BCC Minutes 06/09/2015 R BCC
REGULAR
MEETING
MINUTES
June 9, 2015
June 9, 2015
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, June 9, 2015
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: Tim Nance
Donna Fiala
Georgia Hiller
Tom Henning
Penny Taylor
ALSO PRESENT:
Leo Ochs, County Manager
Nick Casalanguida, Deputy County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Courts
Troy Miller, Television Operations Manager
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
01 I I,
• *
r,
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3" Floor
Naples FL 34112
June 09, 2015
9:00 AM
Commissioner Tim Nance, District 5—BCC Chair
Commissioner Donna Fiala, District 1 — BCC Vice-Chair; CRA Chair
Commissioner Georgia Hiller, District 2 — Community & Economic Dev. Chair
Commissioner Tom Henning, District 3 — PSCC Chair
Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4— TDC Chair; CRA Vice-Chair
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER 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.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR
FUTURE AGENDA TO BE HEARD NO SOONER THAN 1:00 P.M., OR AT THE
CONCLUSION OF THE AGENDA; WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST.
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."
Page 1
June 9, 2015
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.
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.
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 DIVISION LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor Michael Bannon - Crossroads Community Church of Naples
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent agenda.)
B. May 12, 2015 - BCC/Regular Meeting Minutes
3. SERVICE AWARDS
Page 2
June 9,2015
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating June 15, 2015 as World Elder Abuse Awareness
Day in Collier County recognizing that seniors are valued members of our
community and that it is our collective responsibility to ensure they live
safely and with dignity. To be accepted by Vickijo Letchworth, Elder Abuse
Advocate.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for June 2015 to
the Naples Daily News. To be accepted by Manny Garcia, Editor; Andrea
Sturzenegger, Vice President, Membership and Marketing, The Greater
Naples Chamber of Commerce; and Kristi Bartlett, Vice President,
Opportunity Naples, The Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
Item #7 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT
OR FUTURE AGENDA
Item 8 and Item #9 to be heard no sooner than 1:30 pm unless otherwise noted.
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item to be heard at 9:30 a.m. Recommendation to deny the single,
2013 Cycle 3 Growth Management Plan Amendment specific to the
Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict petition. (Adoption Hearing) (Companion
to rezone petition PUDZ-PL20130001726, Vincentian Village Mixed Use
Planned Unit Development).
B. 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 (1) approve an Ordinance amending
Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land
Page 3
June 9, 2015
Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations
for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the
appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification
of the herein described real property from a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) zoning district to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD)
zoning district for a project to be known as the Vincentian Village MPUD,
to allow construction of a maximum of 224 multifamily residential dwelling
units, up to 250,000 gross square feet of commercial land uses, and a hotel
limited to 150 rooms and an assisted living facility (ALF) at 0.6 FAR, and
(2) an Agreement Confirming GAP Housing and Imposing Covenants and
Restrictions on Real Property. The commercial uses are subject to
conversions and limitations if the project is developed as mixed use or if a
hotel or ALF is constructed. The residential uses are subject to a GAP
Housing Agreement which would provide that a minimum of 40% of the
dwelling units constructed above the allowable base density of 3 dwelling
units per acre shall be offered to persons who earn between 81-150% of the
Naples Marco Island Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) annual median
income at the time of qualification. The subject property is located at the
southeast corner of Southwest Boulevard and U.S. 41 in Section 32,
Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of
30.68+/- acres; providing for the repeal of Ordinance Number 99-37, the
Vincentian PUD; and by providing an effective date. [PUDZ-
PL20130001726. This is a companion item to the Growth Management Plan
Amendment establishing the Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict,
PL2013 0001767/CP-2013-10].
C. This item to be heard immediately following Item 9B. This item
requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be
sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance
Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code
which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the
unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate
zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein
described real property from a Residential (RSF-3) and Agricultural (A)
zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning
district for the project known as Argo Manatee RPUD to allow development
of up to 225 single family and/or multi-family dwelling units on property
located south and adjacent to U.S. 41 and Manatee Road in Section 11,
Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of
Page 4
June 9, 2015
75.3±- acres; and by providing an effective date [PUDZ-PL20130002588].
D. This item has been continued from the May 26, 2015 BCC Meeting, and
further continued to the June 23, 2015 BCC meeting at staffs request
with the applicant's concurrence. 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 deny Petition VAC-PL20140001887 to disclaim,
renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of 15th
Street as shown on the plat of Eastover, Plat Book 1 Page 97, of the Public
Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 3, Township 47
South, Range 29 East, Immokalee, Collier County, Florida.
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to adopt a resolution authorizing the condemnation of
those perpetual and temporary easement interests necessary for the
construction of stormwater improvements known as the Wing South
segment of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project. (Project No.
51101.) Estimated fiscal impact: $1,715,000. (Gerald Kurtz, Principal
Project Manager).
B. Recommendation to approve a resolution superseding Resolution 2014-224,
providing for updates to the Collier County Growth Management
Department Development Services Fee Schedule with an effective date of
October 1, 2015, decreasing fees for building permit development-related
application, processing, review, and inspection fees, and related engineering
re-inspection fees. (Jamie French, Growth Management Deputy
Administrator)
C. Recommendation to authorize the creation of fifteen (15) additional Full-
Time Equivalent positions in the Growth Management Department in
response to increased customer demand. The proposed positions will be
funded with current user fee reserves, require no additional fees, and have no
fiscal impact on the General Fund. (Jamie French, Growth Management
Deputy Administrator)
D. Recommendation to provide direction for operations and management of the
Page 5
June 9, 2015
County's dependent fire districts. (Len Golden Price, Administrative
Services Administrator)
E. Recommendation to adopt a resolution establishing the Ave Maria
Innovation Zone to attract and retain qualified targeted industry businesses
in the defined unincorporated area of Collier County. (Bruce Register,
Office of Business and Economic Development Director)
F. Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid #15-6379 Collier Area Transit
(CAT) Facility Improvements - Phase II for construction of improvements at
the Collier Area Transit Administration and Operations Facility, to DEC
Contracting Group, Inc., in the amount of$1,454,508.67 and authorize the
Chairman to sign the attached contract. (Steve Carnell, Public Services
Administrator)
G. Recommendation to amend the Procurement Ordinance, No. 2013-069, as
recommended and authorize the County Attorney to advertise a future public
hearing date for adoption. (Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
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.
Page 6
June 9,2015
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Runaway Bay at Fiddler's Creek, Phase 1,
PL20120002610 and to authorize the County Manager, or his
designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of
$4,000 to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent.
2) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Runaway Bay at Fiddler's Creek, Phase 2,
PL20130000531, and to authorize the County Manager, or his
designee, to release the Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of
$4,000 to the Project Engineer or the Developer's designated agent.
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facilities for Runaway Bay at Fiddler's Creek, Phase 2-1,
PL20130000543, and to authorize the County Manager, or his
designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) and
Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of$18,743 to the Project
Engineer or the Developer's designated agent.
4) Recommendation to approve an extension for completion of
subdivision improvements associated with Cordoba at Lely Resort
(AR-13078).
5) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearin2 be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Hacienda Lakes Business Park,
(Application Number PL20140000776) approval of the standard form
Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount
of the performance security.
6) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. Should a hearin2 be held on this item, all
participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve for recording the final plat of Corsica at Talis Park Replat,
(Application Number PL20150000146) approval of the standard form
Construction and Maintenance Agreement, approval of the amount of
Page 7
June 9,2015
the performance security.
7) 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 Center Village,
Application Number 20140002649.
8) Recommendation to approve the release of(2) Code Enforcement
Liens with a combined accrued value of$346,374.58 for payment of
$674.58, in the code enforcement action entitled Board of County
Commissioners v. Saint Hubert Jean Baptiste and Fabiola Antoine,
Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Case Nos. CEPM20110004442
and CESD20110004443 relating to property located at 4724 25th
Avenue SW, Collier County, Florida.
9) Recommendation to approve the release of a Code Enforcement Lien
with an accrued value of$88,577.29 for payment of$2,027.29, in the
code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Paul and Jacqueline Richards, Code Enforcement Board Case No.
CESD20100020099, relating to property located at 580 24th Avenue
NE, Collier County, Florida.
10) Recommendation to approve the release of a Code Enforcement Lien
with an accrued value of$45,567.87 for payment of$567.87, in the
code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v.
Kenneth W. Lipka, Code Enforcement Special Magistrate Case No.
CEV20080016915, relating to property located at 2675 43rd Avenue
NE, Collier County, Florida.
11) Recommendation to approve a Resolution establishing the Growth
Management Oversight Committee as provided for during the May
26, 2015 Board of County Commissioners public hearing.
12) Recommendation to hear Land Development Code Amendments
5.05.05 Automobile Service Stations and 2.03.09 Open Space Zoning
Districts at two regularly scheduled daytime hearings and waive the
night hearing requirement. LDC Amendment 5.05.05 Automobile
Service Stations proposes to add a conditional use to several zoning
districts.
Page 8
June 9,2015
13) Recommendation to accept a proposal from Humiston & Moore
Engineers dated May 8, 2015 for review and confirmation of beach
width/fill analysis conducted by county staff to determine if beach
renourishment is required in November 2015; approve a work order
under Contract 13-6164-CZ for a not to exceed amount of$4,984,
authorize the County Manager or his designee to execute Work Order,
and make a finding that this item promotes tourism (Project No.
80165).
14) Recommendation to authorize a $10,000 increase to Purchase Order
4500149729 for Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz,
P.C., ("Baker Donelson") relating to legal services in the FEMA
Beach Restoration Deobligation Second Appeal, DR-1609-DR-FL.,
PA ID 021-99021-00 to approve Work Orders with CB&I Coastal
Planning & Engineering, Inc. and Atkins North America, Inc. to
provide professional engineering services for Phase II Contingency
FEMA Response Assistance under Contract No. 13-6164-CZ for a
Time and Material amount not to exceed $5,000 each (Fund No. 001-
103010), and authorize the Board's Chairman to execute the attached
work orders.
15) Recommendation to direct the County Manager or designee to
advertise and bring back a proposed ordinance establishing the
adoption of the required State mandated Florida Building Code Fifth
Edition (2014) update effective June 30, 2015 and incorporate existing
local amendments and the current County wind maps. Exemptions
identified in Ordinance 2012-14 will remain in full effect until the
filing of the new Ordinance.
16) Recommendation to approve an Adopt-a-Road Program Agreement
for the roadway segment of Vanderbilt Beach Road from US 41 to
Goodlette-Frank Road, with two (2) recognition signs at a total cost of
$60 with the volunteer group, Platinum Dry Cleaners.
17) Recommendation to approve a waiver in accordance with the
guidelines set forth in the Advance Street Name Sign Guidelines
policy and Resolution No. 2012-114 for the placement of advance
street name guide signs along Immokalee Road (CR 846) at the
approaches to Pebblebrooke Drive.
Page 9
June 9, 2015
18) Recommendation to quitclaim Collier County's interests in a 30 foot
strip of land to Jeff Dami, Calixto Montenegro and World Strategic
Alliances, LLC, that was originally deeded to Collier County for road
right-of-way by a predecessor in title. (Fiscal Impact: $0)
19) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the total
amount of$46,237 for Parcel 263RDUE in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. Ganash Rajaram, et al., Case No. 15-CA-379. (Golden
Gate Boulevard From East of Wilson Boulevard to 20th Street East,
Project No. 60040.) Fiscal Impact: $46,237.
20) Recommendation to approve and execute a Local Agency Program
Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation in which
Collier County would be reimbursed up to $1,270,901 for the
construction and construction engineering inspection of sidewalks on
New Market Road in Immokalee, a Resolution authorizing the
Chairman to execute the Agreement and to authorize the necessary
budget amendment (Project #33423).
21) Recommendation to approve the annual Traffic Signal Maintenance
and Compensation Agreement for the maintenance of Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) owned traffic signal devices to
be maintained by the Collier County Traffic Operations (CCTO)
Section of the Transportation Engineering Division and to authorize
the Chairman to sign the Agreement. (Fiscal Impact Revenue
$169,176.)
22) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
Contract No. 15-6382, "Grant Funded Professional Services for
Coastal Zone" with four engineering firms: Atkins North America,
Inc., CB&I Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc., Humiston & Moore
Engineers, P.A., and Olsen Associates, Inc.
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation that the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)
accept an offer to purchase CRA-owned property known as Rebecca
Weeks, Lots 26 and 27 reserving an easement over the westerly 25
feet and the southerly 10 feet for stormwater purposes; authorize the
Page 10
June 9,2015
CRA Chairman to execute all documents necessary to facilitate the
sale and authorize staff to deposit the funds received from the sale into
the appropriate account.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve a contract with Disney & Associates,
P.A., under Request for Proposal #14-6356, "Re-Design of the
Northeast Recycling Center" (Project Number 59009).
2) Recommendation to award Request for Quote No. 14-6213-33, "Bay
Villas Water Main Replacement," to Douglas N. Higgins, Inc., in the
amount of$521,148 (Project Numbers 71010 and 70043).
3) Recommendation to award Request for Quotation No. 14-6213-24
"Wiggins Pass Water Main Replacement," to Douglas N. Higgins,
Inc., in the amount of$623,897 (Project Number 71010).
4) Recommendation to approve, and authorize the Chairman to execute,
the attached inter-local agreement allowing the Collier County Water-
Sewer District to assume ownership of the fire hydrants now owned
and maintained by the Greater Naples Fire District (excluding any fire
hydrants behind master meters), together with the ongoing
responsibility for maintenance, repair, and replacement; and, authorize
the county to accept a Bill of Sale.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager or his designee to
electronically enter an amendment in the Federal Transit
Administration Transportation Electronic Award Management system
to the grant award for the Congestion Management System/Intelligent
Transportation System grant award revising the number of shelters to
be constructed from 12 to 24 and reallocate funds for construction
management.
2) Recommendation to approve, "after the fact," submittal of the attached
project proposal to the Florida Department of Transportation for the
State Discretionary Transit Service Development Program for a total
funding request of$274,500.
Page 11
June 9, 2015
3) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment recognizing
$93,877.23 in program income revenue generated by the sale of a
Collier County owned affordable home acquired under the
Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP 1).
4) Recommendation to approve Third Amendment to the Subrecipient
Agreement with Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc., to
extend the Faith Landing Infrastructure Improvement project
completion date and clarify beneficiary requirements and deadlines.
5) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to execute the Student
School Year Agreement with the District School Board of Collier
County for transportation services for County recreation program
participants. Program fees for each participant fully cover these costs.
6) Recommendation to approve Amendment No. 3 to the subrecipient
agreement with the City of Naples to provide additional Disaster
Recovery Enhancement funds for the George Washington Carver
Apartments area stormwater improvement project.
7) Recommendation to authorize a budget amendment for a Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) subgrant in the amount of$94,265
to fund the design and permitting of the Immokalee Sports Complex
Fitness Center expansion project.
8) Recommendation to execute a Joint Participation Agreement between
Collier County and the Florida Department of Transportation to
accept Federal Transit Administration Section 5339 Bus and Bus
Facilities funds in the amount of$272,000 for the necessary
improvements to bus stops in the rural area in accordance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act; approve a resolution authorizing the
Chairman to sign the agreement; and authorize the necessary budget
amendments.
9) Recommendation to recognize FY 2015/2016 Transportation
Disadvantaged Trust Fund Trip/Equipment Grant revenue in the
amount of$781,793 with a local match of$86,866, approve a
resolution authorizing its Chairman to execute the grant information
sheet and grant agreement upon receipt from the State, after County
Page 12
June 9,2015
Attorney review, and approve the appropriate budget amendments to
prevent delay of the use of grant funds for the Collier Area Transit
system.
10) Recommendation to recognize and accept revenue for Collier Area
Transit bus purchase in the amount of$230,690.01 and to approve all
necessary budget amendments.
11) Recommendation to approve the FY15 Program of Projects and
submittal of a grant application for the Federal Transit Administration,
49 USC § 5339 FY15 grant funds of$365,428 through Transportation
Electronic Award Management System.
12) Recommendation to reject the only proposal received for Request for
Proposal No.14-6294 All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) site identification,
which the proposing vendor has withdrawn, and re-establish the ATV
Ad Hoc committee through December 12, 2015.
13) Recommendation to waive the Purchasing Ordinance for purchases to
Commercial Energy Specialist over $50,000 and as a sole source
supplier for a period of five years to support the chemical and pool
filtration systems.
14) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment recognizing
revenue from a repayment of Community Development Block Grant
funds from Empowerment Alliance of Southwest Florida where a
grant funded project did not meet a National Objective. Total fiscal
impact $59,001.
15) Recommendation to approve Standard Facility Use Agreements for
Community Markets, authorize the County Manager or his designee to
execute the Short-Term Use Agreements; and direct staff to bring any
Long Term Use Agreements back to the Board for approval and
signature.
16) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution repealing all previous
resolutions establishing and amending parts of the Collier County
Parks and Recreation Department Facilities and Outdoor Areas
License and Fee Policy and establishing the policy anew to provide
for fees for open space rentals at Golden Gate Community Center in
Page 13
June 9, 2015
all user categories.
17) Recommendation to approve an amendment to eight Subrecipient
Agreements for the CDBG and HOME programs to clarify the
duration of the records retention period.
18) Recommendation to approve a standard Donation Agreement that
allows Naples North, LLC to donate a 2.50-acre parcel along with a
management endowment of$4,050.80 to the Conservation Collier
Land Acquisition Program under the offsite vegetation retention
provision of the Land Development Code, at no cost to the County,
and authorize the Chairman to sign the Donation Agreement and staff
to take all necessary actions to close.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve and execute an Amendment to
Agreement providing a time extension to allow for the receipt and
installation of equipment for the Greater Naples Fire District with
respect to funding by the GAC Land Trust.
2) Recommendation to approve an amendment to the agreement with
Florida Department of Transportation for the second year funding of
Fire Station 63 on I-75 and authorize the necessary budget amendment
in the amount of$1,522,069.60.
3) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid #14-6333 - "Motor Oils,
Lubricants, and Fluids" to: Flamingo Oil Corp. as primary vendor,
Palmdale Oil Company as secondary vendor, and Combs Oil
Company as tertiary vendor.
4) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid #15-6432
"Preventative Maintenance Inspection Services and On-Call
Mechanical Contractor Services" to Johnson Controls, Inc. as
primary vendor and Conditioned Air Corporation of Naples, Inc., as
secondary vendor, for Preventative Maintenance and On-Call
Services; and authorize the payment of $17,058.67 to
Conditioned Air Corporation of Naples, Inc. on the predecessor
contract; and, direct the Clerk of Courts to issue payment to
Conditioned Air.
Page 14
June 9,2015
5) Recommendation to approve an Agreement with the City of Coral
Springs, allowing the City's Fire Academy paramedic trainees to
obtain State-required field internship experience and training under
the appropriate supervision of Collier County Emergency Medical
Services.
6) Recommendation to accept reports and ratify staff-approved change
orders and changes to work orders.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve a report covering budget amendments
impacting reserves and moving funds in an amount up to and
including $25,000 and $50,000, respectively.
2) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2014-15 Adopted Budget.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to execute the attached
Interlocal Agreement between the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County and the City of Naples Airport Authority for
emergency and on-call support services as needed.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Recommendation to reappoint three members to the Coastal Advisory
Committee.
2) Recommendation to appoint two members to the Animal Services
Advisory Board.
3) Recommendation to reappoint two members to the Black Affairs
Advisory Board.
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
Page 15
June 9, 2015
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Recommendation to approve an Interlocal Agreement for Election
Services for the November 24, 2015 City of Everglades City
Municipal Election.
2) Recommendation to approve the use of$25,000 from the Confiscated
Trust Funds to support the Collier 211 Campaign.
3) Recommendation to provide approval to designate the Sheriff as the
official applicant and point of contact for the U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance
Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) FY 15 Local
Standard grant, authorize the electronic submission of the application,
accept the grant when awarded, approve associated budget
amendments and approve the Collier County Sheriffs Office to
receive and expend 2015 JAG Standard grant funds.
4) Board declaration of expenditures serving a valid public purpose and
approval of disbursements for the period of May 20 through May 27,
2015.
5) Board declaration of expenditures serving a valid public purpose and
approval of disbursements for the period of May 28 through June 3,
2015.
6) To provide to the Board of County Commissioners the Clerk of the
Circuit Court's Internal Audit Report 2015-3 Job Creation Investment
Program: Arthrex, Inc., and Arthrex Manufacturing, Inc., issued on
June 3, 2015.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to authorize an increase to the purchase order for
Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson, P.A. ("Nabors Giblin") relating to legal
services in the case of Collier County v. Orange Tree Utility Co., et al,
Case No. 2014-CA-001434 and all work related to concluding the
acquisition and integration of the Orange Tree Utility Company into
the Collier County Water-Sewer District.
Page 16
June 9, 2015
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.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
Page 17
June 9, 2015
June 9, 2015
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
Welcome to the Board of County Commissioners meeting of June 9th.
In order to assist us having a smooth meeting, I would ask you at
this time to silence all electronic devices and cell phones so we don't
have interruptions, gongs, chimes, and various other sundry reminders.
Today our invocation will be given to us by Pastor Michael
Bannon of the Crossroads Community Church of Naples. I would ask
you to stand and remain standing and join the Board in the Pledge of
Allegiance.
Item #1A
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — INVOCATION
GIVEN BY PASTOR MICHAEL BANNON FROM THE
CROSSROADS COMMUNITY CHURCH OF NAPLES
PASTOR BANNON: Good morning, and thank you for this
opportunity. Let's pray.
Lord God, I marvel that you have given us such free access that
we can just say "let's pray" and know that we're talking to the Lord of
all.
And so I pray, Lord God, that you would show your sovereignty
over this meeting. You are the one who has appointed government for
us as your servant for our good, and your word tells us it's pleasing for
us to pray for those in authority over us, that we might lead peaceable
and quiet lives Godly in every way.
And so we do ask, Lord God, that you would bless our
commissioners with great wisdom in the issues that they have to deal
with today, great insight into them, that they might make good
decisions that are good for us. I pray for us as well as citizens of this
Page 2
June 9, 2015
county, that you would give us a cooperative spirit that we might be
co-laborers with them for the good of our community.
So we give you thanks for what you'll accomplish. Glorify
yourself, we pray, amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Mr. Ochs, would you take us through today's proposed agenda
changes.
