BCC Minutes 12/09/2014 R BCC
REGULAR
MEETING
MINUTES
December 9, 2014
December 9, 2014
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, December 9, 2014
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 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION
in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida,
with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Tom Henning
Donna Fiala
Georgia Hiller
Tim Nance
Penny Taylor
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo Ochs, County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Courts
Tim Durham, Executive Manager of Business Operations
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
II ,
r
Ot
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples FL 34112
December 9, 2014
9:00 AM
Commissioner Tom Henning, District 3 - BCC Chair
Commissioner Tim Nance, District 5 - BCC Vice-Chair; TDC Chair
Commissioner Donna Fiala, District 1 - CRAB Chair
Commissioner Georgia Hiller, District 2 - Community & Economic Dev. Chair
Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE
EXECUTIVE MANAGER TO THE BCC PRIOR TO PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL
RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY
THE CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE
BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
Page 1
December 9, 2014
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Sheila Zellers - Motivated By Love Ministries®, Inc.
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's consent agenda as amended (Ex Parte Disclosure
provided by Commission members for consent agenda.)
3. SERVICE AWARDS
A. 20 Year Attendees
1) Stephen Chandler— Public Utilities
Page 2
December 9,2014
2) Osmin Conde —Parks & Recreation
3) Paul Passaretti —EMS
B. 25 Year Attendee
1) Janet Go — Solid Waste
C. 30 Year Attendee
1) Jeanine McPherson—Parks & Recreation
D. Retirees Recognized
1) Meryl Rorer— Parks & Recreation, 10 years of service
2) Beth Ryan— Solid Waste, 10 years of service
3) Carole Esposito — Water Department, 18 years of service
4) Skip Camp —Facilities Management, 33 years of service
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation recognizing the outstanding performance of the Seacrest
Country Day School's women's volleyball teams of 2013 and 2014 and for
winning the 2013 FHSAA State 2A Crown. To be accepted by Dr. John
Watson, Head of School; Jessica Castleberry, Director of Communications
and Marketing; Erin Duffy, Head of Upper School; Mark Marsala, Director
of Athletics; Jan Class, Coach; and 14 members of the state championship
team. Sponsored by Commissioner Henning.
B. Proclamation designating January 16, 2015 as Religious Freedom Day.
To be accepted by Greg Harper and Jerry Rutherford. Sponsored by the
Board of County Commissioners.
C. Proclamation designating December 9, 2014 as Ted Below Appreciation
Day. To be accepted by Ted Below. Sponsored by the Board of County
Commissioners.
Page 3
December 9, 2014
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for December
2014 to Physicians Regional Healthcare System. To be accepted by Scott
Lowe, Interim CEO.
B. Recommendation recognizing Linda Swisher, Administrative Secretary,
Ochopee Fire District as the Employee of the Month for November, 2014.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request from Lieutenant Colonel Lee Henderson,
representing the Civil Air Patrol, requesting $15,000 funding to support
approximately 75 missions annually.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
Item #8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. This item to be heard immediately following Item #11F. This item
requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be
sworn in. Recommendation to approve a Resolution relating to Petition
Number ASW-PL20140000797, granting a waiver from the minimum
required separation of 500 feet between automobile service stations pursuant
to Section 5.05.05.B of the Land Development Code, for property located on
the south side of U.S. 41 between Frederick Street and Palm Street in
Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
Item #9 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item to be heard at 1:30 p.m. This item requires that ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be
held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
Standard Pacific of Florida GP, Inc. requests an appeal to the Board of
Page 4
December 9, 2014
County Commissioners of a final decision by the Collier County Planning
Commission to deny Petition BDE-PL20130001765 for a 32-foot boat dock
extension over the maximum 20-foot limit allowed by Section 5.03.06 of the
Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 52 feet to accommodate a
42 slip multi-family docking facility for the benefit of a 19.06 ± acre project
to be known as Haldeman's Landing in Sections 11 and 14, Township 50
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [Petition ADA-
PL20140001454] (Companion to Petition ST-PL20140000896)
B. Recommendation to deny the single petition within the 2014 Cycle 1 of
Growth Management Plan Amendments for transmittal to the Florida
Department of Economic Opportunity for Review and Comments response,
for an amendment specific to the San Marino project, Transmittal Hearing.
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution creating the Collier County EMS
Fire Districts Merger Ad Hoc Committee. (Commissioner Henning)
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners ("Board")
directs the County Attorney to advertise and bring back to the Board an
ordinance creating the Collier County Anti-Harassment Ordinance, making
it a misdemeanor to harass a bicyclist, pedestrian, runner, or person in a
wheelchair. (Commissioner Hiller)
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to accept the consultant's report and recommendations
regarding the public safety radio system and authorize staff to negotiate an
agreement with Communications International for the implementation of a
P25 digital radio system using the State of Florida contract. (John Daly,
Telecommunications Manager)
B. Recommendation to provide direction on proposed options for operations
and management of the County's dependent fire districts. (Len Price,
Administrative Services Administrator)
C. This item to be heard at 10:45 a.m. Recommendation (1) to approve a
Resolution adopting a revised Investment Policy, which provides for best
Page 5
December 9, 2014
practices as directed by the Board and recommended by Public Financial
Management Group (PFM), the County's contractual Financial Advisor
(FA), and (2) direct the County Attorney to advertise and bring back at a
future public hearing an ordinance repealing Ordinance 87-65. (Mark
Isackson, Corporate Financial and Management Services Director
D. Recommendation to provide direction to replace the Fiscal Impact Analysis
Model with an alternative approach for estimating projects' fiscal impacts on
public facilities and services; and, provide direction to initiate necessary
amendments to the Land Development Code and the Future Land Use
Element of the Growth Management Plan. (Mike Bosi, Zoning Director)
E. This item to be heard immediately following Item #9A. This item
requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be
sworn in. Recommendation to approve a Resolution approving a Special
Treatment Development Permit to allow for impacts within the ST Overlay
area caused by construction of a 42-slip docking facility on private
submerged lands and adjacent upland development on property owned by
Standard Pacific of Florida with a zoning designation of RMF-6(3) and a
Special Treatment Overlay located in Sections 11 and 14, Township 50
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida [Petition ST-
PL20140000896] (Companion to Petition ADA-PL20140001454;
ST-PL20140000896 shall be heard after ADA-PL20140001454).
(Summer B. Araque, Principal Environmental Specialist)
F. This item to be heard immediately following Item #11E. This item
requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be
sworn in. Recommendation to accept the staff interpretation of Land
Development Code (LDC) Section 5.05.05.B. regarding the manner in which
the distance between automobile service stations are determined (This item
is a companion to Item #8A Petition ASW-PL201400000797). (Mike Bosi,
Zoning Director)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
Page 6
December 9, 2014
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) as the Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA) award Contract #14-6236 — Immokalee Stormwater
Improvements — Phase II to Quality Enterprises, Inc. in the amount
of$2,208,149.95 (Project No. 33214).
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Current BCC Workshop Schedule
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
1) Recommendation to recognize and approve a revised construction
schedule (Exhibit "A") for Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT) Local Agency Program (LAP) Agreement 430875-1-58-01
in order to commence installation of advance intersection signs at a
later date.
2) Recommendation to approve the purchase of a Perpetual, Non-
exclusive, Road Right-of-Way, Drainage and Utility Easement
(Parcel 376RDUE) containing 675 square feet, required for the
four-laning of Golden Gate Boulevard between Wilson Boulevard
and DeSoto Boulevard. Project No. 60040. (Fiscal Impact: $300)
3) Recommendation to award a construction contract to Quality
Page 7
December 9, 2014
Enterprises USA, Inc. for Bid #14-6357 - Pine Ridge Road at Forest
Lakes Boulevard and Woodshire Lane/Bed, Bath and Beyond Plaza
Median Improvements Project No. 60016, in the amount of
$235,867.17 and reserve $10,000 on the purchase order for funding
allowances, for a total of$245,867.17.
4) Recommendation to award Agreement #14-6296 for Construction
Engineering and Inspection (CEI) and Related Services for the
"Chokoloskee Bridge Replacement" to HighSpans Engineering, Inc.
Project No. 66066. (Fiscal Impact: $594,560.58).
5) Recommendation to terminate an easement agreement dated June 27,
2014, entered into between Collier County and Jose Luis Carballea for
the purchase of a road right-of-way, drainage and utility easement
(Parcel 234RDUE) required for the expansion of Golden Gate
Boulevard from east of Wilson Boulevard to 20th Street East.
(Project No. 60040).
6) Recommendation to approve an Amended and Restated Interlocal
Agreement for Creation of the Collier Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO).
7) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release
Performance Bond No. K08446155 in the amount of$68,000, which
was posted as a development guaranty for early work associated with
Del Webb at Ave Maria, Parcels 201-203 (PL20140001578).
8) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release Letter of
Credit No. FGAC 13263 in the amount of$93,540 which was posted
as a guaranty for Excavation Permit Number 59.917-3,
(PL20130001215) for work associated with Giaveno at Treviso Bay.
9) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Esplanade Golf& Country
Club of Naples Blocks "E" and "G2", (Application PL20140002187)
approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
Page 8
December 9, 2014
10) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Winding Cypress Phase One,
(Application Number PPLA-PL20140001143) approval of the
standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval
of the amount of the performance security.
11) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Siracusa, (Application Number
PL20140001844) approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
12) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the minor final plat of Gaspar Station, Phase 2,
Application Number PL20140002327.
13) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Twineagles Grand Arbors,
Phase Two C, Block 111, (Application Number PL20140001072)
approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
14) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the minor final plat of Naples Reserve Island
Club, Application Number PL20140000758.
15) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
Page 9
December 9, 2014
approve for recording the final plat Heritage Bay Commons Tract D
Replat, (Application Number PL20130002392) approval of the
standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval
of the amount of the performance security.
16) Recommendation to approve the final ranking of firms pursuant to
RFP #14-6289 - "Design-Build Golden Gate Boulevard 4-Lane,
East of Wilson Boulevard" and authorize staff to enter into contract
development between Collier County and the top-ranked firm,
Ajax Paving Industries, Inc./Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.,
for subsequent Board approval. (Project No. 60040)
17) Recommendation to approve an Easement Agreement required for the
Crews Road, Cope Lane and Sandy Lane/Wing South Interconnect
segment of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project (Project
#51101). Estimated Fiscal Impact: $21,700.
18) Recommendation to approve the 2015 schedule of submittals to
amend Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP), as aligned
with Florida Statutes, and approve an exemption from the schedule to
expedite an amendment related to environmental review of oil wells,
and allow for future exemptions, as determined by the Board .
19) Recommendation to approve four code enforcement releases of lien
with the combined accrued value of$1,249,713 for payment of
$5,663, in the code enforcement action entitled Board of County
Commissioners v. Allen W. Fuller and Barbara A. Davis, Code
Enforcement Board Case Nos. CESD20080010447,
CESD20080010474, CEPM20110002247 and CEPM20110002260,
relating to property at 267 Price Street, Collier County, Florida.
20) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with an accrued value of$19,812.38, for payment of$1,762.38, in
the code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners
v. Dale C. Hunt and Anne M. Hunt, Code Enforcement Special
Magistrate Case No. CEPM20110010931, relating to property located
4972 Traynor Court, Collier County, Florida.
21) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
Page 10
December 9, 2014
with an accrued value of$41,313.74, for payment of$513.74, in the
code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Serafin Ordaz Hernandez and Sara De La Rosa, Code Enforcement
Board Case No. CESD20120002127, relating to property located at
3200 Westclox Street, Collier County, Florida.
22) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with an accrued value of$26,862.20, for payment of$562.20, in the
code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Lorrie L. Callow, Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Case No.
CEV20090013615, relating to property located 786 103rd Avenue N.,
Collier County, Florida.
23) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with an accrued value of$10,339.03, for payment of$2,039.03, in the
code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Robert Tarantola and Donna Tarantola, Special Magistrate Case No.
CEPM20140003819, relating to property located at 7804 Valencia
Ct., Collier County, Florida.
24) Recommendation to approve an easement agreement for the purchase
of a Road Right-of-Way, Drainage and Utility Easement (Parcel
229RDUE) required for the expansion of Golden Gate Boulevard
from east of Wilson Boulevard to 20th Street East. Project No. 60040
(Fiscal Impact: $3,950).
25) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment to recognize carry
forward for projects within the Transportation Supported Gas Tax
Fund (313) in the amount of$20,250. (Project No. 60066 and 60085)
26) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment to recognize
revenue for projects within the Transportation Capital Funds in the
amount of$29,929. (Project No. 60085 and 69081)
27) Recommendation to award ITB #14-6321S, Traffic Signs and
Related Materials, to Municipal Supply & Sign Company, per the
attached Bid Tabulation.
28) Recommendation to award ITB #14-6346, "Traffic Operations Signal
Page 11
December 9,2014
Components" to the following vendors: Multicom Inc., Transportation
Control Systems, Peek Traffic Corporation, Express Supply, Temple
Inc., Traffic Signal Inc.
29) Recommendation to accept a proposal from CB&I Coastal Planning &
Engineering (CB&I/CP&E) dated November 18, 2014 for Wiggins
Pass Interim Dredge Analysis & Design, Permitting and Bid
Assistance; authorize a work order under Contract #13-6164-CZ in an
amount not to exceed $62,992.75; authorize necessary budget
amendment and make a finding that this item promotes tourism
(Project No. 195-80288)
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
(BCC) (Board) as the Collier County Community Redevelopment
Agency (CRA) award Contract #14-6251 Colorado Avenue
Stormwater/Sidewalk Improvements to Marquee Development, Inc.
in the amount of$368,176.50 (Project No. 33293) and authorize the
Chairman to sign the standard Board approved contract after legal
review by the Office of the County Attorney.
2) Recommendation the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
(BCC) as the Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA) approve the attached Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
between the CRA and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning
Council (SWFRPC) identifying programmatic roles in the
implementation of the proposed Rural Promise Zone Program.
3) Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
approve the First Amendment to a lease with Caliber Bodyworks of
Florida, Inc., successor in interest by assignment from Auto Pride
Collision Centers, Inc., a Florida Corporation, continuing occupancy
of CRA owned property at 1911 E. Tamiami Trail in the Gateway
Mini-Triangle until July 2015 with same terms as the original lease.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve a Change Order in the amount of
Page 12
December 9, 2014
$42,627.50 and add an additional 158 days to Contract #11-5708,
"Construction Engineering and Inspection Services for Master
Pumping Station 312 Rehabilitation," with Q. Grady Minor, Project
72549.
2) Recommendation to approve a resolution to remove uncollectible
accounts receivable and their respective balances from the financial
records of the Collier County Water-Sewer District in the amount of
$64,428.56, in accordance with Resolution 2006-252.
3) Recommendation to award Bid #14-6318, Immokalee Road
Chloramine Booster Station, in the amount of$595,127, to Mitchell &
Stark Construction Company, Inc., and approve conveyance of Collier
County-owned property to the Collier County Water-Sewer District at
an estimated cost not to exceed $75 for a proposed Chloramine
Booster Station, Project No. 70103.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION
1) Recommendation to approve a Modification to a Disaster Recovery
Grant Agreement for disaster relief and long term recovery or
mitigation with the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity,
and approve an associated subrecipient agreement amendment.
2) Recommendation to approve Second Amendment to a subrecipient
agreement with Big Cypress Housing Corporation to reallocate
activity funds.
3) Recommendation to approve First Amendment to an agreement with
Big Cypress Housing Corporation for a Community Development
Block Grant Site Improvements Project to extend the completion date,
and update language.
4) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment recognizing
$10,000 in program income revenue generated by affordable rental
properties acquired under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program.
5) Recommendation to approve three after-the-fact Amendments and
• Attestation Statements with the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest
Page 13
December 9, 2014
Florida, Inc. for Community Care for the Elderly, Alzheimer's Disease
Initiative and Home Care for the Elderly Programs to add additional
grantor language.
6) Recommendation to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with
Collier County Senior Resource Center, Inc., d/b/a Collier Senior
Resources to host the Senior Nutrition Program at the Golden Gate
Senior Center.
7) Recommendation to approve an after-the-fact amendment to the
Master Contract and Attestation Statement with the Area Agency
on Aging of Southwest Florida, Inc. for Federal- and State-funded
Services for Seniors programs.
8) Recommendation to approve proposed route modifications within the
Collier Area Transit system.
9) Recommendation to approve two Memorandums of Understanding
with Southwest Florida Workforce Development Board, Inc. for
delivery of 21st Century Community Learning Centers swimming
skills and drowning prevention "Miracle Plus 1" and "Miracle Plus 2"
programs.
10) Recommendation to approve a Memorandum of Understanding with
the Naples Children & Education Foundation which will provide
funds to allow up to 150 children to receive free recreational
opportunities during the school year.
11) Recommendation to approve the Collier County Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) for U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development for Community Development
Block, HOME Investment Partnership, and Emergency Solutions
Grant for Fiscal Year 2013-2014; approve the Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation Report Resolution; and authorize the
Chairman to certify the Consolidated Annual Performance and
Evaluations Report for submission to HUD.
12) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution repealing all previous
resolutions establishing the Collier County Parks and Recreation
Page 14
December 9, 2014
Policy and Procedures for the sale and consumption of alcoholic
beverages (beer and wine) in Collier County Parks incorporating
Freedom Park to the list of approved facilities.
13) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager or his designee to
enter into a Facility Rental Agreement with the Naples Model Yacht
Club, Inc. for the use of the North Collier Regional Park (NCRP)
pond during designated dates and times.
14) Recommendation to approve an after-the-fact grant application to
receive U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development rural
capacity building technical assistance sponsored by the National
Association for Latino Community Asset Builders.
15) Recommendation to approve the renewal of Contract #09-5247,
"Tigertail Beach Water and Beach Concession Agreement" with
Recreational Facilities of America, Inc., and approve and authorize
the Chairman to sign Amendment #2 providing for an increase in
contract value.
16) Recommendation to approve an Applicant-Installed Facilities
Agreement for Underground Conversions (WR#4188191 &
#4188163) with Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) for Phases
two and three of the Vanderbilt Beach Municipal Service Taxing Unit
(MSTU) Utility Conversion Project.
17) Recommendation to approve a Second Amendment to the
Subrecipient Agreement with Habitat for Humanity of Collier County,
Inc. to extend the end date to June 30, 2015.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
1) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
renew Collier County's Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity for Advanced Life Support Transport for one year and
authorize the Chairman to execute the Permit and Certificate.
Page 15
December 9,2014
2) Recommendation to approve the purchase of Group Health
Reinsurance coverage for calendar year 2015 in the estimated amount
of$854,854 from Fairmont/US Fire Insurance Company effective
January 1, 2015.
3) Recommendation to award ITB #14-6331 to B3 Enterprises, LLC
d/b/a Midas and PMG of Naples, LLC d/b/a Carsmetics for vehicle
and equipment parts and authorize staff to re-solicit the bid for
additional vendors.
4) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid #14-6308S - "Fleet and
Equipment Services" to multiple vendors for Fleet Management
services, repair parts and accessories.
5) Recommendation to award Bid #14-6306, "Tire Services" to Dan
Callaghan Enterprises Inc. d/b/a Callaghan Tire and to Wagner Tire
d/b/a Collier Tire & Auto Repair.
6) Recommendation to accept reports and ratify staff-approved change
orders and changes to work orders.
7) Recommendation to approve the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) Federally-Funded Subgrant Agreement 15-DS-P4-09-21-01-
xxx in the amount of$16,000 for Emergency Management planning,
training and exercises and approve the associated budget amendment.
8) Recommendation to change the name of the service provider on the
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity and Permit issued to
North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District to North Collier Fire
Control and Rescue District due to the merger of the North Naples
Fire Control and Rescue District and Big Corkscrew Island Fire
Control and Rescue District.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve a Release of Lien for the Crestview Park
Apartments Phase II due to the impact fees being paid in full in
accordance with the Multi-family Rental Impact Fee Deferral
Page 16
December 9, 2014
Program, as set forth by Section 74-401(e) and 74-401(g) (5) of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances.
2) Recommendation to approve two (2) releases of lien for Immokalee
owner occupied workforce housing dwelling units that have been
repaid in full.
3) Recommendation to approve an impact fee reimbursement for
Murphy Oil USA that totals $109,938, due to an overpayment of Road
Impact Fees on a building permit.
4) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2014-15 Adopted Budget.
5) Recommendation to approve the Clam Bay Natural Resource
Protection Area (NRPA) Management Plan (Plan) and authorize
Pelican Bay Services Division to administer the Plan and to submit it
and a 10-Year Permit Application to required Federal and State
Agencies.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Recommendation to appoint an alternate member to the Code
Enforcement Board.
2) Recommendation to appoint members to the Collier County Public
Safety Authority.
3) Recommendation to appoint three members to the Isles of Capri Fire
Control District Advisory Committee.
4) Recommendation to appoint a member to the Haldeman Creek
Dredging Maintenance Advisory Committee.
5) Recommendation to appoint two members to the Collier County
Citizens Corps.
Page 17
December 9, 2014
6) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement
regarding attendance at a function serving a Valid Public Purpose.
Attended East Naples Civic Association lunch on November 20, 2014.
The sum of$18 to be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Board declaration of expenditures serving a valid public purpose and
approval of disbursements for the period of November 13, 2014
through November 19, 2014.
2) Board declaration of expenditures serving a valid public purpose and
approval of disbursements for the period of November 20, 2014
through November 26, 2014.
3) Board declaration of expenditures serving a valid public purpose and
approval of disbursements for the period of November 27, 2014
through December 3, 2014.
4) Request that the Board of County Commissioners approve the use of
$1,000 from the Confiscated Trust Funds to support the National Law
Enforcement Museum.
5) Provide the Board of County Commissioners the Clerk of the Circuit
Court's Internal Audit Report 2014-14 Job Creation Investment
Program: Florida Specialties, LLC, issued December 3, 2014.
6) Recommendation to accept the report of interest for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2014 pursuant to Florida Statute 218.78 and the
Purchasing Ordinance; for the year ending September 30, 2014 no
interest was requested or paid.
7) Request the Board of County Commissioners accepts and approves
capital asset disposition records for the time period October 1, 2013
through September 30, 2014.
Page 18
December 9, 2014
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to approve payment for litigation support services
by R. Alan Wilcox, MAI, SRA for the Order of Taking Hearing
Collier County v. Andy Morgan, et al., (LASIP Project No. 51101) -
Crews, Cope, and Sandy Lane in an amount not to exceed $1,500.
Fiscal Impact: $1,500.
2) Recommendation to approve the expenditure of$60,045 for follow-up
real estate appraisal services relating to the Golden Gate Boulevard
Widening Project. (Project No. 60040)
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
Fiscal Year 2014-15 Adopted Budget.
B. Recommendation to approve a Resolution amending the Collier County
Water-Sewer District's Utilities Standards Manual.
C. Recommendation to (1) adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the use of
the uniform method of collecting non-ad valorem special assessments within
Page 19
December 9, 2014
the Platt Road Community as the method of collecting the $10,500 utilized
for emergency repairs on Platt Road and (2) adopt an Ordinance to establish
the Platt Road Municipal Service Benefit Unit.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 20
December 9, 2014
December 9, 2014
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good morning. If everybody would
silence or turn off their cell phones, it would help us with our
proceeding today.
Today's invocation will be given by Sheila Zellers from
Motivation By Love Ministry.
If you'd all rise for the invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
REVEREND ZELLERS: I'd like to open by reading a scripture
from the New Living Translation. In first Timothy 2: 1 and 2, it says, I
urge you all, first of all, to pray for all people, ask God to help them,
intercede on their behalf, and give thanks for them. Pray for the
workings for -- the ways of kings and the presidents and governing
officials, all who are in authority so they can live and we can live in
peaceful and quiet lives marked by godliness and great dignity.
May we pray. Dear gracious Heavenly Father, we are grateful
today to live in the USA, to be free, to have liberty and justice for all.
Father, we ask you to touch our land, bring healing to hearts, bring
unity, love, and peace to our nation.
As we agree to gather for the county commissioners today and
this meeting, Father, may your wisdom guide each decision for the
betterment of Collier County. Where there could be conflict, bring
resolve. Where there could be unrest, bring peace. Where there could
be differences, bring unity of minds. Give all who speak the gentle
nudge of your love to cover the greatest and hardest mandates so we
will all see the commissioners doing their part to make our county and
Page 2
December 9, 2014
our lives what you intend them to be, not selfish, but for good of all
people.
Father God, many times in choices, there are hard choices and we
do not see outcome until after the choices have been made, the
consequences until later. But because of these meetings and because
of the reasoning and the weighing out of each decision in front of the
people, we can know that the future of Collier County can be done in
the betterment and the goodness and the graciousness for all people to
live great lives.
May your life shine bright for all of us to see the quality of life in
Collier County that we all desire. Bless all who serve, bless all who
have come here today to give their opinions, their thoughts, and may
your goodness and your grace always cover this place. In the name of
the Father, Son, And the Holy Spirit, in Jesus' name I pray, Shalom
and amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager, would you walk us
through today's change list.
Item #2A
TODAY'S CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE
DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR
CONSENT AGENDA) — MOVED, APPROVED AND/OR
ADOPTED W/CHANGES
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Good morning,
Commissioners. These are the proposed agenda changes for the Board
of County Commissioners' meeting of December 9, 2014.
The first proposed change is to withdraw Item 8A. That request
has been made by the petitioner for the project. This is a service
Page 3
December 9, 2014
station waiver request for the RaceTrac service station at U.S. 41.
Again, that was a withdraw request by the petitioner.
The next proposed change is to withdraw Item 9A. That was a
scheduled appeal to the board of a plan commission decision denying
certain boat dock extension requests in the Haldeman's Landing
project. That item is, again, withdrawn at the request of the petitioner.
The third proposed change is to move Item 16A18 off of your
consent agenda onto the county manager's regular agenda.
Commissioners, that's an item with a three-part recommendation
setting the schedule for the Land Development Code amendments for
Calendar Year 2015, also providing some routine exemptions from that
cycle for certain types of land use items as previously directed by the
board, and the third element of that has to do with some prior -- what
the staff believed was some prior direction from the board regarding
the local exemption in your Growth Management Plan to
environmental review of oil well regulations.
The next proposed change is to continue Item 16A28 to the
January 13, 2015, board meeting. That request is made by staff
The next proposed change is to continue Item 16F5 from your
consent agenda -- that is the Clam Bay Management Plan -- to the
January 13, 2015, board meeting. That request has been made
separately by Commissioners Taylor and Fiala.
You have one time-certain item on your agenda, Mr. Chairman.
That is Item 11C, and that will be heard at 10:45 a.m.
Those are all the changes I have, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Let's go to ex parte
communication. Any further changes to today's consent or summary
agenda, Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What do you want me to say?
Page 4
December 9, 2014
Just -- I've had -- go through them?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, not on the regular agenda, not
8A or 9.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just the consent and summary.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: On the consent agenda?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just on consent and summary, yes.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, that's -- I have no ex parte on
the consent.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Do you have any further
changes to today's agenda?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, I don't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. First, before I begin, I want to
say happy birthday, Leo. Leo Ochs, our county manager's birthday
was yesterday.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, ma'am. I don't like to count them
anymore.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Where's Nick Casalanguida? Nick
Casalanguida has a birthday coming up, Commissioner Hiller has a
birthday coming up, and today Jamie French's birthday. So a big
happy birthday to all four of them.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala, you do
understand we were all conceived on or around Saint Patrick's Day.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Don't tell me about that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just saying for what it's worth.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, that's so cute.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's probably TMI.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And now, for the consent agenda, on
16A10 I had meetings, correspondence, and emails. I met with Rich
Page 5
December 9, 2014
Yovanovich and received updates from the staff. And on -- that's all
the disclosures I have for the consent or the summary agenda.
But, Commissioner, on 16A6, this is an MPO issue. I would like
to continue that till another meeting. There's a little bit more research
that needs to be done on that before we discuss it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: 16A6?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 16A6.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there any implications of the
continuance? Is there any --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you mean will there be any bad
effects from continuing it?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, okay. That was my only question
on that one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have no further changes to today's
agenda. Let's see. On -- and I have no ex parte communication on
today's summary or consent.
Commissioner Fiala -- or Commissioner -- I'm sorry.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. I have no ex parte on the
consent, and I have two changes to propose for the agenda. The first is
with respect to the Item 16A18, which was moved from consent to the
regular and is now 11G. I would like to propose that we move the first
two items, which are really noncontroversial, back to consent, and that
relates to the 215 -- I'm sorry, the 2015 schedule for submittals and the
few amendments that are being proposed, and to continue the schedule
to expedite an amendment related to the environmental review of oil
wells until after the legislative session so we have the opportunity to
Page 6
December 9, 2014
see what the legislature is going to do and whether or not we're going
to be, you know, preempted by the state with respect to regulation of
oil drilling.
The second change that I'd like to propose is that we --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do we need to vote on that, Leo?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Let's let her finish.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So that's the first change.
The second change is to -- the item which has been recognized as
16F5 where a request has been made to continue that item to the
January 13th meeting, I don't see any need for that continuance. There
have been so many public meetings on this matter. I understand that
there are some people who would like to see things different. The
opportunity to object has been presented over and over again.
This matter came before the board at the last meeting. The two
changes that or -- I'm sorry. The one change that was requested by the
board has been accomplished and is properly incorporated, and I think
we should move this item back to consent and vote on it as presented
since we've had so much public debate and input on this matter, and
we need to move forward.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that a motion on your amendments?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: On the amendments?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just on the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Now splitting it? Now we're back to
the first one that she --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And let me make a suggestion that
we --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're splitting off the two and
keeping the one; is that what you're saying?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We can -- and why don't we make
Page 7
December 9, 2014
it two motions since there's really two actions. So the first one is with
respect to Item 11G, and the other is with respect to Item 16F5.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I will second -- Commissioner
Hiller, I will second your motion on leaving the first portion of 11G,
16A18, on consent and continuing the element that discusses local
action regarding environmental regulation of oil. I will second that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you; thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion on the -- and
a second on the floor. Discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And let me -- I'm sorry, let me
make sure. We're moving the first two back to consent, and we're
going to discuss the third part; is that right?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. We're going to continue the
third part to vote on it, and -- well, basically to discuss and vote on it
after the legislative session, because we need to find out what the
legislature is going to do with respect to our ability to deal with oil
drilling locally before we can start moving forward with a Growth
Management Plan amendment.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I understand -- I understand I
wasn't part of the discussions before, and I understand the delicateness
of the situation, but it seems to me that unless we form what we're
willing to do here, and then if state law preempts us, state law
preempts us, but I don't think it's -- I don't think it's a too-early
discussion or being disrespectful to the state. I think we just -- because
we don't have any -- what I understand, don't have any rules to -- for
conditional use or to be able to monitor drilling within Collier County
locally, it seems to me that we need to enact that now or even in
January and then wait for the state. So I don't think --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Henning, may I
respond to that?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure, yeah. If she's done. Are you
Page 8
December 9, 2014
done?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'm done, yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, we were not -- we wouldn't
be enacting anything; we wouldn't be able to. Because the Growth
Management Plan amendment requires two steps, we would have to
develop a proposal which would then have to be voted on for
transmittal to the state. The state would have to approve our request to
consider a Growth Management Plan amendment, then it would have
to come back for the actual amendment.
And so there's quite a long process. We're not going to adopt
anything in January. And this would only delay the start of that
process by three months. So it's not a material delay, but I would hate
to see staff go through all the work that I'm just describing and waste
resources if within three months the state comes back and says you're
preempted.
So we're only talking about a three-month delay. It's -- but your
point is well made. I mean, it's never too soon to start to do a good
thing, but in this case it's not going to hurt because everyone has
agreed that they're not going to drill, you know --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Right now.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- while this is going on anyway,
so there's no harm that could possibly occur in the interim period.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala and, I think,
Commissioner Nance.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I agree with the remarks that
Commissioner Hiller just made. I actually asked to pull this agenda
item because I think that we're on a very, very good track with FDEP
as a lead agency. And after the wonderful presentation we had at our
legislative delegation, it's very clear that the Collier legislative
Page 9
December 9, 2014
delegation as a unit is taking action in our behalf and at our request.
And I believe that we need to allow FDEP the courtesy and new
interim Secretary Wilson the opportunity to move this forward, and
then we should certainly respond after that time with what we want to
do locally. But I believe that we should maintain a little decorum and
stick to our stipulated agreement with FDEP, and then we can follow
up as the board sees fit.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, yes, sorry.
I was going to say part of what you said and part of what he said
but, being the last guy, I'll just say I agree.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion on the
motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
The second part -- you want to make two-part motions?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. And the second motion is to
move 16F5 back to consent given all the public discussion that has
already been had, both at the advisory board and at the board level and
to allow the process to move forward.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That is a motion?
Page 10
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I will second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion and second.
Discussion on the motion? Commissioner Taylor; is that right?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're trying to find her button here;
excuse me.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I understand there's been a lot of
public discussion on it, but I guess I'm asking the commission's, my
colleagues' indulgence in allowing me a little time to get up to date on
it. I am not as current as I should be, frankly. And I feel that -- maybe
I can use your analogy, that less than three weeks away we're going to
hear it, or maybe four weeks, and if you could please allow me that
time to immerse myself into this issue.
It's been a thorny issue in the city for a long time, and I have not
been really that much a part of it, having left the council in 2010, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't we cut to the chase and just
put it on the regular agenda and discuss it and get up to speed since we
have two items that have been withdrawn from our agenda. Let's
discuss it today.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But then all of the players don't even
know that we're going to do that, and I don't think that that's going to
work because they've got things to produce and so forth. I just don't
think that would work at all. I would prefer to continue it as well.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And not to do it -- not to do it for
six months, just, you know, less than four weeks away, three Sundays
and maybe four Mondays or something. Just if we could do that,
maybe a Christmas gift to our community, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, if the motion fails, I'm
going to make a motion to put it on the regular agenda.
Discussion on the motion? Any further?
Page 11
December 9, 2014
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Aye.
Motion carries -- motion fails 3-2.
And I'm going to make a motion to have this item put on the
regular agenda for -- anybody wishing to participate in the discussion
may do so.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: My question is -- and I guess I have
to ask you, Jeff, even -- now it's just a few hours away from then, and
if people aren't prepared, know that they're going to -- their subject is
going to be on the regular agenda, I think that that would affect greatly
the outcome if they're not even able to present; not only that, but I
think most people have more studying to do on this subject. I don't
think that's a good -- I don't think it's fair, actually, and we want to
pride ourselves on being fair to all people.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So what's your question to the county
attorney?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm just asking him, is this even
something that can be done without the proper notification in advance
that it will be discussed?
