably find that as we get
going with this particular item that especially at 951 boat launch,
we'll probably have some additional park rangers out at the
location, reassignments, in order to help educate the public as to
how the machinery works and why we're doing it and -- and
explaining to them so that we don't have a lot of noncompliance,
rather an educational session for them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING'- And that's just on a short time --
a short -- short-term basis ?
Page 136
April 10, 2001
aye.
MS. RAMSEY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no further questions.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. All in favor signify by saying
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by same sign. Motion carries
5-0. Thank you very much, Maria.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Were you registered to speak on
the boat launch fee?
MR. OSBORNE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Then we failed to call you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We did not have any --
MR. OSBORNE: They were submitted this morning, sir, two
of them.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. I didn't know that. I asked
the question, and I didn't receive them, but we'll back up and let
you make your public comment.
MR. OSBORNE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Come on.
MR. OSBORNE: Yeah, I apologize. I submitted that this
morning, first thing.
My name is Phil Osborne for the record. I'm president of the
Marine Industries Association of Collier County and the owner of
Naples Boat Mart.
I just want to make it clear that the Marine Industries
Association does not necessarily oppose a per-launch fee,
assuming that these funds are to provide much-needed
maintenance on the ramps that we currently have and in addition
to more launch facilities than what we currently have now.
The ramps that we currently have available are grossly
inadequate to handle the volume traffic that they experience.
That's evidenced by commissioners' response to people parking
Page 137
April 10, 2001
out on the streets at Bayview and so forth. It's not necessarily
because they're trying to get away with not paying parking fee.
There just is not enough room. This problem is only going to get
worse. As marinas here in Collier County are -- are being sold
and converted to dockominiums, as current dry storage facilities
are full and proposed new facilities are currently on legal hold,
boaters are -- are going to be forced to convert their -- their
boating experiences to trailering experiences as opposed to
marina experiences.
It should be noted that people are having a very, very
difficult time -- boaters are having a very difficult time right now
of locating homes for their boats. And this is going to sour
people on boating as it becomes more of a hassle or there just
aren't any places to put boats. The industry and -- and the boat
dealers are very concerned over this issue.
As far as the punitive measure of commercialized use and
having to pay a hundred-dollar-per-vehicle fee annually, it should
be understood that your Collier County boat dealerships and your
professional service repair facilities that use these ramps are
performing launch and retrieval services for the overwhelming
majority of customers who do not own a trailer for whatever
reason. It could be that they live in a gated community and are
prevented from having the ability to keep a boat at home. It
could be that they don't have a -- a vehicle capable of hauling a
boat, whatever. But these people that are in marinas that need
their boat hauled out for service work, etc., and brought into
repair facilities, those folks are -- are -- are paying that $3 fee.
So for -- you know, for us to -- the boat dealers and the service
centers to have to pay in addition to that I find unacceptable.
It should be noted that less than 15 percent of boaters who
purchase boats in this county purchase trailers. The
overwhelming majority of people that buy boats have lifts in the
Page 138
April 10, 2001
backyard or, again, are in marinas that don't have an opportunity
for them to yank the boat out of the water at their convenience.
In the same breath, your county boat dealers and
professional repair centers should be given the same opportunity
as private citizens, and that is to purchase a seasonably priced
annual permit. Hopefully this will stave off logistical accounting
nightmares that a per-launch token situation is going to create.
In the ordinance, as I read it -- I don't think it was brought up
in Miss Ramsey's presentation -- private citizens are going to be
given the opportunity to purchase a $60 annual permit so they
don't have to fool around with taking a wad of quarters to the
launch ramp. And I think that it -- the same opportunity should
be given to boat dealers who utilize the ramps, again, for launch
and retrieval purposes so that I don't have somebody coming to
me every time they need to go pick up John Q. Public's boat and
banging on my door for a dollar's worth of quarters or $3 worth of
quarters in this case.
So I would like the amendment to -- to address that concern.
Above and beyond that, I don't have anything else. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Questions of Miss Ramsey
by board members?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I think we have other speakers
though.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I know~ but questions in regards to
what the last speaker said.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can -- I can concur that we do
have a shortage of not only launch areas but the parking for the
boats and trailers. And talking to Tom Olliff a number of years
ago up at 951, I think, there is a place, but there's a problem with
the State of Florida being able to utilize that. And I'd be happy to
work with you and the State of Florida to see if we can make
some things happen like we do in the Barefoot preserve is
Page 139
April 10, 2001
manage it and be a good steward of the land.
MS. RAMSEY: We actually are already in communication
with them, and it looks like very promising that they will get the
easement along there to expand that particular site as well as
working with Rookery Bay for a off-site parking area across from
the piece of property that they own on Isle of Capri Road.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next speaker, please.
MR. WARD: Good afternoon. I'm Randy Ward with the
Marine Industries Association. We would just like to stress that
if this charge is -- is passed, we would like to see that the
funding go to repairing ramps, coming up with some more
innovative ways of finding parking, voter education, that sort of
thing that they can help. And we as an industry will be more
than happy to work with you. I mean we have a lot of expertise
in our dealerships and in -- and in our members, and we -- we
would pledge to help you come up with -- with additional
facilities.
And the other thing I would like to stress is that our drivers
when they're delivering their customer boats are really good
neighbors to the ramps. Quite often these guys pull up to a ramp
and somebody is stuck or they're trying to pull out a 28-foot boat
with a Toyota. So these guys will literally disconnect the boat
that they're hauling, pull the -- pull the person back out obviously
so they can use the ramp. But they're also the ones that are
prepared when they come to the ramp, they have the correct
equipment to haul and to launch and are in and out and obviously
doing this mostly during the week when there's -- when there's
less demand on their thing. But if there's anything that the
Marine Industries Association can do to help you, we'd be more
than happy to do so. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You can help by finding more
Page 140
April 10, 2001
sites.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's what he said.
COMMISSIONER HENNING.' Yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Do we have any more
additional speakers, Mr. McNees? MR. McNEES: Yes, sir.
MR. FARQUHAR: John Farquhar on behalf of Paul Harvey.
We were concerned that the increased use of commercial
launching was going to negatively impact our franchise for one of
your parks on the parking, that we already have a parking
problem, and we see that making the commercial launching more
available is going to exasperate that parking problem. Thank
you,
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Maria, do we have a plan to repair
these boat ramps that we've been hearing about?
MS. RAMSEY: In our 306 fund is a fund called boater
improvement funds. We get about a hundred and fif -- seventy-
five thousand dollars back each year which we have earmarked
specifically in a project number to be utilized for repair of -- of
boats. It's also the fund that we will be using to expand 951 boat
ramp to repair and make the improvements at Bayview as well as
the existing ramps that we have currently. You'll -- you'll see an
executive summary in a couple of weeks asking for some
additional funds from that particular fund.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You're planning on doing that this
year then?
MS. RAMSEY: We will be making improvements at three
different launch facilities yet this year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do you have any plans for a boat
ramp down into the Everglades City, Chokoloskee area?
MS. RAMSEY: About two years ago we looked for some land
Page 141
April 10, 2001
in that area, and we were unsuccessful finding enough depth to
get out. And if anyone knows of some additional land, we would
be willing to look at that, yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Possibly the marine industry
might help us with that.
MR. OSBORNE: Yeah. The marine industry would look
forward to working with parks and rec on any acquisitions that
would better the situation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's good because I know Maria
was saying she's been having some problems identifying some of
these sites. Maybe before you leave you could give her your
cards and -- and you could work together. I'm sure that she
would look forward -- you guys might know things that -- that she
might not be aware of that -- and you could help us get that
through. Thank you.
MR. OSBORNE: We look forward to doing that. We did -- in
addition to -- to those sort of endeavors, one of our members, I
believe, supplied your office with some grant information. He
had just attended a -- a -- what they call legislative days up in
Tallahassee recently. And one of the pieces of information that
came out of Tallahassee was many millions of dollars that are
available in federal grant money for this specific use for --
specifically for boat ramp, either improvement or building. And
we brought that information back from legislative days and
supplied her office with it. So hopefully their office will use due
diligence and pursue all of those efforts to ease all of our local
taxpayers' pocket. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
board?
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
Any further discussion by the
I stand by my vote.
No change.
Page 142
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
Motion does carry.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
speak too?
MS. BARR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
but that --
CHAIRMAN CARTER:
speak for that issue?
Okay. Everybody says okay with that?
Jackie, were you registered to
Well, let's -- lost them apparently,
Is there anyone here that's -- else to
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It makes sense that -- I wondered
why you were here, but it makes sense now that we know.
MR. McNEES: We have a man hunt out for the rest of the
slips.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
MR. McNEES: But for right now, we don't know where they
are.
MS. BARR: I'm Jackie Barr. I'm treasurer of Standing
Watch. It's a boaters rights organization statewide. We protest
the imposition of a $3 launch fee at the county boat ramps. We
believe that we have already contributed through our taxes to
both develop and maintain the boat ramps. Currently, as you
know, the facilities are already inadequate, and by adding a
launch fee to inadequate facilities, it adds insult to injury in the
boaters' minds. Also, the use of the tokens also confuses the
issue. Particularly for our non-English-speaking people, it will
confuse the issue even more for them. We feel like -- that the
boat ramps, if this goes through, the boat ramps with the $3 fee,
both for commercial and public, is discrimination because none
of the other county grant -- county parks have a use fee. That's
all.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Additional question.
Page 143
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE'. Commissioner Henning has a
question.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are we getting any money from
the state and from -- through the licensing of boats and --
MS. RAMSEY: Yeah. Through the registration fee we get
about 175,000. It's estimated we get it in July each year. It's
about $175,000 that we get back each year which we use for --
specifically for boat ramp improvements. And if anyone has been
to Bayview recently, you've seen a number of improvements that
we've done at that particular location, including two years ago
redoing the ramp.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And -- and these additional
monies are going to just stay with the boat ramp facilities? MS. RAMSEY: That's correct. Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Have we gotten everyone?
Okay. Thank you very much.
The motion stands. We appreciate all your inputs and
comments by commissioners. We will move to the next --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' Barefoot Beach?
Item #8D2
UPDATED LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR BAREFOOT BEACH
PARK PRESERVE - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN CARTER: --the next item, Barefoot Beach
master plan, land plan, land management plan. Miss Ramsey.
MS. RAMSEY: Yes. Before I get into a -- a lot of detail or a
little detail, as I was going to do, I just wanted to make sure that
you understood that the -- this was not part of that 60-day
request for -- for the outparcel that's -- that this plan is not going
to address that. That's something that's coming separately.
Page 144
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Carter. I understand
that's a separate issue. Thank you. MS. RAMSEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And could I just ask, could you
point out to us what are the changes, if any, in the -- from the
current management plan to the proposed?
MS. RAMSEY: Yes. As a matter of fact, on the executive
summary, there are some bulleted areas. One of the things that
we've added to this particular plan is to identify the plant
communities by hiring a botanist who helped us with that about
habitats within the preserve area. We have a gopher tortoise
survey that did behaviors, habitats and population in the
preserve area. We talk about our exotic removal program that
has taken place on site and how we are working to keep it exotic
free. We talk about plans to construct the back bay dock east of
the county-owned learning center and concession building that
would be used for boating access to the preserve area. We also
talk about the 75 additional parking spaces that could be located
in the county-owned portion of the preserve, and then the very
last one talks a little about the privately owned outparcel.
And it -- I think the biggest change in there, it talks about
the short-term problem in the preserve and the parcel is covered
with exotics which infest the preserve. A larger concern is how
the owner intends to utilize this property due to the sensitive
nature of the area, any construction of docks, boardwalks and
buildings should be restricted. That's the new language that falls
underneath that particular item.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
the draft, seen the proposal?
MS. RAMSEY: Not yet.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
conversations?
Has anybody in state staff seen
Has anybody had any
Do we have any idea if it's going to be well
Page 145
April 10, 2001
received or--
MS. RAMSEY: Conversations from staff to staff has been
very positive.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because I -- I like it. I'd like to
endorse it. I have two things I'd like to ask for considerations for
future. I don't want to mess with this one.
One is when you -- when you walk the preserve, there is the
official, you know, way to walk it. Then there's an unauthorized
little trail. It would make so much sense if those two could be
connected so that it was one long authorized loop around the
preserve because the experience on one side is significantly
different from the experience on the beach side.
And -- and the other is I don't know enough about the
ecology or how it works there to understand why, but it almost
looks like there are these natural little picnic areas already
created, and people tell me that they're natural areas. They're
not something left over from when there used to be a picnic table
there. But it occurs to me that along that trail we might be able
to -- to provide a nicer amenity without harming the -- you know,
the ecology being the most important part, but it would be nice if
there were a picnic table or somewhere to sit or something there
so that if you wanted to pause in the middle of the preserve,
because some of us like that part better than the beach.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. And as long as you had trash
containers there and they were properly maintained. I don't want
to be walking down through there and stepping on --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's key.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- you know, Burger King wrappers --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- and everything else.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And if -- even if there's more
harm than good to come out of that, then I wouldn't support it,
Page 146
April 10, 2001
but it's just an idea.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Just an idea. And I think it's a good
idea. You're right. The back trail where you see the gopher
tortoises --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We're not allowed to go there.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How could you know? I don't
know how I know. Somebody --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't know. I walked it with Jeff
Lionel (phonetic). I figured I was in good hands so ...
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I'll make a motion to
approve the --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: One other thing I would like to ask a
question about is about a canoe concession to be allowed at
Barefoot Beach.
MS. RAMSEY: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We might be able to put that in there
where people could rent canoes. The friends have canoes there
they take people out on, excursions on, an educational
experience, and it's great. But I know a lot of people that like
running canoes in there and go up and down around the
waterways. So if we could incorporate that in the future, I think
it would be not only be probably financially supportive but a nice
environmental experience.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And when you're looking at it
there, would you look at it at Clam Pass? And there probably are
other places too where there's a canoe launch, and if you have a
canoe that you can haul over there, or if you happen to be a
member of the Pelican Bay something, they have a rack of
canoes that -- but it would sure be nice if we could have some
available for the public.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That would be great. Now, Lisa's back
Page 147
April 10, 2001
there, and she's taking notes. Now you send those up to Jeff,
and you tell him that I took to heart his suggestion when we walk
the beach.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is that his idea? Then I don't
know if I'm for it after all.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good idea. He's on spring break, and I
want to just make sure that he understood that at some point in
time we always have an opportunity to inject that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, there must be something
wrong with it then.
MR. McNEES: And, Commissioner, you do have registered
speakers on this item.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And apparently a lawyer that
wants to talk to us.
MR. MANALICH: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. Very briefly, Ramiro Manalich, chief assistant
county attorney.
The only thing I would add to this discussions is there is one
typo that we need to correct, and that is a reference in the plan
to 18-4 of the Florida Administrative Code. That particular
provision has been repealed, needs to be replaced with the
appropriate provisions. I'd just like authority to make that minor
change.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So noted.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Duly noted.
Any other speakers, Mr. McNees?
MR. McNEES: Yes. Your first speaker would be Nancy
Payton followed by Nicole Ryan.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: How many speakers are there?
MR. McNEES: You have five.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you.
Page 148
April 10, 2001
MS. PAYTON'. Good afternoon. Nancy Payton representing
the Florida Wildlife Federation. In general, we support the
management plan and appreciate all the work that staff has --
has put into it. We do have a few comments and maybe some
clarifications.
First point is we have some concern about the reference of
the 75-car parking lot and wonder if that's still necessary to be in
there in light of the Vanderbilt Beach parking garage and the
potential for the boat access, then also the impacts that it might
have on gopher tortoises and on the preserve in general.
Secondly, the plan fails to acknowledge the -- the county's
role in acquisition of the outparcel. It says that it's logical that
the state should take the lead. But, again, the county needs to
take that lead to assume that responsibility to insure that that
outparcel is -- is acquired. And, therefore, we ask that -- that the
county's role be reflected in the management plan, either as the
lead or as a partnership with the state. But to get the county in
there to show that they -- they have an obligation as well to the --
to the community to help acquire that -- that outparcel.
I -- the -- the copy of the draft that I received had docks,
boardwalks, and buildings prohibited from the outparcel. But I
understand why that's necessary to be changed to restricted.
But we do request that the plan acknowledge that if and when
the parcel -- and we hope, certainly hope, when the parcel is
acquired that docks, boardwalks and outbuildings -- buildings will
be prohibited on that outparcel. This doesn't preclude some
educational signs, some displays of some nature or a reflecting
area, which is what I was calling the areas that you were talking
about picnic tables. But it is halfway down to the end and might
be an appropriate place for some sort of resting area. But, again,
we stress that when we were here a while back concerned about
the partnership that it was sensitive and shouldn't have those
Page 149
April 10, 200t
types of uses on it.
And, lastly, we understand that Friends of Barefoot Beach
have some comments about the plan, and we urge you to listen
closely to those because we will be as -- as well.
In closing, we say thank you very much, and we look forward
to the next board meeting when we'll get an update on the status
of the acquisition of the outparcel. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you very much, Miss Payton, for
your comments.
I can't disclose this afternoon where we are in that
negotiation. There is a -- some efforts being made. And by the
24th you will have that update, and it would not be appropriate
for me to comment at this time. But we're working towards the
end objective to acquire the parcel, and that's where we need to
be, folks. And on the 24th we'll have a lot more insight for you.