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE DISCLOSURE
PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR CONSENT
AGENDA) — APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and
Commissioners. These are the proposed agenda changes for the Board
of County Commissioners meeting of June 9, 2015.
The first proposed change is to continue Item 11E, that is the Ave
Maria Innovation Zone item, to the June 23rd BCC meeting. That
request is made by Commissioner Taylor.
The next proposed change is to move Item 16Al2 from your
growth management consent agenda to become Item 11H on your
regular agenda. That is an LDC amendment regarding several issues.
Commissioner Taylor has made that request.
The next proposed change is to move Item 16A18 to become Item
11I on your regular agenda. It's a recommendation regarding a
quitclaim deed, and that is made at Commissioner Taylor's request.
The next proposed change is to add Item 16F3 to today's agenda
as an add-on item. That's a recommendation to suspend contracts with
Page 3
June 9, 2015
BQ Concrete pending completion of my internal review that I advised
the Board about at the last meeting. That item would become Item
16F3 on your agenda today.
We have a few agenda notes this morning, Commissioners. The
first one has to do with Item 16A11. That is a resolution establishing
the oversight committee that the Board previously directed staff to
bring back during the May 26th board meeting.
Staff is proposing the following clarification to Section 2,
Paragraph B of the resolution. It reads as follows: The committee
shall be comprised of seven members with one member appointed
from each of the four subareas and three members at large.
Subarea members -- that's the modification to this sentence --
must be either residents of, own property in, or have a business interest
within the geographic area of study.
The additional proposed change is that at-large members can
reside anywhere in Collier County without the requirement for
residency in the subareas or the property or business ownership
requirements outlined above. That proposed clarification is made at
staffs request.
The next proposed change is regarding Item 16D15. This is the
item that approves the standard facility use agreements for community
markets both for short-term and long-term use agreements. The staff is
proposing the following addition to the community market long-term
and community market short-term facility use agreements. It's found
under Item A, the duties and responsibilities of the community market
manager, Subparagraph 11.
And it reads that the -- to verify that all vendors distributing food
or beverage, whether by sale or donation, have the appropriate food
licenses and permits as required under all applicable laws -- and this is
the addition -- and comply specifically with Florida Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services requirements for food safety.
Page 4
June 9, 2015
The next proposed change is Item 16D18. The fiscal impact on
this item has been revised. This is a donation agreement for a
two-and-a-half acre parcel with a management endowment of
$9,737.50, is the correct amount, to the Conservation Collier Land
Acquisition program.
Commissioners, there are three time-certain items on your agenda
today. The first is Item 9A that will be heard at 9:30 this morning, and
9A will then be followed immediately by the companion, Item 9B, and
that item will then be followed in turn by Item 9C, the Argo Manatee
RPUD.
Just a reminder that public comment on general topics not on the
-- excuse me -- the current or future agenda will be heard no sooner
than 1 p.m. or at the conclusion of the agenda, whichever occurs first.
And those are the changes that I have this morning, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
At this time we will ask commissioners for any additional
changes or comments on the consent agenda that they might have.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no changes on today's
consent agenda.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And we'll also do ex parte on -- we'll do
ex parte on our hearings when we open up the public hearings. Do you
have any ex parte, sir, on any of the other regular or consent agenda?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no ex parte today on
today's consent or summary agenda; however, on today's agenda in
general, I don't understand why we're doing land use in the morning
when it's -- when we used to always do it in the afternoon. What's the
reason for the change?
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I consulted with the Chair on that.
When we were setting the agenda last Wednesday, it looked like there
may be a possibility that we could move through the agenda and be
Page 5
June 9, 2015
done before we move into the afternoon. That was obviously before
one-on-one meetings with commissioners or knowledge of items that
they wanted to move from consent to regular. So given that, we
thought that we would hear those items in the chance that you may
finish earlier.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: My concern is there's some
members of the public and other officials here to speak on the
fire-related management. That's what I see out there. I just hope that
we can get through the public before we get through petitioners first.
That's my only concern.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. I appreciate that comment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's the only thing I have.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yes, thank you.
I have no disclosure, no changes, and one comment. I just want
to thank staff for making the modification to the contract for
community markets. It's clear you heard when what the Board said,
that the Board had concerns about food safety, and adding the
requirement that there be compliance, which goes without saying, but
nonetheless to make them aware and pointedly putting it in our
contract is a good thing. So thank you for being responsive to our
concerns.
MR. OCHS: Well, you're welcome. And the Chair really
deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you. And you brought it up,
and you did good in doing that, and I'm glad it all has come to fruition,
no pun intended.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. Thank you.
I have no disclosure, no further changes on today's agenda.
I would like to make one comment. On the consent agenda, Item
Page 6
June 9, 2015
16D18, which has to do with another parcel that's being donated to
Conservation Collier -- and it's on today's change sheet that we have an
increase in the endowment. But, once again, the County Manager has
assured me that our review of Land Development Code to make sure
that these acquisitions by Conservation Collier are going to be fully
funded in perpetuity is coming forward. But I just want to state my
concern that we do need to iron out our program with Conservation
Collier to make sure our endowments are consistent with the state,
allows us to do business with the state.
And I think this is particularly important because of Amendment
I, and Amendment I is going to bring state money into helping us
manage and acquire lands of environmental value in the State of
Florida, and I think we need to avail ourselves of them.
So I just think that we really need to do work on this, and I'm glad
the County Manager has reassured me, and I hope that the Board is
recognizing how important this is.
I have no further changes.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good morning. I have no changes,
no corrections. As far as the consent and summary agendas, I have no
ex parte. But you wanted me to declare ex parte on the regular agenda,
did you say?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Regular agenda. We'll do the public
hearing when we open the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But you want me to mention them
now?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Here goes. On Item 9B, I've
had meetings with the developer, Christopher Shucart; with his
attorney, Rich Yovanovich; Laurie Miller; Marci Seamples; several
Planning Commissioners; Hearing Examiner, East Naples Civic
Page 7
June 9, 2015
Association; several East Naples residents; mail from the real estate
broker, Ross McIntosh. That's an item -- actually, it would consider A
and B because they're both the same topic.
On Item No. 9C, I just -- I had some emails and some calls. I also
-- now, this is on the Argo -- Argo Manatee. I made some calls
because I had some concerns about the sidewalks. And so I've made a
few calls to people. I've spoken with Rich Yovanovich about that, and
I've also called the Hearing Examiner. And that's it for me.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'm sorry. I misunderstood. Are
we not declaring our ex parte when the item is heard?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: You can, ma'am, or not. Three of us have
to do it when we open the public hearings.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll wait. Other than that, there's
no changes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Thank you.
All right. Before we take a motion, I believe we have a speaker
on a consent-agenda item, Mr. Miller; is that the case?
MR. MILLER: That's correct, Mr. Chairman. It's Item 16G1,
Marvin Courtright.
MR. COURTRIGHT: You caught me by surprise. I'm usually
waiting until last to address subjects of that matter.
Marvin Courtright, citizen locally, businessperson in Immokalee.
The interlocal agreement has been addressed for a long, long
time. In '06, there was an interlocal agreement endorsed and signed by
the County Commission. I have here a copy of it.
Then, recently, Mr. Henning's office -- and they -- some -- and
they revised it even though the conditions of the original agreement
automatically renewed and stayed valued -- valued (sic) to today.
So I'd like to provide Mr. Ochs, Mr. Justin Lobb, who I
Page 8
June 9, 2015
understand is now an airport manager, Jeff-- Mr. Klatzkow, Board of
County Commissioners Tim Nance, and Mr. Brock a copy of the
original interlocal agreement dated 2006 that addresses everything in
regard to interlocal agreements.
The second item addresses a revision to it endorsed by Mr.
Henning, which was very hard to find even though it's recent.
So I would just like the privilege of leaving this with you for
review, and do not pass or approve the international -- the interlocal
agreement until someone has looked at this from a different point of
view, and that is, how can we help the Immokalee airport.
Ms. Fiala's very familiar with her airport, but we have no one who
is very familiar with the Immokalee airport. And the Immokalee
airport has been a cash cow since day one, and it's time we considered
that.
And this document, the original one, is very good. What's
missing is compliance with -- you have to have an Airport Authority
Board with an executive director, and that's all I have to say, and I'd
like to provide these to the -- any questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I do have a question.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are you saying -- now, we used to
have an airport authority board that was dismantled, right? And so are
you suggesting that we re-establish an airport authority board?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Board of County Commissioners is the
airport authority.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But before they weren't.
MR. COURTRIGHT: And it literally demolished -- it really hurt
the county, and it hurt the commission when Mrs. Hiller took action to
abolish the initial Airport Authority Board, and it ended up being
dumped on the County Manager and --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That wasn't me.
Page 9
June 9, 2015
MR. COURTRIGHT: -- and land management.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Marvin, that wasn't me. I didn't
demolish or get rid of anything.
MR. COURTRIGHT: I'm sorry. I thought I was party to a
conversation where -- here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. I think it was Commissioner
Coyle, if I'm not mistaken. But I didn't do anything.
MR. COURTRIGHT: Well, at the same time those same
commissioners' names are on these endorsements that I'm giving you.
And there is and still is, unless somebody can provide something
shutting it down or extending it or doing something to it, and you can't
do it illegally. There are requirements. This document, that first one, is
good and valid. I recommend that it be researched.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, Marvin. If you would just
give the documents to the County Manager, he will distribute those for
you.
MR. COURTRIGHT: County Manager.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Right there, sir. Thank you.
MR. COURTRIGHT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any further comments from the Board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, is there a motion to
approve today's regular --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- consent, and summary agenda as
amended?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion by Commissioner
Henning and a second by Commissioner Hiller.
Further discussion?
(No response.)
Page 10
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Passes unanimously.
Page 11
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
June 9,2015
Continue Item 11E to the June 23,2015 BCC Meeting: Recommendation to adopt a resolution
establishing the Ave Maria Innovation Zone to attract and retain qualified targeted industry businesses in the
defined unincorporated area of Collier County. (Commissioner Taylor's request)
Move Item 16Al2 to Item 11H: Recommendation to hear Land Development Code Amendments 5.05.05
Automobile Service Stations and 2.03.09 Open Space Zoning Districts at two regularly scheduled daytime
hearings and waive the night hearing requirement. LDC Amendment 5.05.05 Automobile Service Stations
proposes to add a conditional use to several zoning districts. (Commissioner Taylor's request)
Move Item 16A18 to Item 11I: Recommendation to quitclaim Collier County's interests in a 30 foot strip of
land to Jeff Dami,Calixto Montenegro and World Strategic Alliances, LLC,that was originally deeded to
Collier County for road right-of-way by a predecessor in title. (Fiscal Impact: $0) (Commissioner Taylor's
request)
Add On Item 16F3: Recommendation to suspend contracts with BQ Concrete LLC., pending completion
of the County Manager's internal review of this contractor and subsequent presentation of a report to the
Board. (Staffs request)
Note:
Item 16A11: Recommendation to approve a Resolution establishing the Growth Management Oversight
Committee as provided for during the May 26,2015 Board of County Commissioners public hearing.
Staff proposes the following clarification to Section Two,Subparagraph B of the Resolution:
B. The Committee shall be comprised of seven(7)members,with one(1) member appointed from each of the
four(4)sub-areas and three(3)members at large. Sub-area members must be either residents of,own
property in,or have a business interest within the geographic areas of study. At large members can reside
anywhere in Collier County without the requirement for residency in the sub-areas or the property or
business ownership requirements outlined above.All members shall serve at the pleasure of the Board. The
County Manager shall select a staff liaison to attend the Committee meetings and assist the
Committee. (Staffs request)
Item 16D15: Recommendation to approve Standard Facility Use Agreements for Community Markets,
authorize the County Manager or his designee to execute the Short-Term Use Agreements; and direct staff to
bring any Long Term Use Agreements back to the Board for approval and signature.
Staff proposes the following addition to both the Community Market Long-Term and the Community
Market Short-Term Facility Use Agreements:
A. Duties and Responsibilities of the Community Market Manager:
l 1) Verify that all vendors distributing food or beverage,whether by sale or donation, have the
appropriate food licenses and permits as required under all applicable laws and comply specifically
with Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services requirements for food safety.
(Staffs request)
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
June 9,2015
Page 2
Item 16D18 Fiscal Impact has been revised: Recommendation to approve a standard Donation
Agreement that allows Naples North,LLC to donate a 2.50-acre parcel along with a management
endowment of$4,050.80$9,737.50 to the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program under the
offsite vegetation retention provision of the Land Development Code,at no cost to the County,and
authorize the Chairman to sign the Donation Agreement and staff to take all necessary actions to
close. (Staffs request)
Time Certain Items:
Item 9A to be heard at 9:30 a.m.,immediately followed by Items 9B and 9C
6/9/2015 3:31 PM
June 9, 2015
Item #2B
BCC REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FROM MAY 12, 2015 —
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
All right. Approval of the May 12 BCC regular meeting minutes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So moved.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion. A second by
Commissioner Nance.
Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (No verbal response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That passes unanimously.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JUNE 15, 2015 AS WORLD
ELDER ABUSE AWARENESS DAY IN COLLIER COUNTY,
RECOGNIZING THAT SENIORS ARE VALUED MEMBERS OF
OUR COMMUNITY AND THAT IT IS OUR COLLECTIVE
RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THEY LIVE SAFELY AND
WITH DIGNITY. ACCEPTED BY VICKIJO LETCHWORTH,
ELDER ABUSE ADVOCATE — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes you to Item 4,
Page 12
June 9, 2015
proclamations. Item 4A is a proclamation designating June 15, 2015,
as World Elder Abuse Awareness Day in Collier County recognizing
that seniors are valued members of our community and that it is our
collective responsibility to ensure they live safely and with dignity.
To be accepted by VickiJo Letchworth, excuse me, Elder Abuse
Advocate. If you'd please step forward and receive your proclamation.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Would you like to make a few remarks?
MS. LETCHWORTH: Yes, please. Here?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, ma'am.
MS. LETCHWORTH: I'm VickiJo Letchworth. I work at the
Shelter for Abused Women and Children, and I specialize in working
with senior population of Collier County.
I would like to say that according to the best available estimates
that we've been able to locate, that one -- between one and two million
seniors 65 years and older have been neglected, exploited, or abused
by someone that they relied on for either care or protection. For every
one senior report that we get of abuse, five more go unreported.
So I'd like to thank you for your support.
This is a silent epidemic that we don't know that's happening.
There's a shame factor built into this that they don't want to talk about
it because sometimes it's their elder children that are abusing them.
So I would like to recommend that you-all support the shelter and
the seniors in Collier County by wearing purple, anything purple, on
June the 15th, which is the official day.
Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Elder abuse is a big deal, and it
exists in Collier County. We have so many elders at risk. And we've
had discussions about affordable housing, and the real at-risk
population right now is the elder population.
Page 13
June 9, 2015
We have people who are seniors who don't even have enough
money to eat. We have a facility in North Naples. The Jewish
community center is providing a free hot meal on Wednesdays to our
senior citizens, and the line is out the door, and it's the only meal these
people are getting in the entire week.
MS. LETCHWORTH: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So it's a big deal, and we need to
do something about it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's a wonderful place.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I had a little talk with Leo about if
we ever had any monies that were unencumbered and left over, that we
should consider -- instead of some of the other programs, that, you
know, maybe we should be considering donating some of that money
to that organization.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, yeah. And we -- and I've
actually been working with -- we have a new commander at the new
north station through the Sheriffs Office, and he's been working with
the elders, and we've been working with Leo to see what we can do to
assist.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's a great organization.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, it's phenomenal.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I've gone to some of their events.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. It's great. So thank you for
what you're doing.
MS. LETCHWORTH: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you. Yes, we have many
outstanding agencies and volunteers locally that help us, but it's very
true that we have big differences in demographics in Collier County.
We're a very wealthy county, but we also have areas and demographics
Page 14
June 9, 2015
that have great need, and need to remain vigilant for these.
So thank you for everything that you do.
MS. LETCHWORTH: You're welcome. Thank you.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF
THE MONTH FOR JUNE 2015 TO THE NAPLES DAILY NEWS.
ACCEPTED BY MANNY GARCIA, EDITOR; ANDREA
STURZENEGGER, VICE PRESIDENT, MEMBERSHIP AND
MARKETING, GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE;
AND KRISTI BARTLETT, VICE PRESIDENT, OPPORTUNITY
NAPLES, GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE —
PRESENTED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to presentations.
Item 5A is a presentation of the Collier County Business of the
Month for June 2015 to the Naples Daily News. To be accepted by
Manny Garcia, editor; Andrea Sturzenegger, vice president,
membership and marketing for the Greater Naples Chamber of
Commerce; and Kristi Bartlett, vice president, Opportunity Naples
with the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce. Please.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I didn't expect to see you. I thought
that baby would be here by now.
MS. BARLETT: I wish she was here.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: She's moving farther and farther away
from the dais here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But you look wonderful.
MS. BARLETT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: In the center here. There we go. To the
Page 15
June 9, 2015
left, to the left, to the left. There we go.
Mr. Garcia, you're not going to make any remarks here? Come
on now. This is the media.
MR. GARCIA: No, I'll pass.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, sir. Thank you very much.
Is there a motion to approve today's proclamation?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Motion and a second.
(No verbal response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All those in favor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Thank you very much.
All right, sir. That takes us to —
Item #11A
RESOLUTION 2015-122: AUTHORIZING CONDEMNATION
OF THOSE PERPETUAL AND TEMPORARY EASEMENT
INTERESTS NECESSARY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS THE WING
SOUTH SEGMENT OF THE LELY AREA STORMWATER
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Takes us to Item 11, County Manager's report. We
have six minutes before your time-certain.
Page 16
June 9, 2015
The first item is 11A. That is a recommendation to adopt a
resolution authorizing the condemnation of those perpetual and
temporary easement interests necessary for the construction of
stormwater improvements known as the Wing South segment of the
Lely Area Stormwater Improvement project.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Very good.
I will make a motion to approve. We're going to go to discussion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second.
Commissioner Fiala will start, then Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I didn't want to motion or
second until I just had an answer, and it looks like the answer is great.
But still, on Wing South, I looked at the map; I studied the maps. I just
want to make sure that our LASIP project will not interfere with their
runway, nor will it interfere with their taxiways.
The residents in Wing South all have a hangar as a garage, as well
as their own garage, and they can fly in and out every day to work and
come back, and then they taxi over to their garage or to their hangar.
And I just want to make sure that isn't going to interfere.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, ma'am. That will not.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. I didn't want to second
anything until I heard that.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Doesn't staff have to put
something on the record about a -- oh, this is a temporary easement.
MR. KLATZKOW: We ensured that there was sufficient
background, sir, so the presentation is not necessary.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The second question, is
this the last project for LASIP?
Page 17
June 9, 2015
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It is, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Now we're going to Golden Gate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Okay. Well, that will be
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's a good thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That will be great. The
headwaters for Rookery Bay is actually further to the east. That's my
only comment on what was said in the executive summary, but
anyways.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I add a little something?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: When they first started this LASIP
project, what they had to do is start at the bottom of it --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- because they had to open those
channels up. If they started to open it up at the top, which we're
getting to now, the water would have had no place to go because there
was no area to flow into.
So now when we finish this top area, the water will all be able to
flow in and be dispersed rather than be harmful to our waters
surrounding Collier County.
But now we're going to get into Golden Gate because they also
have flooding problems, but we couldn't do that till we got this done.
So I think -- it's a big plan, but most people don't realize how,
what the succession was in planning for the LASIP project, and I just
wanted to put that on the record. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. There's a motion and a second
to adopt the resolution. Is there any further comment?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
Page 18
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It passed unanimously. Thank you.
Item #11B
RESOLUTION 2015-123: SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION
2014-224, PROVIDING UPDATES TO THE COLLIER COUNTY
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES FEE SCHEDULE WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE
OCTOBER 1, 2015, DECREASING FEES FOR BUILDING
PERMIT DEVELOPMENT RELATED APPLICATIONS,
PROCESSING, REVIEW, AND INSPECTION FEES, AND
RELATED ENGINEERING RE-INSPECTIONS FEES — ADOPTED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, Item 11B is a recommendation to
approve a resolution superseding Resolution 2014-224 providing for
updates to the Collier County Growth Management Department
Development Services fee schedule with an effective date of October
1, 2015, decreasing fees for building permit development-related
application, processing, review, and inspection fees, and related
engineering reinspection fees.
Mr. French from your Growth Management Division is available
to make a presentation or respond to questions.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Second.
Page 19
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion to approve and a
second.
Comments by Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I just want to say it's really
impressive, Jamie, that you are proposing a decrease in fees and the
next item proposing additional full-time staff to increase the level of
service. And the fact that we can be saving the construction
community monies while increasing costs at the same time is just --
that's really great management, so thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Seems like a conundrum, doesn't it,
ma'am?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: In government for sure. But, I
mean, that's why -- and that's the difference, because Jamie is --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: David Copperfield.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- kind of like a private sector
public guy. Great job. So I just want to tie those two agenda items
together and say thank you. Excellent.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Excellent. Good-news item.
Any further comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, there's a motion and a
second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It passes unanimously. Thank you.
Page 20
June 9, 2015
Item 11C, sir.
Item #11C
AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF FIFTEEN (15)
ADDITIONAL FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT POSITIONS IN THE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT IN RESPONSE TO
INCREASED CUSTOMER DEMAND. PROPOSED POSITIONS
WILL BE FUNDED WITH CURRENT USER FEE RESERVES,
REQUIRE NO ADDITIONAL FEES, AND HAVE NO FISCAL
IMPACT ON THE GENERAL FUND — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. It's a recommendation to authorize the
creation of 15 additional full-time equivalent positions in the Growth
Management Department in response to increased customer demand.
These positions will be funded with current user fee reserves, require
no additional fees, and have no fiscal impact on the General Fund.
And Mr. French, again, is --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And again, motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Motion -- second.
MR. OCHS: Motion by Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's great.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And second by Commissioner Hiller,
and comments by Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. And I just want to say thank
you again for doing this, because I've heard from the construction
community that it is very clear we need this additional staff because
we're starting to, you know, build up a backlog again and to maintain
that level of service that we had when things were slower. We had
always committed we would bring staff back on when we saw this
uptick. And so we're doing exactly what we committed to the building
Page 21
June 9, 2015
industry.