MR. KLATZKOW: Moving it from consent to regular is an
appropriate action, if that's what the board wishes to do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What happens when they can't
represent themselves? I mean, the city should be here, some of the
Page 12
December 9, 2014
affected neighborhoods should be here, and if they're -- you know, if
they're not standing by to do something like this, then, you know, we're
just going to have -- we're just going to have appeals and so forth.
And, I mean, yes, it can be forced through, but then what good are we
accomplishing if it has to come back where there's lawsuits involved.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, if you're asking me, can it be done or
should it be done, those are two different questions.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm simply telling you, yes, it can be done.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But what about should be done?
MR. KLATZKOW: That's up to you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's a safe answer. I just don't -- I
just don't think it is fair to all --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Was that a plea of diplomatic
immunity?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Wow.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I'd love for somebody to stand
up there at the podium and say I did not know and I need more
information, but anyways.
Commissioner Hiller? Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. This matter was brought
before the Board of County Commissioners at the last board meeting,
and the opportunity for anybody to present occurred at that time.
Since that time, there was another public meeting held by the
Pelican Bay Services Division, and the opportunity to present there
was also made to the public. It has been noticed. It is an item on
consent. The matter was known to the entire community.
And, again, this can keeps getting kicked down the road, and we
have to give staff the opportunity to move forward. As with any
management plan, it is a living document. You know, if we vote on it
today, that doesn't mean that down the road it can't be amended. In
Page 13
December 9, 2014
fact, down the road it will be amended because it should be as
circumstances change.
So I support Commissioner Henning's motion. We often move
items from consent to regular to address issues in discussion. So I
think your recommendation, Commissioner Henning, is appropriate.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And we also continue items for
further information; however, there is some sensitivity, and we'll
discuss it at the time.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 3-2.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, would you like to set a time-certain
for that item so that anybody that does want to come and participate --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't we set it at --
MR. OCHS: One o'clock, perhaps.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- after our lunch.
MR. OCHS: Okay, 1 p.m.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That would be --
MR. OCHS: 1 p.m.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- 1 p.m.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Will somebody be notifying all of
the affected parties about this?
MR. OCHS: Well, we can -- Mr. Dorrill is here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Duly noted.
MR. OCHS: We'll call city hall, if you want some notification at
Page 14
December 9, 2014
the city as well.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, please. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Which item number will that be,
Mr. Ochs, please, sir?
MR. OCHS: Sir, that will become Item 11G now that 11G has
gone back to your consent agenda. So 16F5 will become 11G, thank
you, sir, to be heard at 1 o'clock.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Time-certain at 1 o'clock.
Entertain a motion to approve today's agenda as the remainder
amended.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: We have a little bit of ex parte left.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, I'm sorry, Commissioner. You're
right.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Just to complete the ex parte, sir, I
don't have anything on today's consent or summary agenda. I have a
couple things on the regular agenda should they arise.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further changes?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No further changes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. All in favor to approve today's
agenda as amended?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So moved.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Second.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'm sorry. Chairman Henning,
point of order.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. Klatzkow, can you please tell
me, if I object to something on the agenda being moved from -- you
know, with the last two votes being moved from one place to another,
do I approve the agenda as such, or what -- do I acknowledge and
record my objection with the approval of the agenda?
MR. KLATZKOW: Your objection has been noted in your vote,
Page 15
December 9, 2014
and so the approval is subject to the prior discussions. You're fine.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. So to approve. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by, I believe,
Commissioner Hiller, a second by Commissioner Nance. Do I have
that order right?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Reversed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Nance, second by Commissioner Hiller to approve today's agenda as
further amended.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Now we've got some fun stuff, and that would be employee
services awards. And if the commissioners would join me down in
front of the dais, we'll recognize our employees.
Page 16
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
December 9,2014
Withdraw Item 8A: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item,all participants are required to be sworn in.Recommendation to
approve a Resolution relating to Petition Number ASW-PL20140000797,granting a waiver from the
minimum required separation of 500 feet between automobile service stations pursuant to Section 5.05.05.B
of the Land Development Code,for property located on the south side of U.S. 41 between Frederick Street
and Palm Street in Section 11,Township 50 South, Range 25 East,Collier County,Florida. (Petitioner's
request)
Withdraw Item 9A: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item,all participants are required to be sworn in. Standard Pacific of
Florida GP,Inc. requests an appeal to the Board of County Commissioners of a final decision by the Collier
County Planning Commission to deny Petition BDE-PL20130001765 for a 32-foot boat dock extension over
the maximum 20-foot limit allowed by Section 5.03.06 of the Land Development Code for a total protrusion of
52 feet to accommodate a 42 slip multi-family docking facility for the benefit of a 19.06±acre project to be
known as Haldeman's Landing in Sections 11 and 14,Township 50 South,Range 25 East,Collier County,
Florida. [Petition ADA-PL20140001454] (Companion to Petition ST-PL20140000896). (Petitioner's request)
Move Item 16A18 to Item 11G: Recommendation to approve the 2015 schedule for submittals to amend the
Collier County Growth Management Plan(GMP),as aligned with the Florida Statutes,and to approve an
exemption from the schedule to expedite an amendment related to the environmental review of oil wells,and
allow for future exemptions,as determined by the Board. (Staff's request)
Continue Item 16A28 to the January 13,2015 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to award ITB No. 14-
6346, "Traffic Operations Signal Components",to the following vendors: Multicom Inc.,Transportation
Control Systems,Peek Traffic Corporation,Express Supply,Temple Inc.,Traffic Signal Inc. (Staff's
request)
Continue Item 16F5 to the January 13,2015 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to approve the Clam
Bay Natural Resource Protection Area(NRPA)Management Plan(Plan)and authorize Pelican Bay Services
Division to administer the Plan and submit it with the 10 Year Permit Application to the required Federal
and State Agencies. (Commissioner Taylor and Commissioner Fiala's separate requests)
Time Certain Items:
Item 11C to be heard at 10:45 a.m.
12/24/20148:56 AM
December 9, 2014
Item #3A
SERVICE AWARDS — 20 YEAR ATTENDEES
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, we'll begin our service awards this
morning by recognizing three employees celebrating 20 years of
service with county government. The first is Stephen Chandler from
our public utilities division. Stephen.
(Applause.)
MR. CHANDLER: Where do you want me?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Shake my hand. Take your plaque.
Shake the other commissioners' hands if you'd like.
MR. OCHS: Celebrating 20 years of service with parks and
recreation, Osmin Condi.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He's at Eagle Lakes Community
Park. Yes.
MR. OCHS: Celebrating 20 years with Emergency Medical
Services, Paul Passaretti. Paul?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thanks, Paul.
Item #3B
SERVICE AWARDS — 25 YEAR ATTENDEES
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, celebrating 25 years of service to
county government from our Solid Waste Department, Janet Go.
(Applause.)
Item #3C
Page 17
December 9, 2014
SERVICE AWARDS — 30 YEAR ATTENDEES
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, celebrating 30 years of service at
county government from Parks and Recreation, Jeanine McPherson.
Jeanine?
(Applause.)
MS. McPHERSON: We move in parks and rec.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: She is a joy to work with, I want to
tell you.
MS. McPHERSON: Over here, the big boss. Thank you, sir.
Item #3D
SERVICE AWARDS — RETIREES RECOGNIZED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, we also have the pleasure this
morning of recognizing several of our recently retired employees. The
first one of those, having completed 10 years of service in Parks and
Recreation, is Meryl Rorer. Meryl?
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Recently retired after 10 years of service with Solid
Waste is Beth Ryan. Beth?
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, recently retired, having served 18
years with our Wastewater Department and our Water Department, is
Carole Esposito. Carole?
(Applause.)
MS. ESPOSITO: Leo, I want a hug.
MR. OCHS: You're getting one. Congratulations. Appreciate it.
MS. ESPOSITO: Thank you.
MR. OCHS: Best part of the job.
Page 18
December 9, 2014
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, our final retiree recognition this
morning goes out to a gentleman who dedicated 33 years of
tremendous service to our county government, Skip Camp, our former
Facilities Management Director. Skip?
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that concludes our service awards
this morning. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's go ahead and get it going.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. If everyone can please leave quietly so we
can continue the meeting. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Speak loud.
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS — ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL
PROCLAMATIOS
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE OUTSTANDING
PERFORMANCE OF THE SEACREST COUNTRY DAY
SCHOOL'S WOMEN'S VOLLEYBALL TEAMS OF 2013 AND
2014 AND FOR WINNING THE 2013 FHSAA STATE 2A
CROWN. ACCEPTED BY DR. JOHN WATSON, HEAD OF
SCHOOL; JESSICA CASTLEBERRY, DIRECTOR OF
COMMUNICATIONS AND MARKETING; ERIN DUFFY, HEAD
OF UPPER SCHOOL; MARK MARSALA, DIRECTOR OF
ATHLETICS; JAN CLASS, COACH; AND 14 MEMBERS OF THE
STATE CHAMPIONSHIP TEAM — ADOPTED
Page 19
December 9, 2014
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, this takes us to Item 4 on your
agenda, proclamations. Item 4A is a proclamation recognizing the
outstanding performance of Seacrest Country Day School's women's
volleyball teams of 2013 and 2014 and for winning the 2013 FHSAA
State 2A Crown.
To be accepted by Dr. John Watson, Head of School; Jessica
Castleberry, Director of Communications and Marketing; Erin Duffy,
Head of Upper School; Mark Marsala, Director of Athletics; Jan Class,
Coach; and 14 members of the state championship team. And this
item is sponsored by Commissioner Henning.
If you'd please step forward and receive your proclamation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Come on up, ladies.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Who wants to hold the proclamation?
Two lines.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Tall ones in the back.
(Applause.)
MR. WATSON: If I could just take a moment. My name is John
Watson. I'm head of school. I would like to thank the commissioners
for taking the time out of what's obviously a very busy day to
recognize this remarkable group of young women. They're great
volleyball players. They work so hard together, but we're most proud
because they're better citizens and people. And thank you very much
for recognizing them.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you for providing such great
future leadership. These girls are amazing.
Next proclamation?
Item #4B
Page 20
December 9, 2014
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JANUARY 16, 2015 AS
RELIGIOUS FREEDOM DAY. ACCEPTED BY GREG HARPER
AND JERRY RUTHERFORD — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4B is a proclamation designating January 16,
2015, as Religious Freedom Day. To be accepted by Greg Harper and
Jerry Rutherford, and this item is sponsored by the entire Board of
County Commissioners. If you'd step forward, please.
(Applause.)
MR. HARPER: Jerry's not able to be here, so Father Orst
(phonetic) is going to take his place and accept the award.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's fine; that's great, yes. Thanks
for coming.
MR. HARPER: Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
(Applause.)
MR. HARPER: I don't have the opportunity for a microphone
very often, so I'll take it. But I did want to thank you, sincerely thank
you. We're very appreciative of the fact that you've affirmed the
principle of religious freedom. It's important to a number of us. And,
again, thank you.
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING DECEMBER 9, 2014 AS TED
BELOW APPRECIATION DAY. ACCEPTED BY TED BELOW —
ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Item 4C is a proclamation designating December 9,
2014, as Ted Below Appreciation Day. To be accepted by Ted Below,
and it's sponsored by the entire Board of County Commissioners.
Mr. Below, please step forward.
Page 21
December 9, 2014
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You were in the Marines, but where
did you serve in World War II? Did you serve in Europe or Germany
or --
MR. BELOW: Iwo Jima.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Iwo Jima.
MR. BELOW: That's what finished me, anyway.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. My great uncle you might
know.
MR. BELOW: Well, you know, I'm the age there's not many of
us around.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I know.
Can we get a photograph?
MR. BELOW: Sure thing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think you were a good part of the
Rookery Bay group, weren't you?
MR. BELOW: Oh, I still am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, good.
MR. BELOW: Do I shake hands with people?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That would be my honor.
Congratulations.
MR. BELOW: Nice to see you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Congratulations.
MR. BELOW: Can I say something?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. Go to the microphone.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, please do.
MR. BELOW: I've just got to say it. In the early '60s, I became a
member of the Environmental Advisory Council. I served on it for 16
years. Most of those years we met in this room, which was nothing like
this room then, and this is certainly nothing like we ever had. Thank
you.
Page 22
December 9, 2014
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion to approve today's
proclamations.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion and a second.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Presentation?
Item #5A
PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF
THE MONTH FOR DECEMBER 2014 TO PHYSICIANS
REGIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM. ACCEPTED BY SCOTT
LOWE, INTERIM CEO — PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
Item 5A is a presentation of the Collier County Business of the
Month for December 2014 to Physicians Regional Healthcare System
to be accepted by Scott Lowe, Interim CEO; Renee Palin, System
Director of Marketing and Public Relations; Judy Paul, System Chief
Nursing Officer; and Katie Bove, Chief Nursing Officer in Collier.
(Applause.)
Page 23
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nice to be the Business of the
Month, isn't it?
MR. LOWE: I just want to briefly say thank you to the
commissioners and to the Chamber of Commerce for recognizing
Physicians Regional. We are committed to this community, have been
for a significant amount of time.
I brought with me our two clinical leaders who supervise over
1,500 employees who provide the compassionate care that we deliver
on a day-to-day basis. Many of those employees are recognized
throughout the community for their community service.
Physicians Regional continues to support the community in
multiple different ways. We've invested over $8 million in new
technology just this past six months to continue to enhance the care
we're providing to the citizens of Collier County. So thank you all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #5B
RECOGNIZING LINDA SWISHER, ADMINISTRATIVE
SECRETARY, OCHOPEE FIRE DISTRICT AS THE EMPLOYEE
OF THE MONTH FOR NOVEMBER, 2014 - PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, Item 5B is a recommendation
recognizing Linda Swisher, Administrative Secretary, Ochopee Fire
District, as the Employee of the Month for November 2014.
Linda, if you'd please step forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thank you. It's an honor. I've
heard great things about you. That's for your office, and a little token
of appreciation. And if you want to greet the commissioners, and then
Page 24
December 9, 2014
we're going to get a picture, and commissioner -- or Leo Ochs is going
to embarrass you after that.
MR. OCHS: That's right.
MS. SWISHER: He would.
MR. OCHS: All right, Linda. Stand there and face the cameras
while I embarrass you a little bit.
Commissioners, I'm going to tell you a little bit about Linda; you
probably know a lot. But she's been an employee of the county for
more than 28 years. Her primary duties include the daily operations of
the Ochopee Fire Control office handling all the clerical and secretarial
responsibilities and, of course, the fine print that says, performs all
related duties as required. Chief McLaughlin makes sure that she
understands that.
Now, recently Linda has assumed many of the administrative
assistant duties for the Isles of Capri station after their employee took a
position in a different department, so she's been doing double duty and
doing it quite well.
She's assumed all of the payroll and purchasing responsibilities as
well as all the day-to-day administrative operations, assisting the chief
in that station in addition to her regular duties.
She's a stellar example to all of her peers, and her dedication to all
the fire stations and all the employees is a perfect example of why she
is so deserving of this award.
Commissioners, it's my honor to present Linda Swisher as your
Employee of the Month for November 2014.
Congratulations, Linda.
MS. SWISHER: Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. OCHS: Thank you. Congratulations.
MR. DURHAM: Congratulations, Linda.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, I see we have Mayor Hamilton from
Page 25
December 9, 2014
the great City of Everglades here today. I'm sure he's also appreciative
of all of Linda's efforts on behalf of Ochopee Fire Control.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION FROM LIEUTENANT COLONEL LEE
HENDERSON, REPRESENTING THE CIVIL AIR PATROL,
REQUESTING $15,000 FUNDING TO SUPPORT
APPROXIMATELY 75 MISSIONS ANNUALLY - MOTION
DIRECTING STAFF TO EXPLORE POSSIBLE GRANT
OPPORTUNITIES AND WORK WITH THE CIVIL AIR PATROL
IN SUPPORT OF FUNDING EFFORTS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Sir, that takes us to Item 6. It's your public
petitions this morning. Item 6A is a public-petition request from
Lieutenant Colonel Lee Henderson representing the Civil Air Patrol
requesting $15,000 funding to support approximately 75 missions
annually.
COLONEL HENDERSON: Okay. First thing I want to do is
real briefly go through what the Civil Air Patrol is and then slow down
and say what we do for Collier County and then what we need.
First of all, Civil Air Patrol was established in 1 December '41,
which was six days before Pearl Harbor. And our primary job during
World War II was submarine patrol, cadet program in '42, and then we
were commissioned as the auxiliary in '48.
In World War II, we flew 24 million miles, found 173
submarines, attacked 57, and hit 10 and sank two, and those are all
U-boats.
This, today, are all the units, squadrons and units, Civil Air Patrol
in the United States. So there's quite a few of them.
We're divided into eight regions, and we're in the south region
Page 26
December 9, 2014
down here. I don't know -- my pointer's going. Oh, yeah, down here.
And in our region in Alabama is our headquarters, which is Maxwell
Air Force Base. We also, in this region, include Puerto Rico.
And this is Florida Wing. Each state has a wing, so we have 52 --
50 wings and headquarters in Lakeland, and this is our wing
commander, Colonel Henry. He needs a haircut.
Just to give you an idea of what we do. This is 9/11 . We were
the first civilian aircraft over 9/11 to do -- and we were tasked with
doing reconnaissance. We were taking pictures, and a lot of the
pictures you see on this subject were taken by the Civil Air Patrol.
Also we fly -- just an example, we fly target for the Air Force
today. In fact, we just flew one of these missions a couple days ago. I
was the IC on it. We fly down to Key West, and then we turn around
and infiltrate the United States, and they pick us up on radar, and they
launch their F-15 fighters and intercept us, and then they simulate
shooting us down.
The jewel -- this is where I'll slow down a little bit. The jewel of
Collier County is a 6,000-square-foot hangar at Marco Island. We also
have a hangar at Naples airport. So there's two squadrons. And,
totally, we're over 120 members. Not all of these members are pilots.
Some of them are what we call observers. They ride the right seat
when we're doing missions.
We have two aircraft. Right now the Naples aircraft is in
maintenance, but this is our aircraft at Marco Island. And also at
Marco Island, we have eight radio stations in people's houses around
the island for doing missions and so forth.
We also -- at the hangar itself, we have a complete mission base
communications center, which includes UHF, VHF, HF. We can talk
around the world. We have everything at Marco Island.
Okay. What I want to focus on is this area here. And if you
notice -- can you see my pointer?
Page 27
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COLONEL HENDERSON: If you notice, the Wilderness
Waterway for the Everglades starts out at Everglades City, and then
past Chokoloskee and then down the waterway, and then to the -- past
the Lost Man's River to the Broad River and then out -- and then
through Shark River, through Oyster Bay, and then ends up in
Flamingo. The part of it that we cover is up here north of the Broad
River.
Okay. In the Ten Thousand Islands area, you've got -- is a
primary fishing area for sport fishing. So we have a lot of fishing
boats in there, small boats.
And we have the Wilderness Waterway, which I just pointed out,
which comes down through here. And along the Wilderness Waterway
are campsites. And you'll see here, there's one, there's one here, one
here. This is the Broad River. This is the Lost Man's River. And then
coming back the other side, we stop at Turkey Key and Pelican --
Pavilion Key and then all of the keys and so forth on the way up.
This is an example of a campsite. If you're a canoer down the
Wilderness Waterway, you're not going to camp in the Everglades
because it's all mangroves. So what they've done is they've built these
platforms. So you've got canoers -- there's a canoe right here that's
docked in a camp -- in a tent pitched here on the dock, and that's where
you camp. Here's the privy here.
Okay. And then on -- like at Pavilion Key and Lost Man's Key
and also at Indian Key, so forth, Turkey Key, you've got campsites, so
the canoers would pitch their tent, and so that's where they camp for
the night. They would stop, you know, before sundown.
So the patrols we fly are called sundown patrols, or were in the
past. We call them also coastal patrols down that area, and this is what
we fly. Comes -- starts out from Marco's airport. We fly it out of the
Marco airport, not the Naples airport because the Naples airport adds
Page 28
December 9, 2014
an extra half hour or more of flight time, which costs money, and
Marco is right there at the beginning.
And then the mission base radio station and communications is all
at the hangar or at other spots, eight other radios throughout Marco
Island. We fly down here, but we fly -- we don't fly this route. These
are the -- we fly this route, but we don't exactly go waypoint to
waypoint. We fly along the water here looking for boaters that may be
in distress.
Out of here, we pick up on the Wilderness Waterway, and we fly
-- the normal patrol is the red route here. If we fly a short route,
weather or whatever, that's this blue one down to Pelican Key, or
Pavilion Key, and then back up. And if we fly the extended route, we
go on down here to the Broad River and check out these campsites and
so forth and back up.
Our objective is to be there for boaters, kayakers, canoers, fishing
boats that are in distress. And if you fly -- if we come by a campsite,
we'll drop down to 500 feet, make sure they're not out there waving,
you know, hey, stop, you know, we're in distress. If we find somebody
in distress, we radio back to our radio -- there's always a base radio --
and base radio calls 911, and the sheriff sends a boat out, and that's
what we did.
Oops. What did I do? I hit it too many times. How do I go
back? Oh, yeah, here. Okay.
Bottom line, Marco squadron is funded. If we fly an Air Force
mission, like a reconnaissance over 9/11 or the intercept missions and
so forth, then the Air Force pays for it, so that's covered.
The Air Force gives us airplanes, so the airplanes don't belong to
us. They belong to the Air Force. And we have two airplanes here in
this -- in Collier County. One here and one in Naples.
If we fly anything else, we have to pay for it ourself. And also, at
Marco we have a hangar to maintain, and the cost of the hangar, the --
Page 29
December 9, 2014
or not the cost -- the cost of maintaining the hangar being air
conditioning, water bills, and so forth, are all ours. We even pay
$1,600 a year to the airport authority here in Collier County for the
space that our hangar is on.
A coastal patrol is one-and-a-half hours. It costs about $200.
And we are only able, with the money we have, to fly 30 of them.
That's one -- that's less than one a week. What we're asking for is help
from Collier County. And to give you an idea, $15,000 would pay for
75 additional patrols. That would be three during the high season --
that's now -- and one-and-a-half or one or two in the summer.
Do you have any questions?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yep. Questions by the board
members? Commissioner Fiala? Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. With the announcement that
the Russians are now going to be flying bombers over the Gulf of
Mexico, will this affect you and your surveillance? Will you be
assisting them in any way in reconnaissance efforts or anything; do
you know?
COLONEL HENDERSON: Not Civil Air Patrol. Civil Air Patrol
flies 95 percent of all lost aircraft and so forth within the continental
United States. Anything offshore, outside a gliding distance to land, is
covered by the U.S. Coast Guard.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
COLONEL HENDERSON: All of our patrols are coordinated
with the U.S. Coast Guard, but they may have boats on fire in our area.
Another thing I didn't mention is we also spot fires during the dry
season.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'm very familiar with the Civil
Air Patrol, and I can't thank you enough for what you do and the
Page 30
December 9, 2014
service you provide.
We are a recreational community. We do a lot of fishing. I
mean, everyone loves to fish, and the Ten Thousand Islands, unless
you know them, can be very treacherous. So the public service that
you perform is ongoing and far-reaching, and I want to thank you very
much.
COLONEL HENDERSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COLONEL HENDERSON: Appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do we need to bring this back to the
regular agenda to vote on possibly giving them some fueling dollars
each year, or -- we can't do it now; can we, or can we?
MR. OCHS: Well, traditionally, ma'am, the board takes one of
two actions under a public petition. Either you take no action or you
direct a future action on a future agenda.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Well, I would like to bring it
back to a future agenda, then. I think this is a worthwhile cause. And
with our population increasing and tourism increasing, we need the
Civil Air Patrol, and they can only do so much with their own funds
and their fundraising. They have hot dogs and things like that to raise
funds, but that doesn't do very much to pay for the fuel. So I'd like to
bring it back to a regular agenda, please.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I'd like to add -- give staff a
little bit of direction to maybe investigate through our grant office what
grants or different sorts of assistance might be available to the Civil
Air Patrol that they might not be available to and just come back to the
board with some different options or some suggestions as to what we
might be able to do to help them a little bit.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'd like to say that, you know,
historically we have used and supported United Way for activities such
Page 31
December 9, 2014
as this in the community, and the precedence for future petitions is just
phenomenal with other groups. So I'd like to stick to our present
policy and just support the United Way.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I see your point, Commissioner
Henning. I also see Commissioner Nance's point, and that is, there are
so many funding sources, both state and federal, that could potentially
support your initiative, and I think that directing staff to seek out
potential grants that may be available to you could actually yield you
far more money than what you're requesting by way of$15,000.
And I think, Commissioner Henning, you're right. We do have a
precedent that we have to uphold, and it's not just with respect to
United Way. It's with respect to all these nonprofits, that unless they
come to us to -- as grant subrecipients, we don't provide direct funding,
but we will provide assistance in obtaining grant funding, and also we
contribute tax dollars in the administration of those grants that would
go to you. And I think that is actually the right way to go about getting
you funding.
And like I said, at the end of the day I think you will get a lot
more money to do a lot more things than what you're asking for here.
What you do is very commendable and very important and should be
appropriately supported at the right level.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I think you've made very good
suggestions. And if we can just then direct staff to look into the grants,
I think that's a very good -- excellent suggestion, as a matter of fact, to
guide them along, because I don't know that they're, you know, that
well versed on grant funding anyway, and so then our obligation to
them would assist them in any way we can to help them get the grants
needed for the fueling.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Absolutely. And the one other
thought with respect to that grant funding is to go through the Sheriffs
Page 32
December 9, 2014
Office as well, because the Sheriffs Office does directly solicit grants
for subrecipients also, which is another avenue to take beyond the
Board of County Commissioners. So you actually have two sources of
potential grant funding.
COLONEL HENDERSON: Yeah. I'm going to need some help
on that. I don't know anything.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Leo's the man, and he's got the
team.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I really like what I'm hearing,
especially about the grants, because it's something that would be
ongoing, hopefully, and the Civil Air Patrol is just profound in what
you do and the service you provide; however, I would like to see if
there's any way we can possibly fund them for this year or even partial
funding, understanding that traditionally we've gone through United
Way, but obviously they wouldn't be here if that funding was
appropriate, if they could do what they need to do.
So I don't know if there's any willingness on the part of the board
to do it, but even partially. I think when you look at what they're
talking about, flying three times a week in the high season or one or
two in the summer, I think it's important.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And United Way doesn't -- they
never fund you, do they, United Way?
COLONEL HENDERSON: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I think they just fund, you
know, social service agencies, but --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You have to ask, I think.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Leo, is there --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there any direction?
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think the combination of what
Page 33
December 9, 2014
Commissioner Henning and what Commissioner Nance has proposed
is what the direction ought to be, and that is to direct staff to seek grant
funding both through the board and through the Sheriffs Office and to
do that expeditiously so as to get funding for the Civil Air Patrol this
year, which is doable since we're at the start of the year.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It is?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: If that's a motion, I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That would be the motion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion is to direct staff to seek --
see if there's any grant funding opportunities and get back to the
petitioner?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Hiller,
second by Commissioner Nance.
Discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Leo, would that work for you folks?
COLONEL HENDERSON: Yes. Any help we can get we
appreciate. We're starting out from ground zero.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So are we, thank you. I think we did
a pretty decent job with this, starting out from ground zero. We came
up with some solutions, and we want to help you, as you can see.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No discussion? Any further
discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: If-- yes, just a little bit. And I
don't mean to beat a horse here, a dead horse, but if the grant cycle -- I
always assumed grant cycles were two or three years. If it turns out to
be that kind of cycle, maybe the county manager could get back to us,
just, you know, in a memo or something, just let us know, and then we
could look at this again, but I think that you wouldn't be here if the
need wasn't present.
Page 34
December 9, 2014
COLONEL HENDERSON: Right.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And we are moving into a hugely
popular Collier County time for tourists and fishing. And, with the
reefs -- the reefs being built, et cetera, the emphasis is so much on the
water. And, again, you performed such an important part of public
safety.
So in that vein, if the commission agrees to amend the petition to
say that Mr. Ochs will get back to us with a timeline for any kind of
grant application and hopefully granting the money.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. I'll be happy to do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, the fishing is not going to be
picking up until the water warms up, unless you're mullet fishing; isn't
that right, Sammy?
COLONEL HENDERSON: We do send out a letter once a year,
and I have included the letter in here, but I'm not going to show it right
now, but it's also -- I have some hard copies, and there's a letter in here.
This is the letter that will go out to our database in January. So that's
how we've been funded since the early '90s.
We collect anywheres from 15- to $20,000, but the problem is,
like I say, you've got to maintain a 6,000-square-foot hangar and air
conditioning, and we just finished redoing the roof on that hangar, and
that all comes out of our pocket, and that's where our -- that's what
we've been doing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
Page 35
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And Leo will work with you right
away, you know, I mean, so that you start working immediately, not
having to wait around.
COLONEL HENDERSON: Right, okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COLONEL HENDERSON: I have hard copies here. Do you
want them or --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You can give them to Commissioner
Taylor.
MR. OCHS: I'll take them. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item?
Item #10A
RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION CREATING
THE COLLIER COUNTY EMS FIRE DISTRICTS MERGER AD
HOC COMMITTEE - MOTION TO DELAY ACTION AND
BRING BACK AT A MAY 2015 BCC MEETING - APPROVED
MR. OCHS: The next item is Item 10A. It's a recommendation
to adopt a resolution creating the Collier County EMS Fire District's
Merger Ad Hoc Committee, and this item was brought forward by
Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: A little information. The Board of
Commissioners put on the ballot, I believe in 2006, '7, or '8 -- '6 or '8, a
"would you be in favor of consolidating the fire districts in Collier
County if it enhanced or lowered the cost of service." That was
Page 36
December 9, 2014
resoundingly supported by the public throughout all of Collier County.
And this past year we have witnessed two -- actually four fire
districts, two of them consolidating together. Again, those four
different districts, it was resoundingly supported by the public.
In the past, the Board of Commissioners have stated, if you
consolidate into one single district, we will give you EMS.
Approximately 70 percent of all calls to fire and rescue is medical
calls. I can see a case where, through an independent special district,
such as a fire district, that services can be enhanced, and there's a
possibility of reducing costs.
There is -- give you one example of duplicate buildings just in
Golden Gate Estates. We have a fire station. No, we have an EMS
station one block from a fire station, okay. These men and women
provide the same service for all our residents, our firefighters do. They
provide medical response and they provide fire response.
So I want to lead a group of-- citizen based with all the
stakeholders such as union members, fire commissioners, interested
citizens, to see if we can put a plan together to present to the fire
districts for their support on merging all of the fire districts into one
and providing that transport and further medical services such as we
do.
So I'm going to make that motion.
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, Commissioner Henning. I
would like to second your motion. I will tell you that I would like to
commend you on your leadership during your last year as chair on this
issue. You've done journeyman's work, sir, on helping make this
happen, together with the voice of the people in Collier County.
So I believe that your methodology is a good one to keep the
conversation active and going, and I certainly support it 100 percent.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
Page 37
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. It's a very interesting
discussion and one that's worth having. I'm not going to make a
decision on whether or not we should have this committee till I hear
from the public speakers, but what I will say is that the issue of how
consolidation should occur is one that should be very carefully
contemplated.
What I've heard from the community is in part the same and in
part different from what you're proposing, Commissioner Henning.
There is no question that everyone, not only in the local
community but throughout Florida and throughout the United States,
will agree that everybody wants the highest level of service at the
lowest possible cost, especially when it comes to saving lives. There is
no life which we can afford to lose.
So with respect to the straw ballot, it speaks for itself. I mean,
obviously there's no one in their right mind who could vote against it,
but that doesn't speak to the issue of how consolidation should occur in
the best interest of this community. It just states an obvious.
With respect to consolidation, what I'm hearing is not that this
community wants one single system but that this community wants
two systems, essentially a north and a south system; that you have two
very different types of communities, two very different types of
cultures.
And that -- so when the discussion is had throughout the
community, consideration should be given to two operating systems as
opposed to one system and an integration of fire and EMS, because
that obviously does make sense. And looking at it as a fire-based EMS
system is what I have heard from the various communities and
individuals I've spoken to.
I think the discussion should be had, and I think how it should be
had is something that should be addressed here today, but I think it's
great that it's before this board for consideration.
Page 38
December 9, 2014
And just one other thing I want to also say. We need to give
deference to the contribution of the municipalities as well. I see Mayor
Hamilton sitting in the audience, and I know Mayor Hamilton has an
interest which may not correspond with yours, Commissioner
Henning. And I think it's very important that we consider the input of
other elected officials as well besides the representatives of EMS, the
representatives of fire, representatives of the county. Mayor Hamilton,
I think it's important that you have a seat at the table in whatever that
table is defined as.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, let me respond to that by, if you
read my executive summary, you would see the outreach would be to
any municipality that wants to participate. Yes, I think it's important to
reach out to Everglades, the City of Marco, and City of Naples.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I appreciate that. I just want to
single out Mayor Hamilton because he has a heightened level of
concern, and I think he very much wants a seat at the table of any
discussion that's had. I'm sure the other municipalities do as well, but
he has highlighted his concern with emphasis.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala? Commissioner
Taylor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I guess I was first, did you
say?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have some questions because
I didn't find it really clear. To me everything has to be spelled out
exactly in order for me to understand it completely. And that is, I say
-- I see that you want to consolidate the fire and EMS. Are you
speaking of every single fire department becoming one fire department
as we had discussed many years back then -- and then folding EMS
into that one solid fire department? You're not talking about piecemeal,
Page 39
December 9, 2014
right?
I mean, like, if North doesn't want to consolidate into East, then
it's a no-go, is that what you're trying to say?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that's my goal, but you can't
answer that question until you have the conversation, and I think that
conversation ought to be done in the public through a committee,
Sunshine law, such as that.
Yeah, I want to see how far that we can take it. Obviously, no
action -- no action can be taken unless it comes back to the Board of
Commissioners and then ultimately to the voters.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. It's because it's our EMS that
we're talking about here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And, secondly, with the people that
you had mentioned, I noticed there weren't any financial people on
here, but there were a lot of union people on here, but you don't have,
like, the city manager -- there are three city managers -- and you don't
have any -- the county manager. You know, it seems that it could be --
and not that you've planned it this way, but it could be a stacked deck
if you just -- I think that that should be -- you know, it should be
carefully created.
I can understand where you're going, and I'm not saying I object
to that. I'm just saying the composition of the team that you want to
put together might make it a stacked deck. And I think that there
should be some financial people there as well, not only labor officials.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Well, let me tell you the reason
that I -- the outline the way it is, is, first of all, I didn't want to burden
any staff, okay. The men and women on the street, I don't believe it's a
stacked deck. I think that they provide a valuable input, and without
them I don't think things are going to happen.