So thank you, and please, everybody, understand. At this point
we need to let some activities take place, and then on the 24th
hopefully we have better news.
MR. McNEES: Your next speaker is Nicole Ryan followed by
Bob Krasowski.
MS. RYAN: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
For the record, Nicole Ryan from The Conservancy of Southwest
Florida. And, first of all, I would like to again thank the board for
rescinding the public/private partnership that would have put a
dock and boardwalk and beach club in the middle of Barefoot
Beach. We certainly appreciate that.
Conservancy staff has reviewed the revised Barefoot Beach
management plan, and we're happy that there is no beach club in
the middle of the preserve; however, we were a little taken
aback by the fact that the boardwalks and construction on the
outparcel, instead of being prohibited, is now just restricted. I
certainly do appreciate the parks and rec department staff
Page 150
April 10, 2001
calling to give us the heads up yesterday about that. I really
appreciate that.
However, we know that legally it could be problematic to
put "prohibitive" in the plan. Therefore, as long as "restrictive" is
the toughest language possible to put in there, we do support the
plan as it has been presented to you.
A second area of the plan that The Conservancy would like
to comment on is the county's proposed boardwalk and dock.
We're comfortable with this proposed structure as long as the
boardwalk is built so that it winds around the mangroves as
much as possible and creates the least impact and also that no
dredging will be used for the dock installation. And, of course,
we offer our services and assistance in any way to make sure
that the boardwalk and dock are designed in the most
environmentally compatible way possible. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, Miss Ryan.
The next speaker, please.
MR. McNEES: Mr. Krasowski will be followed by John
Farquhar.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good afternoon again, Commissioners. I
just will ditto Ms. Payton's comments. There's no need to say
anything further. She represents my position. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir.
MR. McNEES: Mr. Farquhar, and the final speaker would be
Margot Wo]ciechowski.
MR. Farquhar: Good afternoon. John Farquhar on behalf of
Paul Harvey. I wanted to raise a few points relating to the plan.
First of all, my client until yesterday wasn't able to even acquire
the full text of the plan to see what was being done. This is a
restriction that's being placed on his property. We've had no
special notice of this. There's certainly substantial lack of due
process in the way this is being handled.
Page 151
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sir, your client doesn't own any
property.
MR. Farquhar: My client has a 40-year lease on the property.
And, from our understanding, there was no notice given to the
property owner either. So if -- if Commissioner Mac'Kie wants to
make that technical point, it is neith -- neither the property owner
or the long-term lessee were notified of this.
We would also point out that eight weeks ago that you
talked about you rescinded your prior agreement with my client.
Since that time there's been one phone call asking for an
extension to my co-counsel, and there's been no contact other
than that with either of my client or the owner of the property.
Basically nothing has been done towards moving this forward.
We want to point out that we thought that this was -- you
know, there were going to be actions taken eight weeks ago
when you had the meeting, and we have not seen any of those
actions. We would like to have seen something done. My client
wants to proceed with his development. But obviously at that
meeting it was indicated very strongly that the county did not
intend to allow him to proceed with this development. Nothing
has been moved forward on that matter. And that is basically--
what we wanted to raise to you today is that, you know, it does
not appear that any action is being taken by the county to move
this forward. And the plan reference here, which talks about the
state acquiring it, the chairman at the meeting eight weeks ago
indicated that the state would clearly not be the one to move
forward to take this. And it seems that -- that nothing is basically
being progressed one way or the other on this issue. And,
obviously, my client has a long-term lease. We're paying our
lease payments, and we think that nothing is being done other
than the -- this plan is not consistent with it and implies, in fact,
references a use across our property that has been made by the
Page 152
April 10, 2001
county which would appear to be a trespass.
We just basically want to let everyone know that nothing is
happening as far as acquiring this property. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Next speaker? There's no more
speakers.
MR. McNEES: Ms. Wojciechowski is your final speaker.
MS. WOJCIECHOWSKI: I'm Margot Wojciechowski, a
permanent resident of Naples and a friend of Barefoot Beach.
I've -- I've walked that beach for at least 20 years. I just love it.
All of the rangers do who work there, too, I know. And I've been
a volunteer there for several years. My main responsibilities are
the butterfly garden.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Oh, it's beautiful.
MS. WOJCIECHOWSKI: The primary objective of this plan is
to protect the preserve's natural resources. The law also off --
offers the option of a secondary objective -- and I quote -- which
will not detract from or interfere with the primary purpose.
Unfortunately, I'm concerned that some of the recommendations
in the plan emphasize the secondary objective, public access for
recreational use at the expense of the first.
How do we protect the preserve? Well, much of the -- of the
mechanisms for that are in the plan: Studies, police -- policing it,
removing the exotics and so on. This is going on at a great rate.
We're also protected by limiting development -- this is mentioned
in the plan -- and by limiting access. And this fourth method of
protection is the focus of my few remarks today.
Limiting access is done by meeting the carrying capacity
restrictions that are put out in the plan. For the county's part of
the beach, 3,000 feet or so, it's 177 persons at any one time; and
for the beach as a whole, the preserve of the whole, it's 587 at
any one time. These numbers don't really change much when
you add in the alternative uses: 200 surf fishermen are going to
Page153
April 10, 2001
be on the beach; 50 boats anchored offshore are going to be
landing people on the beach. So they're part of 500 and some,
Unfortunately, although the numbers are in the plan, they're
largely ignored in the proposals. I would say the other half of the
equation, actual use and present impact, is missing from the
document and, therefore, from the decision-making process.
The report doesn't tell us how many people actually use the
beach at one time. Well, I can tell you. Parking capacity is 254
official spaces. A lot of people also park along the roads. The
last two Sundays there have been over 400 cars parked for the
better part of the day at the preserve. At a very conservative
estimate of 2.5 people per car, that's over a thousand people
arriving by car. Add to this all the people who arrived by shuttle
bus, by bicycle, or on foot or by the boats that are landing
illegally at the Wiggins Pass end.
Now, this is well over the limit of five hundred and -- what?
587. In fact, for the county's portion of the beach, it's five times
the carrying capacity. It's double the capacity for the whole
preserve.
I can't give you any data on impacts of this over -- overuse,
but I know that your rangers can provide you with -- they're very
much aware of what's happening in terms of damage to flora and
fauna there. The plan mentions a possible additional 75 parking
spaces. This would bring more people into exactly the same
area, the north end of the preserve where the facilities are. The
same is true of the proposed boat dock. So I see them as adding
rather than controlling in any way the -- the access to the park.
So I'm thinking about a modified status quo, limiting parking
to the present 254 spaces and no road parking. This would bring
us within the prescribed limits. They have been very specifically
defined. I think there must be some reason behind them. I've
seen no argument to change them.
Page 154
April 10, 2001
Limits to access by car could be trolled -- controlled
efficiently and easily with the addition of an in-out
counterconnected to an electronic sign with three messages:
preserve open, lot full, preserve closed, which would be located
at -- in advance of the entrance booth at a turnaround. A
turnaround is suggested in the plan, by the way.
This arrangement would control parking without requiring
county employees to take the unpleasant task of saying, "Sir, you
can't come in." and I think the sign should be -- should have an
automatic repeater at the Bonita Beach Road entrance so to
save people that long, long drive in if the lot is full.
On busy weekends this would still mean over 600 people at
any one time, and I would point out that the capacity limits are
specified for any one time. They're not weekly averages or
annual averages. They're at -- at any one time.
I would like to just repeat my recommendations. Proposed --
postpone development decisions based on the plan until the staff
have provided with you information on the impact of current
levels of use; limit parking to the official 254 spaces; add an in-
and-out counter sign.
And if you're determined to have a boardwalk and there's no
way to control the boat landing at the south end, maybe we need
a boardwalk there instead because there is a lot of damage being
done to the dunes by people landing by boat at Wiggins Pass and
walking over to the dunes to the beach. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, ma'am. One of the
statements you made about the in-and-out counters and
everything, you know, we agree with that. The Lely beach
people agree with that. The persons just -- the groups in
disagreement happens to be the attorney general's State of
Florida, if I remember correctly, Mr. Manalich. And he may want
to comment on that. And that's our difficulty. We are trying to
Page 155
April 10, 2001
work through a number of issues there. And I agree. I would
hate to have people drive all the way down there to find out they
got to turn around because it's full. I think your suggestion is
excellent. The last meeting I was in, the attorney general in the
State of Florida is the one that's in the way, not Collier County.
MS. WOJCIECHOWSKI: That's unfortunate.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So, Mr. Manalich, you may want to
comment on that. Thank you.
MR. MANALICH: That is the subject that is presently in
discussion with regard to the guardhouse litigation, and the
attorney general does have concerns about those items. I don't
think there's been a resolution to that discussion, but there are
concerns on the table.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Comments from
commissioners or questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question: Is there a capacity
load at the park?
MS. RAMSEY: Well, interpretation of the capacity seems to
differ just a little bit. Staff seems to think that our capacity is
closer to 990 in the park because you can have people on the
pathways, people in the back canoe areas, people fishing, people
using the beaches. And we add all that up, it's 990. Some of
that's over a period of a day. Some of it's at peak -- peak time.
Currently we have 254 parking spaces there. We use a ratio of
2.5 which is 609 visitors using that ratio that we use everywhere.
Adding the extra 75 parking spaces would increase it by 180
which brings us to 789 by our figures.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to remember when this --
when Barefoot Beach park was a big secret and very few people
knew about it. I'm quite surprised to see we reached maximum
in such a short period of time. It was probably due to all the
Page 156
April 10, 2001
favorable advertising we had out there; right? CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA.' I'm trying to get a better feel on
this additional 75 spaces. Are we really doing something that's
detrimental to the -- to the welfare of the park itself by installing
these 75 spaces?
MS. RAMSEY: No. And we wouldn't do that anyway. We
would look at where -- where it's least impact. We do feel we
could add some spaces where we could expand existing parking
lots north or south back toward the access areas which would
not impact the -- the environment as heavily. Before we would
put in another parking space, we definitely would make sure
we're not impacting the preserve itself.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just beg you please to support
the inclusion of those additional parking spaces even though, you
know, it has to be with the highest concern for the natural
systems there. But we are at such shortage -- I mean, we -- we
need to put every place we can for access. And too much of our
community's access to the beaches and the beach ends at the
City of Naples, and we need to do all we can.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You may -- you may be correct
on that, Pam. I agree with you. You go out Wiggins Pass,
though. When they're filled, there's a sign up out front that just
says filled. You have to turn around and leave and go someplace
else.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm not commenting on that. I'm
commenting on the 75. That's Adam, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree with you, each one of you.
Commissioner Carter said before to drive all the way out there
and then have to turn around and go back, what a shame. And,
like you said, Para, we really need those. I don't think that we
need those that many days of the week, but they should be there
Page157
April 10, 2001
for whatever time of the year, a couple days a week that we do
need them. And I know, Jim, you've mentioned before you hate
to see anything put in preserve so nobody can get there and
nobody can get on and walk it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. I -- access I agree with,
and I'd like to see access roads out to the wild lands that we
have out there that we're bringing under government control.
But even there I believe a limited access for so many parking
areas are available so we don't overuse the resource. I -- I'm
questioning whether we're doing ourselves a favor. If this
demand keeps building up, the 75 additional ones aren't going to
be enough. Eventually we'll have a no -- "no access at this point
in time" type of a parking. I just wanted to give everybody some
food for thought on this. It -- it's a stopgap measure; wouldn't
you agree? I mean, you can see the -- the use of the beach
escalating as we go along from practically nothing almost
overnight to full utilization.
MS. RAMSEY: I would agree that over the last three months
or so that our capacity at that location has increased. I would
also point out that we are using the lowest capacity numbers.
We're using 1350 square foot per person where at a commercial
location like Vanderbilt we're using 50 square feet per person.
So we're trying to be as sensitive to the environment as we
possible can, and we used either the lowest or the highest,
depending on how you want to look at it. But we tried to be as
conservative as possible and giving the benefit of the doubt to
the preserve.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You see the reality as commissioners,
there's only two major areas that you can get to the beaches.
One is through the City of Naples. The other happens to be in
District 2 which is running from Vanderbilt all the way up to the
county line, and there's tremendous pressure to get more people
Page 158
April 10, 2001
from your districts and the rest of the county onto the beaches.
I -- I fully understand the problem, but you will hear time and time
again those people who feel those areas are becoming
overcongested. We can't get parking. We can't get access. We
are -- it's a compounded problem which we're working on through
the corridor studies to try and acquire some other parking
spaces up there so you get some balance. But it is a very, very --
for me it's a double-edged sword because I can emphasize if
everybody wants to get there.
On the other side of it is I have a constituency who is
saying, "Well, who else is going to help us?" Pam --
Commissioner Mac'Kie's got the same thing: The city will get in
her face and say, "Why are so many people coming through here
to get to the beach?".
So we're looking -- I know that two commissioners here that
have to work with the other three and want to to find a workable
solution. So each one of these probably gives us an opportunity
to do a piece of it. I question 75 spaces. That's the first thing I
said when I -- I made notes here, and I discussed it with the
county manager, and he said in the plan and everything this is
the need. And he was formerly in that division. So I -- I said,
"Well, you know, if we have to, we have to." I don't know what
the solution is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A suggestion would be is to go
ahead and try the 75 spaces. But let's be realistic. If we find -- if
we utilize this resource too much and we're harming what we
originally set out to do --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- just go ahead and mark these
spaces off not for use anymore.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think the key eventually, we'll be
able to shuttle people in and out and not park there and have it
Page 159
April 10, 2001
done in a safe way so that people can get there and get off the
beach. And time and time again we have sat here and heard
people come to us and say, you know, I want to get my wife and
kids and the -- you know, the picnic -- I want to get down the
beach. But if I have to park blocks away -- you can see them
struggling down there with kids hanging on and everything -- they
have a perfectly legitimate case that says "Get me to the beach
in a safe way, and I don't want -- I don't care where I park but -- if
you shuttle me there, make it easy for me to get on and be able
to get off." and I think that is our overall global objective where
we got to go.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd like to make a motion to
approve the staff recommendation for this Barefoot Beach
management plan.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We have a motion by Commissioner
Mac'Kie. I have a second by Commissioner Fiala. Any other
discussion or questions by members of the board?
All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.) .
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
Motion carries 5-0. Thank you. She's great.
We need a break. Is that -- duly understood. Thank you.
Now we have this changeover time. Thank you.
We'll take five or ten, whatever it takes for them to make the
changes, before we move to the next item.
Item #8G1
REPORT REGARDING A 1/2 PERCENT LOCAL OPTION
INFRASTRUCTURE SALES TAX REFERENDUM - STAFF TO
ADVERTISE FOR AN ORDINANCE TO BE BROUGHT BACK ON MAY
Page 160
April 10, 2001
8, 2001 WITH FURTHER DIRECTIONS
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you, ladies and
gentlemen. We're back in session. We are now at Item 8.G,-
county manager report regarding 1/2 percent local option
infrastructure sales tax referendum.
MR. McNEES: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. Mike McNees from the county manager's office.
I'll be presenting this item this afternoon. The staff's here today
to ask you to take the next step in securing the long-term funding
necessary to support your road infrastructure program. I come
here today without dogs or ponies, without PowerPoint, without
lectures and color-glossy pictures because you've seen those.
We've been through the numbers. Those of you who have been
on the board more than a couple of years have seen this
presentation until you can probably recite it to me. We think
we're at the point now where you -- you left us when we last
spoke on this issue with a handful of unanswered questions, and
we're going to answer those for you today and then ask you to
give us direction to move forward at least to the next step, which
I'll talk about in a few minutes. You asked us when we last
spoke about this issue to assure you that you were levying
impact fees today at the maximum legally defensible limit, and I
went back to the actual adoption when you last discussed
impact fees, and your consultants brought to you a range of
impact fees in all categories, and then they were identified as A,
B, and C with A being the lowest he could recommend, C being
the highest he could recommend. You approved across the
board Level C, which was on that day the highest the consultant
said he could defend. So to answer that question, you're there. I
will assure you that as decision to continue the local-option gas
tax, which will not now be sunset; that will change the equation
Page 161
April 10, 2001
somewhat. The variables will continue to change over time, but
as we bring to you, pursuant to your direction, updates to the
impact-fee ordinances, you will be able to continue to levy them
at the highest legally defensible level, as you are today.
You also asked us could tourist-tax legislation be
changed to allow for the use of road constr -- tourist taxes for
road construction. The answer to that question is yes, it could
be if you could control the legislature and if you thought that
effort had any probability at all of succeeding. What I'm going to
tell you is -- and from a practical standpoint, that is not likely to
happen. That has been tried most recently by Orange County,
and -- and it was really a dismal failure. The movement never
really gained much momentum. It's certainly something staff can
continue to look at, continue to pursue, continue to try to bring
onto the radar screen of the Florida Association of Counties. We
don't think it's a good thing to mortgage our future against
making that happen. We don't have enough confidence in our
ability to influence the legislature of the State of Florida in that
direction, and we think it would be irresponsible to use that as --
as an escape.
You asked us could we adopt a tax at one percent for five
years or some intermediate period with an automatic rollback to
a half a percent after that time. The answer to that question is
yes. You have great flexibility in structuring the tax as long as
the referendum language is explicit and as long as people
understand what they're voting for and that it works that way.