And so, again, great.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And at no General Fund cost,
which is --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And to confirm, Mr. French, these
full-time additional folks are paid in full by the fees that are collected;
is that correct?
MR. FRENCH: They are 100 percent funded by those enterprise
funds, Fund 113, which is your building funds, and then Fund 131,
which is land development funds, that's correct. These are fees we
collect for services.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We could just add that there's
overwhelming building going on, and we needed to have these
employees in place because, we -- things were beginning to drop, and
they did not want to see that happen, so --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, they were.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- we really appreciate you keeping
your finger on the pulse of things and keeping the cost down. Thank
you so much.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Any additional comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, there's a motion by
Commissioner Fiala and a second by Commissioner Hiller to authorize
the creation of these additional positions.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
Page 22
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It passes unanimously. Thank you.
I believe that takes us to our time -- first time-certain, sir.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman.
Item #9A
ORDINANCE 2015-32: RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THE
SINGLE, 2013 CYCLE 3 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT SPECIFIC TO THE VINCENTIAN MIXED USE
SUBDISTRICT PETITION. COMPANION TO REZONE PETITION
PUDZ-PL20130001726, THE VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MIXED
USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT — MOTION TO
APPROVE THE AMENDMENT — ADOPTED
That item is Item 9A on today's agenda. It's a recommendation to
deny the single 2013 Cycle 3 Growth Management Plan amendment
specific to the Venetian mixed use subdistrict petition. This is an
adoption hearing.
And you have a companion rezone petition, which is Item 9B, and
that item does require ex parte disclosure be provided by
commissioners and that all participants be sworn in, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes. At this time I'm going to ask the
commissioners that have not given ex parte to give ex parte on Item 9A
and 9B. We're going to open the hearing at this time.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I had correspondence
from the developer. That's in addition to the last ex parte
communication that we gave when we heard this item.
Page 23
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I've received correspondence and
emails, but I have not discussed this matter with the developer or
anyone else since the last time that they were here speaking before the
Board.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
I have read the staff report. Once again, I've had phone calls with
the petitioner's representatives and received letters.
Commissioner Fiala, I think you already gave yours.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I can -- but I can give it again. It's
simple.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. So I've had meetings,
correspondence, emails, and calls, and I've met with the developer,
Christ Shucart; with his representative, Rich Yovanovich; Laurie
Miller, a neighborhood person; Marcy Seamples, president of East
Naples Civic; Planning Commissioners; Hearing Examiner; East
Naples Civic Association meetings it was discussed at, several East
Naples residents; and I've gotten mail from the -- a real estate broker,
prominent real estate broker named Ross McIntosh.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I've had meetings on both agenda
items, all three.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Thank you. At this time will
all attending that wish to testify in this item please stand to be sworn
in.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Ochs?
Page 24
June 9, 2015
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, just a procedural matter. I'll turn to
the County Attorney, as I always do, on these things.
I understand we're going to hear these together but vote
separately, Mr. Klatzkow; is that how you'd like to proceed?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir. They require different numbers of
votes.
MR. OCHS: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What requires a different number
of votes?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I think they're both supermajority, sir.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, I'm wrong.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Mr. Yovanovich?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Got a little excited there.
Good morning. For the record, Rich Yovanovich on behalf of the
petitioner. With me today is Chris Shucart who is the owner's
representative; Bob Mulhere, Paula McMichael, who are both with
Hole Montes. They're the professional planners and engineering on
this project; and Mike Timmerman is here to answer any questions.
Just briefly, the Comp Plan amendment does two things. It gives
us basically an either/or option and also a combination, but one of the
amendments would allow for up to 250,000 square feet of commercial
uses, a hotel, and senior housing; another option would allow up to 224
units for residential development, so that's the first petition.
The second petition was the PUD to implement both of those
options that are allowed or requested by the Comp Plan amendment.
Where we left off the last time, I believe, was we were given
direction to incorporate gap housing into the PUD and to bring forward
a proposed gap housing agreement to allow for a portion of the
increased density to go towards gap housing. In your agenda package
is the proposed gap housing agreement that would allow for 40 percent
of the increased density to go towards gap housing.
Page 25
June 9, 2015
The agreement further breaks down that 40 percent into three
subsets; 34 percent of those -- that number would go towards -- up to --
from 81 percent to 99 percent, and then from 100 -- 34 percent of the
bonus units, then 33 percent of the bonus units would go from 100
percent to 119.9 percent, and then 33 percent would go towards the
upper end of the gap category, which is the 120 to 150.
We spent a lot of time working with staff making sure that we put
an agreement forward that would provide throughout the range of gap
housing. It didn't target just 149 percent number for the gap housing.
And there would be a five-year commitment for that property to
remain as gap housing.
So we went back, reviewed the minutes. I think we've addressed
the direction we were given by the Board, and I know your staff is
recommending approval of the proposed gap housing agreement,
which would be a companion item to the PUD.
So hopefully we did our work, and we're now able to move
forward with both the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the
proposed PUD amendment.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, you had the
most concerns on this item. Please --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. The -- for staff, is this a
standard agreement for deed restriction for housing?
MR. OCHS: No, sir, but we'll ask Ms. Grant to provide the
detail.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, that answers that
question.
The concern that I have is in, now, therefore No. 4, gap housing
shall be marketed for persons qualified for gap housing for two years
from the date of issuance of CO, for gap housing unit. In the event the
qualified buyer for the unit has not signed the contract purchase within
the two years, the developer may sell the unit for non-gap housing
Page 26
June 9, 2015
qualified purchase.
You know, I don't know where you're going to get the checks and
balances of that. I mean, I would say -- this is a general agreement. I
would say, if there's a problem, once the community becomes
developed, of finding, you know, the firemen, the policemen, the
schoolteacher, come back to us and let's amend it instead of that
qualification.
Because how can you really -- how can the county really monitor
whether you're truly marketing that product to a person that would
qualify for it? You can't. You know, I'd much rather, just like I said,
deal with that issue later on.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I will -- the answer to the question is
developers are in a hurry to sell their units. They're not going to want
to hold these units. They're going to look for and seek qualified
purchasers because it's in their best interest to sell those units as soon
as they become available. The price points --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Unless you're making 20 percent
more.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But even carrying it for two more years to
make that 20 percent works into no money to the developer and
probably a loss.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'd just rather deal with that, if it
is a problem, later on. I'm very amenable to that.
The next one -- I'm trying to find Exhibit E where it refers to in
the agreement. Can you tell me the Exhibit E is? Let me go back to
the actual.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Exhibit E in the actual agreement? I
thought we stopped at CC, but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Did you?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I thought so.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, anyways, let me, if
Page 27
June 9, 2015
I find it, I'll --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- address it. But I do want to
thank -- Rich, I do want to thank you and your client for, you know,
addressing it since this is -- what was forwarded to me was a
commitment to affordable housing for teachers and so on and so forth.
I like the compromise, except for the one thing.
That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
I agree with your concerns on that, Commissioner Henning. I
think it should be the burden of the developer, and if a problem
develops, we should come back.
I'm going to go to Commissioner Hiller, then Commissioner
Taylor.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala, this is in your
district.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I know that you have worked
a great deal on this project --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- and you know what the majority
of your constituents want.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And there's always going to be
someone who objects or a few who object. But what I would like to
know is what do you want, because this is your community and your
constituency, and I know you've worked very hard on this.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. This was originally
going to be more low-income housing there, more affordable housing.
The area is so oversaturated with affordable housing as it is, including
Section 8 right across the street, and very low income and the Habitat
Page 28
June 9, 2015
Village, and then down that street, and then next door to it, Treetops,
very low-income housing.
So this -- I said to him, we don't need any more low-income
housing, but we desperately need some for young people who are
coming into the business community for those people that our
economic development committee is trying to draw to this area. We're
trying to draw businesses, but they need places for the people to reside.
And so after -- and I told him that that's the opinion of the
chamber right now. The chamber is saying we need more housing in
this gap area. In fact, they're going out making speeches to many of
the groups right now saying that we're lacking in this tremendously.
That's why I heard from Ross McIntosh saying, my gosh, this is finally
something that we can use in order to draw businesses to our
community.
So I spoke with him, and I said, and if you question that, that's
okay, go out and ask questions from the business community, which he
did and came back, and he says, oh, my goodness, you're right. And I
said, that's right.
And so he completely redesigned this to accommodate those
skilled workers, those young professionals just getting out of college
so that it would appeal to them and in their price range, larger units and
in their price range. So that's what it was designed to do.
And I was grateful that he saw to it to investigate, on his own,
items that I was telling him. I'm not quite sure why -- and I did a lot of
homework on this. I'm not quite sure why everybody else is weighing
in on my district to try and change something that we worked so hard
to make. I just do not understand that. I try and always support other
people's districts. I don't understand this.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Except mine, but that's okay,
because I'm going to support you.
So with that, I'm going to make a motion that we approve both 9A
Page 29
June 9, 2015
and 9B because I respect the work you've done and your
representation. And I do think you're right that you are doing the best
for your community, and it is the right decision.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, and I'll second that --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I'm making a motion to support
you on both.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- motion, and I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Let's wait a second, because we've got
some housekeeping on 9A, because that's a recommendation to deny.
But first we're going to go to --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I don't agree with the way this
was written because since -- I think it's an error on staffs part, and I --
regardless of the recommendation to deny, I'm making a
recommendation to approve 9A and 9B --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- for both because I totally respect
what Commissioner Fiala has done with respect to this project, and I
think it's very important, given her understanding of her community
and the nature of the development in that community and what the
demand is, that we approve this. And I think you're right,
Commissioner Fiala, and thank you for doing all that work.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We're going to go to Commissioner
Taylor and then back to Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: One thing I didn't understand,
Commissioner Henning, are you suggesting -- well, I guess let's -- tell
me how this works where you -- how you reach out to the recent
college graduate who has this huge amount of money they have to pay
back but still want to establish themselves in Collier County and would
like to own property. How do you reach out to them?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, there's going to be a lot of different
Page 30
June 9, 2015
types of outreach.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. The types of outreach is, one, we
would make sure we -- first of all, it's two years from the date we get
the CO on the unit, not from when we start the project. So two years
from when we CO the unit, we're going to be marketing to the county,
sending county information to distribute to its employees saying here's
a project located on the East Trail. Here are the price points. If you
qualify, you would be eligible. Same thing with the school district,
same thing with all the fire districts.
We will be actively marketing to all of those individuals through
their -- through their organizations, as well as there'll be ads in the
paper.
Now, we have to be careful because there's obligations in here
that say we can't -- we can't say, you know, this is the unit, so the
person who buys this unit is in an income-qualified unit. So we'll be
doing that type of advertising to the general public through marketing
as well as specifically to the county, the school district, the hospital.
All of those organizations we'll market to because, again, it's in our
best interest to market and sell these units as quickly as possible
because the developer only makes money when they actually sell and
close the unit. So that's the marketing we'll be doing.
And we committed that -- and you've done this in other projects
where if for a period of time you were unsuccessful in selling the unit,
you could -- you'd bump up to the next category automatically. In other
words, if you were supposed to sell at the 80 percent or less, you could
then move up to the next higher category.
We were saying for two years we'll market this to these people,
and if we're unsuccessful we would like to move forward and be able
to sell it to the general public.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And, sorry. When are you going
Page 31
June 9, 2015
to start that marketing, Mr. Yovanovich?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, we'll probably do presales. You
know, there will be presales. But my two-year period actually runs
from the CO. It's not from when I do my premarketing.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, good.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So it's more than two years that we'll be
trying to sell these units to qualified people.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So it's -- although it sounds like it's two
years, it's a far longer period than that in order to get the financing to
build the project.
We thought we were -- we were doing what we were asked to do
by adding this type of incentive to get the additional units. The hard
part about coming back if we're struggling after two years is I've lost
two years, I've got to do an amendment process to either the PUD or to
the agreement.
I'll look to Jeff as to whether I just have to do an amendment to
the agreement, or do I have to amend the PUD because the agreement
is referenced in the PUD? If I've got to do an amendment to the PUD,
that's a six- to nine-month process, so now I'm probably three or four
years down the road, and my five-year commitment's, you know,
pretty much almost done anyway.
So what we're hoping for is -- we're the first one coming out of
the shute to try to do this, and we would like to -- we would like to
have, you know, an "attaboy" for trying instead of, well, you didn't
quite get all the way there, because we think we'll be successful. We
think we'll be able to sell these units within those categories within that
two-plus-year marketing period.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Good, good.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, yeah, but two years from CO but
plus the prior -- the preconstruction marketing as well. I just want to
Page 32
June 9, 2015
say the two-plus years, whatever that may be. Three years is probably
more likely to try to sell those units.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: All right. Well, I'm very excited
about this. I hope that we have more of these. I think it's very, very
important to address this part of our workforce.
And compliments to you; I think it's been a lot of hard work. I
know Kim Grant's office has worked very closely with you, which is
part of what we have said that needed to be done in our ordinances, so
well done.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, back to you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala, I need to understand your comments about
others interfering with your district.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, not interfering so much as I hear
comments from the others, but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who's the others?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Huh?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who's the others?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, what's been holding -- who's
been holding this up?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's be specific.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And Penny Taylor, okay.
And I understand -- I understand your motivations because I think
you want to see the best product. I don't think you've been able to get
to talk to the people within the community, the people that, you know,
live right there and the people that work right there, and I don't know
how close you've been able to work with the Chamber of Commerce
about that who also feel this need, and -- but --
Page 33
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Need for what?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Need for gap housing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's my point. And what I
understand from your constituency, they did not want other low
income in there. I agree with that. You know, I understand that;
however, there's a need for the professionals that we have in Collier
County to have housing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what I'm --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I thought you agreed with that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I do. And not only that, but I think
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now you're saying that I'm
interfering.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I get the feeling from your
comments that you want to vote against this. I've just -- I've gotten that
feeling. Maybe I'm wrong.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah -- no, you didn't hear my
comment just a few minutes ago where I commended Rich and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I did hear that. I did hear that,
yeah, yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. The only -- they brought
back a product I think your constituents would like -- wouldn't mind
having professional ALS as a firefighter or teacher or police officer,
you know, as a neighbor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I'm wrong, correct me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's exactly what we're looking
for.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I'm trying to
accommodate you not by interfering; however, I do have a vote.
The only concern that I cannot support in the agreement is a
Page 34
June 9, 2015
provision in there if they can't sell it within two years after CO, that
they can sell it at market rate.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Then if they can't sell it, what would
-- if they can't sell it at market rate, I mean, I'm asking you a question
for --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to understand what you're trying
to say -- then they shouldn't sell it at all?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. If they can't sell it at gap --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- within that two-year period,
come back to us and tell us what they have done to try to sell that, that
they can't sell it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: When have we done this before with
any other developer?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We've done it with Heritage
Bay. We've -- actually, we've done it with Ave Maria. Ave Maria
came to the Board and changed their units from affordable housing to
market rate, and we agreed with that, and it was because at the time it
was not needed.
It gives me a better understanding what's happening out there in
the market. If there's not a need within that two-year period and they
have been marketing it and diligently marketing it, they can't find
anybody, then we need to rethink what we're doing up here. It's a
better tool for me, anyways, to adjust to the times, and we've done that
all the time. Like I said, Ave Maria. We've done that, Heritage Bay;
even Rich mentioned that before.
Heritage Bay is in my district. Ave Maria is in Commissioner
Nance's district. That's all I'm saying, okay. It's not that I'm not
supporting; however, I do have a voice that affects this community,
and I will continue to do that.
Page 35
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you better; you're a
commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I actually think that this is a very
thoughtful change to this proposal. And I do commend Mr.
Yovanovich, and I think that actually, Commissioner Henning, your
extended discussion on this issue has been helpful to all of us.
We absolutely have to have gap housing, and I think having a
program like this is good. And I don't think it's negative to
Commissioner Fiala's wishes or her district in any way. I fully support
this.
I also would like to see the petitioner be in charge of supervising
this agreement. I do not think it should be a burden on the county to
supervise to make sure that this takes place in an affirmative way. So I
share Commissioner Henning's concern on that item, and I won't be
supporting it unless we can get there.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What do you mean by that?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I would like, if it doesn't happen after
two years --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Oh.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I don't want it to be a burden on the
county to be chasing this down and make sure that they're doing
everything they should do and so on and so forth. Let's make it a
burden on the petitioner to do the right thing. If it's a failure, then he
can certainly come back and I believe, exactly as Commissioner
Henning has said, that the Board will respond. If it's not possible and
they gave it their all, then I think certainly it should be reviewed. But I
don't think it should be a burden on the county to make sure that the
petitioner is fulfilling his agreement.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, I'm sure the petitioner is
Page 36
June 9, 2015
going to keep us up to date anyway. I think this is going to be a great
success story.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I think that it is, and I think it's very
thoughtful.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, shall we wait?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Yovanovich, are you amenable to
that?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I can count to four.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay? Well, actually, I can count to two.
So, you know, honestly, I think there's a chance that by requiring us to
come back in two years puts the financial -- the project in jeopardy to
even come out of the chute at the very beginning regarding getting
financing and actually building the units, because I'm going to have
units out there that -- who's going to build a unit knowing that two
years down the road I've got to come back and convince everybody
that I did enough marketing to try to sell this, and maybe I won't
convince you, maybe I will convince you. I don't know if I need four
votes to amend the agreement because it's referenced in the PUD, or do
I need three votes to amend the agreement?
MR. KLATZKOW: You need three votes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Three votes to amend the agreement.
That clears up one issue. But there's issues regarding certainty and the
ability to go forward.
If the only way we're going to get this approved is that we're
going to have to commit to come back in two years to show you we
tried really hard and we were unsuccessful, then we don't have a choice
but to accept that condition.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, Mr. Yovanovich, you're asking us
to have faith in you, but it doesn't seem like you want to have faith in
the Board.
Page 37
June 9, 2015
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I'm just saying, but that happens
three-and-a-half years from now or four years from now when I'm --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: You should have -- you just told us that
you're going to have them all sold by then.
MR. YOVANOVICH: My hope is that we will have them all
sold.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And mine as well.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, again, if that's the only way we're
going to get this approved, I have no choice but to agree to that
condition.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Another option would be that we report --
a year from now we'll come back and we'll make a report to you and
tell you how we're doing. We'll keep you in the loop and tell you what
we've done, how many we've sold, where we stand to show you that
we're working hard and making -- to make this happen.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Why don't we just work through it like
that?
MR. YOVANOVICH: We'll do a report.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And if you have -- if you have this huge
anxiety in 18 months, then you can request the Board change its
policy.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Then I've got to amend the PUD.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, it's an agreement.
MR. KLATZKOW: We structured this so that the DCA stands
apart from the PUD. It's mentioned in the PUD, but the development
agreement stands apart. So it's just three votes, Richard. You don't
have to amend the PUD.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's a gap housing agreement. And if that's
the answer is I can get in front of the Board quickly without a six- to
nine-month process, that's a different issue.
Page 38
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is that possible, Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: That's how it's structured.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: We try to structure all of these so that it's not
CHAIRMAN NANCE: They're adaptable.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- the commitments are not in the PUD but
they're in an outside agreement.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Mr. Yovanovich, does that help?
MR. YOVANOVICH: That does help.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I understand why you're
concerned. I mean, there's going to be an election next year, and four
commission seats are going to be vacated, and who knows who's going
to fill those seats. So, literally, you know, if you're looking say, 18 --
let's look two years out, you could be facing, except for one
commissioner, a completely different board with a very different
perspective. And so that does create uncertainty, I would think, both
for the Board and for you because there's no assurance that what we're
talking about here today is going to be the will of the next board.
And if we're talking about an agreement like this and something
happens for whatever reason -- I mean, what if there's another
economic crash, hypothetically? We've got problems. And you can,
you know, work your tail off and you can try to market as much as
you'd like, but at the end of the day, you know, you cannot control
your buyer. You cannot control the market.
And it's hard for me to understand what standard we are going to
judge you by because, from what I'm hearing here, there is no standard
other than you're going to put forth your best effort, and then it's going
to be at the whim and the will of a future board that may or may not
include us who will say, well, we think you tried hard enough or we
Page 39
June 9, 2015
think you didn't try hard enough, and somehow there's going to be
some sort of penalty or what? I don't understand.
So I think it's very difficult. It's a difficult situation. And I
understand where the Board would like some assurance that you will
do what you are committing to do, but that's the whole point of an
agreement. I mean, the agreement is, you are making certain
commitments, and if at some point, you know, we have reason to
believe you're not, you will be in breach of that agreement, and there
will be legal recourse against you for failing to do what you committed
to do.
So I'm not sure, you know, what we are accomplishing through
this discussion. I mean, again, the obligation to perform is based on
this legal contract, and we're done. You have to do what you have
committed to do; otherwise, you're in breach.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, and then back
to Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Rich, you made a suggestion
about coming back in another year, did you say?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I said what we would do is we can come
back and report to you. We're required to file an annual PUD
monitoring report anyway with county staff. If you would like it to be
an agenda-ed item that we would say we're in preconstruction right
now, here's the marketing efforts we've made, here's the number of
presales we have towards gap housing, we can do that, and we can do
that the following year.
Maybe now we're at the CO stage. We got our CO three months
ago. Here's the marketing we've been doing. Here's how we're doing
-- you know, we're doing towards the agreement, but we're already
required to do a PUD monitoring report to show how we're doing. We
certainly don't mind presenting that to the Board of County
Commissioners and telling you how we're doing.
Page 40
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that would be a great
compromise to concerns is -- hang on. You had your time -- is to put
that in the agreement that the developer will come back to the Board.
At what time?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, why don't we just do it annually,
because that way you would know -- if we're not doing our end of the
bargain under the agreement, you could tell us, you're not doing your
job; you're in breach.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Yeah, no. I think that's a
great compromise, and it will be a great educational experience not
only for the Board but the public of what needs to be.
So, you know, if the motion maker would amend her motion to
accept that as an addendum to the agreement, I could support this item.
MR. KLATZKOW: You may want to note Paragraph 7 of the
agreement and tie it into that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's where I would think we would add
a paragraph that we would report annually to the Board of County
Commissioners progress to meeting that requirement.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: As the motion maker, I want to
respond, and that is, I don't think it's -- the report should be made to the
Board of County Commissioners. The report should be made to staff
Staff is the one who does the PUD monitoring. Staff is the one who has
-- you know, we have a real estate staff, we have our, you know,
affordable housing staff. They're the ones who should be evaluating
this. They're the ones who should determine conformance with the
agreement.