In other words, there's a lot of respect of our firefighters and EMS
Page 40
December 9, 2014
employees by the public, and they have listened to them over and over
again just as recently as the vote taken at the polls.
The other thing, financial people, I've asked Janet Vasey to sit on
this committee. I've asked Jeff Lytle to sit on this committee, because
I think people that have outreach in the community should have a
say-so. I think people like Janet Vasey, who have vast financial
knowledge about how government works coming from that sector, is
very important.
I will -- I will seek out any information that I can get from the
staff, and the county manager's very supportive of that; however, I
don't want to burden his staff or the county manager to be at these, you
know, twice-a-month meetings, but always welcome. Anybody's
always welcome. That's the reason for it.
Did I answer your questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Somewhat, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think I'd like to -- I'm supportive
of this. I think it's a very far-reaching and -- there's a word that I've
lost, but it's thinking about where we're going as a county, so I support
that.
But I, too, would like to hear from the public. My concern is this
is a great idea that I want to succeed, but my concern is it may be too
soon. We just went through an election. Two of the three fire districts
agreed to merge. I believe the Blue Ribbon Committee -- I'm
understanding this, and, again, I'm -- correct me if I'm wrong -- that
was appointed by this commission recommended that EMS and the
fire department don't merge.
So there's a lot of-- the path isn't clear, and I do not want to open
some sores here that, maybe with a little time -- and I'm not talking
about a year, maybe six months, maybe, you know, so we can see how
the districts are performing merged, we can understand from the
Page 41
December 9, 2014
people that they're happy with the service.
So that's where I'm going with it. But, again, I want to reserve
any kind -- I do not want you to interpret this as not supporting this,
because I think it's a very good idea.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala? Commissioner
Hiller?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. You know, it is something that
we've talked about for many, many years, and we were -- we were
pushed into consolidation way back, oh, my goodness, in the early
2000s yet hoping to get them, and nobody, of course, wanted to do
that. So I commend you for taking this leading role.
The five citizens that you mentioned that are appointed by the
Board of County Commissioners, does that mean each one chooses
one from their district?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, no, absolutely not. I think you
want the cream of the crop of citizens within the county. So whatever
the majority of the board selects is -- I think, is -- you'd get better
information, in my opinion. Let's say you might have two from the
City of Naples and one from East Naples. And I know you know a lot
of people with -- outside your district, I think would lend better input
and a good product at the end of the day than having one from each of
the districts.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, those districts serve all of our
five districts, though. We'll talk about composition after we hear from
the audience.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The other question or other mention
that I wanted to present at this time is I do agree that it's a little bit
early, by the way, because I think North and Corkscrew worked real
well together with their compromise and their joining of their staff
members and so forth.
Page 42
December 9, 2014
Golden Gate and East Naples, however, are having some
heavy-duty problems, and it's not a congenial match right now.
They're still suffering with a lot of things that they're trying to get
through, and I don't know if they're ready for this, and I would
certainly like some input.
I know what the union people say and the fire commissioners
because they're pushing in one direction, but I'm hearing a lot from the
people outside of that group.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'd like to hear more of your thought
of that, because I work close with the Greater Naples Fire and Rescue,
so that is really news to me that there's --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Really?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Can you give us some details?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, sure. I would be happy to, not
only that, I could give you names, too, but I wouldn't do that on the
record right now. But there are -- there's a lot of dissention right now
and a lot of concern with the way the money is being spent, the
direction that they're leading in, the feeling -- I wish you could have sat
in the meeting on Wednesday and heard what they all said.
They're very, very concerned that they're not having any voice in
what's going on. And I think there are others around that feel the same
way. And I have to tell you I'm mainly hearing from the East Naples
people, not from the Golden Gate people, to be honest with you.
So I -- that needs to be ironed out. They might get that all ironed
out in the next six months; I don't know that. I think they have to --
with any consolidation, no matter what it is, you always have change.
Change is very difficult to adjust to. Many times it isn't fair to one side
or the other, and they have to work through that so that everybody
comes out a winner and not somebody loses, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have to agree with Commissioner
Page 43
December 9, 2014
Taylor and Commissioner Fiala. I think the general concept, without
getting into the details, is a good one, Commissioner Henning. I just
think it's not ripe.
I think Commissioner Taylor is correct, we just had an election,
we just had one consolidation. We should see how that works. I think
Commissioner Fiala is correct. I've heard there are concerns and
there's, you know, a lack of unanimity and position in East Naples.
So I think you're right; I think both of you are right. I want to
hear from the public speakers. I care very much about what they have
to say about this issue. And there are certainly very good people
you've considered for recommendation, Commissioner Henning. It's
not a reflection on them at all. They're very good people.
But I think we really need to wait, and I think we need to let the
dust settle after this election, get more feedback from the community,
and find out who else might want to sit on this committee, if this
committee is constituted, and what the exact objective of that
committee will be.
So I'm not going to make a motion. I'm going to wait to hear the
public speakers, but then I more likely than not will make a motion to
support what Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Taylor have just
proposed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, first of all, we need to vote on
the motion that's on the floor and seconded.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's the motion that's on the
floor?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion is to approve this item,
approve the resolution.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, okay. And you seconded?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So, I guess, call the question.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, we're going to hear --
Page 44
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, sorry. Forgive me, forgive me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're going to hear from the public.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Yeah, my mistake. We're
going to hear from the public.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Because you said you wanted to hear
from the public before making --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, I do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- up your mind.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep, yep, I do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now you changed that now.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I did, I did. And I now changed
back.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So let's -- Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I changed, I'm changing back,
and I'm changing back. But, yeah. No, I do apologize. I forgot that
you had made a motion with the discussion that we had.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I want to wait till after the public
speakers, Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
How many speakers?
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, we have three registered public
speakers for this item. Your first speaker is Bonnie Keen. She'll be
followed by Paul Anderson.
MS. KEEN: Thank you. I've been here before. And I would like
to commend Commissioner Hiller on her statement about the straw
ballot. If you put on a ballot that this is going to enhance and improve
costs, everybody's going to vote for it -- they don't really understand
sometimes what they're voting for -- because everybody wants to do
better for Collier County.
Right now our fire department -- I'm a Immokalee Fire Control
Page 45
December 9, 2014
District commissioner, so I'm sorry I didn't say that first. And our fire
control -- our fire district has several people that are trained in EMS.
They -- they aren't allowed to use it because they have to do the -- wait
for the ambulance to get there. Also, Immokalee Fire Control District's
one of the oldest in the county simply because we had to meet our
needs.
The coastal areas and the inner lands in Florida are not the same.
We're a widespread district, and we also have a lot farming and a lot of
people in Immokalee to do that. And I feel we're better met with local
control.
Our control was taken away from us with the Sheriffs
Department with 911 . I personally -- I, by the way, worked for Barron
Collier for 38 years, and I personally called EMS and gave them
specific directions to where to go to a grove outside of town. An hour
later, another grove that was 15 miles away called me and said, EMS is
here. What are they here for? It was a snake bite. Fortunately, it
wasn't a poisonous snake, or the guy would have died.
And as far as consolidation, we're consolidated with the fire code
office. And I don't have to say any more about that, I don't think so
anyway. It's pretty much a mess.
County control has not really been good for Immokalee and Ave
Maria. We do serve Ave Maria, and we're blessed to be able to serve
Ave Maria, and Ave Maria has attended -- some of the people have
attended our meetings, and they're very -- you know, they've gotten to
know Immokalee better, so they're not against Immokalee.
The Airport Advisory Board was taken away from the advisory
board, and they didn't listen to any of the board's recommendations,
and who's running the airport now?
And I've been in Immokalee, except for nine months, since I was
four years old. I grew up in Immokalee. I walked the streets of
Immokalee day and night. We never had any problems. Per capita
Page 46
December 9, 2014
crime's worse in Naples and Fort Myers and Lehigh than it is in
Immokalee. We have a really bad reputation, and I would like to thank
Naples Daily News for that, because if something happens bad in
Immokalee, it's on the front page. If something happens good in
Immokalee, you have to find it in there. If it happened in Collier
County, more than likely it happened in Naples.
So, I mean -- make sure I haven't forgotten anything. I think
that's it. I'd like for you to please, each one of you, vote against the
group to do a survey on the codes -- on trying to get Immokalee Fire
Department together with everybody else. We're different from
everybody else.
Everglades and Ochopee are probably closer to us, but Everglades
is still on the waterway, so we're different. And we just need to -- we
have different needs, and we'd like to be able to still control our own
fire district.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. KEEN: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Paul Anderson. He'll be
followed by Mayor Hamilton.
MR. ANDERSON: Hi. My name is Paul Anderson. I'm the fire
chief with the Immokalee Fire Control District.
I've read through the documentation, the recommendation from
Commissioner Henning. I have a few questions as well as some
comments.
The first one is the makeup of the committee concerns me greatly.
It appears to me that it's lopsided on one side. It appears that there will
be a majority of committee members that are pro consolidation. I don't
know if it was set up intentionally that way or not, but that's an
appearance.
The -- I agree with, I believe it was, Commissioner Fiala and Ms.
Taylor who mentioned no management or administration on the
Page 47
December 9, 2014
committee. The Board of Commissioners of each fire district hire a
fire chief to manage that district. There's a reason they hire the fire
chief and not simply pay the union to run the fire department.
The board -- the committee makeup mentions union
representation but not fire district management. From my experience,
firemen will freely tell you what they want and what they think things
should be. There's clearly -- in management, there's clearly a
difference between what may be nice to have and what you want and
what you really need. What you want may not necessarily be what you
actually need. It's vitally important to have a management and
administration component in the committee.
One of the other questions is, it's really not clear on the union
representation if that's one union representative representing all of the
locals or an individual union representative from each different local.
Again, the urbanized area of Collier County will easily outvote
Immokalee and the outlying areas to have their representative on the
committee.
The committee makeup includes fire commissioners. Again, is
that a commissioner from each district, or is that one commissioner
selected by the majority of all the commissioners of all the districts
which, again, will result in someone from the Naples area or the coast
being on the committee without any representation from the outlying
districts.
A couple of the comments. I don't believe there's really a need
for ad hoc committee to look at this. The districts that were interested
in merging and the Board of Commissioners that thought it was in the
best interest of their districts to merge have already done so.
The other districts had an opportunity to join with them in the
consolidations that already took place, and they chose not to. They
chose not to for a reason, and most of them valid reasons. So, in fact,
the residents of one fire district voted against consolidation and in
Page 48
December 9, 2014
favor of maintaining their own separate fire department.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Chief, your time is up. Do you want
me to try to answer your questions followed by your statements or not?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. First and foremost, there's not
going to be a consolidation of any department that does not want to.
That's designed by law. Any special district has to be supported by the
fire district, the fire commissioners.
MR. ANDERSON: And it takes an act of the state legislature.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And it takes an act of state legislature,
yes, okay. That's number one.
A representative by the fire districts would be appointed by the
fire districts, okay. The reason for not having an administration
representative -- however, all these meetings are open to the public and
welcome public comment.
The reason for it is I know that our staff does not have any
available time to do their -- they have to do their day-to-day business.
And, again, anybody's there to -- welcome to comment on that. And
any fire district can choose or not choose to participate.
Does that answer your questions?
MR. ANDERSON: Well, not exactly.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What questions that I did not answer?
MR. ANDERSON: We already have a Collier County Fire
Chiefs Association that work well together.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's a statement. What questions
did I not answer?
MR. ANDERSON: How many fire district commissioners will
be on the committee?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: One from each consolidated district.
In other words, Greater Naples, the North Naples region. I forget, I
apologize, what the name of that is. Immokalee, if they want to
Page 49
December 9, 2014
participate. Okay?
MR. ANDERSON: Okay. So there will be one commissioner
from each fire district?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. ANDERSON: And what about union representation? One
union representative from each separate local?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, of their choosing.
MR. ANDERSON: What do you mean "of their choosing"?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. That union will choose to send
a single representative -- representation or not if they choose not to
participate.
MR. ANDERSON: Okay. So there will be a seat for a union
representative from Immokalee's local?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: If they choose to and if this board
passes this motion. Okay?
MR. ANDERSON: All right. I would just urge the
commissioners to vote against this proposal. I believe it's not needed.
My commissioners believe it's not needed. We already have
organizations in the county that can look into this without another
committee.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And thank you for your time;
however, again, Immokalee can choose not to participate.
Thank you for your time.
Next speaker?
MR. MILLER: Your last speaker for this item is Mayor
Hamilton.
MAYOR HAMILTON: Good morning. For the record, my
name is Sammy Hamilton, Jr., excuse me; I got a little cold here. But I
am the Mayor of Everglades City. And I did read your resolution.
And I'm speaking for the City of Everglades, all the citizens of
Everglades City, and we want to stay exactly the way we are.
Page 50
December 9, 2014
And I don't know where -- maybe I misunderstood what you said,
Commissioner, Chairman, and -- that the biggest majority of people
wants the change. And then you also, I think -- it didn't say now. I
don't know. But the way I read that, that the biggest -- several people
in Everglades City and a big majority of the people in the community
wanted a change. That is not correct.
All the citizens of Everglades City -- I'm not saying you said that.
I'm just saying all the citizens in Everglades City will stand up in front
of you this morning, today, tomorrow, any other day you want this,
and the board, they do not want a change. We want to stay exactly the
way we are. And I think Immokalee should, too. But that is what I
have to say, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You want me to respond to that?
MAYOR HAMILTON: I would like that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I believe the vote was in the
unincorporated area of Collier County that the vast majority of citizens
wanted to merge one fire district. And that was 2008, Leo? Do you
remember? Ten?
MR. OCHS: I believe it was.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 2010. And since then we've had two
-- well, four fire districts merge into two in the unincorporated area.
MAYOR HAMILTON: I'd just like to say, as the mayor of
Everglades City, Everglades City wants to stay exactly the way it is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And, again --
MAYOR HAMILTON: Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- I'm just asking for --
MAYOR HAMILTON: I would just like to say -- yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll be -- if the board supports the
motion, I'll be asking for participation. If you don't want to participate,
you don't have to.
MAYOR HAMILTON: I'm not saying I won't be there, but the
Page 51
December 9, 2014
thing is, I'm saying Everglades City wants to stay the way it is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MAYOR HAMILTON: And I'm going to say again, we are
going to stay that way.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. And Marco Island might feel
the same way.
MAYOR HAMILTON: Right. They do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And the City of Naples.
MAYOR HAMILTON: But I don't think --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: City of Naples might want to also.
MAYOR HAMILTON: Then also, too, maybe I misunderstood
because I've been very, very busy, one person, but been very busy.
And I didn't have a chance to read the whole thing. I just glanced over
it. But when it had this meeting at the Port of the Isles, my
understanding was that someone said that the biggest majority of the
people of Everglades City wanted the change. They do not want a
change. I want to let the board know that.
And I want to thank the board and all this morning for listening to
me, and I need all the support we can get. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think that was -- you're wanting to
speak on a different item.
MAYOR HAMILTON: I'm just saying, again, Chairman --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MAYOR HAMILTON: -- I might have misunderstood the letter,
the resolution that you put out that I didn't have time to just -- just
glance over it. I didn't get it in time, but I'm just saying, once again,
Everglades City wants to stay like it is, and I'll tell it again, all the
citizens wants the same thing.
Thank you. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Nance?
Page 52
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I do support creating this
committee and extending the conversation at this time for a couple of
different reasons. One of them is I believe it is going to -- it is going to
keep the issue active.
Obviously, the now consolidated independent districts continue to
have independently elected fire commissioners and the administration
of the districts that meet in public forums, and they have, so far, carried
the burden of discussing consolidation in the public. And, of course,
the public has had an opportunity to attend those meeting, albeit I don't
think very many people have attended.
I think it's kind of played its way out in the press and on this dais
as much as it has in the meetings, because I don't think there's really
been a very wide public attendance.
I think this particular committee that Commissioner Henning is
proposing has got utility because it brings others into this discussion
that I don't think have been engaged directly, and that is the unions and
the municipalities. I don't think the city municipalities have been
much engaged in this, and I believe that going forward, if there is to be
any opportunity, that it's certainly time for them to voice their opinions
and become engaged more directly in this conversation. That's why I
do support this committee.
I think there's absolutely no reason why we shouldn't continue to
have a conversation. I don't know how it can be negative. If people
don't want to participate, they certainly are not forced to. But if we're
going to really open the -- open the discussion fully and take a look at
all the opportunities, we have to have everybody engaged. And I don't
see that there's any reason to delay.
I think, actually, the new participants that would be engaged
because of this committee might actually help the newly consolidated
districts and their unions get past whatever bumps there are in the road
by continuing to have open and honest conversations.
Page 53
December 9, 2014
So I certainly welcome the opportunity to have the unions step
forward and discuss this as a union and the municipalities as well, so --
and, you know, that's why I second the motion. I think it's got a lot of
utility, and I don't know what the downside is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. The way I understand it, the
unions actually have been guiding this all along. They've had a major
part in who was reelected or who was elected into their fire
commission districts, and they've been guiding this along. And I'm not
saying that's right or wrong, but they have had a major part in this -- in
the conversations. They haven't been left out.
And if you notice here, they were mentioning mostly union
people that they want to be a part of this committee. Like the five
citizens, for instance, on another level, I don't even know who selects
them. And, you know, whoever selects them, then, they can -- again,
I'm going back to stacking the deck on this. I mean, if you get people
of opposite opinions, that's one thing, but if you get everybody that all
-- is under the same belief, well, you can know the outcome. Why
even bother to meet. I just -- I just think it's a little bit early.
And say, for instance, this does move forward and you get the
committee going now rather than waiting a little bit longer till you can
get everybody to discuss this and come up with a fair composition of
this committee. I don't think it's wrong to have the committee. I think
it will be interesting to see who, though, gets on it.
But if-- say, for instance, the districts, as you mentioned a
number of times, don't want to consolidate, as we've heard here, too,
then, if they're not going to consolidate and you only have same -- the
same consolidations that you already have, then what happens with the
EMS portion of this whole thing?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And we'll have to address that when it
comes about. The same way with the municipalities. That will have to
Page 54
December 9, 2014
be addressed, too.
However, we do have one Sheriffs Department in Collier County,
and they respond to all over, all over the unincorporated Collier
County.
All I'm asking for is to support the resolution. It is -- nothing can
be final. There's no final action until, A, it comes back to the Board of
Commissioners, B, it goes back to the fire -- independent fire districts,
and then possibly go back to the citizens.
So without taking a look at it, you know it's not going to happen.
With taking a look at it and coming back with a product, it may be
supported by the majority of the commissioners, the majority of the
fire districts, and the majority of the citizens. That's all I'm asking is to
spend time, as a county commissioner, communicate and having the
proper people at the table to see if we can have a product to the Board
of Commissioners. That's all I'm asking.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, thank you.
I continue to support Commissioner Taylor and Commissioner
Fiala. Having heard the public speakers, I think their position of not
supporting this today and maybe bringing it back at a later time and
allow the parties to work together and discuss these issues as they're
implemented does make a lot of sense.
So I'd ask you to call the question so we could vote on your
motion, and then if that fails, then I would ask Commissioner Fiala to
make a motion, as she has described, to delay this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Before I call the -- before I ask
for the vote, it is going to take at least a year to have any product. So
it's going to have -- you're going to have time to see how the
consolidated districts are working together, as Commissioner Taylor
has said.
And, you know, I can definitely do other work; however, I think
Page 55
December 9, 2014
this would be the best -- could be the best product that we have done
on this board is to look at a consolidated EMS and fire.
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. You know, I don't really
understand the objection to give this committee a try. What is going to
have to happen in order for us to have further discussions on this? I
mean, what's going to occur? If we just sit back, how are we going to
know when it's ready to continue the conversation?
I think engaging the municipalities and the unions directly --
Commissioner Fiala, I understand, of course the unions have been
involved. They were involved in the campaigns and whatnot. But I
would like to know what the individual union's position is on some of
these consolidations issues as a union, not as supporting a fire
commissioner or candidate. But I'd like to know what each of these
locals is thinking and what their concerns are so that they can be
addressed so that they can have comfort going forward, for example.
And I certainly want to know what the City of Marco and the City
of Naples have to think about it. The City of Everglades, you know,
certainly if they don't want to participate, they certainly don't have to.
But I don't know why we would want to wait on their opinion on this.
This is a critical thing.
I mean, we saw how the cities, the City of Naples and the City of
Marco, were involved in helping us expand the EMS service. I mean,
without the City of Marco and the Marco Island fire down there, we
would have never gotten that improvement to EMS.
So I'm disappointed if people want to delay this because I don't
know what's going to occur that's going to indicate to anybody that it's
time to do it. I do think it's very timely, particularly since no decisions
are going to be made by this committee. I think they're just simply
going to air issues and allow people to talk through them.
So, you know, I don't know -- with no decision-making authority
Page 56
December 9, 2014
without the boards and the independent fire districts, I don't know what
the downside is here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion fails 3-2, Commissioner
Taylor, Commissioner Fiala, and Commissioner Hiller opposed.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And now I would like to
make a motion. And first I would like to say to the audience members,
there are a lot of people out there that have very strong opinions. No
one is -- no one has spoken of them at this time, and I think it's because
they prefer to keep them private. In fact, most of them won't even put
it in writing anymore.
We need to hear from you, too. I mean, I hear from people that
are in my own district, but I haven't heard from any others. You know,
we want this to be fair. We don't want -- I do not want to see this
committee, and I think -- I think Commissioner Henning's goal is a
good goal, but I want to see the composition of the committee
representing all of the people in the district, not just a certain mindset,
and yet at the same time we don't want to see this thing bogged down
so that it never moves forward either.
So I'm going to make a motion to discuss this again in March.
That gives everybody time to talk with one another and get your
opinions to us. Tell us what you think and tell us how you feel this
committee -- because I would like to see it go forward -- how this
committee could be appointed, who could be on this committee to best
Page 57
December 9, 2014
represent everybody's needs so that in the end, if a consolidation would
occur, who would it be led by? How would you fold EMS in?
And I really want to hear from you, but if you keep to yourselves
-- and you all know you have plenty of opinions about it -- we're never
going to make a decision that serves everybody. And if nobody
contacts us and tells us what they think, then we'll just go ahead with
the way it is being proposed.
So I make a motion, as I say, to put this off until March and at
such time bring this idea back again.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor. Is there
a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Nance.
Discussion on the motion? Commissioner Hiller, do you want to
discuss the motion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala, I think the
idea of bringing this back for discussion in March is a good one, but I
think we need input from Commissioner Taylor, because March may
be too soon.
As she properly pointed out, that we need the post-election
accomplishments to settle, so we may need a little more time to allow
things to work themselves out to allow for -- you know, if there are
issues with respect to that, to develop.
The second thing is, is that you said that you want a committee
notwithstanding. If they don't -- if the community comes back and has
a different opinion or doesn't come back, that you would want this to
move forward.
But maybe the community wants to organize themselves. It isn't
Page 58
December 9, 2014
government that has to mandate that a committee be formed to address
this. It very well could be that there is an organization already in place
that could act as a catalyst for a private sector committee to address
this and that committee come forward to government.
My concern down the road, potentially, is that we would have the
same problem as with the PSA, and then we're back in a situation.
What happened was, Commissioner Taylor, is we had put together a
public safety advisory board, and it turned out there were problems
because of communications. These -- because these people had to
work together, but because they sat on the committee and they were
addressing, you know, for example, EMS issues, but then they had to
go into the private sector and work together on EMS issues that they
were dealing with, it all fell apart. And I could see potentially the
same situation here; they'd be talking about, you know, fire and
working together and response and transport, and then they'd have to
go into the community working together on those issues, and it would
create some problem. So, you know, the intention is good, but the
practical application might be very difficult.
So what I would ask, Commissioner Fiala, if you would modify
your motion and maybe --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on, hang on. Before you do
that, you're speaking about law, and you know --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm addressing --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- we have a lawyer to do that, and
your statement about the laws, the Sunshine Law, in my opinion, is not
correct.
So let's ask the county attorney. When we form a committee that
is dealing on this item, which would be maybe a future merge, and
those same committee people work on the street, can they talk about --
what can they talk about? They can talk about all the issues that they
do on the day-to-day, but they can't talk about anything of this nature
Page 59
December 9, 2014
such as a merging; is that correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think that the PSA was problematic. I
think this committee is not.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, yeah. It's because I worked
with the county attorney to set it up, so --
Go ahead, Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we worked with the county
attorney to set up the PSA, and that proved to be a complete failure.
So, you know, I appreciate this initial opinion. I still think there's
concern. Notwithstanding, I want to continue my discussion on
Commissioner Fiala's motion.
Commissioner Fiala, if you would change your motion to suggest
that we delay discussion of this and that we bring it back at a later
time, I could definitely support it, and maybe Commissioner Taylor
and you could have some discussion about what would be reasonable.
But three months does seem short.
MR. HILL: Okay. The only reason I chose that month -- I would
be happy to just -- I would be happy to modify it if it makes sense. I
chose March because I figured the session in Tallahassee will be
finished, some of the agreements that the fire departments have already
got on the books will be approved or disapproved, however that will
work out. It will also give people time to talk with us, to talk with one
another, and come back to us with suggestions about the formation of
this committee, yet it won't be so far into the season that it will be
beyond meeting times. So that's why I chose March.
I figure you can't do this in June because then all of a sudden it's
going to fall apart again. It's going to be too close to when everybody's
taking recesses and vacations and so forth, so --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that would make sense. The
other alternative is do it a little bit later to give the time for the dust to
settle after session because, obviously, that's another set of issues that
Page 60
December 9, 2014
will be coming forward that have to work themself into realty.
So you could do -- like, bring it back, for example, in May or,
alternatively, wait till after the summer and let -- you know, let those
few months after session give the community opportunity to work out
all those legislative issues that might be adopted as well and then
basically bring it back in September and allow the communities to
work together. Like, give them ample time to really work together and
make this happen.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'm very interested in this. It is a
timing issue. And my thought of the time issue is to allow the fire
districts that have merged to -- the rubber's hit the road now. So let's
see if you can work together and what the issues are so that we're a lot
wiser as we go forward. And I respect the issue of the -- of June. And,
again, I'm kind of the rookie on the team here, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, but you're a smart rookie.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So, you know, I thought, well,
why not discuss it again in June but start -- have it geared up when -- in
September or the fall because we are a seasonal community, and those
folks will want to weigh in also. And so that's with the time frame, but
I will bow to both of you on that if you can work it out and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And we can work out a time
right now, because we can't just leave that hanging.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, no.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So we have to make sure that people
haven't left for the summer already. I don't know whenever they leave,
May or June or something like that, or is it best to wait until they come
back and start it up in the fall and maybe we'll have more resolutions
prepared in our minds.
And I hope that we hear from people that are sitting in this
audience. Don't stay -- don't stay to yourselves. Let us know what you
Page 61
December 9, 2014
-- what you need, what can be done, so that we could have a
cooperative and fair composition of a committee to move forward with
this idea. If you keep to yourself, we're not going to be able to serve
you, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's just see. There's audience in --
from the fire service and EMS in the audience who did not speak. So
anybody supportive of creating a committee, would you please rise.
Nobody's supportive of it? Okay. All right. So just because people
stay silent doesn't mean that they're not supportive of everything.
You know, you try to get something -- in my mind, I would try to
get something by 2016 to the voters, potentially. You've got to have
enough time to do that. So do you want to vote on your motion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Would you like to modify that
motion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll modify the time frame so that --
well, let's just say May. I don't know if that will even work anymore.
We should give it a time frame or a drop-dead date --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. Oh, yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- because otherwise it will continue
on and on and on.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that supportive of the second?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you restate what your motion
is, Commissioner Fiala, in total, so that we completely understand
what it is.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I would like to just delay this
action until May, at which time we can then readdress it and talk about
a fair composition to this committee.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or if a committee is needed at all?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, or if it's needed at all. That's
true.
Page 62
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a modification to the motion.
Is the second to the motion in favor of that modification?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm going to withdraw my second
because I think by the time we get into May, then we're going to be
making an excuse that, oh, it's summertime --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- and people leaving. And I can't
support it. We're just going to kick this down the road another year.
We're just going to let the momentum die, and it's an awful shame.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, it's politics at its best. But we're
going to call the motion and vote on it.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 4-1 .
We're going to take a -- how long, Terri? Would you like an extra
break since we totally screwed this break up? We're going to take a
break for 15 minutes and come back.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We're back in session.
The next item we're going to -- well, Commissioner Hiller has an
item.
Item #1 1 C
Page 63
December 9, 2014
RESOLUTION 2014-260: A REVISED INVESTMENT POLICY,
WHICH PROVIDES FOR BEST PRACTICES AS DIRECTED BY
THE BOARD AND RECOMMENDED BY PUBLIC FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT GROUP (PFM), THE COUNTY'S
CONTRACTUAL FINANCIAL ADVISOR (FA), AND DIRECT
THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE AND BRING
BACK AT A FUTURE PUBLIC HEARING AN ORDINANCE
REPEALING ORDINANCE 87-65 — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: You had a time-certain item at 10:45, which was
Item 11 C --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. OCHS: -- on your agenda this morning.
It's a recommendation to approve a resolution adopting a revised
investment policy which provides for best practices as directed by the
board and recommended by Public Financial Management Group, the
county's contractual financial advisor, and secondly, to direct the
county attorney to advertise and bring back to a future public hearing
an ordinance repealing Ordinance 87-65, and Mr. Isackson will begin
the presentation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'll make a motion to accept as
recommended. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: There's a second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Discussion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: On the motion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. The motion is unacceptable
for a number of reasons. I feel this matter needs to be continued.
Some very important provisions that existed in the policy as it stands
Page 64
December 9, 2014
today ahead of this proposed change have been deleted; specifically,
the existing policy provides that the chief financial officer will execute
third-party custodial agreements approved by the Board of County
Commissioners with the banks and depository institutions, you know,
and such agreements will include letters of authority, third-party
custodial agreements.
Then it further changes, where an addition is being made, the
clerk -- and that's one --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What page?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- two -- it's on, I'm referring to
Page 12 of the draft. And then on Page 13 it says, the clerk will
execute and what was -- and this is an addition that was modified to
the negative. It said, the clerk will execute on behalf of the board a
third-party custodial agreement, and it just says, the clerk will execute
a third-party custodial agreement with its banks.
The bottom --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Which -- I'm trying to follow you. I'm
sorry --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Not a problem.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- for interrupting.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's section -- not a problem. It's
Section 12 entitled "third-party custodial agreements."
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's not Page 13 then.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's Page 12 and Page 13. The first
comment I was referring to was on Page 12, the second is Page 13.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. My Page 12 says "benchmark
notes and bonds." Is that where it starts?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I can't speak to this. I'm looking at
the hard copy which -- in what I'm holding before me. Why don't you
just look to the section, look to Section 12, "third-party custodial
agreements."
Page 65
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, I thought you said Page 12.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, it is Page 12 in the hard copy.
It's Section 12 entitled "third-party custodial agreements."
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, I'm sorry to interrupt
you.
MR. ISACKSON: Maybe Packet Page 506. That might help.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That would help, too.
Now, I've -- I'm left very concerned. You know, this relates,
again, to a decision that has to be made by the Board of County
Commissioners. The Board of County Commissioners needs to select
and approve of the agreement as to the depository institution as well as
the third-party custodial institutions.
The clerk is there to oversee what these custodians are doing on
behalf of the board, but the clerk cannot select and simultaneously
oversee who he selects because that clearly creates a conflict.
What is in the existing policy is what should stand, and that is that
the board should select the depository institution, the board should
select the third-party custodial agents, and the board should approve
those agreements that can be executed by the chief financial officer as
approved by us.
And what it really should provide is that we shouldn't be
delegating the execution. We should merely execute what we are
approving, as we do with all other agreements, and then allow the clerk
to oversee, in his function as clerk, that what we have agreed to is
being done appropriately.
Another thing that's of concern -- I mean, I don't want to belabor
this but, you know, we could go through this and have ongoing
discussion. For example, continuing in one of the modifications, it
said, the custodian shall provide the clerk with, and what's deleted is
safekeeping receipts, and it merely says that custodian will provide the
clerk with detailed information on securities held by the custodian.
Page 66
December 9, 2014
You know, I believe the clerk does need those safekeeping receipts and
whatever other information he needs to be able to, you know, audit to
the agreements and ensure that the county's assets are being
appropriately safeguarded in his role as auditor.
So I can't support the motion that you have on the table, and I
think what we ought to do -- and if this motion fails, I suggest that we
continue this and give our staff the opportunity to work with our
consultant to review the changes and consider the structure of this
government, which is a constitutional government, not a charter
government, and ensure that what is being provided in this policy is
with the best interest of the public in mind, which this proposal doesn't
contemplate.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: My understanding is that the county
staff did work with our consultant.
And, Mark, did you work with the county attorney also on this
item?
MR. ISACKSON: There were a number of meetings with the
Clerk's Office, myself; Jeff and I had conversations over the phone on
it, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you want to respond?
MR. ISACKSON: -- if it's the board's desire to --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to these complications?
MR. ISACKSON: -- kick this back, we'll take a look at it again.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What did he say?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Did you want to respond to the
concerns?
MR. ISACKSON: No, I don't want to respond to that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I don't blame you.
Okay. Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh, if I -- that must have been
from before. I didn't press a button.
Page 67
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All in favor of the motion,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 4-1, Commissioner
Hiller opposing.
Next item?
Item #10B
DIRECTING THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE AND
BRING BACK TO THE BOARD AN ORDINANCE CREATING
THE COLLIER COUNTY ANTI-HARASSMENT ORDINANCE,
MAKING IT A MISDEMEANOR TO HARASS A BICYCLIST,
PEDESTRIAN, RUNNER, OR PERSON IN A WHEELCHAIR —
MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED AND BRING BACK
AT FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY, 2015 — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: The next item is Item 10B. It's a recommendation
that the Board of County Commissioners directs the county attorney to
advertise and bring back to the board an ordinance creating the Collier
County Anti-Harassment Ordinance, making it a misdemeanor to
harass a bicyclist, pedestrian, runner, or person in a wheelchair.
This item was brought forward by Commissioner Hiller.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Yes, as you all know, we had a workshop on vulnerable-user
Page 68
December 9, 2014
safety, and one of the things that came out of that workshop -- and it
was unanimously supported by this board -- is that the county attorney
come back with an anti-harassment ordinance to address how the
vulnerable users, such as cyclists, runners, pedestrians, and persons in
wheelchairs, could be protected by such an ordinance.
And so the -- I was asked, or I volunteered and was supported in
that effort to work with the county attorney to bring something back to
the board.