What staff's going to recommend to you is that we keep it as
simple as possible and that we not overcomplicate the
referendum with rollbacks or changes midstream and that sort of
thing. We believe that a -- a simple referendum question with a
defined list of projects is probably the best way to go. We're
obviously going to listen to your -- your direction in that regard if
Page 162
April 10, 2001
we go that way.
You asked us how much of the five-year funding
shortfall could be funded by bonding the existing gas taxes that
we have. The answer to that question is approximately 59
percent of the five-year shortfall could be funded, a little more
than half. The problem is once we've funded that half, at the end
of five years, you have no money left for any new projects or for
the other half. So the practical answer to that question is, no,
that doesn't work.
You asked us how much of the five-year funding
shortfall could be funded by the indexing of gas taxes. If we
could make that happen -- and, once again, that depends upon
our ability to influence the Florida legislature, which we already
know is not very high -- we would raise, by our estimate, in the
neighborhood of half a million dollars per year. When our deficit
falls more into the five-, six- hundred-million-dollar range, that's
barely a material difference. Of course, it would help. Of course,
we will continue to pursue that because we think it's the right
thing, but we don't think it's a bail-out option or -- or magic bullet
for our road problem.
You asked us could real estate transfer taxes be
used as a source of revenue. The answer is no. You do not have
the authority under the laws of the State of Florida to levy real
estate transfer taes.
We've answered your questions. Now what I'm going
to ask you to do is authorize the county attorney to -- or to direct
the county attorney to draft an ordinance that would call for a
referendum election with a specific ballot question to be held in
November. Your executive summary includes a tentative time
schedule for what has to happen at what point to make that
happen. We would bring to you at that time a full discussion of
whether you believe a mail ballot or a regular election would be
Page 163
April 10, 2001
most appropriate with documentation of both costs and time
frames on that. Our initial research tells us from the supervisor
of elections that the cost will be the same. We'd like to -- we'd
like to dig into that a little bit more, and we would like to present
to you the full package at that time. We're asking you at this
point to authorize the attorney to draft that ordinance and allow
us to take the next step.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So moved.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. We have a -- a motion by
Commissioner Mac'Kie and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And I have a comment, too,
before -- because of some additional direction I'd like to give to
staff generally that might -- if -- if the board agrees that when we
-- as you're coming back with this calendar of how we will go
about -- you know, what the necessary steps are that you include
in it a -- a promotion plan that would be developed in-house by
our public- information people for how we are going to get the
word out to people in the community, to voters, about this, that
we be proactive in promoting the adoption of this tax and not
merely put the question to the voters, that we tell them, "It is our
opinion that it's an appropriate and necessary thing to do."
And, frankly, if we could do it without a legis --
without a referendum, I personally would do that because I know
that it -- the burden here would be paid for, some percentage, by
our nonproperty-owning visitors. And the alternative is to pay for
it with property taxes, and that's just not the fair thing to do. In
addition to that -- I wish I could take credit for this idea, but it
apparently is something that's been done somewhere else and
was shared with me -- I'd like to see a proposal for putting up
signs on every road where lanes would be added or
improvements would be made. "If you vote yes for a half-a-cent
Page164
April 10, 2001
sales tax on so and so, we will add two lanes to this road," real,
practical on the ground, "if you vote yes, you're going to get a
road here," and, you know, make it as -- as practical as we can
by that signage. I'd like to see those two things, a promotion
plan and a budget for -- for its implementation.
MR. McNEES: I can promise you we'll be bringing that -- we -
- we have already developed at the staff level a skeletal plan for
when we think certain events would have to happen. We wait
only for an affirmative vote from you today to jump on that and
flesh it out. I'll also tell you that there are community resources
knocking down the doors to help us with this campaign, some of
whom are represented in this room today, and they're only
waiting for an affirmative vote today to get onboard with us.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. And I would vote
that we would move forward with that idea cautiously because I
have a concern about using taxpayers' money to promote a tax;
that's my only comment, just so, you know, we --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA.' That's a good comment,
Commissioner Henning, and I appreciate that. I -- what I would
recommend is that when it comes time to do the advertising for
the ballot issue that we show the options, either A or B -- in other
words, A being the sales tax and if we pass that sales tax what
you're going to get, and B would be the -- what do you want to
call it? -- the status quo as we're doing, you know, and the Band-
Aids we're going to be able to apply to keep it moving. And that
would give the public at that point in time a fair measure to be
able to weigh everything. I -- I amend my motion to include -- to
include what you have already brought up, Pam --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You know, there's -- there's a real
important --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- my second rather.
Page 165
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There's a real important
distinction here that's got -- and -- and this is the piece that I
think is appropriate for county government to communicate.
People may get confused and think, "If we vote no for this sales
tax, then development will stop. They'll have to stop issuing
building permits because there aren't enough roads and the
concurrency thing will finally kick in like it did on the sewer."
Reality is -- I have had explained to me by -- by Norman Feder and
our lawyers and everybody else who I've asked is that these are
roads that are required to be built whether we issue another
building permit tomorrow or not. These are roads that -- our half-
a- million-dollar shortfall over 20 years is a shortfall based on
current approvals, and we have to build these roads whether we
issue another building permit or not, so it is truly a question of
what is the method of payment. It isn't -- I mean, people are -- I --
I'm most afraid that the public will be confused and think that if
they vote against this, we won't build the roads and, therefore,
growth will have to stop, and that, I think, is our obligation
because --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- you know, other entities can
promote this and can say they're for it, but unless we as the most
neutral one there is can say, "Here are the actual facts" -- you
know, if CBIA promotes this, it isn't going to -- it isn't going to
solve the problem that I just raised. The people are going to
think, "Maybe if we vote no, it'll stop building.".
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't think CBIA is going to be
promoting.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, maybe they will; maybe
they won't. But you see my point. We have an obligation to
educate the electorate, and that's what I am saying that we need
to do.
Page166
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Exactly. And educating the electorate
is our obligation, to use every resource that we have to get the
message to the community, whether it's Channel 54, any --
anything that our public-information offices can do. We must get
it out through all the media outlets. We must work with all the
entities in the community, and it won't do any good unless five
commissioners will --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's right.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- stand holding hands saying, "Yes, we
have a five-year backlog, and, yes, we need to take this whole
list of projects for five years which brings you up to where you
already need to be." That's the message.
And people say, "How did that happen?" What did the census tell
us, ladies and gentlemen, over the last 10 years? What happened
to Florida? Collier County? The United States?
All the coastal counties? This is where people are.
And they said, "Well, why did all these people do
that?" From 1946 through 1964 or '66, 70 million -- 76 million
baby boomers are out there, and the first wave is only deciding
to say, "You know, I think I'd like to retire where it's nice, and
Florida looks real good to me or the --
one of the coastal counties." There are others behind that
group who are saying, "You know, I can run my business off a
laptop, and so why should I do it in Kee -- Keeacock (phonetic)
where it's 20 below zero? Why don't I do it in Naples, Florida?"
That's the reality of what we have to deal with as a sitting Board
of County Commissioners. We didn't create it. We didn't ask for
it. We're all part of it. So I am -- I've been -- ever since I've been
a commissioner -- I went out there with -- with Mike McNees my
first year, and I got hung, drawed, and quartered. "What do you
mean a sales tax?" I mean, "You're a republican. My God, how
can you go out there and ask to raise the tax?" And I'm saying,
Page 167
April 10, 2001
"But it -- my -- my gut told me we're in trouble." And Io and
behold two years later here we are. We've got everybody here
saying, "You know, we are, and let's get it done." So I'm for it,
Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Let's vote on it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Call for a vote.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wait. You've got some
speakers, I think.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Unless you'd like to talk us out of it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, you -- you can help us
promote it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Help us promote it. So please.
MR. McNEES: You have Dawn Jantsch and Frank Halas
registered. Mrs. Jantsch would be first.
MS. JANTSCH: Well, as a challenge of the baby boomer --
boomers -- Dawn Jantsch, Naples Area Chamber of Commerce --
I'm in that last year, sir, and I thank you for recognizing that my
generation's still in a hurry. I would like to see this go through.
The chamber would like to be there to help you through it. We
appreciate your 5-0 vote on this. It's very important that we have
it to proceed forward. And may I also suggest that in all of your
presentations throughout the community -- because I know that
you don't have 40-hour- or even 50-hour-a-week ]obs. I see you
everywhere making presentations until 9, 10 o'clock at night and
7 o'clock in the morning. I hope that you will continue to support
this and support your fine staff because the transportation
department is one of your best values that you have right now.
You have some of the finest staff from the state, and we look
forward to seeing their support on this issue as well. So let's get
them supported, and let's support the issue.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Next speaker, please.
MR. McNEES: Would be Frank Halas.
Page 168
April 10, 2001
MR. HALAS.' Good afternoon. I'm Frank Halas. I live up in
the Vanderbilt Beach area. I was reading the paper this morning,
and obviously everybody else did, and we found that not only is --
is Naples the second-most prosperous place as far as people
coming here, but also in capital of the people here that have
money, but also we have a -- another problem here in that there's
a lot of people that work here in the Naples area that make five
and seven dollars an hour, and they're in the construction
business. And for them -- and they're already paying a five-cent-a-
gallon gas tax, which is also going to be on the rolls for the next
10, 20 years.
Now we're at saying to these same people that are on
the lower part of the income, "It's your responsibility, not only
along with us, but it's your responsibility to come up with the
half-cent sales tax increase." I feel that with all the large gated
communities that are being put in that some of this responsibility
has to fall on the developers, and I understand from the lawyer
that spoke earlier that you've already maxed out, but I'm looking
at why do the people in the community here have to basically
foot the whole -- have the brunt of their -- of this sales tax
increase put on their shoulders when the builders are building
these large, huge gated communities where they put in a lot of
people here, that they should have -- also come up and ante up
on this deal with the roads. And everybody knows that we do
have a very serious road problem here. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sir, could -- would you mind
staying just for a second, please -- MR. HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- because I think that you're
raising points that people are going to raise and that are so
important. What -- what -- and if you don't mind, if you -- if you
don't want to talk to me about this --
Page 169
April 10, 2001
MR. HALAS.' No.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- in this forum, you certainly
don't have to. But what I'm -- what I'm looking for is to
understand what -- what makes you think that the developers,
the builders, haven't already paid? See, what we're being told is
that we --
MR. HALAS: Well, the develop -- it -- I understand where
you're coming from. Everybody says, "the developers." The
developers don't pay anything.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Of course not.
MR. HALAS: That that -- that cost is put on the people that
want to move here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
MR. HALAS: And rightly so. Now, everybody's picking on
the developers, but I don't think it's the developers here because
what happens is we hear the story, "Well, the developers are
paying their fair share." Whatever the cost of that product is, it's
tacked onto that, and the person that wants to come down here
and live in Naples is going to pay the freight. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
MR. HALAS: And that's the way it should be. When I moved
to this coun -- this county a couple of years ago and bought a
piece of property and started to build a house, all the sudden I'd
come to the realization that, "Hey, I've got an impact fee to pay
here." I wasn't happy about it, but I says, "Hey, if I want to live
here in the sunshine and want to spend my golden years down
here, then I'm going to pay. I'm going to ante up and pay the
impact fee." So why don't we go that way instead of with the
sales tax increase, especially when you get all the people that
have to travel all the way down from Lee County? Because it's
getting to the point where the people that are putting these
houses up that are making the $5 an hour, $7 an hour, they have
Page170
April 10, 2001
to travel all the way from Lee County anymore to come down
here to work.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And my -- my question -- and I
just want to -- to -- I'm concerned that other people will think like
you are, that the builders haven't paid their fair share, so why
should I -- or why should this $5-an-hour guy or I be paying. And
what I want you to hear is that we have charged them every
nickel we can charge them. And the -- you're right. They've
passed it on. But we can't legally charge them any more. We've
already charged them every penny the law will allow us to
charge them, and we're still short this amount of money for this
20-year plan.
MR. HALAS: And we've already got -- you're --
you're one of the few counties that's got a five-cents-a-
gallon --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yes, sir.
MR. HALAS: -- gas tax, and you're still in this dilemma. Why
did this come to be where we are today?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because of the growth rate we
have.
MR. HALAS: Yeah. But how long have you had the gas tax?
That's what I don't understand. And if you've got this big influx
of people coming in, even seasonal, this ought to be more than
enough to offset for road building, you would think.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Wouldn't you think? I would
think, but it isn't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's a good question.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Very good question.
MR. HALAS: I mean, you've got a 65 percent increase in -- in
-- in the people that's coming here to live since nineteen sixty --
or since 1990, and everybody's buying gas here. Okay. So the
more gallons you sell, the more growth tax you guys should be
Page 171
April 10, 2001
getting, and I don't understand where the equation's -- it's gone
off the equation here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Para, make it -- I might --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just want to suggest we --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I just want to thank you, sir, so
much for raising the questions because they're helping us know
what the information is that we need to get out.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was going to say, if we could
have Norm Feder come up to the -- come up here, he can explain
this to us.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We ought to.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If you have any questions, if
anybody needs anything.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We already have those
questions.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You all know Attachment I in your
books, and can you look at the revenue streams. And, you know,
the gentleman was here. He needs to have that copy so that he
can look at it and reference it. It'll reinforce what Mr. Feder has
to tell you.
MR. McNEES: Before Norm gives you the technical answer,
let me give you the simple answer.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thank you.
MR. McNEES.' Because the gentleman asks what on the
surface is a very logical question --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. McNEES: -- you have all these people driving, and
they're paying gas tax, why isn't that enough. That question
presumes that the gas tax is calculated in some way based on
what does it cost to build and maintain a road system divided by
Page172
April 10, 2001
the number of miles driven, and that's what the tax is, and then
you divvy it out to all the counties.
It doesn't work that way. The -- the numbers for the gas taxes
are somewhat arbitrary, numbers given to counties by the
legislature years and years and years -- years ago as local option
ability and statewide ability that the legislature collects and
divvies up by a bunch of different formulas, so there is no
connection between what it costs to do all this and the amount
of gas tax that we're able to levy; that's the answer.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It would be smart if it were done
that way --
MR. McNEES: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- but it's not.
MR. McNEES: It's not. Now, I'm sure Norman can make it
make more sense.
MR. FEDER: I will -- I will stand -- my technical answer's
already been given. Basically, there's not a relationship there,
and that's what we've showed you in the revenues that we have.
This is the cost to meet the needs.
I will just expand on that in two areas. Again, it's Norman Feder,
transportation administrator, for the record. You also have a
situation where we face today, because of that rapid growth --
and most of it in the last three or four years, actually, that you
cannot use impact fees on a backlog situation. They can only be
used to provide new capacity, and while we are using it to
provide new capacity, the revenues, whether it be gas tax or
impact fees together, are not keeping up with growth. We're
falling further behind from these revenue streams, and we can't
use, as we have for the last few years -- and we can't use that on
a backlog situation. As we pointed out to you, you'd have to
almost quadruple the impact fees, and then you still couldn't use
it on the backlog, which is the predominant situation you're
Page 173
April 10, 2001
facing today. The last item on that is, essentially, as you go
through this process, we haven't had the opportunity to index
even our gas tax. Not only was it not established specifically
relative to each mile that a person creates and, therefore, the
cost, it's not indexed, so as the cost of building a road goes up,
the revenue stream has not gone up over these years to keep up
with it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I can expand upon that, too --
and the -- and I want to thank the gentleman for spending his
afternoon here to convey his concerns, but even if we were
allowed to dip more from the developer, being a businessman I
understand that it has to come from someplace else. So then it
goes back on the house, and then you talk to the -- about the
affordability of homes, then we get further in the hole. And
knowing some of the -- my neighbors and colleagues in -- in
Golden Gate, the laborers in construction, they're making more
than five to seven dollars an hour. And part of the problem that
we've had in this county versus other counties is we have the
lowest ad valorem taxes in the state of Florida, and I know Lee
County is at least one mill more than we are. I mean, I'm saying
that it's a doub -- kind of a double-edged sword that -- I mean,
we've enjoyed it. This is the great avenue for the tourists to pay
for.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it doesn't have -- so we
don't have to go to ad valorem. That's my input for the day.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, you know -- and -- and -- and I --
and I thank you, Commissioner Henning, and I thank you,
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I -- I want to say thank you
to Commissioner Henning, but I wanted to add also, I -- I'm very
Page174
April 10, 2001
concerned about the Iow-wage earner. We do have them in
Immokalee where they're earning as little as $5.25 an hour. If we
figure the -- when we went and broke it out at $7, you came up
with 12,500 a year. If you start breaking it down to what a
person's actually going to be paying in taxes at that level, the
way I break it down is allowing half of everything for rent. You
come up with about six thousand some dollars, and half of that
might be for sales tax. You're talking of an impact of $15 a year,
which may be enough where you are -- of -- of an impact when
you're only making $5.25 an hour, but still it shouldn't be
assigned as a burden in any case. It will raise their lev --
standard of living with the fact that they'll be able to get from
Point A to Point B in a reasonable period of time and probably
save that in fuel.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And if you take your multiplier,
Commissioner, and look at the people who come down and shop
at the Watersides and the other places who spend thousands and
thousands of dollars, which they can afford to do, they enjoy
doing, and you take that half cent against that, that helps us
enormously in the process. The other thing is that when we are
in Tallahassee, the two of us, as we go at the end of the month,
we will push for the indexing. We will continue to look at these
other areas to see -- it won't happen this year, ladies and
gentlemen, but maybe next year.