We have a legal staff. They can review it from their angle. If
they see a deviation from the agreement through that monitoring, then
they should bring that to the Board, and you should have the right to
come before the Board and explain yourself for whatever breach that
staff is alleging that you have engaged in.
Page 41
June 9, 2015
But for you to come to the Board and for us to start evaluating,
you know, what you did right or wrong makes no sense. It is not our
expertise. I think we should manage this by exception. I agree that it
should be monitored. We do have PUD monitoring, and that is what
staff is supposed to do.
And so I don't have a problem, you know, ensuring that the report
is provided to staff and that it's understood that, you know, staff will
ensure that there is conformance with the agreement, which is what is
-- that's their job, and that staff will report to the Board if there is a
problem, and then you will have to explain yourself because it would
be deemed a breach of the agreement. But I don't see how we can sit
here and evaluate what you're doing as being right or wrong.
Is there any way, Jeff, that -- is there wording you could suggest
to say that, you know, as part of the PUD monitoring, which is
standard, that the developer will report its progress on gap sales to
staff?
MR. KLATZKOW: That's Paragraph 7 of the agreement. The
requirement is there. The question is -- you can direct the County
Manager to come back to you should there be any questions with the
compliance and do it that way --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Then let me do that.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- or take Commissioner Henning's
suggestion and put it explicit in the agreement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: She's not going to do that today.
So, you know, we're going to disagree with everything today.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, we're not. I think you're
moving absolutely in the right direction, and I think that if we -- if we
-- and what I would do is leave the agreement as-is and direct as part of
the motion for approval, that in monitoring that PUD, that county staff
bring back to the Board any exception with respect to the marketing
and sales of gap housing of this project as it arises, because I don't
Page 42
June 9, 2015
want to sit and wait a year.
I mean, what if staff in their review comes up with a problem
ahead of a year? You know, do we have to wait a year and let the
problem fester because Mr. Yovanovich doesn't have to come before
us for a year based on an agreement?
You know, staff is going to be monitoring this consistently, and
they do that with all PUDs. And Mr. Yovanovich has a reporting duty,
or his client has a reporting duty with respect to the PUD, and that
includes reporting on these gap sales and the marketing effort.
And so I think with staff-- with staff having the burden to come
to us whenever an issue were to arise that highlights an exception to
this agreement, we have far better monitoring than requiring him to
come back once a year and tell us where he stands.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. All right. Well, Mr. Klatzkow, if
we --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We should -- in this instance, I
think we can rely on staff and manage by exception, which could be at
any point in time as opposed to truncated, you know, annually, for
example.
Commissioner Fiala, what's your feel on that?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: One moment, ma'am. I just want one
clarification.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: If we approve the plan amendment and
the rezone based on Mr. Yovanovich's verbal assurances and that
doesn't pan out, what recourse does the Board have unless we have a
stipulation in this process?
MR. KLATZKOW: There are two approaches. Commissioner
Hiller's approach would be to direct the County Manager to ensure that
if there are any issues with respect to compliance of this agreement --
and they have to do an annual compliance report -- that that come back
Page 43
June 9, 2015
to the Board through the County Manager.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: What recourse would we have?
MR. KLATZKOW: At that point in time it could be breach of
contract.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's why we have a contract.
MR. KLATZKOW: The other approach would be Commissioner
Henning's approach where you make that explicit in the contract.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. I'm going to go to Commissioner
Fiala and Commissioner Taylor, and we'll keep going around till we
get -- try to get four votes.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. This is a tough subject,
because it's the first time we've attempted gap housing, but we all
realize the need for it now. And the need is going to even be more so
as our economic development group brings in businesses, and people
are going to be building more and more gap housing.
You've got great -- a great deal of building that is going to be
taking place in Commissioner Nance's district, and they're going to be
wanting to do this same thing. We've got building going on right now
in my district that is already listening. How tough are we going to
make it? And whatever we do today, we're setting a precedent for the
rest of the gap housing that's going to be built.
So much easier to build low-income housing, I want to tell you.
You don't even have to come in, you don't have to prove that you have
10 percent here, 5 percent there. You don't have to do -- we've never
had them do that. We expect staff to do that. And if it's done, great.
And we don't ever know if it is or isn't.
But now we're making it extremely difficult to build this type of
housing which is needed. And we have to -- I think we just have to be
Page 44
June 9, 2015
wary of what we're doing because we want to encourage this type of
housing to help us encourage new business to come to our area.
And if this is what it takes, then we're going to have to make sure
that this is something -- a requirement in everybody's gap housing, no
matter whose district it's in.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
All right. Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: A couple of things.
It's my understanding, Mr. Ochs, that once we get through there,
you're going to create -- staff is going to create a road map for this gap
housing concept, that -- so that there -- I mean, we are kind of
inventing the wheel here and -- don't mean to do it, but that's what
we're doing. So it's my understanding that, going forward, more will
be coming back to us; is that correct?
MR. OCHS: At your next meeting, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: At the next meeting. Okay, great.
So I think that as we -- I'm not sure what's onerous about you reporting
an annual report. It's not. And I'm not sure it's going to set a precedent
at all. This is new, and I think we have to be very specific about this,
so I will bow to the will of the commission, however they want to do
it.
But in response to Commissioner Fiala's remarks about me
interfering in her district, I have low income availability or areas in my
district, and it's not something that I haven't talked to the
Bayshore/Gateway CRA about in very positive terms. If we're going
to exist and flourish as a county, we have to be cognizant and sensitive
to the fact that we would like our workers to live in Collier County and
not to commute from Lehigh or from Lee County.
And, yes, this is a brand new concept, and you are wonderfully
incorporating it in a development.
Page 45
June 9, 2015
And I'm very optimistic that inclusionary zoning is going to work
here. I feel that when we had our first affordable housing workshop --
when we finished it someone came up to me and said, ma'am, you
know why you don't have any workforce housing in Collier County?
I said, no.
He said, because -- he said the most important thing you can do --
I said, well, what are the incentives?
He said, ma'am, follow your law.
And in the law -- and that's why Mr. Bosi said at the last meeting
why we -- why they're denying this is because when a developer builds
in a Coastal High Hazard Zone and requests an increase in intensity,
there's a reciprocal agreement that I guess we haven't been following.
And it's not that we love to put people in low-income housing in
danger. That was said at the last meeting. That's not what it is. It
means if there's a hurricane or an event, our infrastructure's at risk.
And so if we're going to put infrastructure at risk and allow a
developer to build high intensity, or higher intensity than our zoning
allows, then there's a reciprocal part that the developer has to do, which
is low-income housing. It has nothing to do with putting anybody at
risk or safety.
So I think -- this has been a real struggle for me. Mr.
Yovanovich, I didn't return your call because I was still struggling with
this in my mind, because on one hand we do have an LDC, and the
LDC says this, but on the other hand you came together with our
housing department and our staff and worked out a plan, and you didn't
do that quickly. It wasn't done on the fly.
And I think this is a big step forward, and I'm very -- I'm looking
forward to it, and I would like to see more in my district, and I will be
advocating it, and I advocate it everywhere.
And, by the way, the City of Naples has a substantial amount of
low-income housing, and now they're moving into some more gap
Page 46
June 9, 2015
housing. But it's there, and we nurture it, so thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala, then back to Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Thank you so much. Yes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We're wearing it out, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You're right about Bayshore. They
definitely need gap housing, and they're going there. That's something
that they're just awaiting.
On this particular project, just for audience's knowledge, they
were allowed to build 360 units on this property with the affordable
housing that they had in place. And I was the one that encouraged
them not to build that. They wouldn't have had any of these problems
because affordable housing can be built there, and they had the right to
build 360, but instead they've moved it down to gap housing, lesser
units -- 224, I think it is and -- but then staff-- because it wasn't
low-income housing or affordable housing, staff then had to just --
whether they liked the idea or not, they had to deny because it's in the
Coastal High Hazard Area, and now they don't get the affordable
housing approval to build in the Coastal High Hazard Area.
So that's, of course, why staff said to deny. It's really a soft denial.
It's not something that -- you know, they would do this with anything.
But I just wanted to mention that rather than 360 units, we're going to
get 224.
And I think that we all -- in our heart of hearts, all of us realize
the necessity for us to begin to move forward in this direction. We all
know that that type of housing is needed. It's just getting there. And
I'm sorry that it's so painful for all of us and for all of you listening to
it.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, can we craft a
compromise here that meets Commissioner Henning's and my
Page 47
June 9, 2015
concerns?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, let me explain, to address
your concern, Commissioner Nance. You have two issues. You have
the PUD ordinance, and you have a separate contract, which is the
DCA.
And so what I'm going to do is make a recommendation so there
is assurances that there is monitoring not only of the PUD, but of the
DCA as well, that staff, in addition to doing its annual -- or its review
of the PUD, its PUD monitoring, that it couples that with a monitoring
of contractual compliance, basically, that they have to monitor the
DCA at the same time and with the same degree of attention that they
monitor the PUD.
And if there is an exception that comes to light with respect to
monitoring the PUD or monitoring the DCA, that it be immediately
brought to the Board. I don't -- and what staff deems it needs to get
from the developer by way of information as to be able to make that
determination of compliance will be up to staff, because they're going
to be -- and this goes to what is the template we're setting now for all
future projects like this.
And to put the burden on this board to evaluate every year that
that developer is or is not monitor -- complying with the DCA --
because the issue here is compliance with the agreement, not
compliance with the PUD, okay. And we should not -- we never have,
as a board, monitored compliance with DCAs. We have always
allowed staff to monitor compliance with DCAs, and there are many
different issues in these developer agreements, not just the housing
component.
And so we should treat this the same as all developer contribution
agreements and basically say, staff, you are directed to monitor
compliance to the degree necessary to ensure there is no breach. And
if there is a breach, you need to come before the Board and tell us what
Page 48
June 9, 2015
the breech is, and then we'll turn to the County Attorney and say there's
evidence of a breach, you know; do whatever is, you know, legally
within our power to deal with that, because that's what we're dealing
with. We're dealing with a contract. We're not dealing with a PUD.
PUD monitoring is already in place, and now we are going to couple
that with contractual monitoring to ensure compliance, not only on this
gap issue, on everything in the DCA because that's the way it works.
That's the way it's done.
But for us to sit here and get a report and evaluate that report and
try to figure out whether that report is right or wrong -- and then here's
the problem. As both Commissioner Taylor and Commissioner Fiala
have pointed out, we're going to have a whole bunch of these coming
down the pike. Now, do you want to have board meeting after board
meeting evaluating whether or not there is compliance? And what
makes you or I an expert in making that determination?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Or staff, for that matter.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, staff is --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: If I may finish.
Staff is the expert. We have experts in real estate in -- on our
staff. We have experts in affordable housing. We, in fact, in all these
hearings on land use issues, have staff testify, and they are recognized
as experts in these land-use decisions on behalf of the county. That is
the way the law works.
I mean, we have experts, and these are engineers, these are
lawyers, these are planners. These are, you know, experts in housing,
and that's what we rely on. That's how we make all our decisions, by
reliance on our staff experts. So it exists.
We are not experts. That is why we have staff educate us. And
it's a very important precedent. I think it's a big mistake for us to be
trying to do what is staffs job and what they have been doing for us
Page 49
June 9, 2015
with all these DCAs up till now. I don't see this as being any different.
There's a different component. They need to monitor that
component as much as they have to monitor, you know, provisions that
are different in other DCAs. I mean, they're required to. We're
required to. And if there's a problem, they'll report it to us, they'll
report it to the County Attorney. If there's a breach of an agreement,
the County Attorney will do what's necessary to enforce it for the
benefit of the people.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, bring us home.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Well, you know, Rich
has agreed to the amend to the DCA. Commissioner Hiller wants to
kill this development.
And let me just say that for somebody that should be knowing the
law, it says in Statute 125.74, County Administrator's powers and
duties, negotiate lease contracts and other agreements, including
consultant service for the county subject to the approval of the Board.
So -- and it further says in "M" the County Manager will manage
the contracts and agreements, the Board's contract and agreements, and
come back if there's any irregularities within it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Exactly, which is exactly what I've
just said.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're confirming what I just
stated.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you said direct the County
Manager to do so. It's already in there by law.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So, you know, it's just -- it's a
simple thing. So let's go ahead and vote on it, and if it doesn't pass,
then we'll move on to the next item.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. Yovanovich, do you know
Page 50
June 9, 2015
what the motion is? I don't know what the motion is.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The motion --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: What is the motion and any amendments
that might be in the motion?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: First of all, we need to do A, and then
we're going to do B, but let's understand what we're voting on.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: All right. So A doesn't have
anything to do with this discussion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we don't have to address this
discussion --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- in A. So I'll just make the
motion because A is very straightforward. Motion to approve --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- the amendment.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second -- we
need to hear from public speakers first.
Let's go to public speakers, Mr. Miller.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, I have one registered public
speaker for Items 9A and 9B, and that is Jean Kungle.
MS. KUNGLE: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Jean Kungle. I am an East Naples resident.
The Vincentian Village is going to be a very big added asset to
the East Naples area where it is proposed to be, and I do support the
petition, and I do hope that you also support the petition.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Mr. Yovanovich, any final comments before we get a vote here?
Page 51
June 9, 2015
Are you willing to take out the two-year stipulation or not?
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's related to the PUD.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. All right. I'm sorry. We're on 9A.
Any further comments on 9A? There's been a motion to approve the
plan amendment.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It passes 4-1 with Commissioner
Henning in dissent.
9B.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't know what the motion is.
Item #9B
ORDINANCE 2015-33: AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
2004-41 AS AMENDED, COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR
MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE
HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) ZONING DISTRICT TO A MIXED
Page 52
June 9, 2015
USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) ZONING
DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE
VINCENTIAN VILLAGE MPUD, TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION
OF A MAXIMUM OF 224 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DWELLING UNITS, UP TO 250,000 GROSS SQUARE FEET OF
COMMERCIAL LAND USES, AND A HOTEL LIMITED TO 150
ROOMS AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY (ALF) AT 0.6
FAR, AND (2) AN AGREEMENT CONFIRMING GAP HOUSING
AND IMPOSING COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS ON REAL
PROPERTY. THE COMMERCIAL USES ARE SUBJECT TO
CONVERSIONS AND LIMITATIONS IF THE PROJECT IS
DEVELOPED AS MIXED USE OR IF A HOTEL OR ALF IS
CONSTRUCTED. RESIDENTIAL USES ARE SUBJECT TO A
GAP HOUSING AGREEMENT WHICH WOULD PROVIDE A
MINIMUM OF 40% OF THE DWELLING UNITS CONSTRUCTED
ABOVE THE ALLOWABLE BASE DENSITY OF 3 DWELLING
UNITS PER ACRE SHALL BE OFFERED TO PERSONS WHO
EARN BETWEEN 81-150% OF THE NAPLES MARCO ISLAND
METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA (MSA) ANNUAL
MEDIAN INCOME AT THE TIME OF QUALIFICATION. THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF SOUTHWEST BOULEVARD AND U.S. 41 IN
SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 30.68+/-
ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE
NUMBER 99-37, THE VINCENTIAN PUD; AND BY PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE - DEVELOPER TO REPORT TO STAFF
ANNUALLY THROUGH PUD MONITORING AND DEVELOPER
CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT (DCA), STAFF TO BRING ANY
EXCEPTION/NONCOMPLIANCE ON PUD MONITORING OR
THE DCA TO THE BOARD - ADOPTED W/CHANGE
Page 53
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The next motion on 9B is a motion
to approve the PUD ordinance, and the accompanying Developer
Contribution Agreement, which is a contract separate and apart from
the ordinance, and to direct staff to recognize, as Commissioner
Henning has pointed out, that the statute -- that Florida Statute requires
that you monitor both the PUD for compliance as well as the DCA for
compliance.
And I appreciate Commissioner Henning reading the statute
because that is exactly what the protection is, and the protection is that
staff must review and ensure compliance by the developer with the
Developer Contribution Agreement.
So, again, the motion is -- and that's the protection we have with
all these DCAs -- and to direct staff to -- immediately upon them
seeing a deviation by the developer with respect to the ordinance
and/or with respect to the Developer Contribution Agreement, to bring
it back to the Board of County Commissioners so that the Board can
decide how it wants to address what staff has determined.
Is that reasonable?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think it says it all.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Nance?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Have I missed anything? I don't
know.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I don't know why that's in
the motion because it's already law that that happens. So, you know --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Just to make sure it's clear so that
no one -- so there's no ambiguity.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. It's --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I agree with you. I mean, it
Page 54
June 9, 2015
would -- the motion would be just as good without it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, you don't agree with me.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You just want to agree with
what is being presented, and I can't support it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Why not?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think it's a --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because it's the law.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- very simple request. Instead of
removing the two-year limitation is to come back to the Board as a
report and, you know, if there's a problem there, it only takes a simple
majority. It's a simple request, so...
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is that acceptable to the motion maker
and the second?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I don't even understand what
Commissioner Henning is saying.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I propose something,,because we're
really trying to do the right thing here?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I know. We're screwing it
up.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I actually think that our coming
back, at least the first year, maybe even the second year -- you can
always waive it after the first couple reports. I'd rather it be positive
even where we're coming and explaining to everybody how we are
trying to fulfill our agreement to provide gap housing.
If you'll recall, last time I spoke to you-all a month or so ago -- I
think what's going to happen is because of where this project is
located, the price points are going to be gap housing price points
anyway, and I fully expect to come back and say to you, guess what,
I'm selling a whole lot of units to these essential services personal, and
they're buying the units that are unrestricted. They would meet the
Page 55
June 9, 2015
requirements for gap housing, but they're buying the units that are
unrestricted because they don't want the five-year commitment, which
is what I originally said was a concern I had. So I'd like to come back
CHAIRMAN NANCE: You're willing to stipulate that process,
sir?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, that we're willing to come back, and
we'll report to you annually how we're making progress.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is that acceptable to the motion maker
and the second?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Because I think it will be a positive.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. I mean, if that's what this
developer is willing to do, I don't have a problem amending my motion
to include it. I just want to make sure that this isn't what we are
adopting as the standard going down the road, because I think this
really needs to be evaluated as a process, and I'm very concerned that
we are creating a very burdensome process that is not how these DCAs
are supposed to be monitored.
And Commissioner Henning was absolutely right when he read
the statute that explains how contracts are supposed to be monitored
and how deviations should come back to the Board.
MR. KLATZKOW: Mr. Chair?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning -- Mr.
Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: You're coming quickly upon your 10:30
break anyway. If Mr. Yovanovich has some written language he
would like to propose, that might be the easiest thing for the Board to
evaluate.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. I think that would be the --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I can assure you I don't.
Page 56
June 9, 2015
MR. KLATZKOW: But we can do that in the next 10, 15
minutes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Can you assure us that you can do that
shortly?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I would think that Jeff and I could
probably work out language that says that we'll do an annual report to
the Board of County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Let's take a break, and we'll come back
at 10:45 for final comments and a vote on this item if we can craft
something.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Sure. I'm fine with that.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Mr. Yovanovich and Mr.
Klatzkow.
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's all taken care of. I think we're adding
one sentence, and someone stole it. Oh, it's on the visualizer. I didn't
put it like that.
At the end of Paragraph 7, we'll put the commitment that we'll
report annually to the BCC regarding the status of its compliance with
this agreement.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Meaning the gap agreement?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, that's -- yeah, it will be in
Paragraph 7 of the agreement.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Over the break I asked staff to pull
up Paragraph 7, which is part of the Developer Contribution
Agreement. Can you put that on the overhead, please? And what the
Developer Contribution Agreement requires under Paragraph 7, which
is titled "Compliance" -- and I'm going to read the sentence. The
Page 57
June 9, 2015
developer shall provide an annual written compliance report to Collier
County Community and Human Services Division commencing with
the issuance of the first CO for a residential dwelling unit identified to
be offered to those who qualify as gap housing.
And then it continues that this requirement shall conclude when
the required number of units have been purchased by persons qualified
for gap housing or are sold to others under the provisions herein,
whichever occurs first. And then it describes in detail what the report
shall include.
And then it continues further on down that any legal document
that's used in the sale, like the purchase agreement is -- has to be in a
fashion that's acceptable to County Attorney, which is very important,
and then compliance, you know, with respect to resale goes to the unit
owner, which is obvious because the developer will no longer be
involved, especially when you have a developer that ultimately turns
over control of the community to an HOA and is no longer part of that
project.
And then it says, county -- CCHSD, which is the county's housing
division, will periodically monitor the developer to ensure proper gap
housing availability and income certification procedures have been
followed.
The annual progress and monitoring report shall, at a minimum,
require additional information reasonably helpful to ensure compliance
with this section and provide information with regard to gap housing in
Collier County. Failure to complete and submit the monitoring report
to the County Manager or his designee within 60 days from the due
date shall result in a penalty of$50 per day per incident or occurrence
unless a written extension not to exceed 30 days is requested prior to
expiration of the 60-day submission deadline.
So I understand completely what Commissioner Henning and
Commissioner Nance are concerned about, and their concern is,
Page 58
June 9, 2015
essentially, they don't -- they want the burden to produce the
information to support compliance with respect to the gap housing
requirement to be on the developer as opposed to on county staff. And
this provision -- and until I completely understood exactly, especially
what Commissioner Nance was saying, it didn't crystallize that this
compliance requirement, as drafted by the County Attorney and
counsel for the developer, addresses specifically the concern that
commissioners -- that the commissioners have that it should not be
staff chasing this information but rather that the burden should be on
the developer. And that was Commissioner Nance's concern, and this
clearly addresses that.
What this also does is put in the agreement exactly what
Commissioner Henning said, which is that the staff has a duty to
monitor and that monitoring duty has been articulated in this contract,
and what it says is that staff is supposed to receive this agreement, I
mean, this annual compliance, housing compliance report, and staff,
you know, will evaluate it and ask for any additional information
necessary to make sure that they are satisfied that what this contract is
calling for is, in fact, happening.
Again, if the Board wants it to -- not only to go to staff but in
addition come to the Board, we can direct that, but really I think what
we want is staff to be allowed to review it and let staff tell us if there
are exceptions. I'm not sure why we want to create another level of
review, because staff is the one most qualified to assess whether this
developer is doing what it's supposed to do based on the annual written
compliance report that the developer is required to submit by way of
this agreement.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ma'am, we're trying to get four votes.