The community is very supportive of this proposed ordinance.
Everybody sees the need. We've had so many accidents against these
users that this type of law gives law enforcement the ability, if they see
the need, to charge someone with a misdemeanor if they harass in this
fashion. This is the first of this kind of ordinance in the State of
Florida, but this type of ordinance does exist beyond our borders.
And Collier County has been setting the trend in working to
strengthen and clarify the laws to protect vulnerable users. As you all
know, you endorsed making it among our top legislative priority --
among the top of our legislative priorities this year.
So I would ask that you approve this first reading and allow this
proposed ordinance to, you know, come back to the board for a second
hearing in January.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do we have any speakers on this
item?
MR. MILLER: I have no registered public speakers, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Commissioner Hiller, I'm
happy that you took the bull by the horns and brought this forward,
because you're right, there have been way too many accidents. And
we're planning more and more bike paths all the time for people to ride
safely on, but until they all get built, there's still a problem with the
safety of the people who ride bikes and exercise that way. So I'm in
Page 69
December 9, 2014
total agreement. And if you make the motion, I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll make the motion to approve the
ordinance as presented and to bring it back for the second reading in
January, in the first meeting in January.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And who's going to enforce this
ordinance?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The Sheriffs Office. And I have
been working with Sheriff Rambosk on this, so he's aware of it and
he's --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do we have -- can I hear from
somebody from the Sheriffs Department about enforcing this
ordinance?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: He'd be sure to come back at the
next meeting if you would like.
COMMANDER RULE: I didn't prepare for.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm sorry. I was interrupted. I'm
sorry.
COMMANDER RULE: Didn't come prepared for any comment.
I'd rather leave that up to the sheriff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Do we have a second -- do we
have a motion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, you have a motion and a
second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I seconded.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And a second, okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 70
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #11A
CONSULTANT'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
REGARDING THE PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO SYSTEM AND
AUTHORIZE STAFF TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH
COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF A P25 DIGITAL RADIO SYSTEM
USING THE STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to Item 11A this
morning. It's a recommendation to accept the consultant's report and
recommendations regarding the public safety radio system and
authorize staff to negotiate an agreement with Communications
International for the implementation of a P25 digital radio system
using the State of Florida contract.
Mr. Daly, your Telecommunications Manager, will begin the
presentation.
MR. DALY: Good morning, Commissioners. John Daly,
Telecommunications Manager in the Information Technology
Department, for the record.
On March 25th, the board directed staff to competitively solicit
the services of a communication engineering firm to evaluate the
public safety radio system and to make recommendations on how we
replace and migrate to a P25, you know, which is a digital standards
Page 71
December 9, 2014
radio system.
Subsequent to that action, on July 8th the board approved a
contract with Federal Engineering. They commenced work almost
immediately after that contract approval, and we had a fairly
exhaustive process of site visits, meetings with the radio systems users,
and review of system documentation.
Federal Engineering report is attached to this agenda item, and
based upon that report, it is the recommendation of staff to proceed
with using of the state contract pricing to begin our P25 migration.
We do have in place that Federal Engineering will submit, also, a
statement of requirements, which will be the technical basis for the
P25 system, and any proposal that is received will be vetted against
that statement of requirements for, you know, compliance with the
technical and operational and financial requirements of the county.
We have a representative of Federal Engineering here who can
either answer your questions, or he can give you a brief presentation on
their process that they used at your discretion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How many speakers do we have?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Four speakers?
MR. MILLER: I'm sorry; three, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So there's four?
The board want a presentation?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's go to public speakers.
MR. MILLER: Your first registered public speaker is Lourdes
Sori. She'll be followed by Burt Saunders.
MS. SORI: Good morning, all. My name is Lourdes Sori. I'm
with Motorola Solutions. And the board, the county manager, and the
clerk received a letter last night from Motorola Solutions stating our
positions and our thoughts and our concerns on the approval of this
item.
Page 72
December 9, 2014
The purpose for my being here today is just to reiterate that we
believe that the best alternative for the county and for the citizens and
the taxpayers of the county in considering a spend of over $11 .7
million is to go through a fully competitive process so that you could
get the best value and the best quality for the citizens and for public
safety.
That is my purpose to be here today, and I urge you to reject this
item. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Burt Saunders. He'll be
followed by Matthew Hinkle.
MR. SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
County Commission. For your record, Burt Saunders with the Gray
Robinson law firm representing Communications International on this
issue.
We concur with the staff report. The county commission
commissioned this report back in July. I think you spent about
$100,000 to get the recommendation. The recommendation is to
migrate your system using the Harris equipment, using the state
contract, which is a competitively bid contract so you're complying
with your ordinances dealing with competitive bidding, and this is the
recommendation of your engineering firm and your staff.
Mr. Matthew Hinkle is here representing Communications
International also, is available for any questions that you may have.
MR. MILLER: Your final registered speaker is Mr. Hinkle, if he
would like to comment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: If there's any questions? Is there any
questions?
MR. HINKLE: No. I'll waive comment. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there any questions for Mr. Hinkle?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Entertain a motion.
Page 73
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have some questions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. Could the representative
from Motorola come forward?
You heard Mr. Saunders say that the county was going to be
relying on the state contract to extend the existing contract. Can you
comment on why that is not appropriate?
MS. SORT: The state contract, for the most part, is a commodities
contract. Systems are custom designs, and so there is a lot of custom
work. It would be the equivalent of quoting a house, maybe, or a
skyscraper more so, something that is big and complex based on
something -- a commodities contract which is oriented to very standard
sort of items. So this is very custom.
All radio systems are custom designs. They take into account the
environment, the terrain, the geography, the space, and a lot of other
custom environmental issues.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So do you believe that this is being
illegal procured by improperly relying on the state contract and should
be competitively let?
MS. SORT: I believe it should be competitively done. I believe --
I know that that is the best practice. I cannot comment on the legal
aspect of it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. John?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did you -- were you able to compare
everything? And what prompted you to select this company over the
other companies?
MR. DALY: Well, it's based on the recommendation of the
consultant, and I'll let him speak for how they came up with their
recommendation and pricing alternatives that are in their report.
Page 74
December 9, 2014
MR. MUNEZ: For the record, my name is David Munez. I'm
Program Manager with Federal Engineering. I'm for the consulting
firm representing Federal Engineering here today.
As part of the process, we looked at your existing system. We
looked at your infrastructure, and we looked at the migration path of
where you need to go.
The vehicle, in terms of which way you procure it, is still going to
end you at the same location, which is a project 25, P25 system.
I would disagree slightly with the Motorola representative. There
are multiple state contracts that are in play here, and the SLERS day
contract is actually not a commodity contract. It is a systems contract.
There are multiple commodity contracts where you could purchase
subscribers. We also reference those within the document itself that
was presented to you from our study.
From a standpoint of migrating or forklift replacing, it's a
question we deliberated internally and from our firm for quite a bit of
time. And what we were looking at is what is the most practical, cost
effective, and least impactful solution in terms of how do you get from
your EDACS solution today -- which is no longer supported by the
vendor, it is obsolete, has served the county well. It's been maintained.
It's been upgraded to get the most value for your county dollars -- to a
P25 standard base system.
The way the county system is designed, it leverages many sites
and components from both the county system and the SLERS system
to gain the most bang for the buck. Specifically there's three sites that
would need to be replaced at cost to the county and would create some
risk, and they are specifically sites that are environmentally in sensitive
areas. They're I-75 east, which is at the rest stop. Has the added
challenge, there's not a lot of space for additional shelter there. There's
the loop road site located over in the Everglades in Big Cypress, and
the Miles City, which is located in Panther Creek.
Page 75
December 9, 2014
So all things being equal, you can end up in the same place with
either of the scenarios, and the report clearly states you can RFP or you
can migrate. But we did consider that impact to the overall project.
And moving forward with an alternate would introduce some potential
risk and some additional dollars to the overall county project, so that's
why we made our recommendation.
But we're prepared to go either way.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Was the Sheriffs Office or the 911
manager involved in this? Because they're going to be the heaviest
users of this.
MR. MUNEZ: Do you want me to handle that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And it has to perform perfectly for
them.
MR. DALY: Yes. And as part of this evaluation process that
Federal Engineering did, there were three stakeholder meetings that all
of the users were invited to, and they participated in that, and they
provided input to Federal Engineering on their needs and their
requirements. That is how -- the statement requirements document that
Federal Engineering is finalizing will also include those needs.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And my last question is, what
system do we have now, and have we ever dealt with that new system?
MR. DALY: Right now we have an EDACS, which is a
propriety trunking system. We have not experienced P25 before, I
mean, but that is -- the digital standard is what radio systems are
moving to. That's how the federal government is structuring grants
and those types of things so, you know, it's all moving to a
digital-based system. I mean, there's limited alternatives out there for
that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And the Sheriffs Office
agrees with your recommendations?
MR. MUNEZ: Yes, ma'am.
Page 76
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes? Okay, fine.
MR. DALY: Commander Rule from the Sheriffs Office, he's the
communications commander.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Move approval, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 4-1, Commissioner
Hiller dissenting.
COMMANDER RULE: Thank you.
MR. DALY: Thank you very much, Commissioners. Appreciate
it.
MR. SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. DALY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, let's see.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, perhaps 11D we could cover before
your lunch break.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MR. OCHS: Is that acceptable?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
Item #11D
Page 77
December 9, 2014
REPLACING THE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS MODEL WITH
AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH FOR ESTIMATING PROJECTS'
FISCAL IMPACTS ON PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES;
AND, PROVIDE DIRECTION TO INITIATE NECESSARY
AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND
THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 11D, sir, is a recommendation to provide direction
to replace the fiscal impact analysis model with an alternative approach
for estimating projects' fiscal impacts and public facilities and services
and provide direction to initiate necessary amendments to the Land
Development Code and the Future Land Use Element of the Growth
Management Plan.
Michele Mosca will present.
MS. MOSCA: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Michele Mosca with your Comprehensive Planning Staff.
Staff is requesting consideration to replace the Fiscal Impact
Analysis Model, or FIAM, required for the fiscal neutrality
determination of public facilities for certain projects located within the
rural land stewardship area as well as the rural fringe mixed use
district.
Presently --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They've got the wrong slide.
MR. OCHS: Oh, sorry.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I was going to say, I thought we
already -- or maybe we will.
MS. MOSCA: Presently the Town of Ave Maria is the only
project that's located within the rural land stewardship area that has
been required to utilize the FIAM for the purpose of a fiscal neutrality
demonstration.
Page 78
December 9, 2014
Generally the FIAM has not been well received by the board.
Questions regarding the validity of the model were raised at the time of
the project adoption as well as the five-year review and then recently
with the plan amendment or an amendment, I'm sorry, to the PUD.
Staff is asking for board direction today to amend the Land
Development Code and Growth Management Plan to replace the
FIAM requirement with a requirement that an applicant, when
necessary, will enter into a developer contribution agreement to
address their fiscal impacts.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think this is absolutely
necessary, considering the FIAM that was represented by the
development in the RLSA.
I'm going to make a motion to approve --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- and thank you for bringing it
forward.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I will second your motion, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Nance.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Page 79
December 9, 2014
What else do you want to go to, Leo?
Item #11E
RESOLUTION 2014-261 : A SPECIAL TREATMENT
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR IMPACTS WITHIN
THE ST OVERLAY AREA CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION OF A
42-SLIP DOCKING FACILITY ON PRIVATE SUBMERGED
LANDS AND ADJACENT UPLAND DEVELOPMENT ON
PROPERTY OWNED BY STANDARD PACIFIC OF FLORIDA
WITH A ZONING DESIGNATION OF RMF-6(3) AND A
SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 11
AND 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA [PETITION ST-PL20140000896]
(COMPANION TO PETITION ADA-PL20140001454; ST-
PL20140000896 SHALL BE HEARD AFTER ADA-
PL20140001454) — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: 11E, sir. This item does require that ex parte
disclosure be provided by commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Tell me why you don't want to do
11B.
MR. OCHS: Well, I just thought it might take more time and run
into your lunch break, but if you don't mind, we don't mind, sir. I'm
just trying to be considerate.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that's true. We've just got a lot
of people here.
MR. OCHS: Well, we can do it, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Nope, you're right. You're right. So
we're going to do 11E, you said?
MR. OCHS: 11E, yes, sir.
Page 80
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. OCHS: This is a recommendation to approve a special
treatment development permit for the upland portion of the Haldeman
Landings project, and Summer Araque will present.
The board had received the revised resolution here based on the
withdrawal of the petitioner's application under the public hearing
section of your agenda.
Summer?
MS. ARAQUE: Hi. Summer Araque, Environmental Planning,
Growth Management Division, for the record.
And I'll actually let the consultant, Tim Hall, who I'm sure you all
know, present on this, and then I'm available for any questions. Do
you have any questions before you get started?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. We'll -- you're absolutely right.
We need to give ex parte communication on this one; is that correct?
Do we need to swear in participants?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. Raise your right hand if
you're wishing to participate in this item, to be sworn in by the court
reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ex parte communication by board
members on this item. I know we've had several of them.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I do have. I have had meetings,
correspondence, emails, and phone calls, I met with staff, I had a site
visit, I've received emails, met with constituents, met with Rich
Yovanovich and Tim Hall, spoken again with staff and CCPC
members.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Taylor?
Page 81
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I've spoken to some of the
neighbors, but beyond that there's been no other disclosures for this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: My ex parte communication, I
received voluminous amount of emails on this and letters, took the
county attorney out there for the site visit. No fishing poles or no beer;
is that right, Jeff?
MR. KLATZKOW: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: It wasn't a very successful visit, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, it wasn't. Besides, it was a bad
day for all of it.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Correspondence, emails, and calls,
and I also reviewed the staff report.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. I've reviewed the staff report,
I've had multiple emails, letters, calls and correspondence, I've met
with Mr. Yovanovich from the petitioner, and I've had meetings with
staff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Hall? What's your -- what are
you petitioning the board for?
MR. HALL: Commissioners, we're asking today for permission
to develop a small sliver of a special treatment overlay in conjunction
with the upland development associated with Haldeman Landing
project.
I'm here representing Standard Pacific of Florida. And the -- as
you're aware, most of, I think, the email correspondence you've
probably received was in relationship to a boat dock extension
application that was associated with this. That request has been
withdrawn.
What we're here today to talk about is only the small sliver of the
ST overlay that's associated with the upland development.
Page 82
December 9, 2014
MR. KLATZKOW: Tim, could you put that on the monitor,
please, since it's not in the official backup.
MR. HALL: Yeah. I was -- for just clarity sake, the project is
located on Haldeman Creek. It's approximately 8- or 900 feet from
Bayshore Drive. It's a long, narrow property.
The upland development is going to be multifamily residential
units. The area that we're -- the area that we're talking about is this
very small piece. It's about 4-and-a-half to 5 feet wide at one end, and
it goes down then to a point at the other. Overall, it's about 1,417
square feet.
I brought a couple of other exhibits to show you back in the '90s
the shoreline that we're talking about was actually created, was scraped
back. There was a mangrove shelf that was constructed, so what has
grown up there now is mostly -- the area that's proposed to be impacted
with this request is Brazilian pepper, Australian pine, other stuff that
has been -- has grown up in association with that shelf that was created
in the last 20 years or so.
The reason that we need the BDE or -- sorry. The reason that we
need this ST is the back slopes associated with the upland development
to tie into those slopes that were created do extend slightly into the ST
overlay by that square footage.
And I think that's about all I have. If you guys have any questions
associated with it, I'll try to keep it short.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions? Commissioner Nance, did
you have a question?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, I just -- it's my understanding
now that the revision, the revised resolution is what was received from
the county attorney communication and that all references to the dock
extension has been eliminated; is that correct?
MR. HALL: Yes, sir. Should the developer come back at a later
time with another dock request, then we'd have to go through the ST
Page 83
December 9, 2014
process again.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: It would be independently
considered?
MR. HALL: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Very good. I will move approval,
in that case.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Nance,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
Do you have anything else to add, Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I was just going to make a
motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is this a public hearing?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh. So I close the public hearing.
Now I recognize Commissioner Nance's motion and Commissioner
Fiala's motion (sic).
Discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
MR. HALL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Page 84
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Chairman Henning?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I received an email this morning
from some of the neighbors about what appears to be the destruction of
the mangroves that were quite beautiful, at least when I saw them
maybe two weeks ago. I have an image of this, and I don't know quite
how to put this forward, but it needs to be addressed, and it's exactly
the place where the docks were proposed to be built.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that's something, if you want to
make a code enforcement complaint, staff will go out there and take a
look at it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I guess that's what we need to do.
I just wanted -- I mean, it's pretty dramatic.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to see it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: How do we do that? I've seen
you do this before.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, you want us --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, you want to see it on your phone?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Send it to --just email it to Leo,
and then Leo will get it on the overhead.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. That's what I'll do. All
right. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Tim?
MR. HALL: I missed what -- I missed the first part of the
discussion. I wasn't sure what --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, it's alleged that the mangroves
are being destroyed where the docks were proposed.
MR. HALL: I'll have to go out and take a look. I'm not aware of
any of that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We'll send somebody out there.
Page 85
December 9, 2014
MR. HALL: There is clearing going on, on the site, I do know
that, in association with the upland development, but I'm not aware of
-- and there were mangrove impacts associated with that outside of--
or wetland impacts outside of the ST area that have been permitted and
were part of the SDP approval.
So I'll have to go out and check to see. If there are mangroves
being disturbed where the docks were proposed, then we'll have to do
something about that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They're already clearing that before
we've even voted, huh?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Here we go.
MR. HALL: They're clearing some of the other upland portions
that have already been approved. The ST was for just that little area
that we discussed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And there's some emotions out there
about this project anyways, so --
MR. HALL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Is there anyone from code
enforcement here that could address --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a code enforcement officer in
the house?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We'll get started on it right away.
We'll send somebody out today.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I just have a question. There was
some confusion by some of the neighbors because I believe the
property in question was purchased by -- or negotiated by one entity,
and then about a year ago it moved to the current owner; is that
correct?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I don't know that, but it would be
irrelevant for us, ma'am. We would go out and just make sure that the
Page 86
December 9, 2014
mangroves weren't disturbed.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And if it's accurate, this same
developer caused code enforcement to sit there for 12 hours when they
refused to stop construction on the site they didn't have a permit for.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's the same one?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I don't know if it's the same developer,
ma'am. I will find out for you.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. All right.
Mr. Ochs, did you get the email yet?
MR. OCHS: Not yet, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Well --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. OCHS: As soon as I get it, I'll --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that's a separate issue --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- pertaining to the item on the
agenda. So we're going to try to stay with the agenda. But we heard
your comments, and --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- county staff is taking action.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, would you like to do 11F?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What is 11F? Yes.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
Item #11F
ACCEPT THE STAFF INTERPRETATION OF LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) SECTION 5.05.05.B.
REGARDING THE MANNER IN WHICH THE DISTANCE
BETWEEN AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATIONS ARE
Page 87
December 9, 2014
DETERMINED. (THIS ITEM IS A COMPANION TO ITEM #8A
PETITION ASW-PL20140000797) - MOTION TO APPROVE
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: This is a recommendation to accept the staff
interpretation of the Land Development Code section regarding the
manner in which the distance between automobile service stations are
determined. Mr. Bosi present.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, it's in our -- is there any
questions?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I would like to move approval.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Nance to
approve staffs interpretation. Is there a second?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second it for discussion.
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm not seconding it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, I did.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, you seconded. Sorry, forgive
me.
I would very much like to hear from Commissioners Fiala and
Taylor because this involves, in Commissioner Fiala's instance, a
concern that she has expressed a great deal of apprehension about, and
Commissioner Taylor because it is in her district. So I'm going to
defer to them as to how they would like to handle this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's the interpretation --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to see whether or not
-- I'm not interested in your comment, Commissioner Henning. I am
here to hear what -- my request is to hear what Commissioner Taylor
and Commissioner Fiala have to say on this -- that was my request --
not your interpretation of staffs interpretation.
Page 88
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thank you for the interruption.
Here is the issue. It's a staffs interpretation of the Land Development
Code; is that correct?
MR. BOSI: It's the -- correct, it's a clarification for how the
policy's implemented.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. So if-- I think Commissioner
Hiller's question is, do you differ from staffs interpretation;
Commissioner Fiala? Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know what, I want to hear your
interpretation.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Zoning Planning Director.
The way that staff has interpreted how the distance separation for
automobile service stations is to be applied is property line to property
line. That is the most conservative application meaning that results in
the greatest distance between the two facilities.
If you would do a fuel pump to fuel pump, you would have an
ability to have gas stations closer than the 500 feet. So the 500 feet
from property line to property line is the most conservative, the most
restrictive measurement between the two properties, and that's how
staff has applied it in the past when we've had requests for the waiver
before us in petition form and how -- the intended application for the
RaceTrac that currently was on Palm Street.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And my question with that is -- and I
agree with you. I think that that's the way it should be done, but how
do you know where the property line is compared to the other property
line? I mean, where do you measure on that? Is it the closest point?
MR. BOSI: Closest point.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, the closest point.
MR. BOSI: The nearest point.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, okay, good. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. I agree with it. In fact, I
Page 89
December 9, 2014
asked for this to be brought forward, and I totally concur.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anybody else?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So I make a motion to
approve.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have. I have. There's one that's
already made.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I third.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have one more issue that I would
like to raise.
Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts on that.
The other question I have is can you legally, County Attorney,
provide for -- and I understand this has been on the books for quite
some time, but I'd like your legal opinion, and not generally, that, you
know, we, through zoning, have the ability to, you know, restrict uses,
because in this particular instance, we are restricting use of a specific
industry. We are basically saying that two gas stations can't be within
500 feet of each other or, you know, what -- I don't -- I'm sort of
generally paraphrasing.
Can you legally do that as it relates to a specific industry? Can
you have legislation that limits in that fashion?
MR. KLATZKOW: And we put down the legislative history, at
least in part, in the backup, all right, and there was a reason for that.
And based on that legislative history and the rationale given by staff,
the concerns raised by the commissioners at that time, I believe that
this particular ordinance is legally sufficient.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
Page 90
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
We're going to take an hour break for lunch.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Our birthday boy just walked in. It's
your birthday today, right? Take a bow, Jamie.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The first item is which item?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The first item is --
MR. OCHS: Is 11G, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- is we should say Happy Birthday
to Gail Nance. Her birthday is at the end of this month. Happy
Birthday, Gail Nance.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Gail, your parents missed St.
Patrick's Day, just FYI.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It was the aftermath that was so
sweet.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah, the after party.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: TMI, TMI.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Back to the public's business.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
Item #1 1 G
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE CLAM BAY
NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREA (NRPA)
Page 91
December 9, 2014
MANAGEMENT PLAN (PLAN) AND AUTHORIZE PELICAN
BAY SERVICES DIVISION TO ADMINISTER THE PLAN AND
TO SUBMIT IT AND A 10-YEAR PERMIT APPLICATION TO
REQUIRED FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES - MOTION TO
CONTINUE THE ITEM TO THE JANUARY 13, 2015 BCC
MEETING — APPROVED; MOTION TO ALLOW PBSD TO
APPLY FOR A PERMIT APPLICATION W/FEDERAL AND
STATE AGENCIES — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: 11G is the one o'clock time-certain. It's a
recommendation to approve the Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection
Area Management Plan and authorize Pelican Bay Services Division to
administer the plan and submit it with the 10-year permit application to
the required federal and state agencies.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Dorrill?
MR. DORRILL: Commissioners, good afternoon.
As we approach the 20th anniversary of the Pelican Bay Services
Division, I think there's no better example of environmental
stewardship and land management than that body and community of
people.
Actually, beginning in 1992 when the county received the
Governor's Inaugural Award for growth management, and specifically
the environmental element, it highlighted the County Commission's
efforts in Clam Bay and then, in 1995, when the Board of County
Commissioners designated the Clam Bay ecosystem as the west coast
of Florida's First Unique Natural Resource Protection Area and, again,
in 1997, when the Board of County Commissioners, through the
services division, undertook an initiative and a limited management
plan involving mangrove restoration, and then again most recently,
following a series of events and dredgings over the course of those
same 25 years, to develop and task the services division with the
Page 92
December 9, 2014
responsibility to undertake a comprehensive management plan that was
done successfully over the course of almost a year and a half, and now
the associated application for an amendment to our DEP dredging
permit and a new 10-year permit with the Army Corps of Engineers
which, as you know, is a very difficult and lengthy process that we
would like to begin as soon as, hopefully, your adoption of the
management plan this afternoon.
The management plan was originally submitted to the
commission, believe it or not, in June before your summer recess, and
it has been so widely debated in the technical reviews that when we
were last here in October you sent us back and asked us to work with
the Conservancy to incorporate some additional biological features,
and I can tell you that was successfully done, and your services board
met and unanimously adopted the revised and compromised
agreement, having worked with not only the foundation but the
Conservancy, both of whom are represented here today, in order to
meet your most recent directive to us.
With that, I would imagine that you have quite a few speakers and
perhaps your time could be better spent answering specific questions
or addressing concerns of the public.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes. Thank you very much for the
comments you just made. We have a number of public speakers here
to address this plan today, and among those speakers are
representatives of the advisory board that is directed by ordinance, by
county ordinance, to ensure that the review and transmittal process of
this plan to the board is done appropriately and with board direction.
And at the last board meeting, the board had had the opportunity
to review the plan in this public forum and had made a determination
that the input of Conservancy was required. And it is my
understanding that the PBSD did what the board directed it to do,
Page 93
December 9, 2014
which is to incorporate Conservancy's considerations, which I think are
important and has basically complied with every direction of the board
and all requirements of law.
And, as a consequence, the county manager placed the item
appropriately on the consent agenda, but I think Commissioner
Henning appropriately pulled it to the general agenda to ensure that
there were no final comments to address.
So I would actually like to hear what the public comments are.
This plan has been heavily vetted at many public meetings, and I
believe the chair of the -- Dave, are you the chair of the PBSD at this
time? The chair of the PBSD had informed me -- and I'm going to let
him repeat it himself-- that, if my understanding is correct -- and
please correct me if I'm mistaken, Mr. Trecker. But there had been 28
public meetings, publicly noticed meetings on this management plan
over 18 months since the board gave direction for it to be updated.
So I look forward to hearing the public comment, and I would ask
that this board vote on this plan today.
My big concern is that if we don't get this plan approved and get
that permit in to the regulatory agencies, that we would not be prepared
if there was a need to do work on the pass, and we need to get this
done and move forward.
It is a living document. There will be changes based on
regulatory comment. We will continue to take public input, and it will
just get better and better with time.
So I'd like to have the public comment, and then I will make a
motion to accept.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I guess there was an article in the
Naples Daily News that I understand that there's concerns from the
city, city council on this, and they had a meeting, Commissioner
Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: They will have a meeting next
Page 94
December 9, 2014
week.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: On this?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And they wanted to postpone it until
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- they can have some more
discussion?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So they can have some input and
be represented here, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. And they have weighed in on
this issue in the past with the Seagate residents?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I think that's a reasonable
request, you know, to weigh in on it. I mean, we definitely want to get
it right before submitting it and challenging it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, and also for -- you know,
I'm representing -- it's my district now, and I'm not as up to date, I'll be
-- very frankly, I'm not as up to date as I should be on this, and then
there were several calls before, I think it was yesterday, and it was like,
I'm not prepared to argue one point or another until I hear especially
from the Naples City Council and what they would like to do, their
direction. And it's not always -- it's not always what Seagate wants,
and that was important, too. I mean, it's not -- there's not one engineer
driving this train.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have public speakers?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Henning, can I
speak?
Page 95
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, I'm sorry. I kind of leave your
light on permanently. I didn't know --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I mean --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- you wanted to speak again.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- I think in the interest of
efficiency, which makes a lot of sense, you should, and then you don't
have to stretch and you don't have to worry about staying in shape and
all those good things that follow. So I'm with you; just keep it on.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Now can we go to the public
speakers?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, can I please make my
comment?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I thought you did.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That was the preamble.
But, Commissioner Taylor, I appreciate that the city council
would like to have a meeting, but this has been going on for 18
months, and they have had every opportunity to attend all the public
meetings on this plan, and they were fully aware of what was
happening.
You know, I don't understand what the delay is about. They
could have attended the meeting that PBSD held and voiced their
concerns there and made sure that those were addressed before coming
forward now. They could have attended the 17 or however many
meetings prior to that.
This has been going on, I'm sorry, 28 meetings? Did I get that
right? I'm sorry, 28 meetings. I'm sorry. So this was, like, the 28th
meeting that you had? Yeah. So, you know, there has been so much
opportunity.
I would really ask this board to pass it to allow staff to move
forward with this matter. If the city council wants to have a meeting
and address this and, you know, bring suggestions forward, they can
Page 96
December 9, 2014
do so. We can also move to modify the plan at the next meeting. But I
think we need to move forward, you know, 28 meetings later.
It is before the board. We need to get this done. And, you know,
continuously delaying it, there will be another reason to delay it next
time. We have to get this plan approved. And so I would ask,
Commissioner Henning, that you think about supporting getting this
approved at this meeting with absolutely a full understanding that if the
City of Naples wants to come forward at the next meeting and suggest
something additional, that they can do so, and any meeting thereafter
as well.
MR. MILLER: We have seven registered public speakers, Mr.
Chairman. Your first speaker is Dave Trecker. He'll be followed by
Susan O'Brien.
MR. TRECKER: I don't have any birthday greetings to add, but
on behalf of the Pelican Bay Services Division, I'd like to wish you all
Happy Holidays.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
MR. TRECKER: I'm current chairman of the Pelican Bay
Services Division. And I don't want to repeat too many of the points
Commissioner Hiller made. In fact, we have been at this for quite a
while.
We have drawn input from 16 different stakeholder groups,
including surrounding communities, among those Seagate. We
received a written statement from them in July listing a number of
changes that they would like made to the plan. We took those
seriously, incorporated many, not all, but many of the changes that
they had asked for.
We were also responsive to the experts that were brought in, and
this is really very important in putting a plan like this together. We
had coastal engineers. We had biologists of all stripes and
Page 97
December 9, 2014
representatives who are individual stakeholders, many, many, many of
those.
As Commissioner Hiller said, the process up to this point, has
taken 18 months, 28 publicly noticed meetings, importantly, including
a number of very well publicized workshops. So everyone has really
had ample opportunity to weigh in on this.
The earlier version of the plan presented to the County
Commissioners was remanded to us with a couple instructions. One,
to be sure that the language tied it into subsequent dredging permit
applications. We've done that. We've made those changes. And the
other, to take into account concerns by the Conservancy, and the
Conservancy actually helped us rewrite those sections to be sure that
their wishes were met there.
These included beefing up the section on freshwater input and
ensuring that environmental concerns were taken into account in a
dredging criteria. I think we've gone the extra mile on this.
There are provisions to modify the plan. It's a living document.
It can be changed and will undoubtedly be changed, and I urge you to
approve the plan today. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Susan O'Brien. She'll be
followed by Kathy Worley.
MS. O'BRIEN: Good afternoon. Susan O'Brien. I'm chair of the
Clam Bay Committee.
And we really appreciate the opportunity to work on the plan.
And, as indicated, we've been at it for 18 months, 28 publicly noticed
meetings. And among those that were invited by personal letter to
participate in the process 18 months ago were both Dr. Buser and the
City of Naples, each of them receiving a personalized invitation.
And we did work with those who came forward and wanted to
work with us. Now, unfortunately, we didn't hear from Dr. Buser until
July 2nd, which was the afternoon -- that afternoon I was at the PBSD
Page 98
December 9, 2014
board meeting at which we approved the management plan, the first
draft of the management plan. I got home that afternoon, and we had
an email from Dr. Buser concerned about some of the elements of the
plan.
So he responded after we had approved it, you know, knowing
that he had been invited to participate in the process.
And so we did. We then, on December 1st, we just sent a letter to
the Naples City Council members informing them what we had
changed in the management plan, the latest draft, because of Dr.
Buser's concerns. There were five specific things that he had talked
about. We've addressed each and every one of them.
I spoke at the last city council meeting and just indicated to the
council members that we continue to be interested in what they think
and what Dr. Buser thinks, and we want to continue to dialogue with
them.
So we would hope to continue to hear from the city if they have
concerns, and we will continue to address them.
As Commissioner Hiller says, it's a living document. Should it
need to be amended, we can do that. The board would -- our board
would consider that and recommend that to the commission. So we
want to continue to work with, whether it's Dr. Buser, the City of
Naples, any other stakeholders, but at some point in time we need to
get this plan approved so that we can apply for the dredging permit that
we really need in order to be able to maintain the whole Clam Bay
system at its optimal.
So we would appreciate very much your support this afternoon
for its approval. Thanks.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kathy Worley. She'll be
followed by Mary Bolen.
MS. WORLEY: Hi. Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name
is Kathy Worley, and I'm from the Conservancy of Southwest Florida
Page 99
December 9, 2014
where I'm their Director of Science.
And I've been working in the Clam Bay system since 1994 for
those of you that are new to the board and don't recognize my face.
But I first want to make it clear that although this item includes a
reference to the permit application, my comments today are strictly on
the management plan. Since the permit application just recently
became available, we haven't had a chance to review it yet.
So in regards to the management plan, at the October 14, 2014,
BCC meeting, the commission asked Pelican Bay Services to address
some of the Conservancy's major concerns, in particular, regarding the
freshwater inflows and looking at the ecology of the NRPA in relation
to the hydrology, and they also asked -- you all also asked to tie the
plan to future dredging events.
Now, in complying with your motion, the Pelican Bay Services
Division consultant, who was hired to write the plan, Tim Hall, and a
foundation -- Pelican Bay Foundation representative, Mary Johnson
and myself, met and spent enumerable hours hashing out a
compromise to add a freshwater component to the plan and to
strengthen the language that -- to address some of the ecosystem-wide
concerns.
This compromise enhanced the monitoring program in particular
and ensured that the ecological and hydrological components would, to
some extent, be evaluated together and not looked at in isolation,
which was the problem that -- well, not problem, but it was the issue I
had before. Additionally, some of the language did -- was inserted to
tie the plan to the dredging permit.
What we didn't do was restructure or recheck all of the historical
inclusions or rewrite the plan or streamline it, which some of us
wanted to do, but -- to make it a little less cumbersome, but this wasn't
in your directive, so that's not what we did. What we came up with
was a consensus document. Is that everything the Conservancy would
Page 100
December 9, 2014
like to see? No. Is it everything that Pelican Bay Foundation would
like? No. Or the Services Division? No. It was a compromise. And
we compromised regarding the major issues that we had brought
before you at the last meeting.