I mean, I was appalled to hear and see we cannot
levy a real estate transfer fee. Counties can't do that.
The state won't allow us. That means the state legislature would
have to change it so we could do it. And the gentleman is right
because all the people who came here and got the free yar -- free
ride --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- when those impact fees were Iow,
Page 175
April 10, 2001
when they move from house to house and don't build another
one, they don't take -- nothing happens here. I mean, I can't
blame them. It's just the way it was. But if we had that transfer
fee, it would have been a contributor. We don't have it. That
takes state legislation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The last little comment was good --
one good thing about our -- our Iow-wage employees that we do
have now is the bus system, so they'll be able to save the money
using the buses, and I'm hoping that they do - -. COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to offset what -- whatever any
income tax -- or sales tax.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Before you call the question, I
hope that this discussion makes the point about the need for our
public-information campaign.
MR. McNEES: That'll be the -- one of the things we'll bring
back to you will be first the ordinance pursuant to the details as -
- as outlined on your executive summary as the schedule and
such, a more flushed out but still preliminary public-information
campaign, which we agree that that has to be a lot of in-house
resource. We don't want to spend a lot of money on that --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
MR. McNEES: -- because of the bad message that that
sends.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No.
MR. McNEES: And also, third, we will update the financial
information that's in your package and bring that up to the
minute as to what the numbers are, the projects, the revenues so
that we -- we can have one last pass at that before we move
forward.
Page 176
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're right, Mike. We've got the in-
house capabilities. We have -- we can do PSIs, public- service-
information things. We've got kids in high school in programs
that are taught how to do kind of -- we can get all kinds of effort
here to -- to educate, educate, educate, and we can do it cost
effective and still get the message to the community. And I
thank the gentleman for the points that he raised --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- because those will come to us time
and time again, and this gives us an opportunity to try to clarify
the situation and demonstrate the need that we can all win
uniformity here and with the business communities and the other
groups -- all the other groups in the communities, the Rotaries,
the Kiwanis, all of them can get behind us and say, "This is good
for Collier County.".
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Call the question?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You certainly may. I will call the
question. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unamious response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. Motion
carries 5-0. Thank you, Mr. Feder. That takes us to the county
manager's report.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Item #9A
SETTLEMENT OFFER OF $10,000 IN THE CASE OF MAXIE D.
HOLMES V. COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 2:00.CV-262-FTM-
2929DNF - APPROVED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Did we have an add-on for a
settlement agreement?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's -- I'm sorry. It's down to the
Page 177
April 10, 2001
county attorney's agreement. I'm sorry. Yes. And that's Add-on
A, settlement from Mr. Weigel. That's next.
MR. WEIGEL: And Mr. Pettit will present it. Thank you.
MR. PETTIT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Mike Pettit, assistant county attorney. I'm here this
afternoon to recommend to the county a settlement of case of
Maxie Holmes versus Collier County in the amount of $10,000.
This is an age.discrimination case that is currently pending in the
United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: This is one that I've been briefed
on, we had a session on. I think it's a very good result, and I'll
move approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And we have a -- a motion by
Commissioner Mac'Kie, a second by Commissioner Fiala to
approve your recommendation. Any speakers? Any discussion
by board members? All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unamious response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. Motion
carries 5-0.
MR. PETTIT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Did we -- 9-B was taken
care of, is that correct, on the Grande Sand, or is that still there?
MR. WEIGEL: I'm not too sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That was pulled off.
MR. WEIGEL: Yes.
Item #10A
RESOLUTION 2001-127, RE-APPOINTING SUSAN SAUM AND
WILFRED JAEGER TO THE RADIO ROAD BEAUTIFICATION
ADVISORY COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
Page 178
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah, that was pulled.
Thank you, Commissioner Coletta. That takes us now to Item 10-
A under Board of County Commissioners appointment of
members to the Radio Road Beautification --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There are --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- Committee.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- two applicants for two
positions. I move their approval.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have an approval by Commissioner
Mac'Kie, a second by Commissioner Henning. All in favor signify
by saying aye. Oppose by the same sign. Motion carries 5-0.
Item #10B
RESOLUTION 2001-128, APPOINTING ROBERT G. JENKINS TO
THE BLACK AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD - ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Likewise, there's one applicant
for one position on the Black Affairs Advisory Board. I move for
his approval.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I have a -- I have a motion by
Commissioner Ma¢'Kie, a second by Commissioner Coletta. All in
favor signify by saying aye.
(Unamious response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign. Motion
carries 5-0.
Item #10C
RESOLUTION 2001-129, SUPPORTING CITIZENS RIGHT TO
HONEST GOVERNMENT ACT - ADOPTED
Page 179
April 10, 2001
Item 10-C, consideration of the resolution
supporting Citizens Rights to Honest Government.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER COLETTA.'
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COLETTA:
MAC'KIE:
I'm against that, though, so ...
I'm sure you are.
Just kidding.
There goes the sales tax.
Motion to approve the resolution.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have just a question before we do
that. You know, it's a great -- I mean, who could be against it?
But I would like to know if our county attorney's had a chance to
review this and has any advice that he may give us in terms of
what this means and how it --
it impacts the government at all levels.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and
Commissioners. And principally this amends Chapter 838, which
is titled "Bribery and Misuse of Public Office." As you will note in
the backup Mr. Coletta's provided, the --
the bill amends Chapter 383 and a couple of other statutes,
and what it does in -- in most -- most sections here is it -- it
increases penalties from third-degree felony to second- degree
felony for the violations which are defined or identified. One
thing I note -- and it's not perhaps a significant difference, but
under "public records law," of course, if -- if you -- if a person,
staff person or elected official, public officer, destroys the public
records, there -- or -- there is a -- there is a penalty under Chapter
119 of a -- of a fine of up to a thousand dollars and up to six
months in the pokey. But since -- since -- well, at any rate here
the destruction of public records is elevated to the second-
degree felony, which may be a little more of a penalty in that
regard. But, as you know, we're on our lecture tour at the county
Page180
April 10, 2001
attorney's office with all officials, advisory committees and -- and
staff in regard to the care and storage of public records, and
we'll continue to assist in that regard, so hopefully it wouldn't be
a problem even if the penalty does upgrade to something a little
more -- more problematical for the offenders.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Is there no -- and as long as there's no
conflict of our ethics ordinance, which is, as far as I know, the
toughest in the state, that's --
MR. WEIGEL: No. That's true. Absolutely no problem with
our local ordinance whatsoever there.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: No.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Any questions that might not
have been sufficiently answered? All in favor signify by saying
aye.
MR. McNEES: You have one registered speaker.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Whoa. Registered speaker.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He's against honest government
too.
MR. KRASOWSKI: You got it. I'm against this. I had to
chuckle when I read that on, you know, who could be against
honest government. Oh, excuse me. I'm Bob Krasowski, for the
record. But I -- the one little comment I'd like to make, though, is
honest government is possible when it's open government. The
more you try to close issues or discussion or input, the higher
risk we're at of people suspecting or being correct that some
special interest is being served. So I'll chime in with Mr. Coletta
and support the concept of honest government.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: We all support it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may -- may ask Bob a
personal question, would you say that the county government's
Page 181
April 10, 2001
been very open to you in the process that's taken place in the
landfill?
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yes. Yes. It's -- it's been pretty good, a
little touch and go on -- on occasion, but I don't want to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I mean, when you get the
reports before me, I say it's doing very well.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Well, I try hard. You have a -- you have a
lot more to do than I do, but I'm just focused on a specific task,
and I have had a little difficulty on some of-- a little
misunderstanding that we had, but overall things have been
going very well.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And, Bob, you know--
MR. KRASOWSKI: And I hope they keep up, especially with
your emphasis on open, honest government -- honest
government. I don't mean to put words in your mouth. But open
government as well; right?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And we would like to know if you
ever had problems that you thought you needed some help
resolving --
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- by open government for Collier
County. We would want to know.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I appreciate that because, you know, I'd
do it anyway.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I know.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you. Now I will call -- is
there any other speakers, Mr. McNees? MR. McNEES: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you. I, therefore, call the
question. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Unamious response.}
Page 182
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Opposed by the same sign.
carries 5-0. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
COMMISSIONER HENNING:
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
Motion
Mr. Chairman.
Mr.--
Thank you for bringing it to us.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Item 10-D--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The county attorney is saying
something.
MR. WEIGEL: I'll just say with your -- with your passage of
the directive to the resolution, the resolution will include the
typical kind of pass-through; that is, that it goes through
legislative delegation and all the appropriate officials so that it
carries as much force as possible.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
MR. WEIGEL: Right.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right.
David, has been continued.
All right.
Good.
Thank you. Item 10-D, as in
Item #10E
RECONSIDERATION OT AGENDA ITEM 9B OF THE BCC MARCH
27, 2001 MEETING REGARDING VANDERBILT SHORES
CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., VANDERBILT CLUB
CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., THE MANSIONS
CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., GULF COVE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION, INC., AND VANDERBILT BEACH AND BAY
ASSOCIATION, INC. CHALLENGING THE COUNTY'S APPROVAL
OF SDP-2000-108 FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACHCOMBER
RESORT AS INCONSISTENT WITH THE COUNTY'S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - TO BE RECONSIDERED ON MAY 8, 2001
Page 183
April 10, 2001
That takes us to Item 10-E, res --
reconsideration of Vanderbilt Beachcomber Resort. I put
that on the agenda this afternoon. As all of you, I hope, have
read my letter that I sent to the Naples Daily News --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: --that was printed on Saturday.
I think it outlined the position that when I -- voted to approve
staff's position two weeks ago, I fully intended, as I discussed
with couns -- our legal counsel, David Weigel, on the way to
Tallahassee that I needed time, and I knew the only way I could
achieve time to find out what the possibilities were is to vote in
the affirmative because that's how the law works. If you vote
with an affirmity and you are in a major -- majority position, you
can always bring it back for discussion about reconsidering the
issue. If you vote in the negative, you are the minority. You,
therefore, cannot bring it back. And the logic behind that is is
every time you lose something in a council or a commission, you
could continually bring it back, and it's almost like filibustering.
I'll keep bringing it back and bringing it back until I wear them
out.
My intent here all along has been twofold; one to
deal with the Beachcomber because that's an immediate issue.
Secondly is to continue to work on the Land Development Code
as it affects RT zoning in Vanderbilt Beach. And RT zoning for
Vanderbilt Beach is the only section in the county yet,
unincorporated area, that we, the Board of County
Commissioners, deal with. The other RT zoning would be in the
City of Naples, Commissioner Mac'Kie, and at Marco city,
Commissioner Fiala, which she is -- is a part of her district. So
we have a situation where a part of this whole beach area is RT
zoning, but there are a number of other uses in there with
different classifications. And what I would like to do the -- this
Page 184
April 10, 2001
afternoon is ask the board if we might bring this back -- I think
it's two meetings from now, if I understand that correctly, Mr.
Weigel.
MR. WEIGEL: Correct.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- which would allow me the time to
work with all the interested parties to get to a successful
conclusion. All parties have said, "We don't want to go to Court."
The county doesn't want to go there. The developer doesn't
want to go there. Vanderbilt Beach Association doesn't want to
go there. We would all like to achieve the objective sitting down
and discussing the options.
I will be having a meeting tomorrow with the
Vanderbilt Beach Association and their committee to clarify their
issues. I will schedule meetings with the Beachcomber
representatives to discuss those issues, and I will be conversing,
of course, with our county attorney to see can we find a
workable solution to the problem. That's why I'm asking the
board this afternoon to allow me that opportunity to bring this
back for discussion of reconsideration so that the first meeting in
May, hopefully, we could have resolved the issue for the
Beachcomber.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
May I comment?
Can I just finish?
I'm so sorry.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Let me just finish my statement.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I thought you were.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Secondly, I have contacted through
Nancy Lenanne, our -- our representative in Tallahassee -- she is
providing us with ordinances -- or I'm going to say ordinances,
land development codes, and zoning that have been done by two
coastal counties in the panhandle. These two counties,
Escambia and -- I can't think of the other one. They are sending
Page 185
April 10, 2001
us their regulations, and they will help us identify how we can
protect our beach communities. How can you do that? One has
successfully defended it legally; the other is still in litigation,
which seems to be going on and on, but at least it gives us some
guidelines.
I have not -- I -- I don't believe there is anyone -
- any legal group or anyone -- they're not saying, "We don't want
to look at that." We want to look at it because it may require not
only a Land Development Code change, which was part of it -- we
may have to look at our growth management plan and ask
ourselves, "Is there some things that we can do in the next
cycle?" or "What is the due process to get it done?" I'm looking
for that. We'll continue to work with the Vanderbilt Beach
community with legal counsels and find out how we can achieve
this objective so that when we get to the next cycle the
commissioners will be well briefed, understand exactly what is
going on there. What happened last December is -- like, when I
got here, they hadn't been on the dais more than two weeks, and
suddenly we're into LDCs, land development codes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Now, that's a real tough challenge.
Now, what do you do, and how do you deal with it? And I
remember that. We tried to find a workable solution at that time.
It was not acceptable to the Board of County Commissioners or
the Vanderbilt Beach Association. They --
we couldn't get together. It's -- I was fearful at that
time that if we couldn't work through that residential tourist
situation, we would be where we are today and, unfortunately,
that's where we are. So we need to address the big picture and
the interim solution, so that's why the only thing I can deal with
today with my colleagues is bringing this back for discussion of --
giving us the opportunity through the reconsideration process to
Page 186
April 10, 2001
achieve that objective, which will allow me, hopefully, to resolve
it by the first meeting in May. Thank you. Thank you for your
indulgence, Commissioners. Commissioner Mac'Kie and then
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I absolutely endorse every single
goal and objective you just described, and if anybody can
accomplish this, it will be you if you can get these people in the
room together and make them agree.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, we're going to start separately.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's -- that's you know how to
do it. So say, you know, start separately and then together.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You bet. You bet.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But my only question is how
reconsideration will help that proposal, and here's why: If we -- if
we reconsider then at whatever meeting it's scheduled, we will
have the room packed again with the people who wanted to talk
before who will talk this time, and we will discuss it, and we will
hear from them that they hate this, which we know already that
they hate this. Other than that, I don't think we accomplish
anything because, you know, the lawsuit, the -- un -- unless I'm
wrong, Mr. McNees -- correct me if I am.
As I understand it, the rule is that, and that
statute is that you have to file a lawsuit within 30 days and that
that 30-day lawsuit -- that 30-day deadline is not tolled, is not
affected by whether or not we reconsider this. In other words,
they're going to have to file their lawsuit anyway. And the
normal process here will be for this to be negotiated as a part of
a settlement of that lawsuit. I just don't see what is served by
having a public hearing here again on this subject when the
reality is the lawsuit has to be filed because their deadline is
their deadline, and you're going to negotiate with them, and
hopefully you're going to solve the problem, and that'll come
Page 187
April 10, 2001
back to us for approval of a settlement agreement. But what are
we -- how are we gaining anything by talking about it again?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, Commissioner, if I do achieve
what I'd like to, we won't have a roomful of people. We will
already have the agreement. It will be well communicated
throughout the community, and we'll be able at that time to say,
"Here's our agreement. Everybody is -- is satisfied with it and" --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But, Commissioner, we can do
that on approval for -- approval of the settlement agreement. It's
the same thing.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You can, but -- but this does enhance a
sense of urgency to get it done.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, I -- I -- does it? Am I right
about the timing? Are they going to have to file their lawsuit or
lose it anyway?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I've -- I've spoken with
Mr. Rynders, the attorney for the proposed litigants, a couple of
times now, and it's his decision to determine whether the matter
is jurisdictional or not. I don't advise him that he has to file the
lawsuit, nor would I attempt to, representing my clients as I do,
but he may or he may not file it. He will read the statutes and
make his own determination there; however -- in fact, he's not
here today in -- in part because he felt that it wasn't necessary to
come and discuss or kibitz or anything else with this board in
regard to the motion for reconsideration today. He --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Has he indicated to you whether
our reconsideration would -- would affect his decision to file or
not to file?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I didn't try to draw him out too far.
Typically attorneys don't push each other for strategies. But he
may file, but he is going to be weighing it and looking at the
statutes. I in no way wanted to advise him one way or the other
Page 188
April 10, 2001
and then be subject to the slings and arrows for any reason from
-- from he and his -- his worthy clients.
But the fact is is that the motion for
reconsideration would come back on May 8th for discussion of
the item in chief, but as Mr. Carter indicates, this provides to all
parties, including potential litigates -- litigants the fact that there
is a -- a significant effort going forward to find a common ground
to reach across the issues and presumably reduce issues,
hopefully, and there is even a possibility, although I can't project
this, that what was before you on March 27th, which was a
review of the site development plan approval done by staff,
which is correctly a staff dec -- decision that arguably or possibly
could, in fact, change, and so that -- the site development
concept may be different, and -- and the board will have an
opportunity, potentially, with all parties submitting themselves of
record to potentiality amend or change what has previously been
an administrative approval at the staff level.