Commissioner Henning, does that meet --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, the County Attorney and
Rich was working on an amendment, No. 7, what is it? What is being
Page 59
June 9, 2015
proposed?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I just had that up on the visualizer. Add a
sentence at the end of Paragraph 7 that says we'll come back -- the
developer shall report annually to the BCC regarding the status of its
compliance with the agreement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That's great.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Does that work for you?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Are you good?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So, you know, she's going to
drag this out forever. So, Mr. Chairman --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Let's vote.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ask her if she wants to --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Do you want to amend your motion to
include that, ma'am?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Nance, do you feel
that it's necessary to add this in?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning would like it,
and it's good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let's just do it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I would ask you to add it, or we can vote,
and then we can add it secondarily.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll add it to the motion to amend
Paragraph -- is it 7 of the -- is it Paragraph 7 of the DCA?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's Paragraph 7, yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- to add the following sentence to
Paragraph 7 of the DCA, and that is that the developer shall report
annually to the BCC regarding the status of its compliance with this
agreement.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And the second, ma'am?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Page 60
June 9, 2015
Commissioners, I think it's been a somewhat torturous but a very
important discussion to have because I think we're on new ground.
The first time you do anything, it's important -- of this magnitude, it's
important to discuss it.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Passes unanimously.
Thank you, Mr. Yovanovich.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, can we go to the
-- I forget which item it is. We have several firefighters and fire
commissioners here. Can we hear that item?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Do you want to do that, Mr. Ochs? Is it
the pleasure of the Board?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's fine with me.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I say -- I think we should. They're all
assembled here, and I think it would be -- it would be nice of us to do
that, and courteous.
Let's go to that item, Mr. Ochs.
MR. OCHS: Yes.
Item #11D
RECOMMENDATION TO PROVIDE DIRECTION FOR
OPERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT OF THE COUNTY'S
DEPENDENT FIRE DISTRICTS — MOTION TO APPROVE A
Page 61
June 9, 2015
PHASED APPROACH BETWEEN GREATER NAPLES FIRE
DISTRICT AND ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE & RESCUE, WITH THE
COUNTY ATTORNEY TO BRING BACK AN INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT FOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES — APPROVED;
MOTION TO APPROVE PHASED APPROACH AS OCHOPEE
AND EVERGLADES FIRE OUTLINED BY STAFF AND WORK
WITH ALL STAKEHOLDERS TO BRING BACK PROPOSALS —
APPROVED; MOTION DIRECTING STAFF TO CONSOLIDATE
THE MANAGEMENT PORTION OF DISTRICT #1 INTO THE
GREATER NAPLES FIRE DISTRICT — APPROVED
Commissioners, that item is 11D on this morning's agenda. It's a
recommendation to provide direction for operations and management
of the county's dependent fire districts, and Ms. Price has a brief
presentation.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, would you like
to hear the presentation first, or would you like to comment?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We had a presentation at the
workshop.
MS. PRICE: You did. I was just going to summarize things, but
at your pleasure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Why don't -- I guess if
you're going to summarize, are you doing a contrast and comparison
summary?
MR. OCHS: Sir, let me interrupt for a minute, Len.
If the commissioners have a policy decision they want to make,
and then depending on what that is, I think that would help Ms. Price
then shape her presentation in terms of some of the clarifying questions
that we would have.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: A policy statement.
MR. OCHS: No. If you want to make your decision or give us
Page 62
June 9, 2015
an indication of which way you want to go, and then we can ask a few
clarifying questions.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if I can start. The
workshop was very informative. There was a contrast and comparable.
Greater Naples is going to lower the millage rate not only in District 1
but for Isle of Capri.
So my preference would be to contract with Greater Naples to
manage Isle of Capri and District 1 as committed at the workshop by
Greater Naples.
And also there was -- what was it, Station 64 on the Alley?
MS. PRICE: Sixty-three.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sixty-three. I missed it by a
mile. I apologize.
And further ask Greater Naples to evaluate the Ochopee Fire
District, work with the City of Everglades, and potentially bring back a
proposal to manage that. That's my preference.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Now, say that last part again, please.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is on -- oh, the Ochopee Fire
District?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, just --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You with me on that one?
Which --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is to ask Greater Naples -- we
can't direct because they're a separate entity -- ask them to evaluate to
manage that department, work with the City of Everglades, and
potentially come back with an agreement to manage Ochopee.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. So -- before I ask my
question, so what you're saying really, in essence, is begin to work on a
consolidation for Everglades City and the entire District 1 area and all
Page 63
June 9, 2015
that Ochopee now covers; is that what you're really saying?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me further say that, you
know, we had a straw ballot vote by Isle of Capri, and it failed by a
small margin.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Isles of Capri we're not talking
about.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I know, but just let me
finish. I think we're going to get there at a consolidated fire district.
Right now it's just managing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what I'm asking. Is that what
you're -- is that what you're kind of-- rather than -- rather than drag it
on any longer, what you're trying to do is investigate consolidating all
of it right now; is that what I'm hearing you really say?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. What I'm saying is baby
steps: Management. I think consolidation's going to come after that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay, fine. So then to my
comments.
I agree that Isles of Capri should definitely be folded into the
Greater Naples. It only makes sense. They're right down the street
anyway.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: As management or as
consolidated?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: As consolidated, yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Then I can support that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think that Isles of Capri is ready for
that. I've spoken to the people on Capri, and they all feel very
comfortable with folding themselves right into it. They realize that the
first year their millage rate would still remain the same at the 2 point,
but that eventually that would get down to 1.5. They're all comfortable
with that as well. I think that's --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I could support that.
Page 64
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good. I think that's a good idea.
I want to know where -- is Station 63 in Ochopee?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. That's on the Alligator
Alley.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I would think, then, that
being that it's in Ochopee, it should stay with Ochopee Fire
Department. Until we decide how we're going to fold things together,
we can't take everything that has any money involved with it away
from them and just leave them in Everglades City. I think we need to
take our time with that.
District 1 has been divided, actually, between the Greater Naples
group and between Ochopee. And right now they -- you know, I think
that we should -- we should make sure that Ochopee has enough of--
that District 1 area that they right now are serving, I think they should
continue to serve that. But that's the only thing I would -- I agree with
the rest of everything you said.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Remember, that's a potential liability. I
don't think that's a great asset, because the funding has only been
committed for three years. So we could get down the road -- if we
don't have some legislative action on that, somebody's going to be left
holding the bag of about a million eight a year, and I don't know that
Ochopee is capable of dealing with that, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, that's right. There is -- and
that's -- we're going to have to work with the legislator as it was
pointed out with -- in the workshop by Greater Naples. They have a
great relationship with the legislators during this consolidation process
of Golden Gate and East Naples and a relationship with Broward
County officials and fire department to put together a package for, you
know, funding for the long term on that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's a huge -- huge burden.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It could be.
Page 65
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It could be.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I listened to what both
Commissioner Henning and Fiala have said, and I think what's clear is
there seems to be consensus as to what will happen with the Isle of
Capri fire district. It also seems clear to me that as of right now, there
is no clarity as to what's going to happen with Ochopee.
So I think we should table the discussion on Ochopee and let the
way Ochopee is managed continue till something new is brought
forward through staff or through the community, and I think
Everglades City needs to be part of that discussion and be here before
we start making any decisions about them.
So I think it's relatively easy to vote on Isle of Capri today. And
then I think we should table Ochopee. And then, you know,
Commissioner Henning has been working with the community, and
staff has been working with the community, and, you know,
Commissioner Fiala has been working with the community. Let that
discussion about Ochopee come back as Part 2 of this consolidation
effort with, you know, some proposals.
But one thing I don't think we can do as a board is -- I mean, we
always can recommend, and we shouldn't recommend it as part of a
motion. But, you know, Commissioner Henning says to recommend to
these jurisdictions to work together to come up with, you know, either
a management plan or a consolidation plan, and we can absolutely
suggest to them that they do, but we can't direct them to do anything,
and I don't think that's his intent.
But I would say that shouldn't be part of our motion. It could be,
you know, a direction to the Chair to write a letter to suggest it to the
multiple parties involved to consider, you know, looking at this
together if you want to do something like that. But I definitely think
that we can vote on Isle of Capri today.
Page 66
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Back to Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Hiller made
some erogenous comments, but, anyways, let -- Commissioner Fiala, if
you want to make that motion on Isle of Capri, I will second it, and we
can have subsequent motions after that on the different issues of fire
protection.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I need to --
MR. OCHS: Excuse me. Mr. --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, go ahead.
MR. OCHS: I'm sorry, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Ochs.
MR. OCHS: Just a couple clarifying points so the Board knows
exactly what they're -- what they're getting and when they're getting it
with respect to Isle of Capri, per the proposal from the Greater Naples
Fire District, if we might. It will only take a minute.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think that's wise.
MR. OCHS: Go ahead, Len.
MS. PRICE: Commissioners, what I put up here is what I think is
a phased approach to getting from where we are today to a total
package at the end.
I've spoken with our staff, I've spoken with Greater Naples chief
as well, and we all believe that the best way to handle this is to do it in
a phased, methodical way starting out with a management agreement
where for the first year the funds come into the county, and Greater
Naples manages, you know, not the whole gamut of things; Isles of
Capri definitely.
You know, they can sit down with us, and we can determine
timing-wise when to include District 1, when to include Station 63 as
well with the ultimate goal, of course, to be entering into
conversations, as Commissioner Henning said, with Everglades City so
Page 67
June 9, 2015
that eventually we could bring Ochopee into the fold as well.
Each piece is -- kind of comes in three steps. Management to
begin with. There's got to be legislative action in order to make
boundary changes, and then the full annexation. And some of these
can go on at the same time. They don't -- I mean, they're not mutually
exclusive, and they don't need to be sequential necessarily.
But what I would ask, the direction from the Board, particularly
because there weren't any real proposed changes to Capri's taxing in
the first year, they proposed -- Greater Naples proposed leaving it at
two for the first two years.
So with that we have some time to go back, come back to you,
perhaps, in September, with a -- with a management services contract
and a timetable for exactly how we're going to lay it out so that we can
work through the entire transition process. There are a number of
things that need to be dealt with and addressed. Nothing
insurmountable, but some of it just needs to be worked through, things
like the ALS agreements to make sure that there's no gaps in ALS
service. How are we going to do that?
I understand that the unions are working together right now, but
that needs to be finalized, and it's going to take a little bit of time to
make sure that we can easily transition the employees over so that, you
know -- ultimately, the goal would be that the only real change that
we'll see is the, you know, color of their uniform and the patch on their
shoulders, but that there's no gap in service, that there's no gap in
quality and that -- you know, that things move over smoothly.
So that would be my recommendation to you is that you allow us
to sit down around a table and work out the exact time frame, with Isle
of Capri being first and, you know, and District 1 and 63 being, I'm
going to say second, but they could be concurrent. I mean, I don't
know at this point. But certainly Isle of Capri to start off with, working
into the 63.
Page 68
June 9, 2015
We had talked -- Commissioner Henning, you had mentioned
about making sure that Ochopee stayed whole with respect to the
funding for the first year or so that they currently get from District 1.
So we could work out something as far as that goes. Either leave the
millage at the current two for the one year or come to a blended rate
that would equal 1.5 for the rest plus the leaving Ochopee whole.
MR. OCHS: And, Commissioners, the reason I wanted to have
this information now before you voted on Isle of Capri was only
because during the workshop there was an emphasis on the reduction
in millage from 2 to 1.5, and that, indeed, is the phased goal in the
Greater Naples proposal, but the millage rate will remain under their
proposal at 2 mills for the first two years. And with that
understanding, I just wanted to make sure that the Board was cognizant
of that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes. Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala, then Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Stay there. Isles of Capri is ready to
become a partner in this. They want to be a part of the Greater Naples
Fire District. It's a given. You're not going to see any opposition on
that. Do you still have to go through all these phases for that portion
even though they're ready to join --
MS. PRICE: Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- together?
MS. PRICE: -- the earliest that those things can take place -- it
takes legislative action. So with the fiscal year starting October 1, the
legislative session doesn't start until after that. The governor generally
doesn't sign bills until April, May, sometimes June. Then there has to
be a vote. So that goes to the voters; earliest potential could be
November of'f 16, and so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So in other words what you're
saying is, yes, it has to go through all three phases?
Page 69
June 9, 2015
MS. PRICE: We need to do these because there's these different
steps involved, exactly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine. I just wanted to make
sure, because I know that they're ready to take a giant step forward.
But if it has to go through that, you answered my question. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. So, Commissioner Fiala,
since you're going to make the motion on this, I think, again, that we
should isolate it, as you properly say, to the Isles of Capri and that we
endorse the Isle of Capri joining Greater Naples by way of the phased
approach that staff has outlined.
And does this mean, Jeff, that you're going to bring back a
management services contract, an interlocal agreement between the
county and Greater Naples as it relates to Isle of Capri to allow for
Phase 1 to take place?
MR. KLATZKOW: If that's what the Board directs, yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I think we should have some sort
of an agreement so there's clear understanding what oversight provided
by Greater Naples is and also that Greater Naples understands that the
county will remain obligated for the funding for that two-year period.
MR. KLATZKOW: Understood.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think it's pretty easy to make a
motion on that one, because now we're just addressing the one area and
that we can tackle the other one, which seems to be a little bit more
convoluted.
So I'd like to make a motion that we approve the phased approach
in joining together -- I don't know if I can say annexing, so I'll just say
joining together the Greater Naples Fire Department and the Isles of
Capri Fire Department.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll second that.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman?
Page 70
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And bring back a contract, an
interlocal.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I would like to include the phased
approach on all three as has been outlined by staff when we did at the
workshop which means that there would be a consideration of Isles of
Capri, District 1 as was outlined in the workshop, and also Mile
Marker 63 station. That would be my preference. I don't want to go
through this --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But with whom?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: With Greater Naples, as was proposed at
the workshop. They talked about --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But they only --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- addressing those --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: They only bid on Isle of Capri.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: No, they didn't, ma'am. They talked
about a proposal for all three --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Did they?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- dependent districts.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I thought -- okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And I don't -- I would hate to have to go
through this in a piecemeal fashion if staff can get together with
Greater Naples and bring back what was proposed in the workshop.
MR. OCHS: The proposal included a management services
agreement for the Isles of Capri district, for Collier County Fire
District 1, and for the Mile Marker 63 station operation only that is
located in the Ochopee district but is separately funded by a state grant.
That was, in essence, the proposal.
And I just want to remind the Board, before you take any votes,
you probably have some public speakers from the Greater Naples
district that may want to address you on these items --
Page 71
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
MR. OCHS: -- before you finalize your vote.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I would like to go to Commissioner
Henning and then hear the public speakers.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I just finish -- can I finish
what I was talking about?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, I go to you after Commissioner
Henning, then, ma'am. Then we'll go to Commissioner Hiller.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Commissioner -- Mr.
Chairman, what you said I support, and I'm ready to make a separate
motion. The reason I wanted to deal with just the Isle of Capri issue is
because Commissioner Fiala's been working very close with that. She
made the motion; I'm going to support the motion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: However, I think there could be,
and I will make another motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. That's good.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Let's hear the public speakers
and get some guidance from them.
Mr. Miller?
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, your first public speaker is Jean
Kunkle. She'll be followed by Lee Kidder.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: How many do you have, Mr. Miller?
MR. MILLER: Four.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
MS. KUNGLE: Good morning, again. My name's Jean Kungle.
I am a resident of East Naples and a business owner in Ochopee at Port
of the Islands.
At this time I do not see where the Greater Naples proposal brings
better or less expensive services, only a larger domain. While I am not
Page 72
June 9, 2015
against consolidation, it is how and why it is being done through the
RFP. On a normal RFP I thought it went through purchasing for their
vetting and recommendation, which I do not see where this has
happened.
The RFP asked for a proposal for Ochopee, Isles of Capri, and
District 1. Greater Naples only wants a portion of Ochopee, all of
District 1, which covers Ochopee -- which Ochopee covers 70 percent
of its lands in Isles of Capri.
Nervous.
Ochopee has been covering I-75 for the past 40 years at no cost to
the state and a huge cost to the taxpayers of the district, Ochopee
district. No one else would cover it. No one else would go there.
Now, finally, there is a station, and most of the costs are being covered
by the state through an agreement with our district.
Now Greater Naples says they are the closest and wants to step in
and take over before we've even had a chance to enjoy the fruits of our
labor and get the station completed. It's not done yet.
It's part of the Ochopee district. It does not make sense to begin
breaking down the district into parts with no plan for the future in
place.
Plus Greater Naples is still getting settled in with the greater
Golden Gate and East Naples merger as an independent district. They
are a business, and we all know it's difficult for a business to grow too
fast. Why not take a step back, let the fire chiefs get together and work
out a more seamless plan that will work for everyone rather than
dealing with only the best parts.
I strongly, very strongly urge you not to take any action on the
Ochopee fire district today and the I-75 station. It needs to stay with
Ochopee. The three-year agreement, this four-year agreement is still in
place, and it needs to continue.
Thank you.
Page 73
June 9, 2015
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Lee Kidder. He'll followed
by Jeremy Morgan.
MR. KIDDER: Good afternoon. Lee Kidder, 13-year employee
with the Ochopee Fire Department, fourth generation Floridian, fourth
generation Collier County resident working on fifth and sixth
generation at the time.
I've been around, seen a lot. I'd like to make corrections to the
workshop.
Eighty-two mile marker kept coming up. We go to the 83 mile
marker for -- just for your knowledge.
If you want to see who's closer to the east end of I-75, it's not us,
and it's not Greater Naples. It's actually Immokalee. They're closer
than any of us to the east end of I-75.
We respond -- we respond per the CAD to the 83. You can check
that. That's supported by data. We've primarily covered I-75 in our
district for over 30 years, possibly 40.
We still -- even though, let's say, you do give the 63-mile marker
to Greater Naples, we still have to respond up to 75. We still have to
respond out there, because they're not allowed to leave I-75. They
have -- they can turn around, they can fuel, and that's it.
If somebody gets lost in the Big Cypress, plane crash, whatever,
we still have to go out there. We still have to ride up there. It doesn't
make any sense to me that we ride up that road right past that station,
even though that station still can't do it. It's our district. We go
through there. We should stay in our district.
We are not against a merger. We just want it done right. And I
don't think that there's anything been proven that this is being done
right. And I understand you worried about holding the bag at the end
for the 1.8 million you said, sir? Mr. Nance?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
MR. KIDDER: I understand that. They have to go through the
Page 74
June 9, 2015
same process we've got to go through. Give us a chance. Let us try to
get that money. Don't take it away from us. Nobody wanted anything
to do with I-75 until the golden egg got put out there. Now all of a
sudden everybody wants a piece of it.
I've worked too hard, I've lived in this county too long, and I hate
to see my brothers get put out of work. And I know that we're a victim
of the interlocal agreement. That's beyond your control. But when I've
got members from that local expressing concern for the survival rate of
the new employees we just hired and some of the old employees from
that station, I have to listen.
I don't think that they'll survive, I really don't. I think eventually
they'll be pushed out. And to me every firefighter that's worked on I-75
for the last 40 years somehow someway left a piece of themselves on
that road. We've seen horrific accidents nobody -- nobody showed up
to help us do. We're doing a good job. It's not costing you any money.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, you still have time. You're not
done. You still have time.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yeah. You can continue, sir.
MR. KIDDER: We do a good job. We do an effective job.
We've done -- I know you've heard this before. We've done so much
for so little for so long. Well, let us show you what we can do with the
proper equipment, proper manning.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sir, there is absolute unanimous feeling
on this board that protection of personnel is one of our number one
things. And nobody -- the reorganization of first response services and
the consideration by the citizens is not to put people out of work. It's
to reorganize it and gain efficiency, and we're dedicated to making sure
that everybody -- that all the unions get a chance to stabilize and
interact and reorganize.
So please don't think it's any criticism that anybody has done less
Page 75
June 9, 2015
than a stellar job. There's absolutely no question that you guys have
done duty above and beyond. I recognize everybody that traverses the
huge distances and the huge impediments to get to emergencies in the
district.
And I will -- I pledge to you personally that we are all dedicated
to making sure that it works out with the least amount of pain possible.
MR. KIDDER: Good to hear.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It is.
MR. KIDDER: And, like I said, done right, it could be a good
thing.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, sir.
MR. KIDDER: Let's not hurry and do the wrong thing.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, thank you. Are you
speaking on behalf of the local?
MR. KIDDER: I am a local member. No, sir, our president will
follow me. I am actually a taxpayer. And, like I said, I've lived here
my whole life, and family's lived here their whole lives. I've seen a lot.
And I don't mean to go over the time. I spent 13 years on a
monopoly with a towing business out there when it was two-laned.
I've seen what this department's come to. I helped pull cars apart with
the firefighter that was on the truck because there wasn't enough
manpower out there.
These guys are standup guys. And I'm not saying you guys are
saying we're not. I'm just saying, give us a chance. Let us show you
what we can do.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Everyone in all the dependent districts
deserve stability. I don't want to see this discussion continue ad
nauseam. I want to try to make sure that we can move forward as
expeditiously as we can, because you deserve that. And we deserve --
you know, it's our responsibility to make a decision in a way so that
Page 76
June 9, 2015
you don't feel like you're on the hook and you understand what people
are thinking. Please don't think that you are not on our minds. It's
stated right at the beginning that we're dedicated to --
MR. KIDDER: Sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- the commitment we have to you. And
don't think that any of us are wavering in that at all, please.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But thank you for.
MR. KIDDER: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No. Thank you very much for
bringing up what you did --
MR. KIDDER: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- because I think it makes great
deal of good sense.
MR. KIDDER: To me it does. If we're out there doing other
things, we might as well be doing the 63 mile marker, too. I mean, we
cover north of 75 on 29, we go up 75 to access certain areas of the Big
Cypress. That's our responsibility. And it don't make sense to drive up
into somebody else's, I don't want to call it district, but their area, when
we could already be there, we could already have help on the way, you
know, not necessarily leave I-75, but we can do what we can do. And
we're going there. No matter what, we're going there. They could be
sitting in the station. We drive right by their station, in a fire truck, in
an ambulance. It happens.
Yes, I thank you. Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jeremy Morgan. He'll be
followed by Brian Mading.
MR. MORGAN: Jeremy Morgan, president, Local 3670.