What we did include also is language that ensures that the meat of
the plan or the goals and objectives would be evaluated annually so
that changes can be made to the plan. And I hope that during this
annual review would also allow for fixing any, you know, errors or
inaccuracies that might have been overlooked at the time. So there
would be a way to fix anything that --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Comes up.
MS. WORLEY: -- comes up, yeah. Can I finish?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
MS. WORLEY: In conclusion, the 1998 plan should remain as a
reference or a guidance document that would serve and stay
particularly in regard to those issues that are not addressed in the new
management plan. I think most of us would agree that the 1998 plan
was a good restoration plan to build upon and serves as a basis for the
new plan and, thus, you can't really abandon it entirely.
I hope this has helped clarify what we were asked to do, and I
thank you for giving me time to speak on this.
Happy Holidays.
MR. MILLER: Your next registered speaker is Mary Bolen.
She'll be followed by Jim Hoppensteadt.
MS. BOLEN: I'm Mary Bolen. I'm a resident of Pelican Bay.
I'm also a volunteer at the Conservancy.
I have been following this for many months. Actually -- it's
actually gone beyond that. And everyone's had an opportunity to
speak, to hear, and learn about this if they really cared. And it just
can't go on and on and on.
And everyone was contacted to come to these meetings. They
Page 101
December 9, 2014
had the opportunity. Somewhere along the line you have to make a
decision, and I think the time is now.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jim Hoppensteadt. He'll be
followed Bob Naegele.
MR. HOPPENSTEADT: Thank you, Commissioners.
Two years ago I came before this commission and asked this
commission to forestall an action that you took. That action was to
give the exclusive right to advise this commission on matters related to
Clam Bay. The reason I asked for it to be forestalled was because
there was an outstanding permit that still was not in hand. That is the
Army Corps.
This Board of County Commissioners then directed the Pelican
Bay Services Division to go and develop a plan which would support
that permit. It's now been two years. They've taken 18 months with an
exhaustive inclusive process to do exactly what you asked them to do.
What's outstanding here, and to put things in perspective, is a
missing permit. Without that permit, you cannot properly dredge this
pass.
Now, Commissioner Fiala asked me about access, and
specifically recreational access. Without properly dredging this pass,
you aren't going to have recreational access.
The purpose for the dredging is for the health of the estuary. It's
not for boating, it's not for, you know, all these things that people seem
to be fearful of. But the incidental benefit of properly dredging the
pass is a recreational use of that system which, for the last two years,
quite honestly, you have denied the public because you have not
allowed the Pelican Bay Services Division to go get the proper permits
that they need to properly maintain this system.
Time is now of the essence. The longer you forestall this process
by denying this management plan, the longer you do damage to this
system.
Page 102
December 9, 2014
Now, we have looked at this plan; the Foundation has review
rights. We've hired and paid professional experts to look at water
quality, to look at dredging. This is a good, solid plan.
And I will reiterate what other people have said; it is also a living
document. This can be amended. You've amended the past one. So if
something comes up subsequent to this, you can always go back and
ask the services division to look at it, to advise you, and to properly
amend the plan.
To continue to kick this down the road and not start the Army
Corps permit, which could be a 12- to 18-month process, is really not a
good fiduciary position to put this commission in.
I think that at this point the Pelican Bay Foundation would like to
strongly urge the Board of County Commissioners to approve the
management plan and to get on with the process of filing for the Army
Corps permit and get this system back into stability.
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Bob Naegele. He'll
be followed by Marcia Craven.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Jim, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Jim, could I --
MR. MILLER: One moment, Mr. Naegele.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala has a question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Everybody's been making some very
good points. I -- Susan O'Brien, you're a wonderful speaker, and you
did a great job, and Kathy Worley, talking about the compromise. Jim,
you talked about the Army Corps. And I know how long it takes
because it took us 16 years to get an Army Corps permit to do the
LASIP project, Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project.
And so that's also a selling point, and I just wanted to make that
statement. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Naegele.
MR. NAEGELE: Thanks, Mr. Chairman, members of the
Page 103
December 9, 2014
commission, Bob Naegele, Pelican Bay Property Owners president.
We're a voluntary homeowners' association, about 1,800 folks
living in Pelican Bay. And we've followed the process, both of the
Pelican Bay Services Division and the -- overwatched by the
foundation and the good counsel of the Conservancy and others, and
we similarly urge your adoption of this as soon as possible.
Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your final registered speaker on this item is
Marcia Cravens.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What's our rule on handout
information? I forget.
MS. CRAVENS: I think you have to vote.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think we're not supposed to accept.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, no. Hang on. Marcia, would you
stop.
MR. KLATZKOW: I mean, we don't really have a rule with
respect to handouts by public speakers. At the end of the day, it's
pointless since you can't possibly have the time to read this during your
three minutes. I mean, I would suggest to any public speaker, if you
want to do something, get it to the board well in advance.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. I -- this is a voluminous
document.
MS. CRAVENS: Thank you. Marcia --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Maybe we should delay this action
until we can read it.
MS. CRAVENS: Marcia Cravens with the Sierra Club. And,
actually, that's my point. There's a lot of information, a lot of
background material that has not been considered, a lot of concerns
that I have raised with the consultant in particular that mostly has not
been incorporated into the management plan.
There are inaccuracies throughout the management plan. It omits
Page 104
December 9, 2014
any management activity other than monitoring for the primary tidal
creeks that connect the bays to each other and connect them to Clam
Pass. So it really only addresses Clam Pass and the creek going south.
It does not address the network of small interior creeks which are an
important thing that needs to be continued to be monitored as well as
maintained.
It does not address that there are actually three outstanding
permits right now.
There is a DEP permit in Tallahassee for the state authorization to
dredge Clam Pass. There is a DEP permit authorization in Fort Myers
that authorizes continuation of the small network of channels that go
through the mangroves which the state -- that state permit actually
expires in 2015 if it's not continued. And there is an Army Corps of
Engineers permit that is a companion to the state permit for the small
network of flushing channels through the mangroves.
Now, the Florida DEP does require to bifurcate their permits
whereby they require you to have one permit for anything that involves
the coastal inlets and beach quality sand and a separate permit at a
separate office for anything that's interior; however, the Army Corps of
Engineers does not require separate permits. And, as a matter of fact,
they have guidelines that they not have more than one permit for the
same subject location.
And I have repeatedly recommended and been pretty much
ignored -- and I have done a lot of homework on these permits -- that
the Corps permit be modified to, again, include the small -- the
dredging of Clam Pass and dredging of the interior tidal creeks. This
could be accomplished if this body of work that the Pelican Bay
Services Division has done would be incorporated into -- incorporated
into the 1998 plan and not supplant it, because if you approve this
particular 2014 plan and it supersedes the prior 1998 plan, we risk all
the success and improvements that were made under the 1998 plan
Page 105
December 9, 2014
because it will become moot. It will have expired.
And, you know, it's very concerning. It's very concerning that
there's no continuity of eco-restoration maintenance for two of the
other primary works.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. CRAVENS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What's next?
Oh, Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Could I ask a question of Tim
Hall?
Tim, you're the consultant who worked with the community and
the services division on developing the plan that's being presented
today?
MR. HALL: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Marcia raised some issues today,
and I would like you to address them. Could you explain how, when
she raised these issues, you satisfied the concerns she raised so that we,
as a board, can be satisfied?
MR. HALL: Well, with respect to the permitting issues, which I
think are maybe the most concerning for you guys -- you can correct
me if I'm mistaken -- there are two current FDEP permits in place, as
she said; the one for the dredging of the pass, and the one for the
maintenance of the interior flushing channels.
She was not entirely correct when she said that the interior
flushing channel permit expires. When we originally set that up, we set
it up so that the maintenance of those channels could continue, and
then that permit could actually be phased or changed from a
construction permit to an operational permit. And an operational
permit does not expire. It allows you to maintain the operations of
those facilities that were constructed under the original permit.
So the modifications to the FDEP permit will have to be made in
Page 106
December 9, 2014
conjunction with this new application based on the management plan.
And we're aware of that, but we haven't been able to do that until the
board approves the management plan and allows us to go forward.
In terms of the Army Corps permit, again, she's correct in saying
that the Corps does not like to issue multiple permits for the same
project, and part of the Army Corps application will be to take those
hand-dug flushing channels and roll them into this new permit that
we're applying for. That's actually outlined in the application that we
want to move forward with.
So the management plan does talk about monitoring the interior
channels. And if it becomes necessary to do maintenance of those
interior channels, it recognizes that additional permitting may be
required, and then it would be pursued at that time. But it's hard to get
an agency to issue a permit for a "what if' condition.
In regard to the hand-dug flushing channels, we know they have
to be maintained. In regards to the pass, we know that it has to be
maintained. We can put forward an application to do those activities
as they're needed because we have enough documentation to show that
that's a definite, defined activity.
With regards to everything else, all we can do is monitor, and
then if a problem presents itself, then the management plan outlines
how we are to address that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I do. I have one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, for Tim Hall you have a
question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, please.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Yeah, while he's here, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Then we'll go to Commissioner
Taylor.
Page 107
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't know if there's any validity to
this, that's why I'm asking you. Thank you.
I received a note here from David Buser, and it said, in addition,
key language contained in the 1998 plan that stated that the sand
dredged from the -- from the inlet and channel leading to Outer Clam
Bay would be placed on the eroded beach of Clam Pass Park has been
removed from the current PBSD plan.
This would allow the PBSD to continue to use TDC funds to
renourish its own beach north of Clam Pass and will force the county
to spend additional public money to erode -- to eroded re -- it says to
"eroded renourish" the public beach but, you know, you can figure out
what he's saying.
I don't know if there's any validity to that or not, so I need to ask
you.
MR. HALL: I can't address how the funds got split up. Maybe
Neil or somebody else could do that.
With regards to where the sand is being placed, there are
templates to the north and to the south that allow for us to correct for
any erosion and maintain the grading that the engineers have decided is
needed to help maintain the stability of the pass.
The intent originally and always has been that the sand go south
of the pass. Sand has been placed north of the pass. At the last
emergency operation, sand was placed north of the pass because of the
limited template that we had to be able to do the work. We weren't
allowed to fill any wetland. We weren't allowed to put any fill below
the mean high-water line, so we had an area where work had been
done under past permits above mean high-water line in the uplands,
and that's where the sand was put under those emergency conditions.
There were some issues that resulted because of that. With the
higher-than-normal scarp, the sand got back into the pass faster than
we had hoped, and the permit applications that we're moving forward
Page 108
December 9, 2014
with and the engineering plans all are formulated to address those
issues to make sure that that doesn't happen again so that when we
move forward with the permits, we can do it the right way.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So has that -- has that portion been
removed from the -- from the new PBSD plan?
MR. HALL: In terms of, like, the specific language or --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. HALL: -- the specific sentence that he's taking about, the
whole plan has been rewritten from the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, it has been.
MR. HALL: -- from the 1998 version, but the sand placement is
still the down-drift beach. It still goes -- the majority of the sand goes
to the south side except for what's needed to do the proper grading and
so forth.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Renourish the other beach.
MR. HALL: No, not renourishment. And we need to make sure
that it's understood that this dredging is not for any renourishment.
The dredging is done --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not what we're dredging it for, but
would you be using it to renourish?
MR. HALL: It would be reusing it to recontour the slopes to help
support the pass to keep it open for the longest period of time, and it's,
you know, in its as natural condition as possible.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We've been against all of that stuff
before.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. So just help me because,
as I say, I'm kind of new at this. You have an FDEP permit to dredge
the pass.
MR. HALL: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Why hasn't it been dredged?
Page 109
December 9, 2014
MR. HALL: Because we don't have the Army Corps permit, and
we have to have both of them.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. And why haven't you
applied for that?
MR. HALL: Because the -- this board directed that the
management plan be submitted and that they be tied together. So until
this management plan is approved, we can't submit for that permit.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Do you see 35 days as a huge
impediment to getting the Army Corps -- of applying to the Army
Corps of Engineers permit?
MR. HALL: I see it as 35 more days that the pass would be
closed if it does close before we get the approval.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I was -- and I don't know this, but
I was told by staff that this plan had gone through many -- several
iterations, but that the iteration that's before us now came to the county
just four days before it went to print. Is that accurate?
MR. HALL: I'm not sure. The version that you have right now?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. The version that we're going
to pass did not arrive to the county until four days before it went to
print, so let's say -- let's say for the sake of this it would be two weeks
ago Friday because it went to print on the Wednesday.
MR. HALL: Well -- but nothing ever comes to you guys until
before you're ready to hear it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But that's the problem we have
with the city council, because they haven't had a meeting with the final
version to look at it. They haven't had that before -- because if it just
came to the County Commission four working days -- let's say
working days -- before it went to print, which is Wednesday, the
council hasn't had an opportunity to see that final version. I believe
Dr. Buser did, but that's not the city council.
MR. HALL: Well, but city staff has been provided the plans.
Page 110
December 9, 2014
And I agree with you. I mean, I don't know whether city staff has seen
it or not.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, I think if you work for staff,
you figure out early on that if you're going to pass things, you better be
up here and be elected by the people. Other than that, you've got to
give it to the people where the buck stops, which is, you know, the
elected official.
So I think the issue is not that staff didn't see it. I think the issue
is that the city council hasn't had an opportunity to see the very final
version. That's what was communicated to me.
MR. DORRILL: I'll look at Ms. O'Brien. I don't think the final
version has changed since October. There was a public workshop and
a meeting of her committee, and the version has not changed, and it
was distributed at that particular time.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: When did you meet with the
Conservancy, Mr. Dorrill?
MS. O'BRIEN: See, the -- there was a committee meeting on
November the 6th at which we, the committee, approved the changes
recommended by the Conservancy, the work group that involved
Kathy Worley and the Conservancy, and then the plan, the final
version that you have today in front of you, was approved by our board
on November 14th, which meant it was posted on our website several
days before -- probably the week -- well, several days before that.
So those people who participated in the entire process know that
all the latest versions of the documents that we're looking at, whether it
be at our board meetings or our committee meetings, are always posted
on the website. So everyone has ready access to that website.
So the version you have in front of you has been available for
weeks. And I did not hear that from the council when I spoke with
them that last week, that, you know, they hadn't had access to the
management plan. Thank you.
Page 111
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: All right. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one final question, and that is,
about that dredged sand, are we going to continue to put it on the north
side if they have erosion or if they need it on there?
MR. DABEES: For the record, Mohammad Dabees, Humiston &
Moore Engineers.
The plan, the 1998 plan, stated that the material -- or, to my
understanding, that the material be placed on the south, and that was
consistent with the state rules at the time where material dredged from
inlets be placed on the down-drift beaches. And, in general,
down-drift beaches are south of inlets in Southwest Florida or as -- in
general terms.
The state's recent strategic management and rules have been
updated to modify these rules for materials to be placed on adjacent
beaches and not specifically specify south or north because different
inlets and different seasons bring a wave energy from different
directions, so they wanted to leave the management plans open enough
so if chronic erosion occurs due to inlets on one side or the other, the
material will be put on the side that needs the sand most.
Our current plan states that the material will be -- first be placed
to grade the mouth of the pass according to the design template, and
then the first beach disposal area will be the state park -- sorry -- the
county park on the south side, and then there is a template to the north
that will also be in the permit to give us adequate disposal area in case
of-- if there is more fill than what the state park template can hold.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you know what, I agree with
that. I think that they should take dredged material and put it on the
closest adjacent beaches; however, that has been contested at times,
specifically with Hideaway Beach. And I just -- I feel that if we've got
this sand, put it on the north beach or the south beach, but then the
Page 112
December 9, 2014
same consideration should be given to other areas as well, and that's
the point I'm trying to make.
MR. DALY: And that has been the state's position. Everything is
being reviewed by the state. Everything has to be consistent with the
state's rules and strategic management plans. Inlet management plans
and permits are always reviewed and concurred by the state's rules that
looks into regional sand budgets rather than the sand being put in a
specific place.
Plans are not made out of a vacuum. They're made based on
engineering environmental constraints as well as the state and local
rules that exist.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to go ahead and make a
motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'd like to make a motion that we
accept the management plan as presented.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I will second that because of the
answers that I've just received. Your presentation, Mrs. O'Brien, was, if
that's -- let me see. Did I get your name right?
MR. DORRILL: Yes, Susan O'Brien.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay -- was very, very good. I like
the fact that everybody's come to a compromise and you've taken into
consideration the concerns of everyone, that I can see. And I still
worry about the city, but knowing that they can come back and contest
it at some point in time allows me then to move forward, and I like the
idea of the dredge sand being put where it's needed most, and whether
it be private or public beach.
So with that, I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Page 113
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now, here's my concern about -- after
receiving some more knowledge. The city may contest this to the
Corps of Engineers. If they contest it, then we're back at square one.
I think it's more prudent to wait to get that input and then make a
decision. Then we can tell the Corps of Engineers we heard the city's
concerns and here's how we feel. To do it --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I think that's where we were
going this morning, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. To do it now is -- I don't think
it's wise.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Then I'll pull my second.
You've made a good point. That's why I was, anyway, trying to pull it
off this morning and just continue it, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you want to continue it until May
or September or what?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Till January.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh, no. Till January, you know,
they have a meeting next week, next Wednesday.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So do you have a motion?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, there's a motion on the
table.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It fails for a second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- it failed.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So I'd like to make a motion that
we put this on our regular agenda at our next meeting January the 13th,
not on the consent agenda, and that we are -- and that at that time all
the stakeholders will have weighed in, and we go forward.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Discussion on the motion?
Page 114
December 9, 2014
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 4-1.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. Dorrill, before you leave the
podium, we had a brief discussion yesterday, and it has been
communicated to me as the commissioner from District 1 (sic), which
has the City of Naples and also the neighborhood of Seagate in it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're District 4.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Four, excuse me. That's right --
that the meetings with the Pelican Bay Services Division be televised
so it will take that veil of-- that pretend veil or that -- you know, this
image that they're not open to the public. And you responded very
favorably, so I'd like to put that on the record right now and see if we
can't make this happen going forward.
MR. DORRILL: My understanding is that the technology exists
and is capable, and based on my previous comments -- it is not unusual
for us to have 50 members of the community at our meetings, and our
meetings can be quite spirited, as you can appreciate, and highly
inclusive. And I -- you know, I would want to defer to my board, but
they're certainly not hiding from the public up in Pelican Bay. I think
they'd be more than happy to televise their meetings.
I stopped just short of asking the community to come down here
and meet in the board chambers, as is the practice with the TDC and
the Planning Commission, perhaps others, because I think that would
Page 115
December 9, 2014
have a negative impact on the people who want to come to the
meetings and participate, you know, directly, and -- but if we can do
that and broadcast from Pelican Bay, I would think that the current
board that I work for would be very receptive of that.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you very much. That's
wonderful. That's a big --
MR. DORRILL: As we leave today, and since I have been trying
to file a permit application going back to June, at some point -- because
this system is very, very negatively impacted by wave energy and cold
fronts, to the chairman's point, I don't know that we'll ever get to the
point to where no one is going to object or participate in the federal
Army Corps process -- you really need to consider allowing us to file
that application at some point, because the amount of sand that is in
Sections B and C and other scientific factors that we use as indicators
of pass failure are occurring as we speak.
And for us to sit and think that, aside from the framework that the
commissioners created 18 months ago, that we're going to get
complete buy-in, I don't know that we will get complete buy-in from
the diverse boating and environmental and residential and political
communities.
So if we come back in January, I just -- I would ask you, at some
point you need to at least consider letting us file the application in
recognition of the fact that it could take a year to a year and a half to
obtain.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Mr. Chairman, I would like to
make a motion to do that, but before I ask for a second, I'm going to --
I'm going to say that, you know, I support this current extension for
only one reason, and that is, I want to put some resolution to this. I do
not expect, honestly, that these parties are ever going to agree about
Page 116
December 9, 2014
everything in this permit. I do not think that's possible. And I think a
very, very serious effort has been put forth.
But this plan does need to get passed, and I'm going to support it
at the next meeting unless there's something very, very unusual about
what's going on, because we just have to do that. And, in the interim,
I'm going to make a motion that we allow -- if PBSD needs to go
ahead and start on the application, to let them go ahead and do so,
because I don't want to get this thing mucked and mired again in a
winter storm and then have us be in a crisis, which I fear where we're
at.
And I can sense, you know, the feelings on the dais today, and I'm
going to be respectful to Commissioner Taylor, because she is new on
the board, and I am trying to give her the latitude which I think she
deserves because the city is, indeed, a neighbor on this plan. But we
need to move forward on this.
So I'm going to make a motion that we allow PBSD to go ahead
and apply for the permit if they need to go ahead, if there's a second.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
MR. DORRILL: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just a comment, just a comment. Our
staff recommended to separate the issue, the pass, because they knew
this was going to be a political issue.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, they didn't recommend that it
be separated.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm not recommending that it be
separated. I'm rec --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Leo, wasn't it you who recommended
it be separated?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, that was one of our recommendations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, you know, I shouldn't have
even asked you the question. I already knew the answer, but other
Page 117
December 9, 2014
people think differently.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think this is a good idea because
this way, then, it allows them, which is the main focus of their
presentation, to move forward, and at the same time, yet it still shows a
respect for the City of Naples and their concerns, and I think you've
come up with a good conclusion there. Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I'm just trying to provide them with
an outlet so that we don't get ourselves caught in a nightmare. I mean,
maybe this on the 13th is going to sail right through. I'm going to
support it, like I say, unless there is something completely
extraordinary.
I believe that this is going to be -- there are going to be
contentious things about this going forward for the rest of my lifetime,
however the good Lord allows that to be. But that having been said,
this is a very fragile system. It needs to have something done. We
need to have a point of beginning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I just want a point of clarification.
Commissioner Nance, what you're suggesting is to allow PBSD to
start working on that permit application so that when this hopefully
will be approved at the next meeting that they will be able to attach the
work they've done to that permit to --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to the plan to the permit to submit,
finally, to the state?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, I want them to begin to go to
work on this, yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Then I'll support your
motion, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that clear to the second?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, it is.
Page 118
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That this is -- that they will be
submitted jointly.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Carries unanimously.
MR. DORRILL: We're headed to city hall. Thank you, again.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Our last item.
MR. OCHS: I wish.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Our last item?
MR. OCHS: We're getting close, sir. We have one other one
under CRA after that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh.
MR. OCHS: And we have a public hearing under 9B.
Item #11B
DIRECTION ON PROPOSED OPTIONS FOR OPERATIONS
AND MANAGEMENT OF THE COUNTY'S DEPENDENT FIRE
DISTRICTS - MOTION DIRECTING STAFF TO BRING BACK
AN AGREEMENT FOR GREATER NAPLES FIRE AND RESCUE
DISTRICT TO MANAGE THE FIDDLER'S CREEK AREA —
APPROVED; MOTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE AN
Page 119
December 9, 2014
INFORMAL BID FOR SERVICES AND BRING BACK
COMPARABLE PLANS WHILE MAINTAINING CURRENT
STAFF — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: So 11B, Commissioners, is a recommendation to
provide direction on proposed options for operations and management
of the county's dependent fire districts.
Ms. Price, your Administrative Services Administrator, will take
you through those options.
MS. PRICE: Good afternoon. Good afternoon. For the record,
Len Price, Administrative Services Division Administrator.
In September you asked me to come back to you with alternatives
and options for the Isles of Capri Fire District and to include as part of
those options the potential to consolidate all of our fire districts, and
that is what I have done for you.
In doing this, I tried to include all of the stakeholders, including
the advisory boards of both of the fire districts, the citizens, and spoke
to the fire districts themselves.
Your Isles of Capri Fire District Advisory Board has provided
their opinion that they would like to stay exactly as they are, and
they're willing to pay the cost of doing so. Your Ochopee and
Everglades City residents have indicated the same.
The union representatives are all in favor of consolidating the four
fire districts, or at least two of the four fire districts, and I think that --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What four fire districts?
MS. PRICE: Your four fire MSTUs, I'm sorry. I misspoke. That
would be Ochopee, Isles of Capri, District 1, and the Goodland/Horr's
Island.
What I've tried to provide for you is the gamut of options that are
open to you. And I've divided them into, essentially, three categories.
The first would be, you could call it, maintain or take no action, which
Page 120
December 9, 2014
would leave the MSTUs essentially as they are and would require, in
some instances, to increase taxes.
The second series of options would be consolidation of the
county's fire MSTUs, and there's a number of ways in which that could
be done.
Currently your District 1 is partially contracted out to the Greater
Naples Fire District, your Goodland MSTU is entirely contracted out
to City of Marco Island and, of course, we have the two districts.
There is a number of ways that we could consolidate those under a
number of different scenarios.
And the last category of options would include some form of
outsourcing which could be done either through an interlocal
agreement or, if you chose, you could go down the route of an RFP
and put it out in the open market and see if other agencies and/or
companies would want to do that.
I did not give you a whole lot of information on any one of these
because they were so wide and so varied that I wanted you to start to
give me some direction as to how you wanted to take this before I did
that.
There are some considerations I thought you might want to take
into account, things like local institutional knowledge. Everybody in
all of the districts wants to ensure that they have high level of service,
at least as good as what they're getting currently. There's tax rates to
be taken into consideration, job stability for the folks who are working
out there to include their pension benefits, their rank, their seniority, et
cetera.
Obviously, all of these districts need to be reserved for capital and
for replacement for contingencies that come up, and there's
opportunities to share resources.
Fiscal impacts are as wide-ranging as the array of options are.
What I've given you, just for your reference, is where we are today.
Page 121
December 9, 2014
Isles of Capri is at 2, 2 mills; Ochopee is at 4.
Please keep in mind that in the upcoming year we're going to be
also assessing the loan payment that you approved a few years ago for
the building of the Port of the Islands station as well as some breathing
apparatus that we financed, so that will be added on top of the 4 mills
in the Ochopee district.
District 1 is taxed currently at 2 mills, and the Goodland/Horr's
Island MSTU is at 1.2760.
So that's where we are today. Depending on how you want to
make any changes, some of those rates could stay the same. The Isles
of Capri could go as high as 3 mills. Again, there's a wide range of
what you can do, depending on the direction that you tell me that you
want to take.
With that, I can answer some of your questions. I believe that
you've got some public speakers to consider. And at the end of the
day, I am hoping that you will give me some direction, maybe one or
two options that you would like to see me come back to you with more
meat, with timetables, with -- you know, with all of the steps that
would be involved in making those a reality.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have the maps of the different
districts that you're speaking about?
MS. PRICE: I don't have them with me, but I could obtain that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I'm familiar with it, and I think
the board needs to be familiar with it before it considers District 1, and
the reason is, is you have other fire departments that services, actually
contracted, we provide funding for those services to the district.
MS. PRICE: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. And that wasn't shared with
the board.
So what happens with those, you know, agreements and sharing
of the pot for covering District 1?
Page 122
December 9, 2014
MS. PRICE: Actually, in the options that I provided you, we
could either leave that the same as it is today, or we could roll those
back into the county's -- as a consolidated district. We could look at
that. But I did try to provide both options when I did the calculations.
And the calculations that I provided to you in your packet were really
just for demonstration purposes to give you kind of a scope of the
changes that you would see.
I used today's budgets and today's taxable rates. Obviously,
moving into the future, both of those are going to change. But because
it was too difficult to determine how each of them would change, I
thought if we just looked at what things would look like if we
implemented those changes. Given today's set of circumstances, you
could see a magnitude of change that we're talking about.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What page could I find the fiscal
statement if we roll District 1 into the four districts?
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, this was Attachment 1 in your
executive summary. I apologize for the small type, but there's a lot of
data that we're trying to capture here. I'll ask Ms. Price to point out
those areas, Commissioner Henning, that you're referencing.
MS. PRICE: Commissioners, when you look at the consolidated
fire service single rate without parts of District 1 and Goodland, what I
was trying to say there is that would be what we would have to raise as
county funds assuming that we left those two contracts in place.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I got the page. Which item?
Point your finger at it again. That's where it says -- is that --
MS. PRICE: It's your second set of numbers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The second column. The
second set of columns.
MS. PRICE: Yes, the second set of columns. So up here at the
top --
MR. OCHS: Just the third line down. There you go.
Page 123
December 9, 2014
MS. PRICE: District 1 currently at 2 mills, we receive $306,000.
Of that, only 135,500 stays with the county. The rest of it is paid to --
it had been divided between the two districts. And now that they're all
one, it would all go to Greater Naples.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's not that significant of monies.
Have you -- was there any thought or discussions about rolling in the
dependent districts into EMS?
MS. PRICE: Commissioners, we were talking -- at the time I got
my direction, you were talking options for the Isles of Capri Fire
District, and so as part of what I did, I did not include EMS. If that's
your desire, I could certainly go back and look at some of that.
Rolling EMS into the fire districts isn't as black and white as the
fire districts themselves because they don't have a specific taxing
amount, so we'd be looking at their -- at their budgets and how they
would be funded as part of the General Fund, including with their
revenue and et cetera.
So it's not an apples-to-apples type of a comparison and, you
know, for a number of reasons I left that off the table for right now
until you gave me direction otherwise.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Was there any type of
discussion through this process, merging the two dependent districts
into EMS? Did you have any discussions with anybody about that?
MS. PRICE: Fire unions came to visit me, and they expressed
that they would be in favor of doing something like that, but, you
know, beyond that, that was the only conversations that were had.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There was no studies of--
MS. PRICE: Not as of now.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Not as of when we gave the direction
MS. PRICE: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- until present?
Page 124
December 9, 2014
MS. PRICE: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Public speakers?
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. We have seven registered public
speakers. Your first speaker is Phil Brougham. He'll be followed by
Jean Kungle.
MR. BROUGHAM: Chairman Henning, fellow commissioners,
my name is Phil Brougham, and I'm a resident of Fiddler's Creek.
And, as you said, many of you said this morning, anytime you
talk about fire, it's very complex. It's been a long almost three years
since I've been trying to accomplish a goal and objective for 280
property owners in Fiddler's Creek and that is that we wish to be
served on fire and rescue services by our closest fire station which now
belongs to the Greater Naples Fire Rescue District.
We've gone through two informal and one formal election of the
residents in Fiddler's Creek, the property owners in Fiddler's Creek.
We've voted consistently in excess of 90 percent to join the Greater
Naples Fire District.
I'm in support of consolidation. I'm in support of either Option 2
as presented by Len this morning, or this afternoon, or Option 3.
But I also want to make a comment that this issue is more
complex when you talk about the independent fire districts
consolidating; I understand that. You have little to no control over that
except to exhibit some leadership and urge people to get together and
work out their issues.
With respect to the dependent fire districts, it's totally within your
control. And I believe you have an opportunity to set the stage and to
show leadership and to move this ball down the road with some form
of consolidation of these dependent districts. I think there's economies
of scales to be attained.
But having said that, the local bill that is sponsored by Greater
Naples Fire this week was heard by the local delegation. It passed
Page 125
December 9, 2014
unanimously for them to annex the 280 properties in Fiddler's Creek.
That bill certainly will be approved by the legislature. I can't see how
there was any obstacle against that.
However, if we follow that process, the governor will not sign
that bill until July probably. You're well into budgets. Then that bill,
once it's signed, has to be affirmed by the affected parties, the 280
property owners in Fiddler's Creek, at a general election. When is
that? That general election is in November of 2016, well after you've
already approved the budget for Fiscal '16/'17.
So we're -- even though we're following the process, we're faced
with a potential that we would not be formerly joined with Greater
Naples until 2018.
What I'd like to ask you to do today is to consider taking some
interim action, and that is to draft an interlocal agreement with the
Greater Naples Fire District to start providing fire and rescue services
to the 280 properties in Fiddler's Creek. It's inevitable we're going to
join them. We'd rather do it sooner than later. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jean Kungle. She'll be
followed by Ron Gilbert.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I ask a question while Jean is
coming up? Can we do something like that? Can we start the process
now? I don't know if it's Jeff or Leo that answers that.
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, the answer's yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because it seems like what
everybody wants to do.
MR. KLATZKOW: You can do that. I would suggest you do
that by separate executive summary so the board has full information.
But, yes, you can do that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Maybe -- could you get that
in motion for me? Is it you, Jeff, that would put it in motion, or Leo?
MR. OCHS: No, it's me, ma'am. If the board votes to do that,
Page 126
December 9, 2014
that's what we'll do. You need to understand all the implications for
your remaining Isles of Capri district if you do that, because their
boundaries will change and their revenue streams will change as well.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think -- actually, you know, we've
been promising Fiddler's Creek all this time, we've worked with them
closely, and I know that -- I know that Isles of Capri needs the money
but, you know, that isn't the reason that we should not grant them the
same rights as the rest of all of Fiddler's Creek have. Everybody else is
served by the Greater Naples or East Naples Fire Department, and they
all pay one millage rate, and then here's 280 properties that are served
by another that's farther away and pay a higher millage rate, and I don't
think that that's fair at all, and I would like to start that.
I would make that motion to have you put something together and
start the process for me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion on the floor
to direct staff to bring an item back. It would be a management
agreement for Greater Naples Fire and Rescue to manage the
remainder portion of Fiddler's Creek.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's coming back, so there's no actual
decision on this. It's not going to hurt.
MR. KLATZKOW: There's a lot of information you guys need
to digest, so it will be coming back.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Discussion on that particular
motion? Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I can't support the motion. I think
that's just a little tiny interim step that's just going to make things
worse.
I'd like to propose something much broader than that.
Everybody's afraid to talk about it; I'll talk about it. We're nibbling
around like this is some sort of a breakfast sausage or something.
Page 127
December 9, 2014
We're never going to get there unless somebody takes a big bite. So, I
mean, I just -- I understand what Commissioner Fiala wants to do.
And, look, everybody wants to make everybody happy, but we've
got a situation with all these small districts where some people are
paying one-fourth the tax rate as others. People are getting serviced by
the fire station that's close to them that's not even supposed to be
servicing them. This whole thing is insane, and it's a result of
incremental growth of our community over time. It's not anybody's
fault, but we find ourselves -- I think it's a very awkward dilemma. I
think we need to do something a little more sweeping to get -- at least
get the skunk out of the box here and get some legitimate
conversations going on.
I know we didn't get it in the last agenda item, but I'll make
another motion. I can't support that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're going to have a little bit of
discussion on this, so bear with us, please.
So what would your thoughts be, Commissioner Nance, on the
total package, I'm very curious, before I vote on the motion on the
floor?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I would propose that we direct
county staff to engage in discussions with the Greater Naples Fire and
Rescue District to consider the options and the impediments to
providing contract services for all these minor dependent districts.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Just get a discussion going on.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I could support that. Actually,
there was communications from the East Naples --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I mean, I don't even know that
they're willing to do that, but I think we ought to at least start having
some conversations, and that's why, I think -- you know, I don't think
we're ever going to get there unless we start talking about some
Page 128
December 9, 2014
specifics, some specific problems and how we might address them, and
the only way we're going to have it is if we have -- let's get them all on
the table, see if we can sort the deck of cards out.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I have spoken to the district
commissioners and staffing on that, and they're willing to do that.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: And if it can't take place -- you
know, maybe there's some reason why it shouldn't or can't take place.