So I kind of applaud this. The -- the discussions
could go forward without a motion for reconsideration, but at the
same time I think it -- it lowers the -- call it the threshold of
potential contentiousness as we reach out and try to work --
work through the issues.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. All commissioners can
vote on this, by the way, and I didn't want to infer, Commissioner
Fiala, that you couldn't vote on this. You couldn't bring it back is
all, but you can vote today. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I -- I applaud you for what you've
done. I -- so what you're going to be asking for is a continuance?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm asking -- well, I'm asking that the
board agree today to have a reconsideration discussion on the
first meeting in May, and that gives me this interim period to
decrease what I consider the hostilities so that we have a
Page 189
April 10, 2001
workable framework in which to pursue that, and I'm going to be
optimistic that we will get there by the 8th.
MR. McNEES: You have some registered speakers, Mr.
Chairman, if you're ready for them.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes, sir.
MR. McNEES: Your first is Bob Krasowski followed by Frank
Halas.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He's getting his money's worth
today.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I thought that if I'm going to be here, I
might as well speak up with anything interesting.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Good.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Bob Krasowski, private citizen. I was out
in the hall, and I heard some people speaking of this issue, and
they -- I'm familiar with that neighborhood. I first moved here to
Vanderbilt Beach and Naples Park. And they mentioned that this
hotel that you're discussing might be permitted to operate just so
many jet skis, and I just can't see how that could fit into the
existing community there because you have those fingers from
Vanderbilt, which is on the side of Naples Park, and there's some
nice homes in there. People have a nice lifestyle going. You
know, they've been there for a long time, and I would think the
last thing they're going to want is these screaming jet skis going
up and down.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Bob, I couldn't agree with you more.
I'm going to do everything I can and however I have to do it to
propose whatever we need to do to keep jet skis totally out of
the place. I mean, when I go to the beach, I don't need to hear a
jet ski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I've got paddlewheel boats that go
around and all of--
Page 190
April 10, 2001
MR. KRASOWSKI: Canoes and kayaks or stuff like that, you
know, but the -- the noise is --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, sir. I agree with you. Jet skis and
-- a lot of people may hate me, but I'm going to tell you I am not
for jet skis, and I'll do everything I can -- whatever issues we
need to deal with to keep them off the beach.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. Well, good luck.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Frank Halas, your next speaker, followed by
Carol Wright.
MR. HALAS: Good afternoon. Frank Halas. I live up in the
Vanderbilt Beach area. One of the main reasons that my wife
and I decided to move to the Naples area -- we're from the
Michigan area -- was that the -- the beauty and the lush
vegetation that we found in the Vanderbilt Beach area in 1997.
We bought the property because we found out that there was
deed restrictions and felt that this would adhere to our
betterment of the community. We also liked the woods that was
just north of us because we live on Flamingo. Well, needless to
say, those -- that woods is gone because now they've got a gated
community that's going in there, The Dunes.
We understand that the county does not endorse deed
restrictions, and that is kind of a -- a -- a sin that we feel, but --
however, being a homeowner, I plan to vigorously uphold the
deed restrictions, especially when we've got two lots there less
than an acre in size and we want to put a 68- unit hotel there,
and we believe that the -- those lots are deeded under the old
Conners Park. We are opposed to the hotel being there not only
because of the height and everything else, but we feel that the
impact of people in that particular area -- as you can see, we've
got The Dunes going in with about 700 or so units going there,
and there's also -- eventually sometime on the south end of the
Page 191
April 10, 2001
bay there -- we understand that people are buying up all that
property, and God knows what that's going to be for, probably for
something else. I think that's at the corner of Vanderbilt - - let's
see Vanderbilt Beach Road and Gulfshore Drive.
The other thing is that the concession of jet skis -
- as the gentleman stated earlier, I just can't envision what that's
going to do for our privacy and for the quietness and the serenity
of the neighborhood. Further, I think that --
or I believe that the Commission, if it so chooses, can find
a significant legal basis for disapproving this project. Please help
us preserve the harmony of this residential -- and nature of the
area. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please.
Carol Wright who will be followed by Joe
MR. McNEES:
Connolly.
MS. WRIGHT:
Good afternoon, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good afternoon.
MS. WRIGHT: My name is Carol Wright, president of the
Vanderbilt Beach and Bay Association representing over 700
members. I'm just here today to tell you that I -- I just want to
ask you to open up your hearts and your minds and to listen to
just a few of these speakers that are here today. And I want to
thank Dr. Carter and the board for addressing this issue again
and bringing it back up. We had a lot of people that wanted to be
here today to speak, but not knowing where we were on the
agenda and what the time frame was going to be and figuring
that the board would like to have your -- your desire would be to
shorten this procedure, we decided to just keep it to a few of us
and told everybody to just watch it on TV, so, Commissioners,
they are watching; they're listening; and they're watching for
what you're doing today on your vote. And I'm here today to ask
you to please, please do this vote over again. Please reconsider
Page 192
April 10, 2001
it so that we can possibly work this out so that - - whatever is
going to be best for the neighborhood and this property. Thank
yOU,
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thankyou.
MR. McNEES.' Mr. Connolly will be followed by Bruce
Anderson.
MR. CONNOLLY: I'm Joe Connolly, and I live at 10633
Gulfshore Drive. I'm a vice president of the Mansions Condo
Association and the director of the Vanderbilt Beach and Bay
Association. I don't put those forward trying to brag on my
credentials but to make the point that those two organizations
along with other condominium associations and along with many,
many residents of the adjoining area have formed an ad hoc
committee called the Save Vanderbilt Beach Association, and if
there is a lawsuit or potentially three lawsuits, they will be
brought by the Save Vanderbilt Beach Association, not by the
Vander -- Vanderbilt Beach and Bay Association. And the
committee is trying to save money. We'll take donations from you
to support us in this effort, not just in this, but in the future to
maintain the character of Vanderbilt Beach.
Commissioner Carter in his article said that he was
dismayed with the hotel that they're proposing. I am dismayed.
We are dismayed. The citizens of the county are dismayed. And
how the planning department through their land development
shenanigans could let like -- something like -- like this happen is -
- is beyond us really, and I believe that the legal department, your
staff, in their efforts to CYA the planning department has
exposed theirself because there are legal ways that you can stop
this.
Now, I think you need to go back to them and say,
"You say you turned over every rock. Go back and look again
because there are some you didn't see." And if they can't you've
Page 193
April 10, 2001
really got a problem, but there is a group of attorneys from the --
the east coast, and they're working in the Naples area right now
for the City of Naples, in fact, and if your staff can't find a way,
these people have been reading the newspapers, and they know
a way for you. So if your staff can't do it -- you retain attorneys
all the time - - I ask you to look at somebody else, and we can tell
you who they are. Thank you again, and hopefully you will
reconsider.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you.
MR. McNEES: Mr. Anderson. Your last speaker is Diane
Katcham.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Bruce, before you comment, I
appreciate all the comments by the community, and I know how
upset they are. There is several classifications of property out
there, RT, other RF, something, something. There is a map that
spells this all out. Some of these do have deed restrictions, and
others don't. And we'll get into that discussion when I -- I think
we'll have to look at all of that and find out the way it -- we can't
blanket it, but we're going to find ways to look at each parcel of
that, and that's what we need to do quietly and methodically to
find a way. And our staff did within what they're directed and
guided to do, and I can't fault them. I don't agree with them.
Legal counsel and I have spent hours on this, and we're trying to
find ways, and I believe through all our efforts we will find those
ways. Now, Mr. Anderson.
MR. ANDERSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Bruce Anderson, and I represent the property
owner, Aquaport, LLC. First of all, with regard to the item up
before you, it's a reconsideration, and my question is, what is
there to reconsider? There is nothing new. What we're doing
here is we're proceeding to flog a dead horse. Earlier this
morning you had the opportunity to discuss the Pelican Bay issue
Page 194
April 10, 2001
again for the umpteenth time, and we may make a run at that
with this Vanderbilt Beach issue -- at that record.
How many times do we need to hear the same thing?
We do applaud Commissioner Carter's efforts to try to resolve the
differences between the property owner and the residents of this
area, and we have always, always been willing to meet with the
residents out there, and we offered to meet with them in a letter
to their attorney, their prior attorney -- they're now on round two -
- in a November 14th letter. We offered to meet to -- with them.
And let me read you an excerpt from that letter.
"We would be interested in any initial reactions that your clients
have to our proposed project as we are nearing time to make a
decision on whether to move forward with the 24- unit extended
stay concept or the alternate seven -- 70- to 80-unit typical
transient lodging facility." So everyone knew what the
alternatives were back in November. They chose not to sit down
with us and talk. They spurned our offer to compromise and sit
down and talk, so we had to move forward under the existing
zoning regulations, as we told their attorney we would, in fact,
do,
The only surprise should be is that we did exactly
what we said we would do. Secondly~ I'd point out that -- the
point Commissioner Mac'Kie raised. Under the statute the
county had 30 days to respond after they filed their verified
complaint with you, and then after the county's response
deadline is -- is -- been completed, then a complaint has to be
filed in the circuit court no later than 30 days after the county's
response deadline. Let me give you that time frame. The SDP
was approved January 29th. The verified complaint was filed
February 26th. The deadline for the county's response was
March 28th, and the deadline to file a lawsuit with the circuit
court is April 27th, fully a week or two before this item can come
Page 195
April 10, 2001
back before you for any kind of discussion.
Let me tell you that we are willing and have and
continue to be willing to sit down to discuss possibilities of
compromise and settlement with these property owners whether
you reconsider, whether a lawsuit gets filed, whatever. We've
always been willing to do that. They're the ones who, when they
had the opportunity, gave us the back of their hand. And with all
due deference to the commission, the issue is not whether you
like the project or I like the project. The issue is whether it is
consistent with the growth management plan and the Land
Development Code, and you have been told on two separate
occasions now by your county attorney and by your planning
staff that, in fact, this site development plan meets the
requirements of law.
We'd ask you to vote not to reconsider. We're
simply -- you know, the sad fact is you really didn't even need to
vote two weeks ago to do anything. If you had just sat silently by
and done nothing, it would have had the same effect as the
approval vote that you gave that you got so whipsawed by the
newspaper and the neighbors for. You needn't have taken any
action. If you had done nothing, things would have proceeded
along the path that they're currently on. I'd ask you today again.
Don't do anything.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And the last speaker, please.
MR. McNEES: Diane Katcham.
MS. KATCHAM: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I have
seen something here that I am truly excited about. I have seen a
developer's attorney get upset about something that has actually
happened here.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, pay attention because he --
he rants and raves all the time.
MS. KATCHAM: Yeah. But this is truly a moment that the
Page196
April t0, 200t
public should be very, very excited to see, something that's
happened that they're not happy about. My name is Diane
Katcham, and I'm on the board of Vanderbilt Beach and Bay, but
I'm really here to speak to you as an individual today. My
husband and I own a condominium near the Beachcomber land.
Before I say what I have prepared to say, I have to
set the record straight. Our organization has never been
approached by the developer. We would have been delighted to
talk to them. I think what Mr. Anderson is talking about is a few
homeowners had hired a lawyer. One of them is here.
He never recalls -- he told me -- that he ever got a letter in
November saying that the developer would like to meet them.
But our group has never been contacted by the developer, and I
would just like to make that point.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: But you know, though, that when
somebody has a lawyer, lawyers are prohibited by the ethics
code from contacting that person directly, so the only way they
could communicate is lawyer to lawyer, and you're the only one
here that would have --
MS. KATCHAM: That would be fine, but we're not talking
about our lawyer. He's talking about something in November.
We didn't get involved in this until -- it was December when we
were talking about the Land Development Code. I hope I'm
getting my five minutes extended. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Of course you are.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's fine.
MS. KATCHAM: Thank you. As you know, the site originally
was zoned for a small, one-story seven-unit condominium. Now
we're talking about a 10-story, 68-unit hotel. I could tell you all
the reasons why increasing the density on this property by nine
times would be disastrous to the character of our neighborhood,
what it would do to the traffic, which is already a nightmare on
Page 197
April 10, 2001
our narrow two-lane road, so much so that recently a terrible
accident took place in front of the Beachcomber property, and
four young people were carried away on stretchers. I could tell
you what a 10- story, 68-unit hotel would do to the sewage
problem already overflowing or to the water problem
underflowing as it is, but not only does this project threaten the
infrastructure, it threatens our lives.
By increasing density in a coastal high hazard area,
the board of commissioners would be endangering the lives of
those who live on the beach. We have only one evacuation route,
the narrow two-lane Gulfshore Drive. By approving a high-density
hotel on this road, you are threatening our safety. We will do
whatever it takes to protect our families and our community, but
we're hopeful that you will listen to us today, the people who live
on Gulfshore Drive.
And we truly commend dr. Carter for bringing this
forward today, and we appreciate Commissioner Henning, Fiala,
and Coletta who have shown us some concern for this. We're
hopeful that you will listen to the people on Gulfshore Drive, and
please understand many people live there.
Although portions of the street are zoned residential tourist, the
vast majority was developed as residential. The Beachcomber is
in the heart of this residential area.
They're one-story homes and two- and three-story condo
buildings.
Only three motels exist on this entire road. All
of them are only two stories high, and they're located at the end
of our street near access roads. We have only one hotel, La
Playa. I believe there's a misconception about Gulfshore Drive,
and I urge board members to visit there and meet with us to
discuss the future of our area. Last June, without any input from
the public, the county planning department with a rubber stamp
Page t98
April 10, 2001
from the board of commissioners changed the Land Development
Code to make it easier for development to be in greater density
in redeveloping Vanderbilt Beach. The changes allowed this
hotel project to crop up. I urge you not to force this on us by
saying your hands are tied, that your staff says it's allowable
under the law.
You are the law. You can decide whether this
approval may have been a mistake and if it needs to be reviewed.
And, please, have no fear about the Byrd-Harris (phonetic) Act.
We keep hearing that, that the Byrd-Harris Act -- that the
developer can sue because of the review or a future rejection of
the site plan. The Byrd-Harris Act, which is always being used as
a threat, only applies to an existing use or a vested right. The
existing use for this land was a seven-unit condominium. No
vested right for a 68- unit hotel exists because the land was
purchased by the developer before the county even changed the
code increasing the density allowing 68 units.
So why should you reconsider this site plan? The
Land Development Code calls for one acre minimum lot size for
hotels. This property is less than an acre; that alone should
question any quick approval. The planning department says,
"Well, forget the one acre. This is a lot of record." Now, I'm not a
lawyer, but a lot of record, as I see it, is just that, a lot, normally
a vacant piece of land. There have been buildings on this land
since the early '60s. That makes these buildings a
nonconforming structure.
There is a section in your Land Development Code
that specifically talks about redevelopment of nonconforming
structure does not already exist. We believe a variance is
needed, not a rubber-stamp approval.
And there's more. The planning department approved
this project with a jet ski concession on fragile Vanderbilt
Page 199
April 10, 2001
Lagoon. Environmentalists are in shock of this. This is a
manatee area. The planning department approved this project as
a beach destination resort giving it added density, but a beach
destination resort is supposed to be on the beach with direct
access to the gulf. This is across the street. Hotel guests will
have to cross a dangerous blind curve to get to the beach using a
path which is basically a drainage area. You've heard about deed
restrictions. The Florida Department of Community Affairs is
very concerned about increasing density in coastal high alt --
areas. I think they would have a problem with this project.
Aren't these enough questions to warrant a review?
The people of Vanderbilt Beach beseech you. Give us the chance
to have input in what is built in our neighborhood.
We accept something will be built in this property, and we are
more than willing to discuss what's going to be built on this
property, but please make it fit the law, not the profit matter --
margin of a developer. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. Does that conclude our
speakers, Mr. McNees?
MR. McNEES: Sure does.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I believe I was skipped over.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He -- he wanted to --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I have some comments I
wanted to add. I think Bruce Anderson did say, and -- and I think
he's correct, that our staff has told us on numerous occasions
that it did meet the Land Development Code and growth
management plan, and so on and so forth, and I heard that, but I
still have questions in my mind. And I did read your comments in
the Naples Daily News and -- and your comments here today, and
I just want to reflect back on the Land Development Code,
December 13th from last year: "Commissioner Carter: And what I
Page 200
April 10, 2001
was trying to do and I think the other board members were trying
to do -- it is in your area, and we have some concerns. We were
trying to get some direction. And let me just say that" --
Commissioner Mac'Kie says that "1 tell you, this is
too confusing to do this on the fly, and we are to --".
"Commissioner Carter: I agree.".
"Commissioner Mac'Kie: -- likely to get sued.".
"Commissioner Carter: I agree.".
"Commissioner Mac'Kie: If we do it wrong.".
"Commissioner Carter: Well, another positive is that we can
continue this to the next cycle to work all these details out.".
"Commissioner Henning: Mr. Chairman, I think that's a great
idea.".
· 'Commissioner Carter: I agree."
The motion was -- is to carry it to the next cycle,
and from the -- your comments, that's what I thought that you
wanted to do. And, by the way, we were talking about two
different issues. It wasn't a heighth. It was a full-area elevation.
So, Mr. Chairman, if -- if you do want support in the future, I -- I
would hope that you would be more clear on what you want, and
we -- it was our first Land Development Code meeting, but I don't
think that we are all agreeing here so ...