Station 63 has been on the -- trying to be built for 30, 40 years, as
we all know. Our staff, including Chief McLaughlin, Linda Swisher,
has put a lot of time and effort into this to get it going. And I would
Page 77
June 9, 2015
hate to see it separated from our department so soon when we just got
it built.
All the staff has really put in a lot of work to getting this all
going, getting it all good to go.
And I think I can speak on behalf of the union, we are willing to
work to merge in the future the whole department. I don't think
fractioning a department in half is really what's going to happen.
You're splitting a department in half. Let us work to get it all at once
instead of just splitting it all, you know, into pieces.
And I think it will work well. I think we could work well with
Greater Naples in the future to make that happen. But to do it in pieces
like this of one department I don't think will work.
And that's all I have.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MORGAN: Any questions or --
MR. MILLER: Your final speaker on this item is Brian Mading.
MR. MADING: Commissioners, thank you. My name is Brian
Mading. I represent Local 2396 as the executive vice president.
And I'm more here to talk about just the -- to strengthen what Ms.
Price said and reiterate it, that as a union and working with Isles of
Capri union and working with Jeremy and their union, we do look
forward to combining our unions.
Regardless of what happens here, us and Isles are very much in
the talk of merging our unions. I spoke with Jeremy and his
membership, or some of his executive members, and -- to come to
some sort of amicability in the future.
And we just wanted to let you guys know that we support each
other for our growth at no harm to another union or another area. We
obviously are working very well and diligently with our administration
and our management to what we feel is the right thing. And, yeah, the
Page 78
June 9, 2015
unions are for it. We see the wave of the future coming.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's wonderful.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
MR. MADING: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now if we can vote on this
motion and then open up discussion for --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. We have a motion and a second
regarding a phased approach on Isles Capri; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: With the request that County
Attorney bring back an interlocal agreement.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. Any additional discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, all those in favor,
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
motion to --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: My light was on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- approve the outline as
presented by Len Price, our administrative services department, with
the consideration of the comments made by the firefighters of
Ochopee. I think that's some information that we didn't have before on
station -- the Alligator Alley station, Station 62.
Page 79
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sixty-three.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Three.
MS. PRICE: Sixty-three.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Four?
MS. PRICE: Do I hear five?
COMMISSIONER NANCE: So you want to omit Station 63, sir,
or include it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. What I'm saying is, as
outlined by Len Price --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- with consideration of what
was testified here today and one of them is, you know, don't split us
up. Keep us all together, but we're okay looking at merging or being
under one department. That's the message that I want to give.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. I'll second that.
Now, we're going to Commissioner Hiller, then Commissioner --
are you done, sir? I'm sorry. Commissioner Hiller --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- then Commissioner Taylor.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The problem is is that's not what
Greater Naples wants. I mean, Greater Naples is looking to do what
the County Manager described, which is to break up Ochopee, and so I
don't think we have the proposal that you're looking for in front of us
as an option today, Commissioner Henning. I mean, if it turns out that
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You have to ask the fire
department about that, not me.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So I mean, I could not support that
motion today. Now, if Greater Naples comes back and -- with, you
know, full agreement of Ochopee that that would all become one unit,
that's one thing. But I completely agree. I mean, I listened to what the
Page 80
June 9, 2015
speaker said. I listened to what Ms. Kunkle said and what the
firefighters have said.
And I think, you know, cherry-picking a monied asset or, you
know, monied infrastructure and leaving everything else to the side is
somewhat disingenuous as a proposal. I mean, of course, you know,
like -- you know, that's like looking to buy a company and saying, you
know, I'll take -- I'll take this brand because it's profitable and, you
know, we'll just leave that on the table. No, when you buy the
company, you buy the whole company. We're not doing a spinoff here.
We're doing a wholesale of the entire Ochopee Fire District.
And I feel uncomfortable moving forward with any of that
without -- and, you know, we talked about the City of Everglades --
without having Sammy Hamilton here to address his perspective. And
I think it's very inappropriate for us to be moving forward on that
issue.
Now, you could bring it back in two weeks.
MS. PRICE: Commissioners, what I was suggesting --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: What the proposal was was to have staff
bring us back a phased approach proposal for Isles of Capri, and what
Commissioner Henning was suggesting is to ask them to bring back a
phased approach regarding District 1 and Mile Marker 63. We're not
voting on it right now. We're asking for a proposal; is that correct, Ms.
Price?
MS. PRICE: Absolutely. I will bring back --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All we're asking for is a proposal.
We can dig into the details of that when we get it from you.
MS. PRICE: That's right. What we can bring back is an
agreement working with the County Attorney for the management of
Isles of Capri --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Right.
MS. PRICE: -- and a scheduled approach over the next whatever
Page 81
June 9, 2015
appropriate period of time is, to bring in all the other pieces. And I
think sitting around a table we can come up with what would work
best with mixing management services with -- you know, with later
going to legislation and full annexation. We can --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And to include the municipality of
Everglades in --
MS. PRICE: -- include --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- your discussions?
MS. PRICE: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And not to bifurcate Ochopee and
to allow other fire districts to make proposals just like Greater Naples
made a proposal on Isle of Capri.
MS. PRICE: At your will.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, I think you have to open it
up because I think what we want to do for these firefighters and for
their communities is present the best option. And the only way to do
that is to get -- you know, put it out there, put it on the table and let
everybody make a proposal just like we did with Isle of Capri, and Isle
of Capri turned out to work best with Greater Naples.
And so let's just do the same thing with the remainder. However
we got to Isle of Capri --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller, we already did
this. We already asked for all proposals on these independent districts,
and we got back two. We got one from Ochopee and one from Greater
Naples. We already asked for proposals.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And that's the --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I don't think we should ask for proposals
again.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I think we do because we
didn't -- well, then I think we have to accept Ochopee and just let
Ochopee be --
Page 82
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, let's see what staff brings back.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- because, I mean, Greater Naples
doesn't want Ochopee. Greater Naples just wants the funded asset of
Ochopee.
MR. OCHS: Commissioner, if I might.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We were at the workshop.
MR. OCHS: Yeah. At the workshop -- and you may want to
hear from the chief or the commissioner.
But my recollection in the workshop was it was represented that
they primarily didn't include a proposal on the Ochopee district in
deference to the concerns that Mayor Hamilton and some of the
residents had there.
So I'm not sure that they weren't willing to do that. I think they
did that because they knew there was some concern and potential
opposition that they then expressed they would be willing to work
through over some period of time. And I think that's what we're
suggesting as well.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And I understand that. That's why I
bring up Mayor Hamilton and Everglades City.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And so what I'm just saying is,
before we vote on giving staff direction, why not sit down with Mayor
Hamilton and with Ochopee and Greater Naples and come back with a
separate executive summary with whatever approach would be best for
those entities?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's what we're asking staff to do.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, we're -- no, we're asking them
to follow this approach. And this may not necessarily be the right
approach for that group. You know, we're asking -- this phased
approach we know is going to work for Isle of Capri and Greater
Naples. We know that there's not going to be any split in Isle of Capri.
Page 83
June 9, 2015
We know that Greater Naples and Isle of Capri are happy together and
that this approach will work for them to get to, you know, ultimately
the transfer of the assets and the new tax rate and, you know, their new
management team, if you will.
So this approach is really a great approach. And we know that,
based on the discussions between the parties, this is going to work to
get it done.
We don't know who the parties will be and what will work best to
accomplish the next step. I mean, we're just talking about, you know, a
few weeks. Let the parties get together. Let staff work with Mayor
Hamilton. Let staff work with Ochopee and any other fire district that
wants to participate.
Maybe it should be Immokalee. Maybe it's someone else. I don't
know. I don't want to get involved in that. That's what you need to go
find out. But I don't think we should vote on anything today, because
we know there is a concern on the part of Mayor Hamilton, and I don't
think we should be directing staff to do anything before we get him
involved and talking on the same page as Ochopee and that Ochopee
feels secure that -- you know, that no agency is going to cherrypick
their assets, that they will be protected and recognized as a unit.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, isn't that your
motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: My motion stands. It was very
clear. It doesn't need to be repeated, and I'm ready to vote.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: County Manager Ochs, when
were you hired by Collier County as a public works director?
MR. OCHS: I was hired, ma'am, as the personnel director in
1986.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And the headlines in the paper
were?
Page 84
June 9, 2015
MR. OCHS: County and fire districts to discuss consolidation.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I think we need to re-evaluate Mr. Ochs'
contract. I think he's been negligent in his duty.
MR. OCHS: That was an epic failure on my part, obviously.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not at all, but I would say that
what I've heard today from Ochopee was a seat change. What I'm
hearing is that there's a willingness of the fire departments to merge,
and I remember the chief at the workshop saying, give us the
opportunity to work it out. Stay out of it, Collier County. Work it out,
come back to us, and leave your district whole, and leave it as it is, and
I would agree to that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's what I feel, too. I think,
Commissioner Taylor, you're absolutely right. I think we need to let
them work it out and then come back.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Let them work it out.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. It's not for us to work it out.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, I don't want to tell Mayor
Hamilton how he should run his community.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No. And they know -- that's their
district. They know those -- the mayor. They know what their
concerns are. They've expressed a willingness to merge.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Let's give them an opportunity to
bring it back to us.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I agree, I agree.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So which agency is going to handle
those discussions, ma'am?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think we could leave it up to the
chief.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
Page 85
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think maybe --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: What's been the impediment of the chief
to do this up to now?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It would be you, Len? Would your
department work this out?
MS. PRICE: I believe that we could lead the discussions --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: The motion is for staff to lead this
discussion and bring everybody to the table and work it out. That's the
-- that is the motion from Commissioner Henning, and I will second
that, because I think if staff--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That wasn't the motion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- is not going to be at the center of this
discussion, I don't think it's going to take place.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are you saying "staff," like Len
Price's office?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, for staff to have the responsibility --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm just asking you to clarify.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yeah. For staff to have the
responsibility to gather all these people together and make sure no
stone is unturned and nobody's left out of the discussion --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Would the clerk --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- bring it back to the Board with some
option.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I hear from the chief? I'd like
to hear the Ochopee chief. Can I --
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chair?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
MR. OCHS: Just, again, the Ochopee Fire Control District is
your fire district.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes.
MR. OCHS: It's not the City of Everglades' district. You're in
Page 86
June 9, 2015
charge of that MSTU. You have asked me to run that department
through the chain of command, and I think it's entirely appropriate that
we stay involved in this next phase of the discussion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We're not parties disconnected from this
discussion.
MR. OCHS: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We are, in fact, the ones that have to
administer these dependent districts --
MR. OCHS: Right.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- together with the professionals.
MR. OCHS: Right. We manage the personnel, we manage the
budget, and we manage the operation.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So I think it's justifiable for us to be at
the table, bring the professionals in, and have this discussion. So I
fully endorse Commissioner Henning's motion to lead this discussion
forward and let's keep it going. I think if we don't do this --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But that's not his motion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- it's going to --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: If that's your motion,
Commissioner Nance, I would support it, but that is not his motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Excuse me. Could the Clerk,
please -- would you read back --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Court reporter.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- court reporter -- excuse me,
what Commissioner Henning's motion was? Because I would agree
with Commissioner Hiller. I didn't hear that either, so --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No. I would support
Commissioner Nance's motion as he just articulated it, but that's very
different from Commissioner Henning's, and I would agree with
Commissioner Nance, not Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Maybe I heard something different.
Page 87
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, you heard it right,
Commissioner Nance.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Could we read it back?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: She's got to go on a search and destroy
mission to find it.
(The court reporter read back the motion as follows: "I'd like to
make a motion to approve the outline as presented by Len Price, our
administrative services department, with the consideration of the
comments made by the firefighters of Ochopee.")
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So Ms. Price has suggested to do exactly
what I think I stated.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that right, Len?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Would you like --
MS. PRICE: I believe so.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Would you like to restate your motion,
sir, with clarity so that we can maybe get three votes? I'm trying to
find --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, what I understand what
Len Price, the administrator said, was a phased approach, you know,
working with all the stakeholders, correct?
MS. PRICE: Present.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That would be including the
mayor, right?
MS. PRICE: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I also suggested, because it was
stated under there about the Alligator Alley station, and I said, after the
public comments, the firefighters of Ochopee said don't split us up, and
I further stated in the motion to take consideration of what the
firefighters from Ochopee said.
So, I mean, that addresses the whole gamut of things is work with
Page 88
June 9, 2015
everybody. You've got to work with the Greater Naples Fire
Department, you've got to work with the neighbors, you've got to work
with the firefighters, you've got to work with the citizens and bring
back a proposal.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: For Ochopee to merge with
whom?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Bring back a proposal of some sort.
MS. PRICE: With Greater Naples.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Only Greater Naples?
MS. PRICE: At this time, yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Or you're opening up --
MS. PRICE: Commissioner, we did open up everything to all the
fire districts -- North Naples was at the table, Immokalee was at the
table -- and they chose not to make a proposal.
So at this point I would recommend that we work with Greater
Naples. If we can't come to terms that work in the best interest of
everybody, we'd come back to you and tell you that it didn't work out
and can you give me further direction at that point.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And I seconded it.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So this is strictly to give direction
to allow for discussions to continue?
MS. PRICE: For discussions to continue, outside of Isle of Capri.
I mean, I've got direction on Isle of Capri.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So for discussions to continue to
address whether or not a phased approach would work and how it
would work?
MS. PRICE: Right, and how it would work.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay.
MS. PRICE: Bring you a timeline and whatever steps are
necessary, et cetera.
Page 89
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And before we vote, we need to
address District 1.
MS. PRICE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's the second -- that's the
third motion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. All right. So we're now talking
about how to address Ochopee and Mile Marker 63.
There's a motion and a second.
Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: With Greater Naples.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: With Greater Naples.
Hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. That passes 5-0. Now --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: My next motion would be to
direct county staff to consolidate the management portion of District 1
that Greater Naples controls, consolidate that into the Greater Naples
Fire District.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: At the current funding level?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: At -- yes. Well --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Or a portion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the current portion --
MS. PRICE: That would also require the same phased approach
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
Page 90
June 9, 2015
MS. PRICE: -- you know, in order to get it to legislation, so --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's my motion, the same
phased approach.
MS. PRICE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And I'll second that.
Commissioner Fiala's button is not working, but I'm going to
recognize her anyway.
MS. PRICE: And we'll talk to you about the Ochopee piece of
that as we bring that forward, you know, at what point in time the
Ochopee piece of District 1 might merge in with it or not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Most likely not.
MS. PRICE: Your -- I'm sorry. Did I understand that you're
saying that you want to look at just the part that they handle right now?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MS. PRICE: I understand.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's -- okay. And that's
because Ochopee counts on that --
MS. PRICE: On that revenue, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- revenue.
MS. PRICE: And that would be problematic for us.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: The consideration of Ochopee has to do
with their current funding level so that they remain fiscally whole.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. That's what I'm just
questioning also. That's what you're saying is the part that Greater
Naples already handles of District 1 stays with Greater Naples. The
part that Ochopee handles stays with Ochopee until these other things
can be resolved through these discussions. Is that what I hear you
saying?
MS. PRICE: That's what I'm saying.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And is that what the motion said?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
Page 91
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, and the second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, fine.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And the second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So you've got your work cut out for you,
Ms. Price. Thank you very much. I think we'll get some -- hopefully
we'll get some good proposals coming forward.
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, thank you for your guidance on
that. I look forward to moving forward with the stakeholders.
Item #9C
ORDINANCE 2015-34: AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH ESTABLISHED THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR
MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE
HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A
RESIDENTIAL (RSF-3) AND AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING
Page 92
June 9, 2015
DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE
PROJECT KNOWN AS ARGO MANATEE RPUD TO ALLOW
DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 225 SINGLE FAMILY AND/OR
MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED
SOUTH AND ADJACENT TO U.S. 41 AND MANATEE ROAD IN
SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 75.3±- ACRES;
AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE — ADOPTED
WITHOUT SIDEWALK DEVIATION
Mr. Chairman, we have one more public-hearing item. That is
Item 9C. This item requires that the commission members be sworn
and all participants -- excuse me -- all participants be sworn. Ex parte
is required. It's a recommendation --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: At this time we're going to have ex parte
for commissioners that have not given it on Item 9C, which is the
project known as Argo Manatee RPUD.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I can find it. I had staff
meeting and phone calls. That's it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I read the staff report, and I have
no other disclosures.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I've read the staff report and had
discussions with staff.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've spoken with staff, I've had
emails, and I've had calls. I've spoken with Rich Yovanovich. I don't
-- I haven't spoken to the developer. I don't know who that is. And also
I've talked with some Planning Commissioners and Hearing Examiner.
Page 93
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I've had a staff meeting. That's it.
No phone calls, nothing else.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you want to know why I pulled
it?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala, it's your item,
please.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You have the floor, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Please tell us, ma'am.
MR. OCHS: Excuse me. Did we swear? Get sworn in?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Oh, I'm sorry. Excuse me. Will all --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Don't swear.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All that wish to testify, please rise to be
sworn in by the court reporter for the opening of this public hearing.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you, Mr. Ochs.
MR. OCHS: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have no problems with the
dwelling units or most anything on this PUD except for the elimination
of the sidewalks, and that concerned me. It concerned me especially
because I got another letter from somebody -- I don't know his name --
in Ave Maria saying that there's an effort now to eliminate sidewalks
on one of the -- side of the street in Ave Maria.
And then we know that coming up before us is going to be the
Big Cypress PUD, or I don't even know if it's a DRI or a PUD, and I'm
concerned that we're going to start going into a phase where we're
eliminating sidewalks on one side of the road in all of these
developments, and I don't think that's the way we want to go.
Page 94
June 9, 2015
Right now we're in -- there's a lot of hiking and biking going on,
which many of our members seem to really support, especially because
of the health benefits to the biking. And the second thing is we're in
this blue zone, and the whole county is working on the blue zone. And
we want to see people lead a healthier lifestyle, and we're encouraging
that lifestyle, and part of that is working, is -- I'm sorry -- walking and
riding and --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Walking.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- riding bikes and so forth.
In here it also says -- they're talking about the deviation, and they
said every single sidewalk would be 6 feet in width; however, staff
response was, if this is -- if allowed as proposed, the resulting street
design would have pedestrians -- I want you to listen carefully to this --
would have pedestrians walking in every street with only a portion of
them crossing to use the sidewalk.
So you're going to find people -- we have the same problem in
Naples Manor. Now we have to go back -- and taxpayers have to pay
for this. We have to go back and retrofit and add sidewalks because
we've had children being hit by cars in Naples Manor because they're
walking on the street.
And I'm thinking, I don't think we're going in the right direction if
we want to start eliminating sidewalks. We worked hard to get
sidewalks on both sides of the street as part of our LDC, and I don't
think we should deviate from that, so that's why I pulled it.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I will agree 100 percent with
Commissioner Fiala. I cannot support setting aside sidewalks on both
sides of the street until we've had a very comprehensive discussion of
this item, and primarily for the number of reasons that she's already
said, but I'll say them again.
We've got FDOT focused on bike ped. We've got probably the
most active Pathways Committee we've ever had. We've got the blue
Page 95
June 9, 2015
zones coming forward to talk about this. And I believe that making
exceptions before we've had a chance to talk about this would be a
grave error.
I believe that there are opportunities where we don't need
sidewalks on both sides of the street, but I think it's going to be very
tough when the communities are a double-loaded design.
The second thing is, I believe that some of the sidewalk designs
that we actually have in our LDC, together with our landscaping
ordinance, is very inappropriate. I don't think it's producing the sorts
of infrastructure that we want. And I believe there's a way that we
could perhaps build sidewalks on one side of the street with
landscaping that would produce something that would be maybe better
than sidewalks on both sides of the street.
But I think we're going to need to have a very, very
comprehensive discussion on this. And I would like to think that we
should have a workshop on it so we can start having a greater
discussion because I realize it's coming up in the Rural Land
Stewardship Area in a big way.
So I -- I'm just going to say that I can't support it at this time, and
I think we need a greater discussion.
Other commissioners have comments?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll make one more, and that is that
this is also adjacent to a school, actually to two schools, middle school
and an elementary school. And being that these kids wouldn't be
bussed in, they're going to be walking to school, and they need the
sidewalks to get there on.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: If it's okay with the Chair, I'd like
to hear from some of the speakers, because I think --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Do you mind if the applicant speaks?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not at all.
Page 96
June 9, 2015
MR. YOVANOVICH: Because --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, do we really have to hear from
you? I'm just -- I'm sorry. I'm being a little silly.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I appreciate that.
But, again -- well, for the first time on this petition today, for the
record, Rich Yovanovich on behalf of the petitioner. With me I have
Scott Bland, who's a representative of Argo Manatee. Argo also is the
developer of the Warm Springs project up off of Collier Boulevard and
Tree Farm Road.
So -- and I have with me Mike Herrera, who's the engineer from
JR Evans on the project; and Anita Jenkins, who is our planner for this
project.
Those of you who have been around as long as some of us who
have been involved with county government will remember Anita as
your pathways coordinator way back when for Collier County.
I would like to briefly go over the sidewalk issue, which just so
the commission understands, was discussed in great detail at your
Planning Commission, and this specific deviation was discussed in
great detail at the Planning Commission.
And the Planning Commission recommended unanimously the
approval of this deviation. Likewise, Corby Schmidt spoke in favor --
with your Comprehensive Planning Department, spoke in favor of the
requested deviation.
And I put on the visualizer in green where the property is located.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, Mr. Yovanovich, I'd just like to tell
you one thing. My discussions with members of the Planning
Commission is that a number of them have remorse over that vote.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So that may well be, but what I'm saying
is, there are things.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I can only handle what happens at a
Page 97
June 9, 2015
public hearing.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I understand.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I can only handle what the
competent substantial evidence says in the record. If someone has
buyer's remorse, I can't handle that situation. It's not fair to the
applicant. And we spent a lot of greater detail -- and I also am aware
that there is going to be a workshop, at least at the Planning
Commission level, to discuss the bigger picture pathway/sidewalk
issue.
So I don't think that this project that is roughly 75 acres is going
to be Pandora's box, that every project that comes forward is going to
be exempted from a sidewalk on one side of the street. And I will also
point out that your staff supported a sidewalk on one side of the street
but originally wanted it 8 feet in width instead of the 6 feet in width
that was approved for very good reason and was ultimately supported
by staff in your most recent rendition of the staff report.