I don't know. But like I say, unless we start talking about it, we can
apply minor interim improvements to every one of these. I promise
you we can. We could go tweak each one, but then at the end of the
day what have you done? You've still got, you know, all sorts of
overlap, inefficiencies. I would just like to give it a shot.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Henning, would you
tell me what you just were referring to? You have spoken to the
different fire commissions that he's talking about rolling all together; is
that what you're saying, that they're willing to do that?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So Ochopee is willing to do that?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, no, no, East -- Commissioner
Nance stated I don't know if they're willing to do that, otherwise
referring to East Naples, now Greater Naples. And my comeback was,
well, I have spoken to them, and there is a willingness.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean to take in Fiddler's?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, to manage.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, you mean to take in -- oh, okay,
all of the others.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To manage, to manage.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Yeah. What we were trying
to do was -- you know, we knew that this was a positive, and it might
just seem like piecemeal, but at least we were going to get that taken
care of so they didn't have to wait a few more years. We could just get
Page 129
December 9, 2014
that done. It's already been approved by our legislative delegation.
They're going up to Tallahassee with us.
You know, this is all something that's already set and just moving
forward, and we'd like to get that done. And by making this -- you
know, creating this management agreement, I know East Naples would
be happy to do that; they've offered to do it, but they can't do it unless
we approve it, and that's why I was trying to move it forward now.
When we tackle the rest of them, it's going to be a difficult -- it's
going to be a little more difficult because nobody really wants, you
know, to give up their territory, I think, is the best way to put it. But
this one's a slam dunk. I thought we should just move forward with it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Who was first? Commissioner
Hiller? Commissioner Taylor? I forget. I didn't see.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think I was.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So what I'm understanding is --
and just help me with this -- Commissioner Nance, you're on point.
And let's look at the big picture but, meanwhile, we've got a small area
that is concerned about their safety and the efficiency of their service.
And without this motion that I seconded, that won't happen, right?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, let me point out one thing to
you, ma'am. Any community can decide to leave their fire district and
go with another fire district. You know, there are -- there are parts of
the Big Corkscrew Island Fire and Rescue District that are paying
almost 4 mills. They could vote tomorrow to go to North Naples and
pay 1 mill.
So I think by us entertaining all these individual neighborhoods
that are trying to solve their own problem -- I think it's the Board of
County Commissioners' problem to provide equity and to solve these
problems. We can't let these communities be coming up with
solutions. That's what Mr. Brougham's community is doing here.
Page 130
December 9, 2014
They're trying to fix their own solution (sic). They're saying, we're
being overtaxed and our system is inefficient.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. Three-quarter -- no, maybe
nine-tenths of their community is already in the East Naples Fire
District, and for some reason this little piece of it is carved out, and it's
in Isles of Capri, and it's -- and what they're saying is, we're all in one
community, we all come in and out the same gate. What we want to
do is be in the same fire district, which is located right across the street
from them rather than a few miles away.
And so what they want to do is just be the same as the rest of their
community. It's not like they're carving themselves out and becoming
a part of another community.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, what I'm telling you is,
ma'am, there are many other examples that you could have going
forward. If we don't take the bull by the horns and solve some of these
dangling little participles, in my view, we're going to have more
neighborhoods that are going to respond in the same way. They're
going to just reach out, and they're going to say, hey, what's going on?
You know, I'll raise my hand. I'll go in there, and we'll take a straw
vote, and we'll all move in some other district. This is crazy.
Until we can get our head around these small, little irregularities,
which I consider these to be -- and it's not meant to be in a derogatory
manner. It's just developed that way over time. It's parts of a growing
community that have developed in a peculiar way. That's why you get
things like Fiddler's Creek that are awkwardly split.
We can resolve this by taking it as a package only in my view. I
don't think we can go in and incrementally say, okay, we're going to
fix this, we're going to fix this, we're going to fix this.
At the end of the day, you're still not going to know what the
recipe is for the chili because you've got six or seven cooks trying to
make chili.
Page 131
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Can't we do this in tandem? Can't
we do both? Can't we pass two motions here?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, what you could do is -- one of
the recommendations is issue an RFP for management; correct, Len?
MS. PRICE: It is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So that still can be accomplished. So
to answer your question, yes.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Because I think there are two
very important points here. And I think -- you know, I agree with you.
It's almost like spot zoning of fire districts.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, it's exactly what it is, ma'am,
and it's just -- it's awkward to everyone. It is awkward to the citizens.
Believe me, it's mega awkward for the employees of these fire districts.
They're always concerned about what's going on, because they have no
certainty. We need to start moving to stability for everyone concerned;
the citizens to get protection; the employees of these districts, they
deserve some stability.
The only way we're going to do it is if we start taking action in a
little more comprehensive way, in my view. But that's just me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: May I just reply to that? This one's
been going on for about three years now. This new idea which, by the
way, I think is commendable, I don't disagree with it, but it's just
starting, and that takes a while to get through; whereas, this one's at the
end of the process.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to just finish this one off but
then continue on with this next objective and see --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- how this will work to join them all
together. But I don't want to punish them because they started out
years ago.
Page 132
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, ma'am. I'm not minimizing
your points, and I didn't -- you know, if you misunderstood it that way,
please don't take it that way. I'm not. I'm just trying to look, you
know, past it to something that maybe we can get heading down the
road with a little more authority here, so I can --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: You know, if you want to -- if you
want to go in that direction, let's see if we can craft a couple of motions
here and get to everybody's comfort level. What do you think,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you know what, you're always
so even -- level headed anyway, and I understand. That's why I have a
great deal of respect for you. I appreciate that.
I would like to start getting this management agreement moving
forward right now so we can get them moving, but then I think the next
chore is to, indeed, tackle these other things because you're going to --
it's going to be an issue right now. Nobody wants to let go of their --
their areas, I understand that. We all like where we live and where we
serve and where we work, and we don't want to let go, but we can talk
about that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Two issues. The first is, I
look at this schedule, and I have a very hard time understanding the
savings. The numbers don't make a lot of sense to me. Like, for
example -- I mean, just taking one number, I look at -- under options, I
look at Isles of Capri, first line that shows --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We have a motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- current budget at a million three,
and then Isles of Capri as is, and it goes down to the bottom of the
page, and it says 1 .3 with a different millage.
So I just -- I'm trying to understand what -- I just --just
Page 133
December 9, 2014
reconciling all these numbers back and forth is a little unclear to me
where the savings are and how the savings are being derived. And that
leads me to my second concern, and that is if you contract out the
management of these -- and we're talking about four MSTUs -- you're
going to be laying off people.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Len, we're going to address the
motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, no. I --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And this is --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: This is a discussion on the motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This is not --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I have to understand --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This is not about the motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, this is about the motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: This is about the item on the agenda.
So all in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 4-1.
Now, would you answer Commissioner Hiller's question.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So going back to this issue, I'm
having a very hard time reconciling what you are going to be doing
with personnel and where the efficiencies are relative to this schedule
and what exactly is going on here and what the input of the community
is with respect to, you know, some sort of management plan, and also
whether or not -- I'm assuming that you mean that they would fall --
when you're talking about District 1, are you talking about the county?
Page 134
December 9, 2014
MS. PRICE: District 1 is the area that's not covered by any other
fire district. There is no personnel associated with District 1. It is 100
percent contracted out. Some of it is contracted out to ourselves, to
Isles of Capri and to Ochopee, some is contracted out to what was
formerly East Naples and Golden Gate Fire Districts. But there's no
fire department associated with District 1, so there's no personnel with
that district.
Golden --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are we just talking -- so who is the
contract with? I mean, who -- what is District 1? I mean, it's a -- it's a
fiction?
MR. OCHS: No, it's a geographic area primarily south of U.S.
41, and it has a few residences in there.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what is the -- who is the
management contract with?
MR. OCHS: There's a service agreement between the board and
what is now the Greater Naples Fire and Rescue Control District where
they receive a portion of the annual ad valorem receipts to respond to
calls that come out of Fire District 1 .
Conversely, Ochopee and Isles of Capri also respond to calls in
certain areas of District 1. So that $306,000 of revenue annually that
are levied and collected in Fire District 1 are allocated via an interlocal
agreement between Ochopee, Isles of Capri, and the Greater Naples
Fire and Rescue District.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so what's being proposed --
what's this management plan that's being proposed? Who's managing
whom? For what? And what's the impact Lakewood (sic)?
MR. OCHS: Well, as I understand Commissioner Nance's
comments, he -- I heard him suggesting that the county take all four of
their dependent districts and contract, either with a private provider or
one of the existing independent districts, to manage and operate those
Page 135
December 9, 2014
dependent fire districts, if I'm correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I recommended that the staff sit
down with Greater Naples Fire and Rescue --
MR. OCHS: Okay, Greater Naples, okay.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: -- and see what we can do here and
let some professionals get involved with this, because right now we're
taking pots of money, and we're arbitrarily dividing it up and paying
ourselves. It's crazy.
MR. OCHS: Yeah, and that's one of the options.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: But I wanted to drop back, Mr.
Chairman, if I might. I saw you shaking your head after that last
motion and the like. I don't --
MR. OCHS: I'm not -- I wasn't -- I was just trying to --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Figure out what the motion was.
So could we clarify that, Mr. Chair?
MR. OCHS: Is that to carve out the Fiddler's Creek?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Fiddler's Creek, and let the Greater
Naples Fire and Rescue manage that portion of it. They actually do
service, kind of like we do with District 1, is pay them a certain
portion of money to serve.
MR. OCHS: Right. And the question for them will be, can they
service it for one-and-a-half mills, or do they want the two mills that's
currently being assessed at.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. The offer is one-and-a-half
mills, because that's what it's going to get when it's annexed into --
MR. OCHS: Well, I agree, sir; otherwise, it defeats the purpose.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. Is that good enough
clarification?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Everybody agree with that?
Page 136
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: See, they agree with me.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, I saw everybody over there at
the flat desks shaking their head, and that's not a good sign.
MR. OCHS: Well, no. I know you had offered an alternative
motion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's why it's flat, okay?
MR. OCHS: Right.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No. My motion was to enter -- is
to direct staff to sit down with the Greater Naples Fire and Rescue
District and allow them to see if they could come up with a way to
contract manage these.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Rather than we do it; let them do
it, right? And then come back to us with a proposal.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah. We'll sit down with them
and come back with a proposal to see if we can make something that's
managed in a little more organized fashion, because right now we're
just dealing cards around. We've got -- the county is collecting money
and giving part of it to one group and part of it to another group, and
they're funding those groups themselves. So they're getting two checks
from the county. It's like Button, Button, Who's Got the Button. I
don't know how they keep it straight. We've got a whole staff of
people trying to gin these numbers up and make sense out of them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner, that's why I
asked. There's more information. You needed to see the map, and I
think you would understand it; however, it's not available.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, sir. Well, I'm not trying to
belittle. I'm just trying to get all the cards on one table at one time with
a couple of professional groups of people and let them see if they can
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We interrupted Commissioner Hiller's
Page 137
December 9, 2014
questioning. Are you complete, Commissioner Hiller, before we go to
the speakers?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, no. I really think that, you
know, trying to, using Commissioner Nance's term, gin this up sitting
here and making proposals to farm it out and assume that that
somehow is going to achieve savings or that the terms are going to be
acceptable to us or to these communities or even to whoever the
service provider may be just doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
I don't know why we don't have a workshop on this and let these
parties -- not -- and I don't mean just the dependent districts but, you
know, the various districts that may provide the management service,
for example, come to the table and speak, as well as the residents of
those communities as to what they're thinking.
I really think we need a workshop. There are just too many
options and too many unanswered questions, and I think we need input
from these various communities. And Fiddler's Creek is different. I
think, you know, Mr. Brougham has done a very good job organizing
his community, and you've been doing this for a very long time. How
many years?
MR. BROUGHAM: About three years now.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. He's got the patience of a
saint. But I think we need to allow these other communities to come to
the table and these employees to come to the table and the unions and
the various possible management entities to have a workshop to
discuss this. There's just too much here to make a decision on the fly.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Let's go back to public
speakers.
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Jean Kungle. She'll
be followed by Ron Gilbert.
MS. KUNGLE: Good afternoon, Commissioners, and thank you.
A lot of what I wrote down here to say -- and I'm listening to
Page 138
December 9, 2014
everything else. First I have to interrupt my own thing here and say
that to think about a management company or another independent
district to come into Ochopee to manage would absolutely make no
sense whatsoever. We have some of the best management in the entire
county with the Ochopee Fire District.
Between the personnel, the management, the funds that are
available, and the growth that we've gone in the last two years, there's
nobody that's going to manage it better than Chief Allen McLaughlin
is already doing. I mean, we have guys down there that, something
needs painting, they don't bid it out. They go and paint it. They do it.
They don't -- you know, it doesn't fall in line with just, I'm a firefighter,
and that's all I do. We have a lot of good stuff like that.
Now, as far as, like, Goodland and District 1, those two districts
are being managed already, so you really only have Isles of Capri and
you have Ochopee.
So to put all that on East Naples or the Greater Naples right now
seems ludicrous to me. They have a lot on their plate right now, and to
take four other entities into their mix before they know really what
they're doing with the two that they already have, which are a giant
two entities, it just makes no sense whatsoever.
I think it would make a lot more sense to have maybe Allen,
being the person that he is and how much -- how good he does manage
and the guys that are around, him personnel, it would make more sense
for him to try to start managing some of these other dependent
districts, bring them in and make them one dependent so that when the
whole county does merge all of the districts -- which we are not
opposed to that at all.
I would like to see the whole county be merged as one district
with one mill rate. I don't think -- I think what Commissioner Nance
said as far as one's paying this, one's paying that, we're all having the
same services. We all need to pay the same, just like we do with the
Page 139
December 9, 2014
Sheriffs Department. When we call the sheriff, I'm not paying a
four-mill rate to have the sheriff come to my house and someone else
is paying a one-mill rate. That makes no sense. And I don't know that
there's another county in the State of Florida that does things the way
that Collier does.
And I know it was piecemeal, it grew, but now it's time to
consolidate. But I think the right steps have to be taken so that it's
more seamless.
And I would urge the county to look at doing the dependent
districts first and then start getting all of the -- then you'll have, like,
one dependent district, and then you'll be able to keep going forward
with getting all the independent districts and the dependent district all
together as one.
We're already managed very well. We don't need new
management. And I believe that that would cost more money. And
we, right now, pay the highest in the county with mill rate. And we
don't want to pay more. We want to pay less, but we want to keep
what we have and what -- we've worked a long time to come to where
we are today in the Ochopee Fire District, really hard.
And I do thank you for listening.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Thank you. One moment.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I'd like to commend you on
what you just said. What you're saying is what I had in the back of my
mind and why I thought a workshop is of value. It's exactly those kind
of comments and those kind of suggestions that make sense to me.
Your idea of one dependent district within the county until
everything else is worked out, to me, sounds like the logical interim
step. But that's why a workshop is in order.
But I commend you for your comments, and I agree with you.
You do have very good management. And why substitute that
Page 140
December 9, 2014
management with some other management when you've got good
people? And what you just need to do is all work together and have an
internal management team till the overall structure is decided.
So thank you for your remarks, and I think you've really brought
something to light that makes a lot of sense.
MS. KUNGLE: Okay. I didn't read any of this, but --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Commissioner Taylor,
Commissioner Fiala, any comments or questions?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: The return of the chair.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are we done with public comment?
MR. MILLER: No, sir. Your next public speaker is Ron Gilbert.
He'll be followed by Jeri Neuhaus.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: By who?
MR. MILLER: Jeri --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Neuhaus.
MR. MILLER: -- Neuhaus, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good afternoon.
MR. GILBERT: Commissioners, I am a member of the Ochopee
Fire Control District Advisory Board.
I'm not opposed to a bonified study to determine pros and cons of
a merger of any fire district. I am opposed to a politically motivated
merger of any of the fire districts.
Ochopee has the highest millage rate of any fire district in the
county. I would like to remind the commissioners that if it was not for
the Ochopee Fire Control District and a portion of District 1, there
would be no PILT funds. PILT funds are payment in lieu of taxes. It
would certainly help our budget if we could get that PILT money for
the purpose in which it was designed. That would help us balance our
budget. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thanks for coming in.
Page 141
December 9, 2014
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jeri Neuhaus. She'll be
followed by Jorge Lara.
MS. NEUHAUS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Jeri
Neuhaus, a Capri business and property owner and, as you know, have
been actively involved with this issue for several years.
While I and many others who support the idea of consolidation
were disappointed in the outcome of the recent vote, our support for
that consolidation should not be construed as extending to
consolidation with Ochopee.
At the beginning of one of the documents that Len Price has
given you, there's a statement in there that says Ochopee and Capri
share unique service delivery circumstances with the mix of urban,
rural, and light commercial structural protection, unique marine and
coastal requirements, moderate high-rise.
It goes on to say, structures in both districts are older,
wood-frame construction without many of the mitigated opportunities
of newer developments in urban Collier County and Naples. The
attack on these fires must be aggressive and is handled, in some cases,
without the benefit of municipal fire hydrants as a water source. That
is simply not accurate.
A, the overwhelming majority of the structures in our district, in
both Fiddler's Creek, Isles of Capri, and Mainsail Drive are, in fact,
concrete block stucco. We do have some wood-frame structures, but
the majority of our stuff is concrete.
B, our district has the tallest high-rises in all of Southern and
Eastern Collier County. No way similar to Ochopee.
And, C, you'd be really hard-pressed to find anywhere in our
district that isn't served by water and fire hydrants. We've got a pretty
good district. I only bring this to your attention because I don't want
someone unfamiliar with the two separate districts to get the
impression that we're so similar that it would be a no-brainer just to
Page 142
December 9, 2014
lump us together. We're not.
Since the county and numerous fire departments may, based on
today meetings, be considering some sort of consolidation with EMS
down the road and at least two of the commissioners have expressed a
desire to see how the latest two mergers have panned out, I would
respectfully ask that the BCC refrain from making a decision that
would merge two dissimilar, nonadjacent fire departments at this time
and, instead, respect the desires of the Capri Fire Advisory Committee
and several residents that have spoken to you-all to keep our fire
department as it is for the time being and approve the requested
millage rate so that we can hire our own chief who does not answer to
Chief Allen McLaughlin but, instead, answers directly to Bureau of
Emergency Services.
Even the chief of Ochopee agrees with my statement that we need
our own chief He has said it to me, and he has put it in writing.
In closing, consolidation simply for the sake of consolidation is
not in our best interests. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jorge Lara. He'll be
followed by John Rogers.
MR. LARA: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Jorge Lara. I
represent the firefighters at Isle of Capri, Local 4719 representative. I
never thought I'd say this, but I agree with a lot of what Jeri says.
My career started at Ochopee, and I did my first five years there
until I was promoted to lieutenant at Isles of Capri. With that said, I
will tell you this, that labor (sic) has met with all three unions, the
EMS, the Ochopee and us, and the one thing we all agree on is that we
support anything that will maintain the level of service or make it
better, enhance it, and it will preserve jobs. I mean, at the end of the
day, you're dealing with human beings, you're dealing with different
personalities, but we all have to provide.
And I think fragmenting districts at this point isn't going to help
Page 143
December 9, 2014
anybody. It's just going to add to the confusion.
And I hear Mr. Brougham said, oh, is this a done deal? This is
that. Well, that's the same thing they said about Isles of Capri, and
they lost that vote. I mean, it's almost like we're trying to circumvent
the democratic process.
In fragmenting Isles of Capri, we're going to have to raise the
millage rate, if not just give the whole thing over in a manage -- an
agreement to East Naples, which seems like the buzz word right now,
you know, even though there's other players in town that may be able
to do it better because, apparently, they still can't even get their stuff
together, East Naples.
I can't tell you that I've met one East Naples firefighter that tells
you he's happy with what's going on. I mean, they've got their own
turmoil and they're dealing with their own issues, so why give them
more now?
And that's about it. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is John Rogers. He'll be
followed by Paul Anderson.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He's not going to make it back.
John Rogers won't make it.
MR. MILLER: Is Paul Anderson here?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He had to leave.
MR. MILLER: Then that concludes our registered speakers for
this item, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm going to make a motion, and let
me explain the motion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think we already have a motion,
don't we?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Nope.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, we do. We have
Commissioner Nance's.
Page 144
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yeah, we do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Would you repeat your motion.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: My motion is to direct staff to work
together with the Greater Naples Fire and Rescue District to examine
the opportunities and the impediments and the challenges of providing
contract services for all of our dependent districts.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does that include waiving our
purchasing policy?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes, for the sake of discussion,
come back -- and come back to the board with a report on what's
possible.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I was going to second, yeah. Can
we have a little discussion? What does that mean when you said
waiving?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well -- and it might not even -- we
might not even be able to do it under Florida law, but our purchasing
policy is over a certain monetary threshold it needs to go out to bid.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh, okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. What I would like to see is,
what is recommended is do the RFP, which East Naples can
participate; however, I would like for the Ochopee Fire District, since
it has a fire chief that is qualified to manage it, also participate in that
RFP. Then we're not waiving any purchasing policy, and we're not
going to have issues with Florida law, which right now I don't know
because it is -- what's the total pot of money, 1 .2 million? No.
MS. PRICE: Total pot would be close to $3 million.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, close to $3 million we're asking
Page 145
December 9, 2014
to manage. And, Jeff, do you know offhand about the Florida Statutes
and --
MR. KLATZKOW: It's my understanding -- and Commissioner
Nance, correct me if you're (sic) wrong -- is that you're asking the
Greater Naples Fire District to take over these functions in exchange
for, I guess, a certain millage rate that we're not charging?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: All I'm asking staff to do is to sit
down with them and discuss what it would take to do this. I'm not
suggesting that we just turn it over to them without a competitive bid.
I'm asking to engage them.
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think you need to competitively bid
this. If you're asking Greater Naples if you'd like to take over these
functions --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To manage these functions? I think
that's what he's saying. Manage them?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's a contract. You're getting into a
contract to manage --
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, we do interlocal agreements all the
time, sir. We don't take interlocal agreements and bid them out. This
is a local government agency, so I'm not concerned about the
purchasing. Now, whether or not you can get a better deal --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aren't we already doing this now,
to a minor extent?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, we are doing this now to a minor
extent. But if-- to get to what Commissioner Henning's saying, you
may get a better deal somewhere else if you put it out.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'm saying we might get a better
deal with our -- within our own dependent district, Ochopee, that has
the infrastructure to manage it. You have Linda Swisher who we
recognized this morning. You've got a fire chief. That's all I'm saying,
Page 146
December 9, 2014
but --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: A little competition in the short --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You can pick and choose.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I mean, then you're getting a -- then
you're getting a comparable, even a contrasting comparable, because
you do have -- you know, I mean, it's a wide area of management.
And Chief McLaughlin has managed Isles of Capri for quite a while.
That's my thought.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: This is my concern, Commissioner
Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: What we find when we have a huge
county is not that we have fire districts in the east that do not have
great firefighters and good management. What we find is that when
we have them isolated in areas of low density, they always constantly
find themselves in extraordinary circumstances. They have budgetary
issues, they have distance issues, and so on and so forth.
It's only going to be when we combine services, as we have with
EMS, that it allows us to start gaining some efficiency of scale when
the scale's big enough and when we have enough participants that we
can even out the millage, treat our residents fairly and equally,
although everybody understands that people are isolated and in rural
areas are always supplemented by people in the urban areas. This is no
secret.
It's the same way with electric power. It's the same way with
water. That's why we had rural electric in the United States, to be able
to provide people in isolated places with electric power. It's something
they could afford. Sure, they can't pay for it by themselves.
But over and over and over again, what we're asking these
dependent districts to do is do something that they just never will be
Page 147
December 9, 2014
able to do. They won't. We just saw, in consolidation between North
Naples and Big Corkscrew Island, two fire districts that are
extraordinarily different make an effort to consolidate. They also have
two extraordinarily different millage rates. One has a millage rate of 1;
the other has a millage rate of approaching 4.
Collier County cannot continue to do this. We have to be able to
move together to get these people all organized and working in
concert.
The amount of work that we have tomorrow, regardless of how
we're organized, is going to be exactly the same. The jobs that need to
get done are exactly the same.
I know everybody's worried about their jobs, but the work is not
disappearing. There is going to be some administrative efficiencies,
but our operational efficiencies, if we all work together, and the
taxation benefits and equity that's going to provide to our citizens is
going to be extraordinary.
But we have to -- but we have to start letting these conversations
take place, and I don't know any other way to do that than to allow,
with some methodology -- there was an earlier discussion today of
having a committee. There's a -- you know, I'm proposing a situation
here where we sit down and start talking about this. Until we get these
cards on the table, we are not going to be able to accomplish it. We
won't be able to do it a nibble at a time, incrementally, not before sea
level rise takes us back to the ocean. It's going to be forever and ever
and ever.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, no. Now you totally lost me.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay. Well --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's -- anybody else on the motion?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And just -- so, Commissioner
Nance, just to move things along, you wouldn't consider amending
your motion to include Chairman Henning's comments about bringing
Page 148
December 9, 2014
Ochopee into the discussions.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I am open to any way we can get
three votes to start having a conversation on greater issue.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Whatever we've got to do. If
Commissioner -- I will withdraw my motion and let Commissioner
Henning propose an alternative motion if he thinks he's got one that's
better.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I would solicit -- direct staff to solicit
bids including East Naples and Ochopee, any other interest, and waive
the formal committee process, do a comparable and bring it back to the
board.
MS. PRICE: You're looking for an informal competitive process?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Uh-huh.
MS. PRICE: And for further clarity, as far as the scope of work
goes, we want to be able to preserve the jobs of our current
employees?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. That's --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's a given.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Am I speaking out of line?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, you're not. It's just the way it is.
MR. OCHS: Sir, if I may?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MR. OCHS: One further point of clarification on this solicitation.
Is it limited to other independent fire districts that may have an interest
in Collier County, or is it open to all proposers, including private firms
that do this kind of business? I don't know how broadly you want to
cast the net.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, here's my thoughts on this. The
board is always in favor of consolidating, and if we get somebody
Page 149
December 9, 2014
managing on the outside -- besides our fire departments is not
conforming to the board's ongoing policy. And if I'm speaking wrong,
just let me know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I agree with that. I feel that we
want to keep it in-house.
MR. OCHS: Very good. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I don't see how this can be
accomplished. I mean, don't we have unions at these districts -- in
these districts? Wouldn't there have to be some sort of an agreement
with the unions since you're already -- you already have labor
agreements in place?
MS. PRICE: There are a number of ways that we could go about
this and probably a lot more than even come to my mind. But, you
know, contracts can be written and rewritten and changed, et cetera.
We could also -- under a management agreement the managing agency
might be all right starting out with having multiple contracts with the
multiple agencies.
I think -- I believe that what the commissioners are asking me to
do is to bring them options with the obstacles that might come into
play, since some of these things may not be -- you know, they may be
obstacles that we can't overcome, but at least I could then come back
and tell you this is what we can't do, this is what we can do, and here's
maybe another way around it or --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I think that's wonderful.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's issue number one. Issue
number two is under what legal basis are we waiving our procurement
ordinance.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's not a purchase. I mean, it's --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not a contract for services?
MR. KLATZKOW: This is outside the scope of your purchasing.
Page 150
December 9, 2014
We're not going out soliciting for widgets here. We're talking about a
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Management services. So your
personal services are not included under the purchasing ordinance?
MR. KLATZKOW: Ma'am, you could get rid of your MSTUs
tomorrow, for example, all right. You don't have to be in this business,
all right.
What you're doing is, if you want to go with the East Naples as an
interlocal agreement, we do interlocal agreements all the time. If what
we want to do is form something different with Ochopee --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They're not talking about an
interlocal agreement.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- that's fine.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They're talking about putting out
an in -- quote, informal bid waiving our procurement standards for
management services.
MR. KLATZKOW: You're viewing this through the prism of a
purchasing thing. What I think we're trying to do is figure out what's
the best option for the county here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we're not competitively bidding
anything? I mean --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We don't have to.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- the discussion we had was that
we were.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's not a -- this is outside the scope of the
purchasing ordinance. We don't bid for firemen.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm sorry?
MR. KLATZKOW: We don't bid for EMS guys. We just hire
them. I mean, there are certain things you don't bid for.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They're working for the county.
MR. KLATZKOW: Right, but you don't --
Page 151
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They're county employees.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- bid for them. I mean, it's different.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But if we're -- but what we're
proposing here is not an employee. We're not looking to hire an
employee.
MR. KLATZKOW: If what you wanted to --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We're looking to have a contract
with an entity.
MR. KLATZKOW: If what you wanted was a private company
to come in here, okay, and run these things and put out a solicitation
for a private company, yes, you're within the purchasing ordinance.
But that's not what I'm really hearing here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So what we're saying is that this is
looking to competitively bid other governmental entities --
MR. KLATZKOW: You keep saying competitively bid. That's
not what we're doing here. We're giving you proposal -- we're hoping
to get a proposal from the Greater Naples and we're hoping to get a
proposal from Chief McLaughlin to come here saying --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Only those --
MR. KLATZKOW: -- this is what we could run this for.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- two entities?
MR. KLATZKOW: That's what my understanding is. If you
wanted to have something different, that's fine.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But Leo was asking about other
entities. I mean, there are private entities, other fire districts.
MR. OCHS: And what I heard in response was that the
preference was to limit it to other independent districts that may have
an interest in providing the service.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So other --
MR. OCHS: If I'm wrong, you know, I would appreciate the
clarification.
Page 152
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So any independent district --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're all -- most of us are on the same
page.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- in Collier County. No, I need
clarification. I think the record needs to be clarified. I think staff
needs to --
MR. OCHS: And to Jeff s point, just by way of example, we have
a long-standing interlocal agreement for fire service with the City of
Marco Island that provides fire rescue service to Goodland and the
Horr's Island area. I would imagine that the final format of this would
mirror that more than, you know, a competitive proposal in a
management contract.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, the other question I have is,
why would putting it under the management of some other district
result in efficiencies, either cost savings or a higher level of service
than what you've got now?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I don't think -- you're exactly right.
I don't know that any of us have drawn that conclusion yet. Until --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I think --
MR. OCHS: -- we have those discussions, we don't really know
if there's going to be cost savings or service enhancements.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you're going to go out, solicit
proposals, and then evaluate whether those proposals will result in
savings or increased level of service all with the understanding that no
employees will be fired?
MS. PRICE: Correct.
MR. OCHS: Essentially what we're going to say, here's the
current situation in these districts, here's the current millage rate, here's
the current level of service. Please give us a proposal on whether you
can provide equal or better service at or below the current cost, and
we'll see what we get.
Page 153
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I would say equal service
doesn't make any sense, because then you might as well maintain the
status quo.
MR. OCHS: Unless they can do it for less money.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: At the same -- right. So the
proposal has to be at less cost and -- or a higher level of service;
otherwise, you've got the status quo, at which point you don't need to
make the change.
MR. OCHS: Well, that's --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: That's simply the process that four
districts just did to get to two. That's exactly what they did. I'm not
asking these folks to do anything more than those people did. They
got together. They said, hey, can this work? Work on it and come
back, and everybody said yes. And guess what? The public supported
it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think one piece is missing here.
Isles of Capri doesn't have a fire chief.
MR. OCHS: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And if we do nothing, at least we're
going to have to make that decision in the future and, therefore, the
cost will go up.
MR. OCHS: Correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Taylor? I
apologize.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think that this is -- I think this is
a wonderful idea. I think your motion is the spirit of Commissioner
Nance's motion, and I think what I'm hearing from Mrs. Price is that
you understand what we're trying to do, and I hope the public does.
Let's turn it over to the experts, and let's see what they come back with,
and we'll get lots of information. And we're not playing fire chief here.
We're going to go to the people that are boots on the ground that
Page 154
December 9, 2014
understand what's going on.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But we're opening this to all
independent districts, private entities --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No private entities.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Only governmental entities.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, only independent districts.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Only independent districts.
MR. OCHS: What about municipalities? Do you want to offer it
to them?
MS. PRICE: And our own dependent districts.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And our own dependent district to
form its own management team.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And the question -- that's a good
one. What about municipalities, City of Naples --
MR. OCHS: City of Marco.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- City of Marco?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, all governmental entities.
MR. OCHS: I'm asking the question. I'm not --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think you should open it up to all
governmental entities, including the individual dependent districts.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Here's the reality of it is you've got to
take a look at the geographical area is -- what is possible? What is
feasible? The City of Naples is not feasible.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But they just pointed out --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: East Naples is, and so is Isle of Capri.
So all in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
Page 155
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. OCHS: Thank you, I think.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: There's lots of perspiration on the
foreheads of folks out there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Looks like it's break time, too,
doesn't it?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. I think we should take a break.
Well, let's take a 10-minute break.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item? I think we're going
back to land use.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2014-262: A SINGLE PETITION WITHIN THE
2014 CYCLE 1 OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
AMENDMENTS FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR REVIEW
AND COMMENTS RESPONSE, FOR AN AMENDMENT
SPECIFIC TO THE SAN MARINO PROJECT, TRANSMITTAL
HEARING - MOTION TO APPROVE WITH STAFF'S
RECOMMENDATIONS (AND W/CCPC RECOMMENDATIONS)
AND TAKING TDR CREDITS FROM SENDING LANDS FROM
MORE THAN 1-MILE AND BEYOND THE URF BOUNDARY
AND INCLUDING THE DENSITY INCREASE FOR 300 UNITS
— ADOPTED
Page 156
December 9, 2014
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. It's Item 9B, and that is a recommendation
to deny the single petition within the 2014 Cycle 1 of Growth
Management Plan amendments for transmittal to the Florida
Department of Economic Opportunity for review and comments
response for an amendment specific to the San Marino project, and this
is a transmittal hearing.
And the petitioner is here, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Yovanovich.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Rich Yovanovich on behalf of the petitioner. With me are
Brian Stock and Keith Gelder from Stock Development. They are
representing the applicant as well; Joe Boff, with Lely Development, is
representing the owner; Alexis Crespo and Jeremy Arnold are with
Waldrop Engineering; Shane Johnson from Passarella is here to
answer any environmental questions you may have; and Jim Banks
with his engineering company is here to answer any transportation
related questions you may have.
On the visualizer outlined in red is the existing San Marino
project, and the existing San Marino project is an approved PUD of
235 acres. It was approved for 352 residential units and a golf course.