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, in all due respect --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I make a motion to --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: In all due respect, Commissioner, you
chose to read what was appropriate to you. I would go back and
read all the minutes of that -- of that Land Development Code
session.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's right here.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Of course we're talking about full-area
elevation. I'm not going to read it now because you're throwing
it to me on the dais, and if you wanted to bring that to my
Page 201
April 10, 2001
attention, you could have given that to me prior to this meeting if
it was in front of you for FYI; called for your information. I tried
at that meeting to get through -- I met with the attorneys that
represented some of the people there. Our attorneys met. We
met with attorneys from the -- the proposed development of the
Beachcomber. We are all struggling to find a way to deal with
the floor issue -- floor-area ratio, and it would have been a 26-unit
residential tourist hotel; that was the discussion. The question
was, was it that type of a hotel or was it going to be a
condominium of 14 or 15 units, somewhere in that neighborhood.
At the end of it, the only direction that seemed to be coming from
the Board of County Commissioners was that we had to continue
it.
Well, continuing it was fine to get it done in the
next cycle to correct the major problem. Unfortunately, it did not
address the issue of what could happen on that particular site,
and the worst-case scenario now has developed. I don't have a
crystal ball. I couldn't have looked into that and say, '~Nell, yeah,
they're going to build a -- try and build 68 rooms" or "Maybe they
will try to do a 26-unit residential approach." I didn't know that.
They didn't stand up there that night and tell me, "That's what
we're going to do."
So I'm in disagreement with you, sir, only because
you did not give this to me prior to coming to the dais and now
saying it's my fault that you made a decision.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not saying that it's your
fault.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And -- and you have to take
responsibility for what you do on this --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Gentlemen.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't even understand the point,
Commissioner Henning, that because -- I mean, what is -- what is
Page 202
April 10, 2001
-- there's nothing -- nothing's changed. At the time it was too
confusing to adopt. We knew that we were taking a risk if we
left on the books what was on the books that something bad
might happen. Well, here's the something bad that has
happened, but I never heard at -- at the LDC meeting that
Commissioner Carter wanted to leave the status quo. It was just
too ill prepared at the time. He didn't say he liked the regs the
way they were.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, you know, all I'm saying is
if he wanted something different out of the LDC is the way they
explained in the paper, then let it be known; that's all.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'. Let's focus on what we're
dealing with right now and -- and how we got here. Let's -- let's
put that behind us. We'll see where we're going to go from this
point. I -- I myself don't feel uncomfortable with putting this off
for -- until the next meeting, give Dr. Carter a chance to try to
resolve it. What's to be lost in the interim? There's nothing to be
lost. The final decision can be made at that time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree. And I have some thoughts
on that -- that's the reason I voted against it -- and I'd like to pass
them on to you so that in your negotiations you might bring
those. They're something to do with --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would value that, and I believe the
county attorney will give me direction. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It can be an FYI. It's public record.
Any and all parties will have a chance -- all commissioners,
anyone in the public can -- can review it, and anyone that has any
thoughts on this -- we all welcome that communication, and
that's why I brought it back this afternoon as -- COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The only--
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- an opportunity to work this.
Page 203
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The only thing that -- you know,
and I'm going to support you, Commissioner Carter, because I
think that the way this has gone, that's the right thing to do, but I
don't think we're doing anything here but adding a public hearing
to the process.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, thank you, Commissioner. If
that's -- in the end is what it takes and it takes some more input
from the public to get to where we need to be -- I have been
properly chastised at the last board meeting for not allowing
enough participation, but I didn't see anyone stick their chin out
there and say, "Let's have everybody speak in the room."
Everybody looked at me like, "You take the walk in the water." I
did it, and I got more arrows in me than Custer's last stand. So
I'm going to tell you, Board Members, I'm not going there again,
so that's why -- that's why I'm asking you to support me to work
through this. I -- I think the world of all of you. I get a little
exercised at times. We do have differences out here, and that's
good because if we all thought the same way all we would need
is one person.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, Commissioner Carter, don't
get me wrong. I am going to support you on this, but this is just
one example in the Vanderbilt area. I think -- of course, I'm just
throwing this out there -- again, this is your district -- that that
whole area needs to be studied of the zoning that is applied to it
today.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I couldn't agree with you more on that
because that's what's going to happen as we look at the
ordinances coming from other counties where we have a better
opportunity to take all that and digest it in the next Land
Development Code cycle. I've spoken with Attorney Weigel
about this. He is backing up the time lines, which we've got to
get it done to get it through the proper communities --
Page 204
April 10, 2001
committees to do that to get this board fully informed on what
our options are and how we can deal with this so we can protect
our beach area and look at all of that and say, "Well, what are our
options. What do we have to do, and how do we change it so
that we -- we meet the objectives as best as we humanly possibly
can?" So, you know, I thank you for your support. Whatever you
do -- whatever you decide to do is your prerogative as a
commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I make -- I make a motion
that we bring this up for reconsideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: At the May 8th meeting?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I have a motion by Commissioner
Coletta. I have a second by Commissioner Fiala to bring this up
at the May 8th meeting allowing us time to work with all the
interested parties. I will go down, and I'll take a roll call. All in
favor signify by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Everyone is in agreement. I certainly
am in agreement. Thank you very much. It passes 5-0.
Item #1 lC
PUBLIC COMMENT ON GENERAL TOPICS - BOB KRASOWSKI
REGARDING SOLID WASTE ISSUES
All right. We now go to public comment. Do we have
any public comment today?
MR. McNEES: You have one registered, Bob Krasowski.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, Bob, I haven't seen you all day.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What would we do without Bob?
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. Right. Everybody leaves when it's
Page 205
April 10, 2001
public comment.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, not when you're here, Bob.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is it public comment, or is it you?
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. Hey, thanks. Now I'll stutter all
the way through this. My name's Bob Krasowski. Let's see. This
is the reason I came here today, just to take advantage of the
public comment and to -- in order to touch base with you on this
solid-waste issue as far as developing a plan and -- and all this
stuff that we spoke about before. Along the lines of some of the
issues we touched on before was the integration of Dr. Paul
Connett into the mix so that he might broaden the discussion as
to methods, alternatives, issues revolving around the various
options that we already know about. And I've been in contact
with Mr. Connett. I've also spoke to Mr. Yilmaz, who is our solid-
waste director and Mr. Mudd also. And what we conjured up here
is that Mr. Yilmaz felt it would be of benefit to have Dr. Connett
informed and prepared to participate in the April 24th meeting
and also the June 26th meeting along with a -- a workshop in -- in
-- in between that that would review everything we've learned
since the December landfill workshop and also would -- would, as
Mr. Yilmaz calls it, provide the workshop -- in other words, have
an opportunity for a panel of experts to be seated along with the
solid-waste department so that we don't have exclusively Dr.
Connett here presenting a -- another point of view independent of
an exchange from those who have already presented to you, you
know. In other words, Malcolm Pierney would probably be here
and the other people you've been working to -- with up to this
point. So what I'm looking for is a -- is a clear understanding
between all the parties involved that on April 24th when the
Malcolm Pierney report is presented by this staff that, since Dr.
Connett is a professor in upstate New York and it would be very
difficult to have him fly down here just for a day or --
Page 206
April 10, 2001
or so -- he has his responsibilities there -- that he --
according to what Mr. Yilmaz has suggested in some
conversations with some of the other commissioners that Dr.
Connett could be present at that meeting via the telephone and
then he could listen in.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Sure.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I've already provided him with a copy of
the rough draft of the Malcolm Pierney report. I understand the
complete draft is now available. I was called and told. So I'll get
that to him. And then being that your meeting specifically deals
with that part of the -- the --
the issue, he could maybe comment there, then in -- in -- we
tried to identify a time when a workshop could be held and the
earlier the better, I think it's been suggested to me by people I've
talked to, but the soonest that Dr. Connett's available -- he's
spending May in Europe. He has this --
these university classes that he teaches, and so he'll --
early June he could come here and be available from June
4th, which is a Monday, on.
The month of June is very open to him. I would
suggest the earliest part of June would be the best for our
situation being that June 26th is a date that you have identified
as -- as a time when you'd like to kind of have a real strong
inclination of what you might be suggesting in regards to the
long range. As you remember, you have your -- you have your
short range, intermediate, and long range. Certainly if it's
necessary to extend that June 26th final decision or whatever
period, I think when we're talking an ex -- excess of $200 million
potential to be spent on the -- the system of waste handling that
you might come to a -- and in conclusion, after reviewing all the
options, certainly a little bit of extra time to get it right is -- is not
out of -- out of the picture.
Page 207
April 10, 2001
I'll -- I'll go back to earlier today when Mr. Bruce
Anderson said in regard to the community character plan
sometimes it's beneficial to bring in outside minds. So I'll use
Bruce. And I think by having the workshops and
Mr. Connett involved we can lower the threshold of potential
contentiousness, as Mr. Weigel had mentioned earlier. So all I
need from you is a "It sounds good" and then everybody onboard
will know that the -- the schedule is something we're going to --
Mr. Yilmaz will work out the details and stuff.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh, I think I need to hear from staff in
terms of when that is scheduled. I don't know about when --
MR. McNEES: What -- what might be more appropriate, Mr.
Chairman, rather than to try to determine when we might hook
the gentleman up by telephone or -- which that in itself makes me
a little nervous. It's one thing when they're sitting in a chair and
we can clearly identify, but a disembodied expert witness from
another state is a little -- something -- I don't know. We can
probably get our hands around it, but what I would probably
suggest would be that you direct us to find the appropriate ways
to work this gentleman into the process from here until the time
we're going to hear it again. Let us work with him and do that.
I'm not sure at this meeting is the time for you to tell us exactly
how we should do that, but we can sure work it out if that's what
you want.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE:
says.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
I'm very interested in anything he
Anything that's realistic.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would concur. We'd like to do it. I
think as Commissioner Coletta said, let's make it realistic. Let's
find a way to work with Bob and the doctor and see how we can
accomplish that goal.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Is he basically -- I mean, is he
Page 208
April 10, 2001
agreeing to give us -- give us these services?
MR. KRASOWSKI: He --yes, he is.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Wow.
MR. KRASOWSKI: He's -- he has an organization that works
on waste, and exactly how he funds it, you know, I'm not sure,
but he -- it might just be a kind of pro bono thing that he does on
his own. But he has his position at St. Lawrence University
where he's a doctor of chemistry and a professor, but he's
knowledgeable on the -- and visits many different countries and
places all over the United States on --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't question the credentials
for a second.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: My only questions is is, you
know, if we're getting this for free, let's don't look the gift horse
in the mouth. If we can get an expert opinion, let's -- let's work
around it.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Mr. Yilmaz had suggested that you would
pay for his transportation costs and maybe you'd put him up
somewhere for when he -- when he visits.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He can stay at Mike's house.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. That -- that would be great. I'm
sure Mike would enjoy him. But -- so am I to understand -- am I to
understand that you're not in favor of the -- of him participating in
the meeting this month on the 24th or --
or will you -- will we work around that and look for a -- a
video conference?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'm --
MR. KRASOWSKI: Can you have that in this room or --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Can you have that in here? I
don't know.
MR. KRASOWSKI: My objective is to have him as -- as part of
Page 209
April 10, 2001
the public record and have comment.
MR. McNEES: And here's where I think -- and I don't -- I -- if
David has no concern with this, then maybe we're fine, but when
we're talking about qualifying an expert witness on the public
record via long distance without even any really an ability to
even verify identity --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It could really be his grandpa.
MR. KRASOWSKI: It could be me.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It could be his grandpa.
MR. KRASOWSKI: I could run outside and --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah. That's right.
MR. McNEES: I'm sure we can find a meaningful way to
bring the gentleman into the -- into the session and into the
subsequent session.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: You've just got to find a way to
do that.
MR. McNEES: If you'll leave it to us, we'll find the
appropriate way to do that.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I would be comfortable in leaving it to
the county manager to work with Bob and the good doctor to find
a way to make it acceptable and legal.
MR. KRASOWSKI: For this upcoming 24th meeting?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't know. Is that when we're going
to hear the first part, or is that later? I don't know the 24th's
schedule.
MR. McNEES: What I'm saying is, if the gentleman has
legitimate input into that meeting, it can be submitted in a
number of ways, and we'll find what we feel is an appropriate
way to get it to you. It may be in writing. It may be -- you know,
you review written input every week. So that's what we have to
determine.
MR. KRASOWSKI: The written input doesn't serve my
Page 210
April 10, 2001
purpose in that I -- what I think -- now, the workshop will. Maybe
if you want to just, you know, okay, go with the written input for -
- for the Malcolm Pierney and then agree to having Dr. Connett
here in the flesh in early June.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: See, that may be the most
beneficial --
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Yeah. At--
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- thought.
MR. WEIGEL: I would just mention that obviously I work very
closely with Mike and Tom and Mr. Krasowski and Joe Yilmaz,
but in regard to Connett please keep in mind that if he's not our
consultant under -- under our contract arrangement or with some
kind of fiduciary relationship, then he's potentially someone
else's consultant with someone else's agenda. And so we have
to approach this very carefully, and I assure you that we will do
so with all --
all prospects of inclusion that we can do, but we'll also
keep you advised of those kinds of issues so that we -- we know
what we have if and when we have it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: So, basically, we don't want to
pay for him to come to town to end up testifying against us in a
lawsuit, I think. Is that what you're trying to say?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I didn't even talk about the pay part. We
probably can't pay for him unless we have a contractual
relationship -- ship, and I'd have to work with Dwight Brock on
that kind of arrangement.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Well, I thought from my conversations
with Mr. Yilmaz that there was -- there's an open array of
opportunities here, and I left that for him to -- if he wanted to
draw -- bring Dr. Connett on board, but it -- it -- we're so -- I don't
think we have to be defensive on Dr. Connett. He -- it's not like
this is a -- a legal procedure in the sense that people are, you
Page 211
April 10, 2001
know, swearing and testifying, and -- and anybody's being
accused or -- of anything. It's just that he, like I, can get up in
front of you and -- and give information and -- so that it can be
considered in the entire mix, where he can do it so much better
than I because of his credentials. He's a Ph.D. In chemistry and
has the experience of many years of dealing with the solid-waste
issue and has many ideas to share.
Now, I've read what our present consultant, at least
the rough draft, the Malcolm Pierney report, and I don't know
how many of you have reviewed that at this time as of yet, but
there are certain options that are not fully explained or included
in their document, but I don't know if that's an area in his
expertise; whereas, you know, Dr. Connett would present you
with much of this information. So I -- I hope what's going on here
is not, you know, stonewalling.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Uh-huh.
MR. KRASOWSKI: You know, "Oh, we're looking for" -- what
I'm looking for as a citizen who represents only those people who
agree with me like we would -- I would like to just have Dr.
Connett included so ...
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Do you know what -- what occurs
to me, Bob, that maybe we ought to explore, too, is when -- since
Bob was with me when I took a tour of the landfill -- I'm sorry --
the incinerator in Lee County and the gentleman, the doctor, the
Ph.D., whose name I can't call up right now.
MR. KRASOWSKI: The man -- the manager of the facility
there?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: No. The guy we want to get to
town.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Oh. Connett.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Oh. Dr. Connett, yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: He was -- they needed -- and they
Page 212
April 10, 2001
announced his name. They said, "Oh, my goodness, we're -- our
expert has wanted to debate this expert -- wanted to debate this
man for years. You know, we would love to have that
opportunity." So maybe that's the way we get him into town, sort
of call them on their bluff there if they really like him.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I love that.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. But the -- the opportunity would be
here, right here for that situation --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Right.
MR. KRASOWSKI: -- in the early June workshop when you
see your experts or your panel, and the public can sit out here,
interested people like myself, and then you people can all
discuss the -- the various issues.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd like to see it work somehow
like that.
MR. KRASOWSKI: And he's a very well-mannered man.
I mean, he's an academian. You know, it's like we had this very
good presentation from these people, and it was impressive, you
know, and everybody here is civil. You know, Dr. Connett would
present alternatives to what some would -- would -- and he'd be
agreeable to some of the other things that have been suggested
to you, but it -- it would be of the highest caliber of a workshop,
you know.
MR. McNEES: Mr. Chairman, if I can clarify what I'm saying,
it seems like the harder I try to be succinct and clear, the more
I'm misunderstood because now we're talking about a stonewall.
If you direct us to bring the gentleman's expertise to bear in this
situation in a meaningful way, we'll go do that.
MR. KRASOWSKI: My only -- my only question with this, the
"meaningful way" if it is not the way that all this other
information has been presented in front of the -- the - - the
Page 213
April 10, 2001
committee and -- and this meeting that -- that'll be fine, whatever
you decide to do, just as long as that the --
the workshop happens because there you go. You have him
here at a workshop, every -- anybody you want here with him,
anybody, you know, that to the -- the -- discuss the issues; that'll
be fine you know. So, you know, I'm agree -- I'm --
I'm certainly agreeing to A if B will happen.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: The -- the direction I'd like to give
to staff is to get his input to us in the most meaningful way that
you possibly can reasonably at the earliest opportunity, but most
specifically to do whatever is possible to get him here for our
workshop so we can have his in-person input at that point. Is
that something a majority agrees on? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think we need pros and cons
on -- on the issue on -- on both sides so you get both sides of the
picture and not just a opponent to -- of a proponent of something,
of some kind of technology.