So if I can just take you, quickly, there's the aerial that shows you
where this 75 acres is located. We're requesting three units per acre,
which is the allowed density under the Comprehensive Plan for this
area. We're asking for single-family as well as multifamily. Here's the
master plan.
We spent a lot of time working with constituencies around this
project, including the School Board. The School Board has two
schools immediately adjacent to this project. The School Board asked
us to provide for a pedestrian interconnection in addition to the two
front entries to this project, which you could see on the master plan,
right here.
They asked us for this connection as well as the connections that
occur at both project entries, which at both project entries will have
sidewalks on both sides of the street.
What we're proposing is that there be a 6-foot-wide sidewalk with
Page 98
June 9, 2015
additional shade streets to actually encourage people to walk on the
sidewalks versus the 5-foot sidewalk on each side of the street.
The sidewalk will be on the outer loop. It will connect -- it will
be 6 feet wide. It will connect all the way around the project on both
sides of the street connecting to a 6-foot sidewalk in Manatee that will
take students to the school; likewise, on this side of the street, why you
would need two sidewalks -- why you would need two sidewalks on
that small cul-de-sac street to get children to the school when they'll
actually physically connect to a 6-foot sidewalk that will ultimately get
you to both Manatee Elementary School and Manatee Middle School
-- safe student access has been carefully thought out. And, in fact, Mr.
Eastman, who is the -- on the Planning Commission, who is the School
Board's representative -- he doesn't get to vote, but he does provide
input. For the first time that I've ever presented a petition, Mr.
Eastman spoke on the petition and spoke very highly about how my
client worked with the School District to address all of their concerns
for safety.
One of the benefits of this community is we are located next to
the elementary school and the middle school because that provides
area for the children who live in here to go play and exercise.
And I will tell you that, first of all, sidewalks are for pedestrians.
They're not for the bicyclists. I grew up and my kids grew up in a
community that has no sidewalks. Commissioner Hiller knows, in
Pine Ridge we have no sidewalks, and there's plenty of people
exercising, riding their bicycles, walking their children. My kids grew
up in Pine Ridge, and they're fine and they're healthy, unlike their
father. But they are healthy children that do exercise and do ride their
bicycles in streets without sidewalks.
This is a gated community, so it's not with through traffic. It is
very safe access. And we spent a lot of time going through this
sidewalk deviation for this specific project that has double-loaded
Page 99
June 9, 2015
streets.
And at the end of the day, the Planning Commission unanimously
recommended approval of the sidewalk deviation we're requesting.
Your staff ultimately recommended approval of the sidewalk deviation
we're requesting.
There is absolutely no competent substantial evidence in the
record that supports that we haven't met the criteria to request that
deviation. It requires an engineering and safety analysis, and ultimately
it was determined that for this project a 6-foot sidewalk on one side of
the street taking into consideration the additional interconnection we're
providing to the School Board sidewalks that we're building in
Manatee Road.
So we're going to have a 6-foot sidewalk connected to a 6-foot
sidewalk that ultimately will connect to whatever sidewalk's being
built on U.S. 41, and people can go wherever they want to go to on our
sidewalk system in a safe manner.
MR. KLATZKOW: Just for the record, there isn't a scintilla of
evidence before this board with respect to sidewalks. Whatever you
said before the Planning Commission or in staff meetings or whatever,
that's not before this board right now.
If you're going to be asking for the deviation, I think you need to
put on some proof of why you need it rather than your simply saying I
need it and I have, already, evidence that I need it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, let me ask you this question. Is the
staff report and the backup materials in the agenda package evidence?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think it's substantial competent
evidence of anything, no. If you're going to put on somebody to testify
what you're doing, that's one thing, all right?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Is the staff report and the backup
information evidence or not?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm simply telling you, you're telling the
Page 100
June 9, 2015
Board that you've demonstrated this, you've offered substantial
competent evidence. I'm telling the Board you haven't yet. You have
not met your burden at this point in time.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. I'd like to enter into the record the
executive summary and the staff report associated with the executive
summary. That's my first piece of evidence.
Then I'm going to call up Anita Jenkins, and I'm going to ask
Anita Jenkins to come up here and speak to the pathways issue from
her experience. And I'll have her give you a summary of her
professional credentials on this issue.
And then I will ask that the same requirement be included in the
record for anybody else who testifies as to what their evidence on my
specific project is as to the deviation.
So, Anita, would you please come up.
MS. JENKINS: Good morning, Commissioners. Anita Jenkins
with JR Evans Engineering. I'm the planning director there now. I did
start my career as a planner out with Collier County as your first
pathway coordinator and probably created some of the LDC that you
look at now for pathways.
So the guidance for pathway planning for pedestrians and
bicyclists, little bit different, but we look towards the FDOT standards
and the pedestrian safety standards that have been issued by FDOT as
part of our guidance.
I've been doing pedestrian facilities, design and training for over
20 years with the Bicycle Federation of America, with Collier County,
with Dan Burden, who's now with Blue Zones training AARP staff.
So a lot of different training.
So when I look at a pedestrian system, and I look towards the
Pedestrian Safety Manual, it basically says that you have to provide a
facility that is safe for the pedestrian. It doesn't say that it's necessary
on both sides, but you have to provide a safe and connected system.
Page 101
June 9, 2015
So in this particular neighborhood, when I look at this
neighborhood -- and I do see the connection with the school, the
interconnection's important.
So providing a 6-foot sidewalk -- and that's a sidewalk that you
can comfortably walk two by two, right? Five foot's a little tight; six
foot you can walk two by two.
So when you're looking at a safe pedestrian system, we're not
going through the community. There's nowhere to go, right. So these
streets are not connecting with the exception to Manatee Road.
So when I look at a collector road like Manatee Road, I would say
sidewalks on both sides are good. That's necessary.
When you look at a local street, is it a grid system where you're
connecting to a lot of destinations, or is it like this, a loop system?
Well, with this loop system, providing a sidewalk on one side of
the street, 6-foot wide that provides connections to Manatee and
Crosswalks, in my professional opinion, is safe and adequate.
The level of service needed to provide for the pedestrians in this
neighborhood have been met with a sidewalk on one side 6-foot wide.
So in our design of this community, that's how we came to this
decision that it is adequate and it is safe for pedestrians in this
community.
I'll answer any questions that you have.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, then
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the definition of
pedestrian in the pedestrian manual that you're referring to?
MS. JENKINS: The definition of a pedestrian? Is that -- I'm
sorry. Is that what you asked me?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
MS. JENKINS: A person walking.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just walking.
Page 102
June 9, 2015
MS. JENKINS: Walking. Bicyclists can be on the sidewalk. If
they are on the sidewalk, they do follow the pedestrian rules.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Rich told me I need to stay off
the sidewalk with my bicycle.
MS. JENKINS: Well, you don't have to stay off of it. If you are
on the sidewalk, you have to follow the rules and regulations as a
pedestrian. If you are on the street, you follow the vehicle.
So the law does not prohibit you from riding your bicycle on the
street (sic). You can prohibit it. Downtown Naples is a good example
where you have a lot of pedestrians. The bicycle doesn't work very
well with pedestrians. But you can ride a bicycle on a sidewalk, unless
it's prohibited by the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What about a stroller? Can you
push a stroller on there?
MS. JENKINS. Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So you're saying it's okay
to have a 6-foot-wide sidewalk on one side for the use of people
walking and people biking in both directions?
MS. JENKINS: In this location in this neighborhood, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's interesting. I would think
with a different use -- because you said the bicycles can be used, it's
not prohibited, I don't need to stay in the street, and then you've got
people walking. In this case I would imagine you're going to have
both uses at the same time near a school. And in your professional
opinion, with those types of uses at the same time, 6-foot wide is
adequate.
MS. JENKINS: Yes, yes. And not -- and in my own experience
-- I live in Lake Park, and my children have both bicycled and walked
to elementary, middle school, and now high school. And so, you know,
it's not just, you know, an opinion, but it's actual evidentiary
movements of pedestrians and bicycles on these sidewalks. And I
Page 103
June 9, 2015
have not seen a sidewalk in --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Lake Park is where
Commissioner Taylor lives.
MS. JENKINS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So I'm just trying to get
the feeling of it.
And I don't know what kind of facilities are in that neighborhood,
so you'll have to tell me what kind of facilities are on the streets.
MS. JENKINS: In Lake Park, which is part of the grid system of
the City of Naples, there are very, very few sidewalks on the streets --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. JENKINS: -- except for 10th, which is a collector.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So how does that compare to
this example?
MS. JENKINS: Well, what I'm saying is that I have not seen --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It doesn't have any sidewalks.
MS. JENKINS: Well, there are a few on the collector roads.
There's a bike path up 12th, there's sidewalks on 7th. So it's
intermittent for -- the facilities are, but I have not seen a sidewalk in
Collier County that the level of service is not adequate in these types of
neighborhoods.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So in our Land
Development Code it calls for sidewalks on both sides in this case or
an 8-foot sidewalk; is that correct?
MS. JENKINS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: On one side.
MS. JENKINS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that was adopted by the
Board mid 2000, I think. Were you part of that process?
MS. JENKINS: I was not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
Page 104
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala, then Commissioner
Hiller.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I don't have a question for
you. Did you want to hear the rest of the speakers first, or shall I just --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Do you have any further questions?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I wanted to know, according
to what I've read, the City of Naples is trying to retrofit the city right
now with sidewalks because they've had so many problems with
disjointed things -- where they stopped the sidewalk, and then on the
other side of the bushes they start again and so forth.
And I think that they clearly see the need for sidewalks in the City
of Naples. And they probably have to -- I do not know this. I'm
guessing that they probably have to do it on the taxpayer dollar
because it wasn't done before.
And I'm afraid that we will set a precedent by this one as we go
into others. Coming up is going to be Ave Maria, and -- which was
heard by the CCPC, like, a -- well, like two weeks after they heard this.
And they began to see that this -- these things are beginning to
materialize. And I think that they then had some heartburn over this
one in particular.
I think also we're talking about -- you mentioned safe passage,
and I'm talking about safe passage. I have Naples Manor in my
district, and they do not have safe passage. They have two schools in
their neighborhood just like this.
But it's hard for the children to get to school safely because in
many cases they don't have a sidewalk. Now, the county is retrofitting
that area, putting some sidewalks in because there have been so many
accidents.
But still, there goes Mr. Taxpayer again. We should just get it
done right away. Put it in right as it goes because the kids need to have
a safe passage to school.
Page 105
June 9, 2015
And you know what, little ones, they don't think about what
sidewalk they're on or what street they're on. They're going to just
dance along. They don't realize the safety issues that could be in front
of them. They just go wherever they can walk. And if it's a sidewalk,
then they're safe. And they ride their little bikes on those sidewalks,
too, rather than riding them in the street.
So I just -- I truly believe that this is something we should not let
go by. We should make sure that we get the sidewalks on both sides of
the street here, as we'll probably want to do in future developments as
well.
MS. JENKINS: Well, I would agree in the context of the City of
Naples where you have a gridded system and lots of destinations, that
the sidewalk system is different than it is in this little loop road. It's
different in Ave Maria where you have lots of definitions and lots of
interconnections, that's a different situation.
Lake Manor, the same. So if you don't have any sidewalks, then
you're not providing a pedestrian-safe passage like you are here with a
sidewalk around the outside of the loop.
If you have a sidewalk on both sides, there's an internal loop. It's
like a track. You can't go anywhere without crossing the road here. So
providing the sidewalk on the outside of the loop with the
interconnection provides the safety for the pedestrians using that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I hear what you're saying. I also
know who pays you, and I'm just feeling that this is not the thing for us
to do. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you point out on your site plan
exactly where the sidewalk would be.
MS. JENKINS: So the sidewalk is going to connect to Manatee
Road. The sidewalk requirement for Manatee Road is to have
sidewalks along the property.
Page 106
June 9, 2015
So we have provided a sidewalk along Manatee Road here and
here as required. The sidewalk is going to be on both sides of the
entrances and then around the outside of the loop, and this is the
interconnection that the school district asked for with a crosswalk, and
they are going to have a crossing guard at that interconnection there.
So they would prefer that the students walk on the outside of the
loop here and cross here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And what -- where would the other
side of-- where would the second set of sidewalks be if there were two
sides?
MS. JENKINS: Right. So if there's two sides, there would be a
sidewalk on this side and then a sidewalk internal here on this loop.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Because on the internal side of the
loop there's what?
MS. JENKINS: Well, it's just -- there's homes here, so the homes
would front the street, right, and on this side they would front the street
and the sidewalk on this side.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So you're saying there would be a
sidewalk on the perimeter?
MS. JENKINS: Right. So this is the street.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, the little chicklet (sic).
MS. JENKINS: Yeah. So the sidewalk would be on this side of
the street, on the outside loop connecting to this interconnection. And
what we've been requesting is that this racetrack sidewalk, right, it
would just go in a loop. So we're requesting deviation from that side
of the street.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, because --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Gas station?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So -- and this sidewalk basically
would -- on the inside of the loop would take away from the front
lawns of all the homes that face the road, that loop road, correct?
Page 107
June 9, 2015
MS. JENKINS: Correct.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's homes on both sides.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, there are homes on both
sides, as Commissioner Nance says; is that correct?
MS. JENKINS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: There's going to be homes on the
perimeter and then homes --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: On the inside.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- on the inside. And there's no --
in terms of, you know, where you've got that shaded area, what does
that represent?
MS. JENKINS: Which shaded area?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's called L.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's a lake.
MS. JENKINS: That's a lake.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, that's the lake.
So essentially what we're talking about is not having a sidewalk
on the inside loop on the side -- on the inside loop side of the road, if
you will?
MS. JENKINS: Right. So if anyone would like to walk, they
basically just cross the street, use the sidewalk. They can go out this
exit if they like and go down -- they'd have to cross the street here to
connect to Manatee Road to go down to Collier, or they come out this
way and go up to U.S. 41.
But there's not a lot of destinations here of where you can go.
You're going to go out -- if you want to walk outside the
neighborhood, you're going to walk to Manatee Road.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So essentially for the inside loop
houses, they forego a larger front yard if they have a sidewalk in front
of their homes, and the road will stay the same width regardless of
whether or not there is a sidewalk in front of those properties or not?
Page 108
June 9, 2015
MS. JENKINS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. And the school -- and what
was the School Board's opinion?
MS. JENKINS: We met with school district staff, and they asked
for us to put an interconnection here particularly because there is the
required landscape buffer, and so they asked us to put an
interconnection which will go between the houses. The houses will be
in a row here.
So we will leave space for an interconnection sidewalk on the
outside loop, and then the sidewalk will pass through and connect to
Manatee Road. And they asked for that particular location and a
crosswalk there.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And did they understand about the
sidewalk being on one side of that loop road as opposed to both?
MS. JENKINS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. You know, I have to say
that I am obviously a big supporter of pathways and -- on the other
hand, I also understand that this is a very different setup because you
are dealing with a loop road.
So while having connectivity, especially where you have a grid
and you're going from, you know, one road -- you know, one block to
another block to another block, what you're really dealing with here is
just, like, one big block, in effect.
And so I don't really see the value add of sidewalks on both sides
of this loop because it's one block, in effect. It doesn't -- I mean, would
it be nice? Sure. But it's -- there's no additional safety benefit. There's
no value.
And really, I really hesitate to -- given that it is a loop, in effect,
one block, to put what amounts to two sidewalks around one block that
would take away from the front lawns, because one of the concerns I
have when I look at this is -- you know, when I look at -- you know,
Page 109
June 9, 2015
we're already taking away from the front lawns of the one side, but I
see the importance of having the pathway there, and now we're taking
away from the other.
I mean, I could see where families would want a large front lawn
for their children to play in and know that they have what the school
system has considered a very safe arrangement for the children.
A lot of kids don't like to ride their bikes on sidewalks. And what
I have found is that more often than not the kids would prefer to ride
on the road as opposed to on a sidewalk. And, you know, if there is a
little child on a -- for example, a tricycle with a mom, I mean, there is
more than enough space for a mom with a child on a tricycle to
navigate a 6-foot sidewalk.
I don't think that, given the configuration -- and I got the same
email from the gentleman from Ave Maria -- I don't believe that we
can compare this project to Ave Maria or Lake Park. I think it's very
different.
I live in Pine Ridge. We have no sidewalks at all, and I will tell
you that it has not impeded the quality of life in Pine Ridge. I mean, I
know in Pine Ridge people are walking all the time. I mean, all the
time, and kids are on their bikes all the time. And, I mean, there is no
issue.
It is really nice to have connectivity, and I think pathways are
extremely important, and I like them, provided they're shaded so
they're usable. But I really -- I mean, with -- you know, with real
careful consideration of this issue, I don't really see the harm. I don't
see -- I don't see this as precedent-setting for those other projects. I
don't see it as harmful.
I think, especially given the involvement of the School District
and the configuration of this project literally as one loop, that really --
there's any additional benefit by having that second sidewalk, and I
don't see the harm created by eliminating it. I mean, that's -- I think
Page 110
June 9, 2015
we're -- I think we're being very harsh given what's before us.
I don't see -- I don't see why this deviation is not acceptable, and I
don't see this as a slippery slope for pathways because we're very
conscientious, and we are very much a blue-zone community. And
this is not taking away from, you know, healthy living or safe living.
So I would -- I would support it. I just don't understand why we
would deny it, especially given the expert testimony we just received.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Let me ask one question, then
we're going to go hear from the public speakers.
What -- how did we get -- I understand the Land Development
Code calls for sidewalks on two sides or an 8-foot sidewalk. How'd
we get from an 8-foot to a 6-foot? If we didn't want to go with two,
why didn't we just go with the one as outlined in the Land
Development Code? Am I right or am I wrong?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Right.
MS. JENKINS: You're correct in that the Land Development
Code says two 5-foot or one 8-foot on one side.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. So what happened to that?
MS. JENKINS: In this neighborhood an 8-foot side sidewalk is --
it's like building a, you know, 6-lane road for the automobiles, you
know, in this neighborhood.
If you compare the level of service that's needed, it's just -- it's a --
we have 6-foot sidewalks along Manatee Road that are existing, so it's
6-foot, and the pedestrians are using 6 feet fine right there. And so the
level of service and what's needed in the width for this particular
neighborhood is a 6-foot neighborhood local street sidewalk.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is that enumerated in the Land
Development Code?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, that's why they're asking for
MS. JENKINS: That's why the deviation is requested.
Page 111
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yeah, okay. So, I mean, I'm just -- I'm
just saying -- I hate to make Mr. Yovanovich the guinea pig twice in
one day, but that's what I'm saying. Just right now, it's just not in
conformity with the goals, objectives, and policies that we've outlined
with all the emphasis we have on bike ped. That's all I'm saying.
Maybe the commission agrees that we should make an exception in
this case.
But what I'm saying is, we need to come to grips with this
because it's coming in great quantity, and I just want to be consistent. I
don't want to be -- I understand if a developer says, listen, I can't afford
this, you know, the landscaping is intrusive, the sidewalk requirements
are intrusive, and perhaps we need to take all that into consideration.
But right now it's just not in conformity.
And, you know, maybe others -- you know, if everybody can
come to grips with it, I guess I can, too, but I'm just saying, that's
where I am.
MR. REISCHL: Mr. Chairman, maybe I can add a little to that.
Fred Reischl, zoning division.
My recollection is that the Planning Commission went with the
6-foot versus the 8 with the addition of the street-tree requirement.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What has that got to do with it?
Safety is safety. Two feet on a sidewalk would allow children,
bicycles, wheelchairs, dogs, everything. What has that got to do with
the trees?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, Commissioner, I think it actually
does. And I'm not minimizing your statement about safety. But I
believe that usable sidewalks are important. I see a lot of sidewalks. I
know there's areas in the county where we have sidewalks, and people
hate to walk on them because they're not shaded. It's brutal to walk out
on all this pavement. And they just don't use it.
So I don't think that's just strictly a frivolous, you know,
Page 112
June 9, 2015
recommendation by the Planning Commission. I don't know that a tree
would make up for it.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's what it said.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: But I can say that truthfully, if we had an
improved sidewalk infrastructure, one improved one might be better
than two unimproved ones. That's just my --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, I mean, I would agree, but
the idea that you would trade two feet for a tree -- why aren't the trees
there anyway? If you want people to use sidewalks, you put trees in.
That's just -- one and one makes two.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's not required.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, then that's another issue we
need to address.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. And to the issue of safety
and 6 feet versus 8 feet. If there are two sidewalks as opposed to one,
it's deemed safe to have a 5-foot sidewalk. So, you know, to sit there
and suggest that six feet isn't safe, I don't think would be the case
because it's clear that five feet is deemed safe.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Ten feet of sidewalk on five feet
on either side versus six feet.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But here's the thing -- you're not
going to have -- you're assuming, like, traffic. And I'll tell you, I lived
-- when I first bought a home in Naples, I lived in Village Walk, and
there were sidewalks on both sides of the street, if I remember
correctly. And I just want you to know that there was never traffic that
would ever warrant, like -- this is not -- these projects are not the kind
of projects where you need an 8-foot-wide pathway instead of two
5-feet.
What I'm saying is, I don't think that six feet is going to create any
kind of harm or any public safety issue, because you don't have the
Page 113
June 9, 2015
kind of traffic here, the pedestrian traffic that you would, for example,
like -- you know, like we're building that greenway on -- what is it,
Vanderbilt Drive? You know, and there you want, like, a multi-use
pathway where there's a lot of people and a lot of traffic because it's
that kind of corridor. This is -- this is a different -- this is a different
use. This is a different scenario.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioners, we're already 20
minutes past lunch break. Our poor court stenographer looks like she's
peeling away, and we've got speakers yet that want to speak on this
subject.
I think we've kind of beat this one to death, and we all have our
own opinions. So let's move on to the speakers, please.
Would you start out with the first one.
MR. MILLER: Your first speaker is Beth Brainard. She'll be
followed by Jane Cheffy.
MS. BRAINARD: Hello. I'm Beth Brainard. I'm the executive
director of Naples Pathways Coalition.
I do believe this is a slippery slope, and I think that there is an
issue with connectivity in Collier County. And we are really asking
you today to hold off on granting deviations until something is done,
something more comprehensive, to look at what's happening.
We're experiencing tremendous growth in Collier County. There
are new cities that are coming. They are not there to just be sold once,
which is only the consideration of a developer. You sell it once.
You're done with it.