That was the density that was allowed under the Comprehensive Plan
at the time. Because we're in the urban residential fringe, you get a
base density of 1.5 units per acre.
Since the original approval of the PUD, the Growth Management
Plan was amended to allow for properties within the urban residential
fringe to increase their density to 2.5 units per acre through the
acquisition of TDRs.
And if you'll recall from the Naples Reserve project, if you
wanted to increase your density, you had to limit where you would buy
the TDRs to the one mile east of the urban area.
Page 157
December 9, 2014
We are in for two amendments. I believe your staff agrees with
the amendment to allow for the acquisition of TDRs beyond the
one-mile area similar to Naples Reserve. We're having a heck of a
time finding TDRs within that one-mile area and would like to be able
to expand the area where we can search for those TDRs.
The second amendment is to allow for the increase from 2.5 units
per acre on the undeveloped portion of San Marino, which is
approximately 196 acres, to be allowed to go to 3.02 units per acre. So
it's roughly a half a unit per acre increase.
If that increase is approved, we would have an overall project
density in San Marino of roughly 2.76 point something units per acre,
which is basically the same density as Hacienda Lakes, which was
recently approved at 2.8 units per acre.
The Planning Commission has recommended unanimously that
the language attached to your resolution be approved by the Board of
County Commissioners for transmittal. If that happens, when we come
back at the adoption hearing, we already have a -- we're concurrently
applying for a PUD, so you will see that the project will be a
single-family residential community on the 196 acres that is yet to be
developed within San Marino.
At our neighborhood information meeting, the residents from
around area were supportive of our request. We have received no
negative feedback from anyone other than comprehensive planning
staff.
Your utilities staff, transportation staff, and all the other staff say
there is available capacity to serve the additional half a unit per acre
that we're requesting.
I can tell you that I know there are concerns about 951 in the
future, what's going to happen. If we give you these additional 102
units, Mr. Yovanovich, we think that 951's going to fail because of
that.
Page 158
December 9, 2014
The Rockedge PUD, which was approved at a higher density --
that density was 5.23 units per acre also in the urban fringe, also along
951, has had a preapplication meeting to amend their zoning to go
down to two-and-a-half units per acre, so we believe that there will be
a corresponding reduction in density along that corridor as we're going
through this protect.
And as you know, Lely Resort is approved for, I think, roughly
9,000 units. I can assure you that they'll be leaving more than 102
units on the table at the end of the day.
So I think from a corridor standpoint, the increase in density of a
half a unit per acre shouldn't have any negative impacts on the 951
corridor.
I can go into a much greater detailed presentation, but I think that
that hits the highlights. And that -- together with your executive
summary and Planning Commission notes, that would conclude my
introductory comments.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was first.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I met with everybody in
my office yesterday, I believe, and my question is going to be prefaced
by a small story. So we're sitting there, and I told them also about the
limitations on these roads and we cannot overtax them.
And then I said to Brian -- congratulations on your wedding, by
the way, Brian Stock. It was wonderful news.
Anyway, and I said to Brian, I said -- or should I call you Mr.
Stock -- I said, you know, you've got extra units you're never going to
use on your property but they've gone -- all of those units have gone
into calculating the concurrency on that road system. Why can't you
just transfer some of those units right over to this property? One
would balance out the other. And he said, yeah, that would be fine
Page 159
December 9, 2014
with me. And I'm thinking, that's exactly what we should do.
If he has to buy some TDRs in order to compensate for some of
the things along that area, he could still switch out some of those units
-- they're not going to be used anyway -- and that would give us the
ability to do this.
And I would like to move forward with this project and just find a
way to do it. But can we do that? Jeff, can we switch out some of
those units here so that we don't overtax the road system?
MR. OCHS: David?
MR. KLATZKOW: Can you do that, yes. Can you do that right
now, right here? That's a different story.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. This is in the rural fringe,
correct?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No.
MR. OCHS: No.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, it's in the --
MR. YOVANOVICH: The property's in the urban residential
fringe mixed use district. But under the rural fringe guidelines, this is
essentially a receiving area that we can bring density from the sending
lands in the rural fringe mixed use district to this urban residential
fringe property.
So you would be -- you would, if you moved -- if you moved
from Lely Resort, you would be taking urban density and keeping it in
the urban area.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. It's a little bit complicated
now.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It is complicated, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I -- is it proposed that you keep the
TDRs as submitted and then also get some of the density from Lely?
MR. YOVANOVICH: We have not asked to transfer any of the
Page 160
December 9, 2014
density from Lely to San Marino. Our proposal was to be allowed to
increase the density above the 2.5 that we can already do to 3.02 and to
increase the density through the acquisition of TDRs.
When we were talking to Commissioner Fiala, she said, hey,
you've got this density left over in Lely. Can you use that density for
that increase of a half a unit per acre, what I understood the discussion
was.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, but --
MR. YOVANOVICH: But it's not something that's in front of
you today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, I know that, but you're not
getting where Commissioner Fiala's real concern is unless you start
removing additional density, and what she's proposing, I believe --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Which we would do. We would take it
out of Lely Resort.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Additional density out of-- what is
that, .5?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's 102 units.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: A hundred two units.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's 102 units. So we would take the 102
units out of Lely Resort --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- and basically transfer them over here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: In addition to the TDRs?
MR. YOVANOVICH: But the TDRs would be for the -- to go
from the 1 .5 to the 2.5, okay. So we would buy TDRs under the
current rules, and for the increase above that -- I think is what
Commissioner Fiala is saying. Do I have it right?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right, just to make sure that we're
not overtaxing that road system at all. We're keeping it the same.
Page 161
December 9, 2014
MR. KLATZKOW: But this is a different PUD. I mean, we can
-- I'm not saying you can't do this, I'm just saying you can't do this
now. This is going to have to get restructured and come back.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: We'd have to change this amendment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But at least I understand where the
discussion is going.
MR. YOVANOVICH: We would have to revise the language in
front of you today to allow for that to happen, because it would require
a Growth Management Plan amendment to make that happen.
So we would revise the current text in front of you to allow that to
happen. It would then be sent to the state for their review, and it would
come back to the Planning Commission and you-all to look at at
adoption, but you cannot do that as a matter of right today without
amending the Growth Management Plan.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And would that be acceptable,
Rich?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's okay to us. I don't know --
MR. OCHS: Well, we have a staff presentation when you're
ready, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay, fine. Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Can I take Rich outside and beat him a
little bit, because --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I, please?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I'm waiting for --
MR. WEEKS: Commissioners, David Weeks, for the record.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: David?
MR. WEEKS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: If you're going to give a full staff
report, then I want to go to Commissioner Hiller first.
Page 162
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So why couldn't we just bi -- Rich,
why couldn't we just bifurcate what's being done? Why don't we vote
on what's before us today up to that one half and just come back
separately for an amendment for the half?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Honestly, I don't want to do that, because
this process takes about a year. So for that half, I would be in limbo as
to whether or not I'm going to -- you know, for another year as to
whether or not we're going to be able to work out this transfer from
Lely Resort to this property. Just so you know --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So then, let me make a different
suggestion. Why not just get it all approved now --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and in the meantime work that
out. And then when it comes back after approval, just drop that part
off and move forward with the other.
MR. YOVANOVICH: That would be fine with us to be able to
have an either/or on the .52, either through the acquisition of TDRs or
through an appropriate transfer of density from --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. Which doesn't hold --
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- Lely Resort.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- hold to this process and allows
us to negotiate on the other. And if the other works, we just adjust
whatever's approved today when it comes back.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And we would be able to do that. We're
in the process of actually doing an amendment to Lely Resort anyway,
so we can easily accommodate that --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Both at the same time.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- transfer of units.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And then it doesn't hold it up, and
you have the flexibility and see which is more effective.
MR. YOVANOVICH: If Casalanguida's willing to do that.
Page 163
December 9, 2014
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Me and David, if we could speak a
little bit.
Commissioners, for the record, Nick Casalanguida.
We talked about this a while back. Rich Yovanovich talks about
concurrency and consistency. 951 is eventually going to fail. We all
know that. That's just a matter of time depending on the units that you
get on there.
What he's proposed is to take units out of Lely. And Brian and I
have a terrific relationship. He's excellent to deal with. These are
units that most likely will never be built. They have an extreme excess
of units right now.
So you're transferring units from something that will never be
built to actually something that will be built.
So I'll make an alternative proposal to you that might -- if you
want to see this project go forward, approve it the way it is right now,
and then when it comes back for adoption, let them reduce a
reasonable amount of units in Lely, let them keep the transfer of
development right holistic, that program holistic, leave that out of the
system. Whatever he does right now with this GMP amendment, he
goes forward, he has to buy TDRs with that, and then when --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: He has to acquire those. Now
you're --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, he does.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Now you're causing him the
burden of an additional cost that he wouldn't have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. This is on our agenda right now,
Commissioner.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, that's what he's asked for.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no, but -- I understand, but
since a more cost effective approach is being suggested, which is to
use the units at Lely --
Page 164
December 9, 2014
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Give you something that has no value.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm sorry?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It has no value.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You say it has no value, but they're
still figured into the concurrency projections through the road capacity,
right?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Only for the long-range transportation
plan. Those cars, unless they destroy all the golf courses and come in,
which they'll have to do through a rezone and amend their PUDs to do
some of that, that's the only time it may have any value at all.
There are thousands of units in Lely that may not get built. I
think the total density's 7,000, roughly, units. They'll probably, I'm
going to guess, do 4- or 5,000 in there.
So to give up a couple hundred units that will never be built in
order to amend the Comp Plan to add more units that will actually be
built makes no sense at all.
And I think a fair approach would be -- and I've talked to Rich
about this, is if the board wants to see this go forward, keep this
application holistic, approve it for transmittal. And when it comes
back for adoption, let them reduce a reasonable amount of units in
Lely. That's just a plus. And, you know, I'd say on the order of two to
one, but that's something you could discuss with the applicant.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, my understanding --
that's why I interjected in the discussion -- you're going to get both.
You're going to get the TDRs and you're going to get the density
reduction at Lely. Now that I understand that isn't what was meant,
I'm not going to support your conversation because it just doesn't -- it
doesn't get you where you want to go, and that's your concern about
Collier Boulevard.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am (sic).
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So anyways, Commissioner Taylor,
Page 165
December 9, 2014
then Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't understand -- I don't
understand why. You know, what we're doing is taking units, although
-- although Nick says they're worthless, still they were used to figure
the concurrency for that road system. And you can't -- and what we're
trying to do is protect it from overcapacity. If you reduce the capacity
on the road, then you can use that capacity on here, and the capacity
remains the same, never taxing anything. And I don't understand
where you're coming from.
I mean, I don't want to see this thing fail. I don't mind keeping my
mouth shut, but I just -- I just don't understand what you're trying to
say here.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Maybe I can clarify the concurrency
versus consistency, because that's always been a complication for the
board and even staff and even the applicant.
Concurrency is actually at the development order when they pull
the plat. We actually measure what's on the road that year, and you
say, do we have enough capacity for that project.
Consistency is only five years. Based on what's on the road that
day and about 2 percent growth rate, you project forward and say, will
the roads have enough capacity in five years? That's consistency.
That's all we can look at.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. What is your capacity on the
road figured at today?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Today there's enough. If I measured
today, there is enough capacity for an actual development order. We
measure every year and give you an AUIR/CIE, and we look forward
five years. And depending on what comes on the prior year, we update
that every year, and we give you kind of a five-year; based on what's
happening today, this is what it should look like in five years.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So what figure do you use for Lely
Page 166
December 9, 2014
Resort then?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Lely only gets figured -- those
additional units only get figured in the long-range transportation plan
as what you'll need ultimately. So it inflates those numbers when you
start trying to figure out road projects. So that's all that -- that's all
that's in with those extra units in Lely.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'll just be quiet. I just want to
see this move forward. I didn't want to break the back of the road. But
if you're telling me even though -- you're telling me -- well, okay. I'll
just be quiet.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Taylor, then
Commissioner Hiller.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I just make one comment to what
Nick just said, if that's okay? He's not too close is he? I mean, I'm
safe?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: For right now.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I want to hear the debate, so --
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's not a debate. Lely is a vested DRI.
And from what I understand, when Nick gets up here and he says --
when everything gets all built out, you're going to have a problem on
951 . Fair?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Everything's not going to get built out in
Lely. So to say that you're going to have a problem in the future and
you're going to hold those units against Stock Development, if you're
going to hold that against Stock Development, there's got to be value to
somebody, to the county, to Brian, to whoever.
We're just simply asking you for an increase in density of 102
units on San Marino. What we've said is, I guarantee you between
Rockedge and what doesn't get built in Lely, we're not -- this project
isn't going to be the reason 951 fails. There will be more than enough
Page 167
December 9, 2014
reduction.
What I'm hearing now is you want me to also buy 102 TDRs to
increase my density and you want me to give up units in Lely to
provide further benefit to the county.
Now, we're -- you know, we know realistically we're not going to
build everything in Lely, but you're basically asking us to pay twice --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- for the increased density. Go buy TDRs
and give up some asset that Lely Resort has that they may or may
never use, but you're asking them to give that up in exchange for
roadway capacity. And we think we should only have to pay once.
And we're okay with the TDRs, and we know that you're not
going to have an issue because Lely Resort isn't going to build out.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So I'm up. Can I listen to -- I
want to hear what Nick's response is to that.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: So, Commissioners, when he said he's
paying once, you only pay impact fees when you build something.
You're giving units -- any ghost units you're -- without the --
throughout the county, by having this discussion, you're saying, if a
development got approved for 500 units but only built 400, if they've
got some sort of value in those vested units, then they can't build.
Picture a 100-acre PUD that develops at one unit per acre with
100 units, but they got zoned for 300 units. Is the argument going to
be going forward, we have 200 units of value that we want to be able
to transfer to other people even though we can't build it?
You're having a commodity market on units that were approved
through a DRI or a PUD. That's not -- that's not a good thing to have
going forward. I would not recommend that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm not --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And they -- I'm sorry. And they
haven't paid yet. You don't pay until actually you pull a permit for
Page 168
December 9, 2014
impact fees or anything else.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So what you're saying is a
developer could come in, max out his land and down the road it's a
commodity market, understanding he would never build everything,
but he could use it in some kind of deal going forward?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: According to my friend Rich, this is
what he's telling you, that he's got units --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, no.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: He's got units he hasn't built that he
wants to transfer that he knows he probably won't build. That, to me,
is you're commoditizing that density. You haven't paid for them, my
friend.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I didn't say that. I said you're holding
those units against me for purposes of roadway capacity. That's all I'm
saying. I haven't said I've paid for them yet, but they are vested
through the DRI process because it's an older DRI. So you're holding
capacity for me because you have to give it to me. I have to pay my
impact fees to get it, but I get it. You can't say no to 9,000 units in
Lely Resort.
We're not going to hit that number. But I'm just saying you
shouldn't also say in this application, go buy 102 units and give up 204
in Lely Resort. That would be the two-to-one is what I think what
we're being asked to come back with the next go-round. It really
doesn't matter because we're not going to use them anyway.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: If it doesn't matter to you, then why
don't you just not build 102 here and build 102 over in Lely? How
about that?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, we're building the 102 here so we
can have a nice single-family project that the residents around us want.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm not saying we're not willing to pay for
Page 169
December 9, 2014
them, Commissioner Nance. I said we're willing to buy the TDRs.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: No, I know that. But you're talking
out of both sides of your mouth. You're saying you're not going to
build them over there, you want to build more over here. Well, just
build 102 less over here and 102 more over in Lely, and then
everybody will -- then it will fit the plan.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know what, I'm sorry. It's me
that started this. I withdraw all of my comments, and I'd like to make a
motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. Yovanovich, before we
finish, tell me why this isn't spot zoning.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Why it's not spot zoning?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Uh-huh.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Because it's a -- it's an existing PUD and
it's under the county's requirements or regulations. The county
frequently -- and, frankly, the county gets very uncomfortable when
you come through with straight zoning. In the county we do a lot of--
and, frankly, do almost -- I would say 99 percent of the zoning is
through the PUD process. PUD zoning is not spot zoning.
What we're doing is we're amending the Comprehensive Plan to
allow for the uses we want, and then we will come through and we will
make our amendment to the PUD to be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, and that's not spot zoning.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But you're amending the
Comprehensive Plan specifically for one project.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And that is also --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But we had that discussion. You
don't think this project -- the idea of the sending and receiving is such a
-- it's a workable --
MR. YOVANOVICH: What I'm saying is we do this quite
frequently is we'll come through with Growth Management Plan
Page 170
December 9, 2014
amendments that are project specific, because you get oddball
properties here and there that don't fit nicely within, you know, the
square peg, round hole.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You want to buy your TDRs, I
believe that's what it is --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- from less expensive areas.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No. I want to be able to buy the TDRs at
a price we can afford to pay in order to build a unit that's both
marketable and potentially profitable.
What's happening is, is we have this limited universe where we
can buy TDRs and, for whatever reason, the people who own those
TDRs don't want to sell those TDRs at this point for a price -- they
may never want to sell them, but we can't even get them at a price we
can afford to pay.
So we're going to have -- we would like to go beyond that
one-mile area to see if we can acquire these TDRs. And I'm going to
tell you, that's going to be no easy task because you don't have any big
parcels that you can get a bunch of TDRs from. We're going to be
talking to a lot of small property owners to try to buy those TDRs.
By creating that limited universe, you've essentially created a
monopoly of property owners that we've got to go talk to, and if they
don't want to deal with us, they're not willing sellers and we're not
willing buyers, and your program doesn't work.
MR. KLATZKOW: But there's the other side to the coin, and the
other side to the coin is that this board took away property rights from
people, all right, by getting rid of their density or drastically reducing
their density. In exchange for that, and not compensation, you gave
them TDRs, all right. So you're diminishing, now, their value. So this
coin has two sides here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So we should pay for the --
Page 171
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But we did not fix the value of the
TDRs.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- fact that we took land away from
somebody else?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We assess the value of those TDRs
based on what their market value was at that time. We didn't create a
fixed-price market and say TDRs are valued at X into perpetuity
notwithstanding or X plus into perpetuity.
MR. KLATZKOW: No. What you did was --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: These are freely tradeable -- these
are freely tradeable, and you can't have a controlled market, and we
can't flip flop on this position.
MR. KLATZKOW: What you did was you created a certain
program, okay. Some people lost their property rights. In exchange
for that --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Nobody lost.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, they did.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. They sold their property. They
didn't lose property. They sold property.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're going to take a 10-minute break
until the lawyers can lawyer it up and figure it out.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And then we're going to stick to the
topic. The transfer of density from Lely is off the table.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Got it. We weren't asking for it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I know it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But we would take it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But it was a great idea.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I would like to second
Commissioner Fiala's motion, and I'd like to call the question.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Nope. We're not going to call the
Page 172
December 9, 2014
question because we're still going to have discussion; we still need to
hear from our staff.
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: I would like to hear Nick
Casalanguida make a recommendation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And then we still need to hear from
comprehensive planning.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Would it be okay if David spoke first?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you.
MR. WEEKS: For the record, David Weeks, comprehensive
planning staff
Commissioners, I'll be brief Basically -- first of all, as you know,
staffs recommendation is for denial. We do not support the petition as
submitted.
As Rich alluded to, staff would support approval of the petition
without the density increase but to allow for the density that they're
presently eligible for, which is one dwelling unit per acre times 196
acres, which is 196 units. Do I have the math right, 196?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
MR. WEEKS: But allowing those -- that density, which is
achieved by buying TDRs, allowing that to be obtained from any
sending lands, as opposed to the restriction of within one mile. That's
what staff would support.
Our concerns are the potential negative impact upon those
landowners within the one-mile corridor if we continue to allow
properties -- TDRs to be acquired from properties more distant, and
secondly is the purpose of the urban residential fringe subdistrict, as
stated in the Future Land Use Element, is to provide for a transitional
density.
If you're on the west side of Collier Boulevard, you're eligible for
Page 173
December 9, 2014
four units per acre, possibly more with density bonuses. For the urban
residential fringe, you're limited to one-and-a-half units per acre. The
only exception to that is this additional one unit per acre by use of
Transfer of Development Rights, the TDRs.
And then next over to the east you have the sending lands, which
is limited to a density of one unit per 40 acres. When the plan was
originally adopted, it would have been one unit per five acres, but
nonetheless, transitioning from a higher density west of Collier
Boulevard through the urban residential fringe and then to what is the
sending lands.
So that, simply put, is the reason that staff does not support the
petition as proposed.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Nick?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir. I'm not going to conduct a
workshop on the long-range transportation plan versus concurrency or
consistency, because that's an hour-long discussion.
These units, when added, these additional 100 units, will be real
homes that will be on the ground. So what I've always said is if
someone's going to add units to the ground, what can they do in
exchange to help the road network? Hacienda, which built their
project, built part of Rattlesnake extension and part of
Wilson/Benfield.
What I suggested to Rich was if you're going to go forward with
this project and the board's going to adopt it with what's in front of the
GMP amendment, then you will be buying additional TDRs, which
will satisfy the TDR program.
As far as additional units in Lely that -- we can argue at some
other time whether they have any true value or not, I would suggest
before adoption -- Rich has put on the record that he would like to
reduce some of those units to help clean up our long-range
transportation plan. That's about the only value it has.
Page 174
December 9, 2014
So I would recommend that if you hear this petition and move it
to transmittal, that prior to adoption he reduces some of the ghost units
to help clean up our long-range transportation plan.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's making them pay twice, and
these are not ghost units.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ma'am, I can explain what ghosts units
are and what they pay. They never paid for those units. They haven't
physically provided any cash for those units.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They're vested, which means they
can. Just like TDRs have a cost, these would have a cost if they were
to develop them. You're making them pay twice.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm not. My easiest example --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's as good as a taking.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: My easiest example, to make it very
simple, is if a development with 100 acres gets approved for 200 units
and they build 100 and use up every piece of property that they have.
They're zoned for 200 units, but they've built 100 units. What value do
those other hundred units have? Nothing in the sense other than if at
some point they tear down homes and they rebuild to multifamily. But
they will show up on your long-range transportation plan in that traffic
analysis zone as approved for 200 units. So they have no material
value.
We've had many developments give up those units and we -- at
one point in time Attorney Klatzkow and I tried to work on something
and encouraged them to give them up, because they were just messing
up our long-range plan.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask you a point of
clarification?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Are you suggesting that they built
at a lower density and they don't have the physical ability to build
Page 175
December 9, 2014
those additional units; is that what you're saying?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am. They have --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Is that true?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Partly. The only way we could build
more units realistically --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Lely.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- would be at some point -- in Lely.
Sometime in the future -- I mean, we still have more density to go, but
there'll be units left over that probably would only be used if a golf
course were redeveloped for residential. Nick's right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do you have land available to
build those additional units?
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, and I've said that from the get-go.
There's no way --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: In Lely.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- we're going to hit -- yeah, in Lely
there's no way we're going to hit the full 9,000 units. So I -- what I
meant to say -- maybe I didn't say clearly enough -- was for purposes
of long-range planning, 9,000 units are assigned to Lely. Realistically,
we're not going to hit the 9,000, and we won't -- if you took 102 away
from the 9,000, we still won't even hit that number.
So the concern you-all have from a long-range planning
standpoint by adding these 102 units, from a practical standpoint,
doesn't exist because we're going to leave far more than 102 units on
the table in Lely.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But you're willing to buy TDRs?
MR. YOVANOVICH: And we're willing to buy TDRs for the
additional 102 units. And we already have to buy them for the first
196.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I don't even understand what
the discussion is. The ghost units, or whatever Nick wants to call
Page 176
December 9, 2014
them, is off the table, so that's not even a consideration. There's no
need to give anything up because it's not going to be developed, so
there's no --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Nick would like me to go on record in the
Lely PUD and take off-- 204 units is what I heard today.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Why?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: He explained it. It is a planning
process when we figure out --
MR. YOVANOVICH: We can help with that accounting to make
this happen. The one thing we don't want to lose today over this is -- I
think we all agree the half a unit is not a horrible thing as long as we
account -- make -- as long as Nick is comfortable that we're more than
offsetting from a transportation --
COMMISSIONER NANCE: If you can commit to that, I can
support it; otherwise, I can't support it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: We can commit to 204 units coming out
of Lely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you -- did that answer your
questions, Commissioner Hiller? Are you done?
(No verbal response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. So I made the motion to
approve of-- for the units -- let me see. And also has staff
recommended changing -- let's see -- taking the TDR credits from
sending lands from more than one mile beyond and removing the
density increase, and --
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, including the density increase.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry, including the density
increase and approving this PUD for 300 units.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There is a motion. But there's no
Page 177
December 9, 2014
more discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Point of clarification. And are we
talking about taking the Lely --
MR. YOVANOVICH: That will occur through the Lely PUD
amendment process.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So does -- but does it have to go
MR. YOVANOVICH: It doesn't go in the Growth Management
Plan language, as I understand it; correct, Nick?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Can it be -- let's make it a second
motion then, so we have it on the record.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So you're going to commit to work
with Nick, and you're going to take 240 out of it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: 204, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: 204, sorry.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I thought it was 240. Didn't you,
Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, he said 240. He misspoke.
We should hold him to 240.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I said 204, didn't I?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What's 38 units, Rich?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's 102 times two, 204.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Yes?
MR. WEEKS: Mr. Chairman, just a point of clarification. I
heard clearly the motion made by Commissioner Fiala. My question
will be, would that be per the Planning Commission's
recommendation?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. WEEKS: Okay.
Page 178
December 9, 2014
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you. I think they said the
same thing as you did, really.
MR. WEEKS: The only difference is that, specifically, Planning
Commission's recommendation included some non-substantive
changes that staff had requested and I believe the applicant is in
agreement to.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is the second in agreement?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
Aye.
Motion carries --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And, Mr. Attorney, do we need to
have on the record a motion that --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries 4-1.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- about the 204 transfer from
Lely? Should we make that into a motion or -- for the record?
MR. KLATZKOW: Are you conditioning this on that?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, that wasn't.
MR. KLATZKOW: If it's not conditioned on it, I don't know
how you enforce it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, you can't.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Look, I can assure you that people will
remember what I said on the record. So when I come forward with the
Lely Resort PUD, which is coming up soon --
Page 179
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hopefully I'll be gone.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- it will be in there, the 204 will come
out. We made that commitment. You don't have to worry about it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Who was the one that voted against?
I didn't even hear it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I did.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay.
Item #14B1
AWARD CONTRACT #14-6236 — IMMOKALEE STORMWATER
IMPROVEMENTS — PHASE II TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES,
INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,208,149.95 (PROJECT NO. 33214)
— APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Our last item is the CRA item,
and that's approving a contract.
MR. OCHS: Sir, would you like to convene as the CRA?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. Go ahead and -- yeah. We're
tabling the BCC meeting, and Commissioner Fiala's going to open up
the CRA.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Okay. Will the CRA meeting please
come to order. We have one subject on our agenda today, and that is
the Immokalee stormwater improvement project.
MR. OCHS: That's correct. Commissioners, this is a
recommended award to the lowest and responsive bidder paid for by
federal grant dollars. It exceeds your one million dollar guideline for
consent versus regular agenda items, and that's the only reason it's on
your regular agenda.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
Page 180
December 9, 2014
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Oh, second. A motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Taylor.
Any questions, concerns?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: No public speakers?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: It passes 5-0.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You run a great meeting,
Commissioner Fiala.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: CRA meeting is --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I like the way you do business.
CHAIRWOMAN FIALA: -- is adjourned. Back to you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The BCC is back in session.
And we're going to go to staff communication and commissioners'
comments.
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, just for the record, if I might, we did
not take Item 7, public comments and general topics not on the current
or future agenda.
Page 181
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, thank you. Let's go to 7A, public
comments.
MR. MILLER: We have no registered speakers for public
comment, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Next item?
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. OCHS: 15A, sir, staff and commission general
communications.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What do you have?
MR. OCHS: Nothing from me today.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Workshop schedule?
MR. OCHS: Reminder, your workshop schedule for February
3rd is the workshop on your public library system and on March 3rd is
your workshop with your affordable and workforce housing advisory
board. Those are the only two workshops we have at this point, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Jeff?
MR. KLATZKOW: An early Merry Christmas.
MR. OCHS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Two things. I read with interest
when I was reading the agenda this time that when your staff
recommends denial they give an alternative within the document itself.
And so what comes up is then maybe an attorney would come back
and say, ah, yes, but staff recommended this; therefore, you know, it's
assuming that that needs to be done that way.
And I spoke to Mr. Casalanguida about it, and he said this is a
Page 182
December 9, 2014
custom. It was requested and, I guess, Commissioner Fiala and maybe
Commissioner Henning would know when, and maybe it was before
your time, that this is how you do things.
In the city it's black or white. Recommended up. You did -- they
recommend it or they deny it. And I don't see doing the work for the
petitioner, which is what we do. We give them alternatives. And I'm
not sure that's the way we should conduct the people's business.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I totally agree with you. They
did that with a comprehensive -- or Growth Management Plan
amendment in my district stating, well, it could be used for this, but
there was no actual data and analysis. And a petition is -- a land use
petition is for its government to take certain action.
So, you know, I totally agree with you. It's -- we need to deal with
this issue, and let's stick with that.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Exactly, and don't give anyone
alternatives. I mean, why -- specifically it was the most -- the hearing
examiner's comments after the Haldeman Creek issue. And I got, oh,
well, Mark Strain recommended this. We're coming back. And what?
And they went through that. But it's easy to interpret things that way, I
think.
So if we could just, going forward -- and this is an agreement
among the commissioners here, my colleagues, if we could agree that
there is an opinion or a decision made by staff that appears in our
material, but there's no alternative.
MR. OCHS: I'm a bit confused with the --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I'm confused on the Haldeman
Creek issue, how that came in. But we asked the hearing examiner for
-- to take a look at this and give his recommendations.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Right, and he did.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And he did. And staff did what?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And then -- but it said, but if the
Page 183
December 9, 2014
commissioners choose to approve this, then do it this way, this way,
this way. And so now the attorney has a blueprint of how to come
back, and I just don't see -- I don't understand why we're doing that. I
think it's -- it's not necessary. I mean, that's a discussion between staff
and the commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Staff recommended approval
of the Haldeman Creek. The Planning Commission did not.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But this was specifically -- this --
the comment about, oh, I'm going to do what Mark Strain told me to
do, I'm going to come back with Mark Strain's ideas, where -- when
the hearing examiner actually gave us options to approve or disapprove
something.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, I'm going to study that
particular one and maybe understand what you're saying, but yes --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But, again, on just the item we
just heard, you know, staff said, we don't -- we don't approve. But if
you decide to improve it -- approve it, do this, do this, do this. I don't
know why we do that.
You approve it or you don't approve it as a staff, and you give
your reasons, but you don't say but if you want to do it, then try it this
way. It just doesn't -- it seems an unnecessary step in the process.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, I think when you start
running across some of these prickly issues that aren't nearly so black
and white, you'll maybe understand the reason why that's there.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But that should be a conversation
between the commissioner and the staff, not necessarily put into the
agenda.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, Commissioner Taylor, I
believe that the reason that's done is that a lot of times some of those
recommendations are the result of the public process on conversations
that happened in public meetings with the residents in the public
Page 184
December 9, 2014
information meetings that actually incorporate things that the residents
suggest or would like to see or are answers to anxieties that they have
that the Planning Commission and the hearing examiner brings
forward to the board. Those people are doing a lot of work on behalf
of the board.
On the Haldeman Creek issue, the hearing examiner was asked to
provide a nonbinding workup of all the information, and I believe, if
you look at that, you will find that it is a most remarkable body of
work. And I'm personally very happy that we have it, because what it
does is it shines a lot of light on things and brought information
forward that we were not going to have save having that work by the
hearing examiner.
So, you know, I don't -- I never mind -- you know, you don't want
to put the burden on staff to provide, necessarily, recommendations,
but I never discount the opinion of our veteran staff, and I ask for it
often. Often we ignore it, which is the right of the board.
But I don't believe that having that is a negative in any way.
Ultimately, you know, you are going to make the decision for your
district, but --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But don't misunderstand me. I'm
not saying that there shouldn't be an opinion of staff. There should be.
But it's not black or white or maybe. If you decide -- if you decide
against this, then try it this way. I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Well, that's what you're getting is
the opinion of staff.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Correct. And, you know, maybe
that's a discussion, but that's not -- shouldn't be laid out in a document
so that the developer can come back and say, well, this is what your
staff told me to do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I think -- if I may
interject here. Sometimes staff feels that the project isn't a bad project,
Page 185
December 9, 2014
and although the Land Development Code says you really can't do this
but then they -- but they really realize that it doesn't pertain to this
particular subject. So they tell you what the Land Development Code
tells them to say, but it's a soft denial. And then they'll tell you that.
Well, they probably won't tell you from the podium, but they'll tell
you, it's probably a soft denial because really it should go through, but
we -- you know, but we have to administer just according to what the
Land Development Code says, but this one isn't a bad thing. So, you
know, it leaves room for you or for me to make our own decisions.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Right. And I don't object to that,
but I think that should be a conversation with the staff without putting
it into the document.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What's your second item?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The second item is we did have a
visit from Naples Art Association to talk about putting art outside here
in the hallway, and I want to make sure that -- you know, rotating
exhibits, and I want to make sure that the commission is agreeable;
we'll start moving towards that direction.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Good.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: All right. That's it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And Merry Christmas and Happy
Holidays to everyone.
MR. OCHS: Same to you, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I have two items. The
first one is, I've been working on an amendment to the towing
ordinance. You probably remember I started on that a good year ago
anyway. I've been working with Scott Teach, and I've been working
with the Sheriffs Office, and what I'd like to do is they seem to be
agreeable. We've worked out something that seems to be agreeable
with everybody, and what I'd like to do is bring that proposed
Page 186
December 9, 2014
amendment to our January meeting, if the board would accept that,
accept me doing that, or Scott Teach doing that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You're welcome to put anything on
the agenda, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You don't have to ask our permission.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But I'm curious why you're asking.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, because Scott Teach suggested
that maybe it would be a good idea.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To ask?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: To ask if I could put it on there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That doesn't sound right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, here it is in writing, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't know why he said that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We've been working on that. I just
think it's a great idea, and I think the Sheriffs Office wants to make
sure that everybody is willing to listen to it.