MR. KRASOWSKI: He's not so much an opponent,
Commissioner Henning, as he is a -- through his years of his
involvement he advocates certain things over others, but he is --
he carries a wealth of information on many of the things that
we're already implying that we're going to do like the recycling,
how's best to re -- what -- what can be done, what's dreamy,
fuzzy -- warm-fuzzy types of stuff. You know, he'll bring hard
examples of what works at the landfill as opposed to
incineration, like pros and cons of the combination or the
individual use of one over the other, you know. So that -- I don't --
I don't think we have to be concerned about his opposition to any
one thing because if he does have opposition to one thing, it's
well founded in science, it's well founded in experience, and it's
something that we should be aware of.
Page 214
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. The direction, I believe, is to
contact and work with the gentleman so the meaningful
information can be presented to this board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In any reasonable way possible.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: In any reasonable way possible.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Does that mean the workshop is what
we're -- during the workshop, or does this --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That depends on a lot of factors,
Bob, how -- if everything's going to be scheduled, what's going to
happened.
MR. KRASOWSKI: It would be early June, you know, and
that's why I --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA.' You're talking pretty late in the
process; that's why you need to have him maybe make a written
report to us way before that.
MR. KRASOWSKI: He's -- he's willing to participate. He -- he
-- he was willing to fly down here for this meeting in the -- on the
24th of this month, but as it gets closer and closer to that -- you
know, of course, with the county paying for his -- his travel, as it
gets closer and closer to that, that doesn't seem as practical as
his attendance at -- by phone or in -- in -- in writing in regards to
this -- to this document that we're -- that you'll be looking at.
Now, the workshop of June, right, is -- and that's
the whole point, the essence of this, is to have him here with
anyone else you want to have here, but to have -- to give him and
the positions he represents the same opportunity as other
consultants or people have had in the public eye at an open
meeting. Open government is honest government. It - - it -- it
just helps. It's helpful at an open meeting to the same extent
that the people who are now assisting you and evaluating solid-
waste options that put him in the -- in the -- in the -- have the
same --
Page 215
April 10, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think June will be the opportunity for
that.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yes.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If we can find another way for the
24th, if he wants to make a written input -- MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- or some other mechanism, that can
be arranged between Mr. Weigel, yourself, and the county
manager's office, I could support that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Anything that's reasonable.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: If that's reasonable that's --
that gives you pretty clear direction -- MR. KRASOWSKI: Sounds good.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- that he can, you know, definitely
count on the June workshop.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Well, you know, one last thing and
I'll leave. You know, many people get up here, and they thank
you for hearing them, and I'd like to do that, but I feel that this is
part of my right, my -- you know, my American --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Absolutely.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Yeah. So I'll -- I'll just say good day and
nice seeing you again, but if I don't thank you it's because I don't
think I should have to.
Bob.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' I agree.
MR. KRASOWSKI: But it's been interesting.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: It's our pleasure always to be here,
MR. KRASOWSKI: Great. I'll talk to you again.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. That takes us to staff
communications.
Page 216
April 10, 2001
MR. McNEES: I have nothing, but Mr. Dunnuck has an
introduction he's like to make.
Item #14A
INTRODUCTION OF DENTON BAKER~ FINANCIAL MANAGER
MR. DUNNUCK: Yes, I would. Thank you, Mike. For the
record, John dunnuck. While I'm losing one staff person this
week, I'd like to introduce you to our newest one that we have.
Mr. Denton Baker is our new business manager. He is a CPA,
MBA, and he's going to come and work with our staff and help us
be a little bit more efficient on what we can do as far as financial
operations and look at where processes are that -- that we can
improve on, and I thought it would be a good opportunity to
introduce him to the board because I'm sure you're going to
speak to him in the future.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well--
MR. DUNNUCK: Would you like to make any comments?
MR. BAKER: No. Happy to be here. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Welcome.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you. We're glad that you're
here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Welcome to the family.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Dysfunctional as we are; right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Speak for yourself.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Couldn't resist that. Great. Having
some fun here. All right. That's all the staff comment. How
about Board of County Commissioners communications?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nothing.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Nada.
Item #15A
Page 217
April 10, 2001
DISCUSSION BY COMMISSIONER COLETTA REGARDING
APPLICANTS FOR THE GOLDEN GATE MASTER PLAN
COMMITTEE AND APPROVAL OF A TWO WEEK EXTENSION
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do, as a matter of fact.
This will only take about 20 minutes. Just kidding. No.
When we started this whole thing with the Golden
Gate master plan and I -- I heard the first outpouring of how long
everything was going to take to come together, I told the number
of people that showed interest in it way back when that they
could expect to see something in May, maybe June as far as for
the committee goes. Well, I've got to hand it to staff. They
pulled all the stops on it at our direction, and we're advertising
now for people for the Golden Gate master plan. The problem is
there's a number of people out there that are still under the
apprehension this will not come up for a couple of weeks. I
would like to at this point ask the board if they would direct
county staff to extend the deadline for an extra two weeks. It's
supposed to end on April the 20th, I believe. MS. RAMSEY: Yes, April 20th.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: April 20th. And that's just not
going to be realistic. I need to get the -- still get the civic
association and make sure they understand where we're at.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I'd be happy to.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We need to get it up in front of
the public. And there's two other parts to this too. There is a lot
of interest in this. I've had about 30- something people. I'm sure
Commissioner Henning has had a number too.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Thirty-something?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So far that have expressed an
interest --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Wow.
Page 218
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER COLETTA.' -- not that have turned in an
application. They've expressed a sincere interest in being on
this. They -- they understand the depth and the magnitude of this
particular thing and the profound effect it's going to have for the
future of that area, Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates.
I'd like to also too -- two other things -- and I did a little bit of
research into it. I'd like to have an application that will spell it
out a little bit better than just a letter from the applicants as far
as the education, the background, the amount of time they spent
in civic activities to be submitted, and I'd like the submittal to go
to the productivity committee for their recommendations
because with the number of people that are going to be looking
to be on this, it becomes a little bit of a political football. And we
need the very best people we can do -- have on this particular
committee, and I'll tell you something. I'm extremely impressed
with the productivity committee. We've been approached, and
they've been asked, and they've agreed to do this if we would so
direct them to.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I would support both of those
ideas.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I -- yeah. I -- I -- you know, you
really hit something there, Commissioner Coletta, and that is
when we get a lot of people applying for an advisory committee,
we don't really have a good system to say, "How do we evaluate
this?" You know, sometimes that committee will make
recommendations and that helps us; other times they hand the
football to the commissioners and say, "No recommendation."
You've got six people there, and our -- we're -- in our infinite
we're supposed to figure that out. I'm with you. I would like a
better process, a better way to evaluate this because you're
going to have that one. Pelican Bay MSTBU has a slug of people
in a lawsuit on this.
Page 219
April 10, 2001
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE.' Really.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And I'm going to look for a process
where we can get input from the county attorney and everybody
else to -- you know, what's the effective way to do this? Because
I don't know at this point. I don't want to be caught in a
situation, nor do you, where they're saying, "Well, it's because
you like that person, and you put them there.".
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Exactly. And I -- what I'd like to
do -- whatever we do, I want everybody to work very closely with
Commissioner Henning too because -- CHAIRMAN CARTER: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- this has two districts together.
I think it's going to be the input that matters.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just a question -- and I -- and I
just try and understand why you wanted to go through their
productivity committee. Do you feel that they would know any
people out there any different than --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- we would, or are you looking
for qualifications?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The problem is that if the
committee was 20 people deep, I don't think there would be a
problem in filling it, but at 10 people the very best people are
going to have to be picked, and I -- I want to make sure that
there's a real evaluation done on this. We have some
tremendous talents out there, and we need a cross-section of the
community representing all -- all ends of it from the --
the construction trade right on through the
environmentalists, and we need to come up with a balance.
And as far as us doing it as a board, I think it's going to be a little
cumbersome to try to work our way up to it. I'm sure we could,
but I -- I've got to think it's going to be a difficult process. If
Page 220
April 10, 2001
anyone has ever sit in -- sat on one of the meetings for the
productivity committee, you have a lot -- I know you have, Pam.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Of course.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: I was there for a year, and I
understand.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's pretty impressive. They are
probably the best-driven committee that we have. The way they
reach conclusions -- it's really beautiful to watch them work.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Could I -- I -- I -- I like the idea. I
just wondered -- I think seeing everyone in the room and thinking
back about our community character, this morning one of the
recommendations that we had was that we don't look at Golden
Gate as one giant issue, and maybe what we need to do here is
have -- if-- if it's a committee with a -- with two subcommittees or
maybe --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- it's that we need one or two
committees.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that -- that has been
suggested that after we have a committee that we put the
remainder of people in subcommittees to report back.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Because -- because, you know,
the part of the Gate in your district and the part in Tom's are not
going to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's all one.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: It's all --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The way I -- the way I look at it
it's all one.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Well, but I mean --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could we --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: -- the people who to take a real
hard turn don't want a single store anywhere ever; that's one
Page 221
April 10, 2001
thing, and the people who want some more urban kinds of
services are another kind. It's just a suggestion. You guys know
your district better than I do.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: And may I -- may I suggest this to the
board. Maybe I can give staff direction here with the actual
process of the committee situations taking all the inputs. We
need legal counsel's input here because I don't know what you
can do and can't do in terms of setting up an interviewing
process for candidates. I know -- I know I could do it in the
private sector, but that's not going to do any good. I've got to
find a way to get candidates through, and I think that's the first
thing. How do we get the best of the best? How do we establish
the subcommittees? We need help.
MR. McNEES: We'll take that as direction, and we'll come up
with something. I'm sure beating all our heads together that --
that we can come up with a plan that -- that we can bring to the
board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: At this point in time, could we
direct staff to extend the deadline by two weeks?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: We could -- I would support that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I agree.
MS. RAMSEY: Would one more person support that?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I -- I agree.
MS. RAMSEY: Just to be clear, you want to extend the
deadline for two weeks?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Two weeks past the 20th or
something like that.
MS. RAMSEY: I'm sorry. Sue Ramsey from the parks & rec.
And who's going to design the application?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll be more than happy to work
with whoever -- I -- I've had some experience making applications
Page 222
April 10, 2001
in the past. I can make a draft and send it on to the
commissioners for their comments to be passed on to the county
manager.
MS. RAMSEY: Okay. And then I'll provide it to the -- all the
applicants I we re -- that I've received resumes from so far and
all future applicants.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then we'll go from the
county manager to the county attorney and back down to you.
We should have it by next Wednesday. MS. RAMSEY: Okay.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner
Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
Thank you.
Item #15B
NAPLES MANOR CLEANUP TO BE HELD APRIL 21, 2001
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Two -- two fast things. Isles
of Capri tonight is their last civic association meeting, and
they've honored me to -- by asking me to be their speaker, so
that's where I'm going after I leave here. So I'll bring them -- give
them an update on everything we've discussed today, and the
second thing is I'd like to just offer -- or -- or ask -- ask anybody
out there who would like to come April 21st to Naples Manor
we're going to have a wonderful cleanup from 9 to 12, and we're
all going to be at Lely High school. Lely's going to have about
100 kids out there, and the sheriff's office is going to help us.
EMS is going to be there. We have Waste Management that's
going to help us, and a bunch of us are just going to get out there
and roll up our sleeves. We're expecting everybody in Naples
Manor to be there. We've been soliciting the churches and
Page 223
April 10, 2001
asking them to get the word out. And, in fact, I'm even going to --
on Easter Sunday I -- I'm going to the Hispanic mass to -- to
announce it in my broken Spanish. No, I don't even know
Spanish, so I'll -- I'll have to do it English, and they'll have to
interpret. But when the priest interprets it will give it some --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: There you go. Extra umph.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- good credibility. So I just wanted
to announce that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Fiala.
Quickly, Board, remember we meet at 9 a.m. Tomorrow morning
for the joint meeting of Lee County and the City of Bonita.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: And then again nine the next
morning. We just can't get enough.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What was that the next morning
again?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Don't we have another board
meeting here?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Development services on Thursdays.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Yeah.
Item #15C
UPDATE BY COMMISSIONER CARTER REGARDING THE APRIL 9,
2001 TDC MEETING
CHAIRMAN CARTER: So we'll get to know each other real
well. So don't forget that, nine o'clock, Worthington Country
Club. Number two, the Tourist Development Council met in this
room until about nine o'clock last night. You will be getting that
coming forward to you in a report of what's taking place, and I
won't belabor it this afternoon.
Page 224
April 10, 2001
You will find that all of the beach items have been
a -- approved on the sit -- well, they haven't been approved. We
have agreed that we will take them forward to the beach
committee. The beach committee will have a chance to review
them and bring them back to the TDC, then it'll come to us, so
it's got to go back to that process. So we -- we did that last
night.
In terms of all the fundings under the category for
museums, the botanical gardens, and the Historical Society of
Marco Island, the TDC voted last night to fully support the
botanical gardens, $750,000, because there's a matching.
It's a public/private partnership. But we only had a million two to
work with, so that left the museum with 450,000, and they
wanted all the money, and it left nothing for the Historical
Society of Marco Island; however, the good news is that Greg
Mihalic is going to bring back the last -- there was another penny
that was passed, the third penny. We can configure some
percentages there. It should free up another million two, so you
might be able to accomplish botanical, you might be able to
accomplish the Marco Island situation, you might be able to
accomplish everything the museums need; that'll be the
decisions made by the Board of County Commissioners. That will
be coming to you in due process.
So I'm just alerting you to be thinking about that. Don't be overly
upset about what the TDC did last night because you're
ultimately the authority to -- to deal with that.
Item #15D
UPDATE BY COMMISSIONER CARTER REGARDING LEGISLATIVE
SESSION IN TALLAHASSEE
Page 225
April 10, 2001
The last thing was a legislative activity in
Tallahassee. Commissioner Coletta and I are going back at the
end of the month. Some -- and everything is moving every day up
there. A couple of things, the TOPS fund, $70 million, that was
monies that normally used to be used that came out of when
Governor Bush said, '~Ne don't want the rail transit system
anymore." We had that money to deal with and pull from. That
won't happen now because they're trying to establish some sort
of a commission for the high-speed rail. What happened, bottom
line, is Lee County got what they were looking for. We don't have
-- as I talked this afternoon, we don't have the money for the
Immokalee Airport and the customs house. We've got to find
about $250,000, and I will work with Senator Saunders and
Dudley Goodlette, our representative, to try to find that money
anywhere, but TOPS bit the -- bit the dust because of the
mandated high-speed rail thing that was passed last fall. The
Preserve and Save the Everglades, a hundred million was pulled
to go towards that process. That will definitely affect your other
Florida Forever kind of projects in the future. What's already
there will be funded. New projects will be another questionable
process that's got to go through masses.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: Has the house passed that
second piece now, or is that just the senate budget?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Which one?
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: On -- on the P2000 raid.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: P2 raid, there I'm sure one body has
passed it.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That was the senate.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The senate. And the other may have
not -- may not have taken action yet, but I haven't kept up in the
last few days. I don't think it has.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: I don't think they have, and I
Page 226
April 10, 2001
don't think they will.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Shadow bills -- shadow bills are out
there. There's no identified piece of legislation. There's no
sponsor. Somebody reserves a spot to get a bill in. One of those
popped up this week. Bill Wallace has been working very hard on
that, and that's in terms of the telecommunications industry.
There was a bill put in there and clang, bang the house -- the
senate passed it. I don't know the details. I don't know what
happened to us on it. It's still got to work its way through the
house. So we took it in the chops on that one through a shadow
bill as bluntly as I could put it.
There's a number of other issues up there in terms
of health and welfare that -- be prepared. We are going to end up
paying more money at the county level. There's a house version,
then there's a senate version on one -- one that cost us one day
for Medicaid, the other one in the senate will cost us two days. I
think the compromise on the house day, which is going to result
in about $70,000 more that we have to pay for in Collier.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What's the good news?
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The good news is the process is
working up there and that they're all listening to us, and we will
make a more aggressive posture in the future through lobbying,
though commissioners, through staff participation so that we can
get a better input into those things. I was appalled when I sat in
the -- the restaurant on -- on -- on Wednesday morning -- here I am
the lone stranger at 7:30 at my table, and there's whole tables
full of people, and they're all having premeetings before they
went to the FAC briefing. And I'm saying, "All right. How do they
do this?" So I nosed around up there, and I found out how they do
it, and we have to take that position. We can't any longer, in my
judgment, as a growing county sit here and say, "Well, we hope it
will take care of itself." It just won't.
Page 227
April 10, 200t
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Coletta's working on
the regional planning. I'm working there. We're taking it to the
state level. People sometimes question why are we there and
why are we doing these things because it's a whole system. We
have got good representatives. You know, Dudley Goodlette is
working very hard for us. We've got to get up there and find out
who to talk to and -- even if you drop your card off with a few
notes that say "Support this piece of legislation.".
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That helps, but I just want to say
that when we start talking about how we need to be more visible
in Tallahassee, we need professional lobbying in Tallahassee --
CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: --for this county. You know,
we've already done a couple when Commissioner Matthews was
here. We had an apartment in Tallie, and everybody went up
there and made nice. And all of that is good, but the way things
get done are through the system that exists, and we need to go
there and have a presence, but we need professional lobbying
assistance for Collier.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: You're absolutely right, Commissioner
Mac'Kie. You know, Dwight Brock is -- has come to us and says
he has a lobbyist. We can help put some things up there. We're
giving him a hit list to work on. You're right. The lobbyists know
how to -- how to -- how to do it and do it better than we can. All
we need to do is be there on certain occasions --
COMMISSIONER MAC'KIE: That's right.
CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- have a system, get around with that
lobbyist, make a presence so those legislators understand Collier
County's just not a county sitting down here in Southwest
Florida; it sits and hopes and prays. We're a donor county. We
need to get a share back here. The only way we're going to do it
Page 228
April 10, 2001
is to get out there and fight with the big boys. So I've taken more
than I wanted, but I just wanted to give you a quick update. I
have nothing further.
If there's no further comments or discussion, we stand
adjourned.
***** Commissioner Mac'Kie moved, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted, with
the exception of Item #17E which carried 4/0 (Commissioner
Mac'Kie abstained): *****
Item #16A1
MORTGAGE AND PROMISSORY NOTE FOR A THREE HUNDRED
THOUSAND ($300,000) DOLLAR LOAN TO HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY~ INC.
Item #16A2 - Moved to Item #8A3
COLLIER COUNTY NATURAL RESOURCES DIRECTOR TO APPLY
FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE DERELICT VESSEL REMOVAL
GRANTS
Item #16A3
SATISFACTION OF CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD LIEN/SALDANA,
DAGOBERTO AND MARIA
Item #16A4
Page 229
April 10, 2001
SATISFACTION OF CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
LIEN/ZDRAVKOVIC~ TRUSTEE GRACE AND WILLIAM
Item #16A5
CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN RESOLUTIONS 2001-100 THROUGH
2001-108, FOR THE COST OF THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC
NUISANCES RE CLAUDE E. LA RUE; FELIX LERCH FAMILY
TRUST; EILEEN CURRAN; J.T. & LOIS B. GAUNT; JESUS
JIMENEZ, JR. AND MARTHA ARREGUIN; LUIS ALFREDO &
PATRICIA ANN CARVAJAL; ABRAHAM J. & DOTY MOSES; AND
MAE T. HOWARD RESPECTIVELY
Item #16A6
RELEASE OF PURPORTED LIEN FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE
RESOLUTION 2000-386 AGAINST GENE & IRIS WOOTEN
Item #16A7
RESOLUTION 2001-109, DESIGNATING THE COUNTY MANAGER
OR THE DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR OF THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION TO
ACCEPT A $300,000 URBAN INFILL AND REDEVELOPMENT
GRANT FUNDS FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
Item #16A8
RESOLUTION 2001-110~ GRANTING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE
ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR
Page 230
April 10, 2001
THE FINAL PLAT OF "AUTUMN WOODS UNIT TWO"
Item #16A9
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR
DIAMOND LAKES, UNITS TWO AND THREE AND RELEASE OF
UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Item #16A10 - Moved to Item #8A4
BID #01-3209 FOR ARTIFICIAL REEF CONSTRUCTION
AT CLAM PASS
Item #16A11
RESOLUTION 2001-111, GRANTING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE
ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR
THE FINAL PLAT OF "GLEN EAGLE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB,
PHASE THREE"
Item #16A12
RESOLUTION 2001-112, GRANTING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE
ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR
THE FINAL PLAT OF "VILLA LA PALMA AT BAY COLONY"
Item #16A13
RESOLUTION 2001-113, GRANTING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE
ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR
THE FINAL PLAT OF "NORTHBROOKE PL/~TA"
Page 231
April 10, 2001
Item #16B1
BID NO. 01-3202, PURCHASE AND DELIVERY OF ORGANIC AND
INORGANIC MULCH - AWARDED TO FORESTRY RESOURCES
LANDSCAPE SUPPLY, INC., SUPERIOR PINE STRAW AND
AACTION MULCH OF SW FL, INC., AS OUTLINED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16B2
RESOLUTION 2001-114, AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF
LAND BY GIFT OR PURCHASE OF FEE SIMPLE TITLE INTERESTS
AND/OR PERPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY,
SIDEWALK, SLOPE, UTILITY, DRAINAGE AND MAINTENANCE
INTERESTS AND/OR TEMPORARY INTERESTS BY EASEMENT FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SIX-LANING IMPROVEMENTS FOR
GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD BETWEEN PINE RIDGE ROAD AND
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD PROJECT, CIE NO. 65, PROJECT NO.
60134
Item #16B3
RESOLUTION 2001-115, AUTHORIZING A CONSTRUCTION
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR
MODIFICATIONS TO THE SIGNAL AND STREET LIGHTING
SYSTEM ON US 41 EAST (SR 90) BETWEEN DAVIS BOULEVARD
TO RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD
Item #16B4
Page 232
April 10, 2001
ACCEPT A ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT AND DONATION
AGREEMENT FROM JULIO F. AND DINA J. ORDONEZ, REQUIRED
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TURN LANE AT 5TM STREET SW
FOR THE GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD PROJECT, CIE PROJECT
NO. 62 (ULTIMATE FOUR-LANE ROADWAY)
Item #16B5
AWARD RFP #00-3152 FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT
FOR CLAM BAY RESTORATION TO TURRELL AND ASSOCIATES,
INC., AND THAT THE CHAIRMAN BE AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE
THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS UPON ATTORNEY REVIEW
Item #16C1
SATISFACTION OF LIEN DOCUMENTS FILED AGAINST REAL
PROPERTY FOR ABATEMENT OF NUISANCES RE LOUIS &
LORETTA CAMBRUZZI; FRANK & SHARON J. FERA; PATRICK S.
AND MARTINE VIGUIE; AND THOMAS & LORRAINE SANZALONE
AND DIRECT THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RECORD SAME IN THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #16C2
PURCHASE OF SERVICES FROM THE FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL
SURVEY AT $40 PER FOOT, TO OBTAIN CONTINUOUS GEOLOGIC
CORES TO SUPPLEMENT EXPLORATORY DRILLING RELATED TO
RECLAIMED WATER AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY,
PROJECT 74030
Item #16C3
Page 233
April 10, 2001
APPROVE SELECTION AND AWARD CONTRACT WITH
YOUNGQUIST BROTHERS, INC., FOR DEEP INJECTION WELL
CONSTRUCTION, RFP 01-31937 PROJECT 70054
Item #16C4
RESOLUTION 2001-116, APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN
THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE
SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1991 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item #16C5
RESOLUTION 2001-117, APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN
THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE
SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1994 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item #16C6
RESOLUTION 2001-118, APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN
THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE
SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1993 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item #16C7
RESOLUTION 2001-119, APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN
Page 234
April 10, 2001
THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE
SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1995 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item #16C8
RESOLUTION 2001-120, APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN
THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE
SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1996 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Item #16C9
AWARD NEGOTIATED ANNUAL CONTRACTS WITH CAMP
DRESSER & MCKEE; GREELEY & HANSEN; HAZEN & SAWYER;
HOLE, MONTES & ASSOCIATES, INC.; MALCOLM PIRNIE; AND
METCALF & EDDY, FOR PROFESSIONAL UTILITY ENGINEERING
SERVICES, RFP 00-3119
Item #16C10
REQUEST A BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $675,000 TO PAY J. C.
DRAINFIELD INVOICES FOR HAULING WASTEWATER FROM THE
NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY
Item #16C11
APPROVAL AND EXECUTION OF SATISFACTIONS OF NOTICE OF
PROMISE TO PAY AND AGREEMENT TO EXTEND PAYMENT OF
WATER AND/OR SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEES FOR EDUARDO
PEREIRO AND LUISA PEREIRO AND CLEYO R. WAGGONER AND
Page 235
April 10, 2001
MARLENE ANN WAGGONER
Item #16C12
APPROVAL AND EXECUTION FOR SATISFACTION OF CLAIM OF
LIENS FOR WATER AND/OR SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEES FOR
TIMOTHY LYNN CARMAN AND MARY ANNE CLARY; REBECCA M.
COLLISON; JAMES J. AND MARY M. GRUSZKA; ARTHUR AND
LISA ANN SCHAFFER LEVINE; ALBERT MCLENON; PHILLIP C.
PIERCE AND DEBRA S. PIERCE; ROBERT M. ROBINSON; AND
LIDIA I. RODRIGUEZ
Item #16C13
AMEND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH FOCUS
ENGINEERING, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $976,533.60 FOR
ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO PELICAN BAY FIRE AND
IRRIGATION WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS, RFP-00-3051,
PROJECT 74023
Item #16D1
AUTHORIZE THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO
OPERATE TWO (2) TWO-WEEK PARK RANGER CAMPS THIS
SUMMER AT SUGDEN REGIONAL PARK
Item #16D2
AWARD OF BID #01-3196 FOR ARTS AND CRAFT SUPPLIES FOR
THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO DICK BLICK
ART MATERIALS
Page 236
April 10, 2001
Item #16E1
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE REVENUES AND
EXPENSES RELATED TO THE SALE OF PERSONAL COMPUTERS
TO EMPLOYEES AND TO AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER OF ITEMS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE COUNTY SURPLUS AUCTION BACK INTO
THE COUNTY'S INVENTORY
Item #16E2
RESOLUTION 2001-121, RATIFYING SPECIFIC EXPENDITURES
FOR EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION MEETINGS AS SERVING A VALID
PUBLIC PURPOSE
Item #16E3 - Deleted
BID NO. 01-3201, PUMP AND MOTOR REPAIR FOR COUNTY-WIDE
MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT
Item #16E4
BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO TRANSFER FUNDS TO COVER COST
OF PURCHASING TWO DIGITAL TAPE DECKS TO BROADCAST
CHANNEL 54 PROGRAMMING
Item #16F1
STANDARD COUNTY CONTRACT WITH HARVARD JOLLY CLESS
TOPPE ARCHITECTS WITH SCHARF & ASSOCIATES FOR DESIGN
SERVICES FOR THE NEW COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY
SERVICES COMPLEX
Page 237
Item #16F2 - Added
April 10, 2001
COUNTY MANAGER TO CREATE A SEPARATE PAY GRADE AND
CLASSIFICATION GROUP FOR EMS PERSONNEL
Item #16G1 - This item has been deleted
Item #16G2
APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT - BUDGET
AMENDMENT #01-238; #01-242
Item #16J1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR REFERRED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by
the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the
various departments as indicated:
Page 238
FOR BOARD ACTION:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
April 10, 2001
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
mo
Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida'Statutes,
Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for
the period:
1. February 28, 2001 through March 06, 2001
2. March 7, 2001 through March 13, 2001
Bo
Districts:
1)
2)
3)
Immokalee Water and Sewer District - 1999 General Purpose Financial
Statement, Registered Agent and Office Destination Letter, Fiscal Year 1998-
1999 Annual Local Government Financial Report
Big Cypress Basin Board of the South Florida Water Management District -
Agenda for February 28, 2001 meeting and Minutes of January 26, 2001
meeting
Collier Soil and Water Conservation District - Notice of March 21,2001
meeting
4) Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Board - Minutes of January 29, 2001
Minutes:
1) Healthcare Planning and Finance Committee - Agenda for January 17, 2001
meeting and Minutes of January 17, 2001 meeting
2)
Beach Renourishment/Maintenance Committee - Agenda for February 1 and
' Mal'ch 1, 2001 meetings and Minutes of December 19, 2000 and January 4,
2001 meetings
3) Development Services Advisory committee - Minutes of February 7, 2001
meeting and Agenda for March 7, 2001 meeting
H:Data/Format
4) Environmental Advisory Council - Minutes of March 7, 2001 meeting and
Agenda of March 7, 2001 meeting
5) Collier County Library Advisory Board - Agenda for February 28, 2001
meeting and Minutes of January 24, 2001 meeting
6) Rural Fringe Area Assessment Oversight Committee - Notice of February 28
and March 21,2001 meetings
7) Collier County Planning Commission - Agenda for March 15, 2001 meeting
8) The Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee - Agenda for March 7, 2001
meeting and Minutes of February 7, 2001 meeting
9) Historic and Archaeological Preservation Board - Minutes of February 16,
2001 meeting
10) Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee - Agenda for March 13,
2001 meeting and Minutes of Meeting February 20, 2001
11) Collier County Productivity Committee - Notice of March 21,2001 meeting
12) Collier County Contractors' Licensing Board - Agenda for March 21, 2001
meeting
13) Immokalee Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee -Agenda for
March 21,2001 meeting and Minutes of February 21,2001 Meeting
14) Rural Fringe Area Assessment Oversight Committee - Minutes of Meeting
of February 14, and February 28, 200 l meetings and Notice for February 28,
2001 meeting and Agenda for February 28, 2001 meeting and Agenda for
March 7, 2001
15) Environmental Advisory Council - Minutes of January 3,2001 meeting and
Agenda for February 7, 2001 meeting
16) Productivity Committee - Agenda for March 21,2001 meeting and Minutes
of February 21,2001 meeting
'17) Coliier County Metropolitan Planning Organization - Agenda for March 23,
.2001 meeting -.
18) Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board - Minutes of January 25,2001 meeting
19) Bayshore Beautification Advisory Committee - Agenda for February 7 and
March 7, 2001 meeting and Minutes of February 7, 2001 meeting
H:Data/Format
20) Isle of Capri Fire/Rescue Advisory Board - Agenda for March 1, 2001
meeting
21) Lely Golf Estates Beautification Advisory Committee - Agenda for March 9,
2001 meeting and Minutes of February 8, 2001 meeting
22) Rural Lands Area Assessment Oversight Committee - Notice of March 26,
2001 meeting
H:Data/Format
April 10, 2001
Item #16K1
RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SERVE AS THE LOCAL COORDINATING UNIT OF GOVERNMENT
IN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT'S ANTI-
DRUG ABUSE ACT FORMULA GRANT PROGRAM
Item #16K2
APPROVE AN INCREASE OF EIGHT SWORN LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICERS IN THE 2000/2001 SHERIFF'S OFFICE BUDGET FOR
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE THREE YEAR
COPS IN SCHOOLS GRANT PROGRAM
Item #16K3
PRESENTATION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA ANNUAL LOCAL
GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1999-
2000 AND THE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT TO
FILE SAME WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE
Item #16L1
APPROVE THE SETTLEMENT IN BONITA GRANDE SAND V.
COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 99-2081-CA, NOW PENDING IN THE
TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO WHICH THE COUNTY WOULD PAY
$10,000 AND CONVEY TO BONITA GRANDE SAND COMPANY,
TITLE TO THE SAND CURRENTLY BEING STORED AT BONITA
GRANDE SAND AND ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THE COUNTY WOULD
BE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. SAID SETTLEMENT WAS
ARRIVED AT DURING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS
Page 239
April 10, 2001
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2001-18, AMENDING ORDINANCE 97-48, TO
INCREASE THE TAPPING FEES FOR POTABLE WATER METERS
WITH SERVICE LINE INSTALLATIONS AND TO ADD A TAPPING
FEE FOR POTABLE WATER METERS WITHOUT SERVICE LINE
INSTALLATIONS
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2001-122, RE PETITION VAC 00-023 TO DISCLAIM,
RENOUNCE AND VACATE ANY AND ALL OF THE COUNTY'S AND
THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN THE 12' WIDE BAY COLONY SHORES
DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND THE 10' WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT
ALONG THE LOT LINE COMMON TO SITES 10 AND 11 AND THE
12' WIDE BAY COLONY SHORES DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON
TRACT "A" CONTIGUOUS TO SITES 10 AND 11, AS DEPICTED ON
THE PLAT OF "PELICAN BAY UNIT TEN" AS RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 15,, PAGES 64 THROUGH 67, PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LOCATED IN SECTION 33,
TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2001-123, RE PETITION VAC 01-001 TO DISCLAIM,
RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S
INTEREST IN THE 10'WIDE UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT
LOCATED ALONG THE LOT LINE COMMON TO LOTS 23 AND 24,
TRACT 5, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF "OLDE CYPRESS, UNIT
THREE" AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 32, PAGES 84 THROUGH
86, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND TO
Page 240
April 10, 2001
ACCEPT A RELOCATED 10' WIDE UTILITY AND DRAINAGE
EASEMENT ON SAID LOTS 23 AND 24, LOCATED IN SECTION 21,
TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST
Item #17D
RESOLUTION 2001-124, RE PETITION CU-2000-21, WILLIAM L.
HOOVER, AICP, OF HOOVER PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.,
REPRESENTING DR. LOREN L. HOFFMAN OF RISING STARS
PRESCHOOL, INC., REQUESTING CONDITIONAL USE "4" OF THE
"C-5" ZONING DISTRICT FOR CHILD DAY CARE SERVICES PER
SECTION 2.2.15 1/2.3 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST
SIDE OF NAPLES BOULEVARD, APPROXIMATELY 1000 FEET
NORTH OF PINE RIDGE ROAD IN SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49 S.,
RANGE 25 E., COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #17E
ORDINANCE 2001-19, REPEALING, IN ITS ENTIRETY, COLLIER
COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2000-82, THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES
DISTRICT ORDINANCE, AND PROVIDING THAT COLLIER COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. 90-111, AS AMENDED, CREATING AND
PROVIDING FOR THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE
TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT AND ITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE,
CONTINUE IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT
There being no further business for the good of the County,
the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:17 p.m.
Page 241
April 10, 200t
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S)OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
~ D~. CARTER, PH.D., CHAIRMAN
.IROCK, CLERK
.--. 'St~atur~ ~1~.
?,. ,~nese,mmutes approved by the Board on
presented v/~ or as corrected
,as
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT
REPORTING, INC., BY BARBARA A. DONOVAN AND KAREN
WHITE
Page 242