And I think that we've come up with -- mainly what we do -- we
already have an ordinance in place, and what they're trying to do is just
put a little -- some teeth into that ordinance so that the people can
follow through and actually enforce the ordinance we already have on
the books. That's what it all boils down to.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: She's right, it does say that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I thought I was, being that I was
looking at it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I just -- no, sorry for questioning you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's all right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The lawyers should know that you
have a right to bring it on the agenda, and you don't need our approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, all right. Well, I'll put it on
Page 187
December 9, 2014
the January agenda then. If you would tell Scott Teach, please. Thank
you.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'll take care of it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The second thing I wanted to just
alert you. We might have a little problem, and it's something that
maybe somehow we can work on for the future because it might affect
everybody's district. Right now it's just going to affect mine, but that is
another RaceTrac that's going in. But this one they've bought the
property in front of Hitching Post, and the Hitching Post is located
right across the street, a six-lane highway from the park. And now
we're just building a community center there, and shortly we're going
to be building a pool there, but this is a walking community. They just
walk and ride bikes, and they're going to want to run across the street,
whether it be to the Habitat village across the street or to one of the
other villages across the street or just to go across and get something to
eat at the convenience store.
And with the traffic that's generated from the RaceTrac over on
Airport Road, we can see that the people can't get out of River Reach
as it is. We can't do anything about this. It's zoned for it. But I think
for the future, when we ask that you work on amendments, we need to
make sure that when something like this, a monster area is located
where it could be a safety concern for our citizens, somehow we have
to have something in that -- in our Land Development Code that will
protect them.
I don't know what we're going to do here. You can possibly work
the transportation from the state or something, but we need something
to make sure that these kids have safe passage.
We've got many, many softball fields -- teams over there. We've
got a huge Hispanic softball group from children all the way up
through adults, and they play there regularly, which is wonderful, but
you see a lot of traffic and a lot of-- a lot of walkers and bikers. Thank
Page 188
December 9, 2014
you.
And with that, Merry Christmas to everybody. Merry Christmas.
Love your families, hug them, enjoy every minute, because you never
could tell what tomorrow brings. So have a great Christmas.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Happy Kwanza, Happy Hanukkah,
Happy Jesus' birthday. And talking to some of the fire commissioners,
they said, well, since the board has not approved that, creating a
committee, we're going to create our own committee, and we want you
to join in our committee. So there.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, first of all, Commissioner
Henning, thank you for being chair this year and, come January, you
are going to just become one of us, and we're going to pick a new one
of you. But we appreciate your service and what you've done in
managing the meetings.
Members of the staff, thank you for all you've done this year.
Happy New Year, Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Merry Happy
Kwanza, and all other possible holidays in the world that may occur
around this time that I may have omitted and don't want to be found at
fault for.
It really has been a good year. We've got a lot accomplished. We
have a new member, and we're very happy to have her. I think she'll
be a very positive addition.
We're going to miss Commissioner Coyle. He made a very
significant contribution this year and in all past years, so we're going to
keep you in mind, Commissioner Coyle, whatever you're doing. If
you're drinking a coconut martini at this point, you're welcome to make
five other ones because we're all coming over, not just me. I'm inviting
my brothers here and sisters.
I really don't have anything more to add other than what I've just
said, and that is thank you.
Page 189
December 9, 2014
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: Yes. Being at the end of the list,
it's hard to add anything to those good thoughts. I think we have had a
good year. You know for my part, and I think everybody's part, effort
needs to continue to allow our staff to work within some good
guidelines and do reasonable things when we ask them and give them
the time to do that and engage our citizens in a meaningful way. And
we've had a lot of contentious issues this year.
I'm very happy. It's -- we're going into the slower time at the end
of the season, but to have a collegial environment is very, very
important to all of us, and I think it's an expectation that our citizens
have and that they rightfully -- that they rightfully have.
So my best wishes to all of you, all the citizens out there, the
Naples Daily News representatives that dog us here till the end of the
meeting, and --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The one Naples Daily News
journalist.
COMMISSIONER NANCE: We will see everyone the first part
of the year. I hope you get a chance to take a little break and enjoy
yourselves. Take a deep breath.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, Eric? Eric? Kisses to Brent.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm sure that's just what he's looking
for.
Does anybody have any objections to adjourning?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're adjourned.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
*****
Page 190
December 9, 2014
**** Commissioner Nance moved, seconded by Commissioner Hiller
and carried unanimously that the following items under the Consent
and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item #16A1
A REVISED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE (EXHIBIT "A") FOR
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT)
LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM (LAP) AGREEMENT #430875-1-
58-01 IN ORDER TO COMMENCE THE INSTALLATION OF
ADVANCE INTERSECTION SIGNS AT A LATER DATE —
ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION COMMENCEMENT DATE IS
11/30/2015
Item #16A2
THE PURCHASE OF A PERPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE, ROAD
RIGHT-OF-WAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT
(PARCEL 376RDUE) CONTAINING 675 SQUARE FEET,
WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR THE FOUR-LANING OF GOLDEN
GATE BOULEVARD BETWEEN WILSON BOULEVARD AND
DESOTO BOULEVARD. PROJECT NO. 60040 (FISCAL
IMPACT: $300) — FOLIO #40931160008
Item #16A3
AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO QUALITY
ENTERPRISES USA, INC., FOR BID NO. 14-6357 - PINE RIDGE
ROAD AT FOREST LAKES BOULEVARD AND WOODSHIRE
LANE/BED, BATH AND BEYOND PLAZA MEDIAN
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 60016, IN THE AMOUNT OF
Page 191
December 9, 2014
$235,867. 17 AND RESERVE $10,000 ON THE PURCHASE
ORDER FOR FUNDING ALLOWANCES, FOR A TOTAL OF
$245,867. 17 — EXTENDING THE EXITING TURN LANES ON
PINE RIDGE ROAD
Item #16A4
AWARD AGREEMENT NO. 14-6296 FOR CONSTRUCTION
ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION (CEI) AND RELATED
SERVICES FOR "CHOKOLOSKEE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT"
TO HIGHSPANS ENGINEERING, INC.; PROJECT NO. 66066.
(FISCAL IMPACT: $594,560.58) REPLACING THE EXISTING
BRIDGE OVER CHOKOLOSKEE BAY ON CR 29 (COPELAND
AVENUE)
Item #16A5
TERMINATING AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT, DATED JUNE
27, 2014, ENTERED INTO BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
JOSE LUIS CARBALLEA FOR THE PURCHASE OF A ROAD
RIGHT-OF-WAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT
(PARCEL 234RDUE) REQUIRED FOR THE EXPANSION OF
GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM EAST OF WILSON
BOULEVARD TO 20TH STREET EAST. (PROJECT NO. 60040)
— NEITHER THE COUNTY OR THE OWNER HAS BEEN ABLE
TO PROCURE THE REQUIRED RELEASES OR
SUBORDINATIONS
Item #16A6 — Continued to a Future BCC Meeting
(Per Commissioner Fiala during Agenda Changes)
Page 192
December 9, 2014
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AN AMENDED AND
RESTATED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR CREATION OF
THE COLLIER METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
(MPO) — BETWEEN FDOT, COLLIER COUNTY, THE CITY OF
MARCO ISLAND, THE CITY OF NAPLES AND EVERGLADES
CITY AND SUPERCEDES THE MAY 10, 2005 INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT
Item #16A7
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE PERFORMANCE
BOND NO. K08446155 IN THE AMOUNT OF $68,000 WHICH
WAS POSTED AS A DEVELOPMENT GUARANTY FOR
EARLY WORK ASSOCIATED WITH DEL WEBB AT AVE
MARIA, PARCELS 201-203 (PL20140001578) — THE
CONSTRUCTION PLAN WAS APPROVED AT THE
SEPTEMBER 9, 2014 BCC MEETING
Item #16A8
THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE LETTER OF CREDIT
NO. FGAC 13263 IN THE AMOUNT OF $93,540 WHICH WAS
POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT
NUMBER 59.917-3, (PL20130001215) FOR WORK ASSOCIATED
WITH GIAVENO AT TREVISO BAY - WORK ASSOCIATED
WITH THIS SECURITY HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND THE
DEVELOPER HAS FULFILLED HIS COMMITMENTS WITH
RESPECT TO THIS SECURITY
Item #16A9
Page 193
December 9, 2014
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF ESPLANADE GOLF &
COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES BLOCKS "E" AND "G2",
(APPLICATION NUMBER PL20140002187) APPROVAL OF THE
STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE
PERFORMANCE SECURITY — LOCATED OFF OF
IMMOKALEE ROAD AND WEST OF CR 951
Item #16A10
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF WINDING CYPRESS
PHASE ONE, (APPLICATION NUMBER PPLA-PL20140001143)
APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY - THE
DEVELOPER MUST RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF
ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE
OF THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN FINAL APPROVAL LETTER
Item #16A11
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF SIRACUSA,
(APPLICATION NUMBER PL20140001844) APPROVAL OF THE
STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE
PERFORMANCE SECURITY — WITHIN THE WENTWORTH
ESTATES PUD
Item #16Al2
RECORDING THE MINOR FINAL PLAT OF GASPAR
Page 194
December 9, 2014
STATION, PHASE 2, APPLICATION NUMBER PL20140002327 —
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD AND
EAST OF LIVINGSTON ROAD
Item #16A13
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF TWINEAGLES GRAND
ARBORS, PHASE TWO C, BLOCK 111, (APPLICATION
NUMBER PL20140001072) APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD
FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - THE DEVELOPER MUST RECEIVE A
CERTIFICATE OFADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES PRIOR TO
THE ISSUANCE OF THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN FINAL
APPROVAL LETTER
Item #16A14
RECORDING THE MINOR FINAL PLAT OF NAPLES RESERVE
ISLAND CLUB, APPLICATION NUMBER PL20140000758 - THE
DEVELOPER MUST RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF
ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE
OF THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN FINAL APPROVAL LETTER
Item #16A15
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF HERITAGE BAY
COMMONS - TRACT D REPLAT, (APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20130002392) APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
Page 195
December 9, 2014
SECURITY — LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF IMMOKALEE
ROAD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD
Item #16A16
FINAL RANKING OF THE FIRMS PURSUANT TO RFP #14-
6289 - "DESIGN-BUILD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 4-LANE,
EAST OF WILSON BOULEVARD" AND AUTHORIZE STAFF
TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND THE TOP-RANKED FIRM, AJAX
PAVING INDUSTRIES, INC./STANTEC CONSULTING
SERVICES, INC., FOR SUBSEQUENT BOARD APPROVAL
(PROJECT NO. 60040)
Item #16A17
AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT REQUIRED FOR THE CREWS
ROAD, COPE LANE AND SANDY LANE/WING SOUTH
INTERCONNECT SEGMENT OF THE LELY AREA
STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT #51101).
ESTIMATED FISCAL IMPACT: $21,700 — A PORTION OF
FOLIO #00409080003, PARCEL 238DAME
Item #16A18 - Moved to Item #11G (Per Agenda Change Sheet);
Returned to the Consent Agenda per Commissioner
Hiller during Agenda Changes with the exception of
the amendment related to oil wells which is continued
until after the Legislative Session
THE 2015 SCHEDULE FOR SUBMITTALS TO AMEND THE
COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP),
Page 196
December 9, 2014
AS ALIGNED WITH THE FLORIDA STATUTES, AND TO
APPROVE AN EXEMPTION FROM THE SCHEDULE TO
EXPEDITE AN AMENDMENT RELATED TO THE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF OIL WELLS, AND ALLOW
FOR FUTURE EXEMPTIONS, AS DETERMINED BY THE
BOARD
Item #16A19
FOUR RELEASES OF CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS WITH A
COMBINED ACCRUED VALUE OF $1,249,713 FOR PAYMENT
OF $5,663, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. ALLEN
W. FULLER AND BARBARA A. DAVIS, CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE NOS. CESD20080010447,
CESD20080010474, CEPM20110002247 AND CEPM20110002260,
RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 267 PRICE STREET,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — CESD20080010477 WAS
BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE BY THE COUNTY ON
OCTOBER 29, 2014, CESD20080010474 WAS BROUGHT INTO
COMPLIANCE ON MAY 19, 2011, CEPM20 1 1 0002247 WAS
BROUGHT INTO COMPLAINCE BY THE COUNTY ON
OCTOBER 29, 2014 AND CEPM20110002260 WAS BROUGHT
INTO COMPLIANCE BY THE COUNTY ON MAY 19, 2011
Item #16A20
THE RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $19,812.38, FOR PAYMENT OF
$1,762.38, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. DALE C. HUNT
Page 197
December 9, 2014
AND ANNE M. HUNT, CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL
MAGISTRATE CASE NO. CEPM20110010931, RELATING TO
PROPERTY LOCATED 4972 TRAYNOR COURT, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA — THE PROPERTY WAS BROUGHT INTO
COMPLAINCE BY THE COUNTY ON FEBRUARY 21, 2012
Item #16A21
THE RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $41,313.74, FOR PAYMENT OF $513.74,
IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. SERAFIN ORDAZ
HERNANDEZ AND SARA DE LA ROSA, CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE NO. CESD20120002127,
RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3200 WESTCLOX
STREET, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — THE PROPERTY
WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE BY THE OWNERS ON
OCTOBER 3, 2014
Item #16A22
THE RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $26,862.20, FOR PAYMENT OF $562.20,
IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. LORRIE L. CALLOW,
CODE ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CASE NO.
CEV20090013615, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED 786
103RD AVENUE N., COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA — THE
PROPERTY WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON
FEBRUARY 24, 2012
Page 198
December 9, 2014
Item #16A23
THE RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $10,339.03, FOR PAYMENT OF
$2,039.03, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. ROBERT
TARANTOLA AND DONNA TARANTOLA, SPECIAL
MAGISTRATE CASE NO. CEPM20140003819, RELATING TO
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7804 VALENCIA CT., COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA - THE PROPERTY WAS BROUGHT INTO
COMPLIANCE ON JULY 18, 2014
Item #16A24
AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A
ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT (PARCEL 229RDUE) REQUIRED FOR THE
EXPANSION OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM EAST
OF WILSON BOULEVARD TO 20TH STREET EAST. PROJECT
NO. 60040 (FISCAL IMPACT: $3,950) — FOLIO #39269640007,
PARCEL 229RDUE
Item #16A25
A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE CARRY
FORWARD FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE TRANSPORTATION
SUPPORTED GAS TAX FUND (313) IN THE AMOUNT OF
$20,250 (PROJECTS #60066 AND #60085) — RECOGNIZING
CARRY FORWARD FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY REVIEW
AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FAIR SHARE
INTERSECTIONS PROJECTS
Page 199
December 9, 2014
Item #16A26
A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE REVENUE FOR
PROJECTS WITHIN THE TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL
FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $29,929. (PROJECTS #60085 AND
#69081) — RECOGNIZING REVENUE FOR THE FAIR SHARE
INTERSECTIONS PROGRAM, COUNTYWIDE PATHWAYS
PROGRAM, AND TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY REVIEW
Item #16A27
AWARD ITB NO. 14-6321S, TRAFFIC SIGNS AND RELATED
MATERIALS, TO MUNICIPAL SUPPLY & SIGN COMPANY,
PER THE BID TABULATION
Item #16A28 — Continued to the January 13, 2015 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD ITB NO. 14-6346, "TRAFFIC
OPERATIONS SIGNAL COMPONENTS", TO THE FOLLOWING
VENDORS: MULTICOM INC., TRANSPORTATION CONTROL
SYSTEMS, PEEK TRAFFIC CORPORATION, EXPRESS
SUPPLY, TEMPLE INC., TRAFFIC SIGNAL INC.
Item #16A29
A PROPOSAL FROM CB&I COASTAL PLANNING &
ENGINEERING (CB&I/CP&E) DATED NOVEMBER 18, 2014
FOR WIGGINS PASS INTERIM DREDGE ANALYSIS &
DESIGN, PERMITTING AND BID ASSISTANCE; A WORK
Page 200
December 9, 2014
ORDER UNDER CONTRACT NO. 13-6164-CZ FOR A NOT TO
EXCEED AMOUNT OF $62,992.75; NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS ITEM
PROMOTES TOURISM (PROJECT NO. 195-80288)
Item #16B1
AWARD CONTRACT NO. 14-6251 — COLORADO AVENUE
STORMWATER/SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS TO MARQUEE
DEVELOPMENT, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $368,176.50
(PROJECT NUMBER 33293) AND THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN
THE STANDARD BOARD APPROVED CONTRACT AFTER
LEGAL REVIEW BY THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
ATTORNEY - FOR DRAINAGE SYSTEM, SIDEWALK AND
DRIVEWAY APRON IMPROVEMENTS TO COLORADO
AVENUE IN IMMOKALEE FROM SOUTH FIRST TO SOUTH
NINTH STREETS
Item #16B2
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN
THE CRA AND THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL
PLANNING COUNCIL (SWFRPC) IDENTIFYING
PROGRAMMATIC ROLES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
PROPOSED RURAL PROMISE ZONE PROGRAM — FOR A
PERIOD OF TIME MATCHING THE DESIGNATION,
ESTIMATED 10 YEARS
Item #16B3
FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE WITH CALIBER
Page 201
December 9, 2014
BODYWORKS OF FLORIDA, INC., SUCCESSORS IN
INTEREST BY ASSIGNMENT FROM AUTO PRIDE COLLISION
CENTERS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, CONTINUING
OCCUPANCY OF CRA OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT
1911 E. TAMIAMI TRAIL IN THE GATEWAY MINI-TRIANGLE
UNTIL JULY 2015 WITH THE SAME TERMS AS THE
ORIGINAL LEASE — ALLOWING THE CRA THE
OPPORTUNITY TO TRANSITION OWNERSHIP OF THE
PROPERTY WHILE STILL COLLECTING RENT
Item #16C1
A CHANGE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $42,627.50 AND TO
ADD AN ADDITIONAL 158 DAYS TO CONTRACT #11-5708,
"CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION
SERVICES FOR MASTER PUMPING STATION 312
REHABILITATION," WITH Q. GRADY MINOR, PROJECT
#72549 - ADDING ADDITIONAL CONTRACT TIME TO
MATCH THE CONSTRUCTION TIME EXTENSIONS, AND
ALLOW ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION WARRANTY PERIOD
Item #16C2
RESOLUTION 2014-248: REMOVING UNCOLLECTIBLE
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AND THEIR RESPECTIVE
BALANCES FROM THE FINANCIAL RECORDS OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $64,428.56, IN ACCORDANCE WITH
RESOLUTION 2006-252
Page 202
December 9, 2014
Item #16C3
AWARD BID NUMBER 14-6318, IMMOKALEE ROAD
CHLORAMINE BOOSTER STATION, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$595, 127, TO MITCHELL & STARK CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY, INC., AND APPROVE CONVEYANCE OF
COLLIER COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY TO THE COLLIER
COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT AT AN ESTIMATED
COST NOT TO EXCEED $75 FOR A PROPOSED CHLORAMINE
BOOSTER STATION, PROJECT #70103 — PROPERTY
LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF IMMOKALEE
ROAD AND 4TH STREET NE
Item #16D1
A MODIFICATION TO A DISASTER RECOVERY GRANT
AGREEMENT FOR DISASTER RELIEF AND LONG TERM
RECOVERY OR MITIGATION WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, AND AN
ASSOCIATED SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT -
ALLOCATING UNSPENT DISASTER RECOVERY GRANT
FUNDS FROM A COMPLETED PROJECT TO GOODWILL'S
ROBERT'S CENTER PROJECT
Item #16D2
SECOND AMENDMENT TO A SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT
WITH BIG CYPRESS HOUSING CORPORATION TO
REALLOCATE ACTIVITY FUNDS - REALLOCATING FUNDS
FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVITY TO
CONSTRUCTION AND CLARIFIES CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Page 203
December 9, 2014
AND MONITORING ESCALATION LANGUAGE
Item #16D3
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH BIG CYPRESS
HOUSING CORPORATION FOR THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT SITE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT TO EXTEND THE COMPLETION DATE, AND
UPDATE LANGUAGE — EXTENDING THE COMPLETION
DATE FROM DECEMBER 31, 2014 TO APRIL 30, 2016 AND
CLARIFYING DELIEVERABLES TO SATISFY FEDERAL AND
LOCAL COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS
Item #16D4
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $10,000 IN
PROGRAM INCOME REVENUE GENERATED BY
AFFORDABLE RENTAL PROPERTIES ACQUIRED UNDER
THE NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM —
INCOME FROM RENTAL PROPERTIES LOCATED ON
GILCHRIST STREET
Item #16D5
THREE AFTER-THE-FACT AMENDMENTS AND
ATTESTATION STATEMENTS WITH AREA AGENCY ON
AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. FOR THE
COMMUNITY CARE FOR THE ELDERLY, ALZHEIMER'S
DISEASE INITIATIVE AND HOME CARE FOR THE ELDERLY
PROGRAMS TO ADD ADDITIONAL GRANTOR LANGUAGE —
CORRECTING THE RATE AMOUNTS IN THE SERVICE RATE
Page 204
December 9, 2014
REPORT
Item #16D6
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH COLLIER
COUNTY SENIOR RESOURCE CENTER, INC, D/B/A COLLIER
SENIOR RESOURCES TO HOST THE SENIOR NUTRITION
PROGRAM AT THE GOLDEN GATE SENIOR CENTER —
LOCATED AT 4898 CORONADO PARKWAY
Item #16D7
AN AFTER-THE-FACT AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER
CONTRACT AND ATTESTATION STATEMENT WITH AREA
AGENCY ON AGING OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. FOR
FEDERAL- AND STATE-FUNDED SERVICES FOR SENIORS
PROGRAMS — CHANGING THE DUE DATE OF THE
SURPLUS/DEFICIT REPORT TO THE 18TH OF EACH MONTH
Item #16D8
ROUTE MODIFICATIONS WITHIN THE COLLIER AREA
TRANSIT SYSTEM — EFFECTING ROUTES #11, #12, #13, #16,
#20, #21, #22, #23, #25 AND #26
Item #16D9
TWO MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
BOARD, INC. FOR THE DELIVERY OF THE 21ST CENTURY
COMMUNITY LEARNING CENTERS SWIMMING SKILLS
Page 205
December 9, 2014
AND DROWNING PREVENTION "MIRACLE PLUS 1 " AND
"MIRACLE PLUS 2" PROGRAMS — CAMPS TO BE HELD
MARCH 16-19, MAY 9, JUNE 8-11 AND JUNE 15-18, 2015 AT
THE IMMOKALEE SPORTS COMPLEX
Item #16D10
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE NAPLES
CHILDREN & EDUCATION FOUNDATION WHICH WILL
PROVIDE FUNDS TO ALLOW UP TO 150 CHILDREN TO
RECEIVE FREE RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES DURING
THE SCHOOL YEAR — PROGRAMS PROVIDED AT THE
IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY PARK AND THE IMMOKALEE
SPORTS COMPLEX
Item #16D11
RESOLUTION 2014-249: THE COLLIER COUNTY
CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND
EVALUATION REPORT (CAPER) FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK, HOME INVESTMENT
PARTNERSHIP, AND EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014; THE CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT RESOLUTION;
AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO CERTIFY THE
CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND
EVALUATIONS REPORT FOR SUBMISSION TO HUD
Item #16D12
Page 206
December 9, 2014
RESOLUTION 2014-250: REPEALING ALL PREVIOUS
RESOLUTIONS ESTABLISHING THE COLLIER COUNTY
PARKS AND RECREATION POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR
THE SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGES (BEER AND WINE) IN COLLIER COUNTY
PARKS INCORPORATING FREEDOM PARK TO THE LIST OF
APPROVED FACILITIES
Item #16D13
THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO ENTER INTO
A FACILITY RENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE NAPLES
MODEL YACHT CLUB, INC. FOR THE USE OF THE NORTH
COLLIER REGIONAL PARK (NCRP) POND DURING
DESIGNATED DATES AND TIMES — FOR A PERIOD OF TWO
YEARS WITH A $500 PER YEAR FEE
Item #16D14
AN AFTER-THE-FACT GRANT APPLICATION TO RECEIVE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT RURAL CAPACITY BUILDING TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE SPONSORED BY THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION FOR LATINO COMMUNITY ASSET BUILDERS
— DEVELOPING A STRATEGIC SET OF ACTIONS TO MEET
THE NEEDS OF THE PREDOMINANTLY HISPANIC/LATINO
COMMUNITY OF IMMOKALEE
Item #16D15
THE RENEWAL OF CONTRACT, NO. 09-5247 "TIGERTAIL
Page 207
December 9, 2014
BEACH WATER AND BEACH CONCESSION AGREEMENT"
WITH RECREATIONAL FACILITIES OF AMERICA, INC., AND
TO APPROVE AND THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN AMENDMENT
#2 PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN CONTRACT VALUE —
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 12, 2015 THE AMENDMENT
PROVIDES FOR THE CONCESSIONAIRE TO PAY FIFTY
DOLLARS PER MONTH FOR UTILITY COST AND INCREASES
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL GROSS REVENUE FROM
TWELVE PERCENT TO THIRTEEN PERCENT
Item #16D16
AN APPLICANT-INSTALLED FACILITIES AGREEMENT FOR
UNDERGROUND CONVERSIONS (WR #4188191 & #4188163)
WITH FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (FPL) FOR
PHASE TWO AND THREE OF THE VANDERBILT BEACH
MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT (MSTU) UTILITY
CONVERSION PROJECT - CONVERTING OVERHEAD
UTILITY LINES TO UNDERGROUND FOR HURRICANE
PREPAREDNESS
Item #16D17
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE SUBRECIPIENT
AGREEMENT WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER
COUNTY, INC. TO EXTEND THE END DATE TO JUNE 30, 2015
Item #16E1
RENEWAL OF COLLIER COUNTY'S CERTIFICATE OF
PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY FOR ADVANCED
Page 208
December 9, 2014
LIFE SUPPORT TRANSPORT FOR ONE YEAR AND THE
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE PERMIT AND CERTIFICATE
Item #16E2
THE PURCHASE OF GROUP HEALTH REINSURANCE
COVERAGE FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2015 IN THE ESTIMATED
AMOUNT OF $854,854 TO FAIRMONT/US FIRE INSURANCE
COMPANY EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2015 — PROTECTING
THE GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE FUND AGAINST
CATASTROPHIC LOSSES
Item #16E3
AWARD ITB #14-6331 TO B3 ENTERPRISES LLC D/B/A
MIDAS AND PMG OF NAPLES LLC D/B/A CARSMETICS FOR
VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT PARTS AND AUTHORIZE STAFF
TO RE-SOLICIT THE BID FOR ADDITIONAL VENDORS —
MAINTAINING COUNTY AUTOMOTIVE, HEAVY
EQUIPMENT AND SMALL EQUIPMENT PARTS AND
SUPPLIES
Item #16E4
AWARD INVITATION TO BID #14-6308S - "FLEET AND
EQUIPMENT SERVICES" TO MULTIPLE VENDORS FOR
FLEET MANAGEMENT SERVICES, REPAIR PARTS AND
ACCESSORIES — AWARDED TO CAPRI LAWN & GARDEN
EQUIPMENT, CUMMINS POWER SOUTH LLC, B3
ENTERPRISES (MIDAS), PMG OF NAPLES LLC
(CARSMETICS), TAMIAMI FORD AND TONY'S AUTO
Page 209
December 9, 2014
GLASS/EDGEWATER AUTO GLASS INC.
Item #16E5
AWARD BID #14-6306 TIRE SERVICES TO DAN CALLAGHAN
ENTERPRISES INC. DBA CALLAGHAN TIRE AND WAGNER
TIRE D/B/A COLLIER TIRE & AUTO REPAIR — FOR
ROADSIDE AND HEAVY TRUCK TIRE REPAIRS AND
REPLACEMENTS
Item #16E6
CHANGE ORDERS AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS —
COVERING THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 22, 2014 TO
NOVEMBER 17, 2014
Item #16E7
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS)
FEDERALLY-FUNDED SUBGRANT AGREEMENT #15-DS-P4-
09-21-01-XXX IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,000 FOR EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT PLANNING, TRAINING AND EXERCISES
AND THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENT — NO
MATCHING FUNDS ARE REQUIRED
Item #16E8
CHANGING THE NAME OF THE SERVICE PROVIDER ON THE
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
AND PERMIT ISSUED TO NORTH NAPLES FIRE CONTROL
AND RESCUE DISTRICT TO NORTH COLLIER FIRE
Page 210
December 9, 2014
CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT DUE TO MERGER OF THE
NORTH NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT
AND BIG CORKSCREW ISLAND FIRE CONTROL AND
RESCUE DISTRICT — IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A STATE
LICENSE TO OPERATE NON-TRANSPORT SERVICES
BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2015
Item #16F1
A RELEASE OF LIEN FOR THE CRESTVIEW PARK
APARTMENTS PHASE II DUE TO THE IMPACT FEES BEING
PAID IN FULL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MULTI-FAMILY
RENTAL IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL PROGRAM, AS SET FORTH
BY SECTION 74-401(E) AND 74-401(G) (5) OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES — IMPACT
FEES WERE PAID IN FULL ON SEPTEMBER 5, 2014
Item #16F2
TWO (2) RELEASES OF LIEN FOR IMMOKALEE OWNER
OCCUPIED WORKFORCE HOUSING DWELLING UNITS THAT
HAVE BEEN REPAID IN FULL — PROPERTY LOCATED AT
1236 ALLEGIANCE WAY AND 1260 ALLEGIANCE WAY
Item #16F3
AN IMPACT FEE REIMBURSEMENT FOR MURPHY OIL USA
TOTALING $109,938, DUE TO AN OVERPAYMENT OF ROAD
IMPACT FEES ON A BUILDING PERMIT — PERMIT FOR A
GAS STATION LOCATED AT THE WALMART @ARTESIA
POINTE
Page 211
December 9, 2014
Item #16F4
RESOLUTION 2014-251 : AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING
GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE
PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2014-15 ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #16F5 — Continued to the January 13, 2015 BCC Meeting
(Per Agenda Change Sheet); Moved to the Regular
Agenda Item #11G (Per Commissioner Henning during
Agenda Changes)
Item #16H1
RESOLUTION 2014-252: APPOINTING SUSAN J. CURLEY AS
AN ALTERNATE MEMBER TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT
BOARD
Item #16H2
RESOLUTION 2014-253: APPOINTING RONALD LEE MYERS,
JANET J. VASEY AND GARY MCNALLY TO THE COLLIER
COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY AUTHORITY TO FOUR YEAR
TERMS EXPIRING ON DECEMBER 31, 2018
Item #16H3
RESOLUTION 2014-254: RE-APPOINTING RAYMOND KANE
AND MATTHEW CROWDER AND APPOINTING DONNA
DOLAN TO THE ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT
Page 212
December 9, 2014
ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR TERMS EXPIRING ON
DECEMBER 31, 2016
Item #16H4
RESOLUTION 2014-255: APPOINTING JOE ADAMS TO THE
HALDEMAN CREEK DREDGING MAINTENANCE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR THE REMAINDER OF TERM WHICH
EXPIRES ON MARCH 13, 2018
Item #161-15
RESOLUTION 2014-256: RE-APPOINTING RACHELLE WOOD
AND APPOINTING JULIAN MORGAN TO THE COLLIER
COUNTY CITIZENS CORPS WITH TERMS EXPIRING
NOVEMBER 5, 2018
Item #16H6
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REIMBURSEMENT REGARDING
ATTENDANCE AT A FUNCTION SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE. ATTENDED THE EAST NAPLES CIVIC
ASSOCIATION LUNCHEON ON NOVEMBER 20, 2014. THE
SUM OF $18 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S
TRAVEL BUDGET — HELD AT THE HAMILTON HARBOR
YACHT CLUB
Item #16J1
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 13, 2014
THROUGH NOVEMBER 19, 2014
Page 213
December 9, 2014
Item #16J2
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 20, 2014
THROUGH NOVEMBER 26, 2014
Item #16J3
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 27, 2014
THROUGH DECEMBER 3, 2014
Item #16J4
THE USE OF $1 ,000 FROM THE CONFISCATED TRUST FUNDS
TO SUPPORT THE NATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
MUSEUM
Item #16J5
THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT'S INTERNAL AUDIT
REPORT 2014-14 JOB CREATION INVESTMENT PROGRAM:
FLORIDA SPECIALTIES, LLC, ISSUED ON DECEMBER 3, 2014
— AVAILABLE ELECTRONICALLY ON THE CLERK OF
COURTS' WEBSITE
Item #16J6
THE REPORT OF INTEREST FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE
218.78 AND THE PURCHASING ORDINANCE; FOR THE YEAR
ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 NO INTEREST WAS
Page 214
December 9, 2014
REQUESTED OR PAID
Item #16J7
CAPITAL ASSET DISPOSITION RECORDS FOR THE TIME
PERIOD OCTOBER 1, 2013 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2014
Item #16K1
PAYMENT FOR LITIGATION SUPPORT SERVICES BY R.
ALAN WILCOX, MAI, SRA FOR THE ORDER OF TAKING
HEARING FOR COLLIER COUNTY V. ANDY MORGAN, ET
AL., (LASIP PROJECT NO. 51101) - CREWS, COPE, SANDY
LANE IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,500. FISCAL
IMPACT $1,500 - THE PARENT TRACT IS LOCATED AT BOTH
THE NORTHEAST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF SANTA
BARBARA BOULEVARD AND WHITAKER ROAD AND AT
BOTH THE NORTHWEST AND SOUTHWEST CORNERS OF
SUNSET BOULEVARD AND WHITAKER ROAD BETWEEN
DAVIS BOULEVARD AND RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD
IN COLLIER COUNTY, NAPLES, FLORIDA
Item #161(2
THE EXPENDITURE OF $60,045 FOR FOLLOW-UP REAL
ESTATE APPRAISAL SERVICES RELATING TO THE GOLDEN
GATE BOULEVARD WIDENING PROJECT (PROJECT NO.
60040)
Item #17A
Page 215
December 9, 2014
RESOLUTION 2014-257: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING
CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL
REVENUE) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2014-15 ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2014-258: AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT'S UTILITIES STANDARDS
MANUAL
Item 417C
ORDINANCE 2014-42 AND RESOLUTION 2014-259:
AUTHORIZING THE USE OF THE UNIFORM METHOD OF
COLLECTING NON-AD VALOREM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
WITHIN THE PLATT ROAD COMMUNITY AS THE METHOD
OF COLLECTING THE $10,500 UTILIZED FOR EMERGENCY
REPAIRS ON PLATT ROAD AND (2) ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
TO ESTABLISH THE PLATT ROAD MUNICIPAL SERVICE
BENEFIT UNIT
Page 216
December 9, 2014
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:20 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECI L DI ►%' CTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
Asa./
TOM HENNING, • AIRMAN
ATTEST
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
'b:; 40
�� M
Attest n -7; an's
signaturejo iy.
These inutes approved by the Board on 13&��5 , as presented
or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT
REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 217