Cities are coming, and they have to be viable, and there has to be
resale. And people are sold on a promise of what amenities exist, and
then they -- without the understanding that these are just chips that can
be value-engineered away and done away with by deviations so that
what they end up with is far different than the community that they
expect to live in.
Page 114
June 9, 2015
The county's trying to attract high-tech firms. This means
younger people. This means people with families. This means people
who are active. AARP Livable Commuter Report is talking about how
the last wave of boomers, as you are saying, want to be more active, as
do the millennials.
The Livable Community Report also says that the resale on the
same two houses, one with a sidewalk and two trees in front of it and
one without a sidewalk, the one with the sidewalk in front of it has a
resale of$34,000, in 2008 terms, more than a house without it.
So if you're looking forward and you're looking at what becomes
of a community after the developer leaves, then I think you have to
think about sustainability.
And here you've just got one development. Soon you have Ave
Maria; you have Big Cypress. You have cities and towns coming
where you need to count on resale and you need to count on being able
to attract businesses not with skimpy amenities that sound good on
paper, but when you get there, you know, you're sorely disappointed,
but with true amenities that actually build a community.
The City of Naples is retrofitting its sidewalks at a great expense.
In the communities that we build here in Collier County, you don't
build sidewalks now, you will build them. And when you do, it's
going to cost you significantly more money than it would if you'd put
them in in the first place when the developer pays for it before they
disappear or however.
What we'd like you to do, please, is to let the Planning
Commission do its walkability study. They're going to be bringing in
people from all -- to look at all aspects of this: The safety aspects, the
health aspects, the financial aspects.
And we think that it's an important step in the planning for the
growth and sustainability of Collier County.
Thank you.
Page 115
June 9, 2015
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jane Cheffy. She'll be
followed by Deborah Chisna.
MS. CHEFFY: Hi, I'm Jane Cheffy, resident of Collier County
for the last 31 years. I'm president of Naples Pathways Coalition, and
I'm here to talk a little bit about the safety aspect of having sidewalks
on both sides of the street.
MR. OCHS: Do you want to use the hand-held mic? Is that
easier for you? You can stand over here.
MS. CHEFFY: If you would look --
MR. MILLER: Turn it on.
MS. CHEFFY: If you'll look at this graph here that was prepared
by the Federal Highway Administration, and on the left-hand side
you'll see statistics regarding a sidewalk on both sides of the street. In
that case, it has the lowest incidence of pedestrian versus automobile
crash.
When you have a sidewalk on only one side of the street, you can
see that it immediately goes up in a way that is significant if it's your
child that is the child that gets hit by the car. And then, of course, with
no sidewalks, it's extremely more dangerous.
Basically what I'm saying is that in the past we really did defer to
developers and cost-value engineering, and things are changing. We
are moving toward a blue-zones environment. We're looking at
complete streets. And when we talk about FDOT standards, those
standards are being changed right now as we speak. They're being
changed by Billy Hattaway, who has embraced complete streets.
So it's important to remember that while maybe the developer has
an expert that says that FDOT standards have been taken into
consideration, those standards are being changed.
I'd like to also point out --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Jane, could I just ask quickly. Are
they being changed for closed developments, or are they being
Page 116
June 9, 2015
changed for open neighborhoods?
MS. CHEFFY: Well, because I'm not privy to what they're doing
specifically, all I know is that Billy Hattaway is in charge of--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm working with Billy. I'm
actually on the Bicycle Safety Committee for the state.
MS. CHEFFY: Right. And what they are doing is, sort of, in a
way, retrofitting standards to say that complete streets should be
considered.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But I'm not sure if-- and I'd have
to go back and look at that, but I'm not sure that's what they're
suggesting in closed communities.
MS. CHEFFY: Well --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And there's a difference. I mean,
there's a difference between -- and I understand where you're coming
from because I'm obviously very involved with it. I can understand --
and I'd have to go back and verify, but -- and it could be just -- you
know, I mean, I just don't remember it off the top of my head, but, you
know, the issue of the complete streets for, like, the City of Naples is
very different than a closed loop like what we have in front of us.
I'm not -- you know, it's a closed community with just a single
loop, and I think that presents a different picture than complete streets,
for example, for the City of Naples. So I'm not sure we can be so
blanket about it.
MS. CHEFFY: Well, I also don't think we can be blanket about
saying that a looped street should only have one sidewalk, because
what about the size of the loop?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But just so you understand -- Jane,
if I may interrupt. We're not being blanket. We're dealing with one
specific issue here. We can't -- we're not talking about generalities.
We have a petitioner in front of us. It's a land-use hearing, and we're
dealing with a deviation from the Land Development Code as it relates
Page 117
June 9, 2015
to this single project, not --
MS. CHEFFY: Right.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- a standard for Collier County.
We're not changing the Land Development Code for Collier County.
We're just addressing this petitioner.
MS. CHEFFY: I understand that --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we have to be specific.
MS. CHEFFY: -- but I would like to say that Mark Strain has
approached Naples Pathways Coalition with his concern that when you
make this decision today, you are setting a standard for future
developments, and he believes --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right.
MS. CHEFFY: -- that it is a slippery slope.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Okay. Well, let me just -- at least
from my perspective, we do deviations from the Land Development
Code all the time, and that doesn't change the applicability of the code
for other projects or what our policies are. And I think, you know, we
have to be very -- I mean, these are case-by-case decisions.
And if there's no basis to change it, then there isn't. But if it
makes sense to allow for a deviation, if there's no harm done in doing
so, then we should also accommodate. I mean, it's not a slippery slope.
I mean, we're not changing the Land Development Code.
MS. CHEFFY: Well, if I may, I'd like to go back to my
presentation.
And on this slide you will see that the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials state that in residential
areas sidewalks are desirable on both sides of the street, but they need
to be provided at least -- on at least one side of all local streets. So in
other words --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Ma'am, I'm going to have to ask
you to wrap up, please.
Page 118
June 9, 2015
MS. CHEFFY: Sure, okay.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: With all due respect, there were
questions from the dais, and she's allowed her time to speak here, I
think.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's take a lunch break.
MS. CHEFFY: I just had one final -- I guess you can't see that.
This is a -- an excerpt from the National Committee for Traffic
Safety's booklet on building traffic safety into residential
developments. And I've highlighted where it says traffic safety
demands good sidewalks on each side of every residential street. It
also says how inappropriate it would be for new residential
developments not to provide them. And they say that maybe in some
areas you could use just one sidewalk, but this should be a very rare
exception.
And so I'm hoping that the county commissioners do not allow
this deviation. I'm hoping that you do allow the Planning Commission
to have a full workshop on walkability, and Naples Pathways Coalition
does endorse sidewalks on both sides.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next public speaker is Deborah Chisna. I
hope I'm saying the last name correct.
MS. CHISNA: Close enough. Deborah Chisna, urban planner,
Florida Department of Health in Collier County.
I'm here in reference to the proposals for the deviations to the land
develop -- for this specific development from the Land Development
Code.
To have sidewalks on only one side of the street would be a giant
step backwards in community design. Research suggests that the
design of cities and neighborhoods can make it difficult for children
and adults to be physically active.
Page 119
June 9, 2015
Did you know that 65 percent of adults in Florida are at an
unhealthy weight, and one out of every three children are obese?
Studies estimate that nearly 80 percent of adults -- adult
Americans do not get the recommended amount of exercise each week
and potentially seeing themselves -- are setting themselves up for years
of health problems and high medical costs.
We live in an auto-centric society, and we've engineered physical
activity out of our lives. Children who grow up in suburbia can't meet
their needs without getting a ride somewhere.
When there is nearly nothing within walking distant to interest a
young person and it is near lethal to bicycle, he or she must relinquish
independence.
Growing evidence demonstrates a strong relationship between our
health and the environment which we live in, local or arterial roads or
collectors.
Many health and planning officials believe that traditionally --
which I'm not in favor of looped development as it is -- traditional
neighborhoods provide connectivity and destinations, but okay.
Traditionally, they -- back to many health and planning officials,
they believe traditionally designed neighborhoods, those with
destinations plus networks of pathways and sidewalks, can help
children and adults get more daily physical activity.
This type of design is recommended by the Surgeon General and
the Institute of Medicine for curbing the obesity epidemic. But many
zoning laws, development regulations, and transportation policies
make it challenging to create communities that facilitate walking and
biking.
Our neighborhoods are shaped by specific policies that guide
development and consequently our health. Land use has to be tied
with transportation. If you're going to build a roadway for cars to
travel, then build pedestrian/bicycling infrastructure equally for all
Page 120
June 9, 2015
modes of transportation to travel also.
We have a responsibility to create well-designed environments
that give residents options to their destinations. As planners we are
trained to look at these changing conditions and quality of life over 20
years or more.
We have the opportunity to effect change, and street design and
transportation planning will set the course for the future.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yes. I had a question that's not
as far as sidewalks. Has nothing to do with sidewalks.
But it mentioned in this backup material also that you were
building a clubhouse, and I'm wondering if it's -- if it's a wrong figure.
It's a 1,000-square-foot clubhouse for 224 homes. I was surprised. I
can't imagine how a clubhouse could only be 1,000 feet. I'm sure it
must be wrong.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Actually, if we build a clubhouse -- and
we may not -- it would be -- it would be a pool with a small area for a
clubhouse with bathroom facilities.
We said at the Planning Commission -- is that the intention was,
is that this is going to be homes for -- as an earlier petition we were
talking about, where it would be marketed to and priced to what we
would believe young professionals with families with the goal of
changing some of the demographics of the school districts in that area
as we speak, and we actually saw the schools as an amenity to serve
this development, because you have ball fields and the play areas at the
schools themselves.
So there would be no need to duplicate those efforts within the
community, because it's very easy for them to walk and get to both the
elementary school -- which every elementary school I know of has
Page 121
June 9, 2015
playground facilities for kids to swing on and play on and run around
on, and then you have the middle school which also has play areas and
ball fields for these kids to go and enjoy and play on like many of us
did growing up in other parts of the town. So there's no commitments
to a clubhouse.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: This wasn't really about the
clubhouse. It was kind of like -- you are going to build a pool?
MR. YOVANOVICH: No. No, ma'am. We have said if we elect
to do that, it will be that minimum size. We expect that the individual
homeowners --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So it's kind of like a pool house, if
you will build a pool; otherwise, there's nothing there? I just wanted to
clarify.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, we expect many of the homes to
have pools, have their own pools. So to have a community pool we
thought was, you know, unnecessary for this small --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't have to defend it. I was
just wondering how a clubhouse could be a thousand square feet.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And that's the minimum.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Mr. Yovanovich, I don't think
you have four votes for one 6-foot sidewalk, but I'm going to go to
Commissioner Hiller, and then I'm going to hear what you have to say.
Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You know, there is no question
that one sidewalk is necessary, and that's made clear by the
information that was provided to us.
I have a very hard time not accepting this because we have
several issues here. The first is the Planning Commission voted in
support of it. Secondly, staff, through the county's experts, have
deemed that this deviation -- and this is not, again, an amendment to
the Land Development Code. This is a deviation for this particular
Page 122
June 9, 2015
project with this design -- was supported by staff
Leo, the lady who spoke from the Health Department, is she with
-- is she an employee of yours?
MR. OCHS: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Who does she work for?
MR. OCHS: State of Florida.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, State of Florida. I was
wondering about that. Because when she said Collier County Health
Department, I got confused if it was county or --
MR. OCHS: Well, it's the Collier County branch of the state
department of--
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, got it. Okay, I understand.
Okay. I was just wondering, because with her input, I was kind of
conflicted with what staff was saying versus what she's recommending.
I think that -- I could not accept this project if there was no
sidewalk. I think that there's no question that sidewalks are necessary
and important, and I think in this particular design, with this
single-loop road, that one sidewalk -- a sidewalk along one side creates
full connectivity, full walkability, promotes connectivity with the
school so that the children can walk from their homes to the school.
And I just can't understand why we would force two sidewalks in
this particular situation. We're not setting a standard for anything else.
This is a unique project with a very simple design and, really, very few
homes as well on the amount of land that is being proposed.
And I will say I think it's extremely important that we have the
shade, which is, you know, something that Commissioner Nance said,
and he's absolutely right. I mean, these sidewalks, you know, are not
walkable if they're not fully shaded. I mean, they're not usable.
So, I mean, I would support staffs recommendation and the
Planning Commission's recommendation for this particular project, not
Page 123
June 9, 2015
as an amendment to the Land Development Code as a general matter,
but in this case it does seem to make sense. So I'm going to make a
motion to approve it as recommended by staff
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Do we need staff to speak to this
on the record?
MR. KLATZKOW: Do you need staff to speak? No.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Actually, I would like staff to
comment on it since they approved --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's take a lunch break.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It fails.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I would like to hear what staff has
to say.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, I want to go to
Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Fiala, and then we'll go to
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I still want to -- I have a right to
hear what staff has to say, why they recommended it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. This is going to continue
like other items are going to continue. Why don't we take a lunch break
and come back.
I agree with the employee from the Health Department. The
community I live in only has sporadic sidewalks on one side. And
using the stroller, my daughter's still getting bigger, and -- Mr.
Chairman, I think that we should take a lunch break.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: What's the feeling of the Board?
Commissioner Taylor wants to vote.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commission Hiller's going to
hold it up.
Page 124
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was going to ask the developer, if
he would add a sidewalk on the other side, I would vote to approve. If
he says, no, we're not, well, then, I won't make a motion. I just wanted
to make it that simple.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I guess I don't get to finish or rebut? I
would like the opportunity to address some comments before I --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Yovanovich, there wasn't a second
to approve your petition as --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I understand.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- as presented, so what would you like
to do to try to get something approved? I'm just trying to bring this to
a conclusion, because I think if you can't get the flavor of it, I think
you've missed something.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Commissioner Nance, you know, you and
I have gone back a long way. I'm pretty sure I understand the flavor.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Well, what would you like to do?
MR. YOVANOVICH: What I would like to do is at least be
allowed to fully address comments before there's an ultimate vote.
I'm pretty certain there were two against this from the get-go
before I even got up here and began to speak.
So what I would really like to address is just a couple of
comments, and you-all can vote to deny the deviation. You have that
right to deny the deviation.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. Well, let's see. Does the Board
want to take a lunch break before we deal with this?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think Commissioner Henning's
idea --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I only have, like, five minutes tops,
comments, then you can take your vote.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Hiller's going to
interrogate you.
Page 125
June 9, 2015
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, she's not.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We're going to go on for --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Let's take a lunch break.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Which, I will say, is my right, and
it is also, in my opinion --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We're going to take a lunch break, and
we're going to return and discuss this further at 1 :40.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's fine.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right.
Now, Mr. Yovanovich has been dutifully standing there the whole
time waiting for us to return.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you for coming back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I ask you to change your
pronunciation. We called him at one time Yovanovich.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And sometimes that's been one of the
nicer things you've called me.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Rich has been called many things.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: We'll leave that for another item.
MR. OCHS: If I may, I just want to remind the Board -- and
correct me if my understanding is incorrect -- but I believe recently
you made a policy or procedural change where you said we were going
to leave public comments on general topics on the agenda to be heard
no sooner than 1 p.m. unless otherwise noticed but that, regardless of
what else was going on when you came back from your lunch break,
you were going to stop and take public comment. I don't --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
Page 126
June 9, 2015
MR. OCHS: I don't know if that's something you want to --
MR. MILLER: We have no registered speakers for public
comment.
MR. OCHS: That was easy.
MR. MILLER: So we have none.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That was lucky.
MR. OCHS: Lucky is the better term.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: At least you brought it up. That's
good.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Even a blind hog gets an acorn once in a
while, right? Okay.
Well, we've dispatched our duty there. If somebody were to show
up here suddenly, we'll indulge them.
But, Mr. Yovanovich, please.
MR. YOVANOVICH: A couple of quick points. And I just feel
like I need to address, just for purposes of the record, there was a
comment made -- and I don't think she meant it the way it came out --
by one of the commissioners about my consultant and -- who provided
testimony on the sidewalks -- about who's paying her, and I don't think
Commissioner Fiala meant that my consultant wasn't acting in a
professional manner in giving professional testimony, but it came
across that way as if I had somehow purchased her opinion.
I just want the record to be very clear that Ms. Jenkins is a
professional. She testified based upon her professional opinion. And
in her professional opinion our sidewalk design of six feet with the
trees is perfectly acceptable.
I've known Anita a long time, and I would never hire a consultant
who would tell me what I wanted to hear. And she has told me on
other times what I didn't want to hear, which is fine.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, sir, and her -- I assure --
MR. YOVANOVICH: I just want to make sure that's very clear.
Page 127
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I assure --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me apologize and say --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- I, by no means, meant any harm
by that. I was just -- it was -- I felt that she was trying to sell us on
this, and I -- but I didn't mean it as a derogatory thing, and I apologize
if it came out that way, because that's not usually my style.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I know that --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I do apologize.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- but I just wanted the record to be really
clear because there are people who actually watch this on TV.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very good.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I assure you that her testimony, sir, has
been received as a professional and accepted as such.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Next, I really want to make it clear --
everybody's talking about some precedent that's being set by approving
this project. Subject to someone finding some other time where I've
argued this -- because I don't think I've ever argued it on a zoning
matter -- that just because you gave me something in one particular
zoning case, you have to give it to me in another zoning case. I've
never argued that position, because each zoning case stands on its own
facts and its own merits.
And I feel as if the community's fear by the two speakers is your
-- or the three speakers is you're somehow setting a precedent for every
other project that comes through, that you have to approve one
sidewalk on -- within a project on one side of the street versus the two.
We -- there is a process by which we can ask -- and you don't.
You look at each individual case. And we think on the merits of this
case, when you look at -- this is really two subdivisions off of a main
road, which is Manatee Road, you have the smaller subdivision to the
right on your screen, and then you have another subdivision to the left
Page 128
June 9, 2015
of your screen.
To me it makes absolutely no sense -- and I hope we can all agree
at least on the right side of the screen, for that small, little cul-de-sac,
do you really need sidewalks on both sides of the street, or could you
agree with what the Planning Commission had originally
recommended for that side?
So hopefully we can all agree that the Planning Commission's
recommendation makes sense on the smaller offshoot.
Now, on the other side where you have the lake, the reason we
don't want to do an 8-foot sidewalk is I'm fairly certain we would
never convince anybody to buy a lot with an 8-foot sidewalk in their
front yard. Nobody's going to buy that lot.
Likewise, curb appeal, pun intended, it's very important to
residents who buy in these communities; they like being the person
who doesn't have the sidewalk in their front yard. They like the bigger
front yard. They like they can do more with their landscaping. They
like that lot. They also like being able to walk across the very easy
street to walk across to get to the sidewalk across the street.
They like the privacy on not having a sidewalk in their front yard,
and they don't, for an instant, believe it is unsafe to walk across the
street to get to the 6-foot sidewalk.
And the last point I would like to make is, I don't know how a
6-foot sidewalk is unsafe within this subdivision when a 6-foot
sidewalk within Manatee Road is perfectly safe to get the kids to
school, because we're connecting a 6-foot sidewalk to a 6-foot
sidewalk. It makes no sense to me why it would be safe on Manatee
Road to walk to school outside of the gate on a 6-foot sidewalk, but
somehow it's unsafe to walk within the community on a 6-foot
sidewalk within the community.
There are a couple reasons for this deviation. One is we think it's
a better plan to have a 6-foot sidewalk with trees and, ultimately, the
Page 129
June 9, 2015
Planning Commission agreed that a 6-foot sidewalk with trees would
probably get more use than two 5-foot sidewalks without the trees,
which is what the code requires.
Second, our purchasers -- and I've heard the Planning
Commission and the Board of County Commissioners say they're not
going to get in the way of dictating to us what we know our clients
want. We know our clients prefer a sidewalk on one side of the street.
My clients do this for a living. There's the reason we've asked for
these deviations because we know what the market wants. We are
never going to be what the last speaker wants, which is an
old-fashioned grid system community.
That's not how Collier County got developed. Collier County got
developed as gated communities. That's the market for Collier County.
We are consistent with what the market wants. Collier County, I can
assure you, has high-value homes. There are no issues with resale in
Collier County.
Pelican Bay is a perfectly fine example. There's a sidewalk on one
side of a lot of those major thoroughfares in Pelican Bay. They're not
having any trouble reselling their homes. Pine Ridge is another
example. We have no sidewalks. We're not having any trouble
reselling their homes.
Collier County is different than what your previous speaker spoke
to. They come from different areas. It's not how we developed. It's
not how our Comprehensive Plan allows us to develop. We don't walk
to anywhere because activity centers are at all the major intersections,
and nobody's going to walk from their house unless they live
immediately adjacent to that activity center to go to Publix, to go to the
restaurant. They're just not doing that. Collier County developed in the
way it developed, which you basically have to drive if you want to go
to get goods and service.
This is a unique example. We're immediately adjacent to schools.
Page 130
June 9, 2015
There are opportunities for kids to exercise. We've worked with the
school system to make sure that they get there and they get there
safely, and we hope that you can follow the Planning Commission's
recommendation which was to allow for a sidewalk on one side of the
street with the additional planted trees, and maybe this can be the
springboard for further discussions as to what ought to be the policy
decision on the grander scheme issue of sidewalks. But I would hate
to hold this project up when we think we've met the merits to allow for
a sidewalk on one side of the street.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that was from before, and I
was going to ask them -- you see, because it leads to a school and
because they're hoping to have children in this neighborhood, I still
feel that it's -- that I don't want to approve a deviation. That's just me.
I'm only one vote here. So I could not make a motion to approve as it
stands.
I would suggest to you that the community will sell just as well
with sidewalks on both sides of the streets, but I think it would be a
safer community, especially if they're designing it around kids that are
able to go down to the playgrounds over at the school system over
there. That means there's going to be a lot of walking and biking to that
area, and because of the experiences we've had also in my district with
kids without sidewalks -- and kids don't pay attention to that. You
know, kids are so carefree.
So I -- but my opinion is if you would say, yes, we'll build
sidewalks on both sides of the street, I'd make a motion to approve it.
But as long as that -- as you prefer not to do that, I'll just remain quiet.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, Commissioner Fiala, you certainly
are within your right to make the motion to approve without the
deviation. And I'm assuming -- I saw you nodding your head yes. I
don't know if you were agreeing with me on the cul-de-sac side as you
Page 131
June 9, 2015
agreed that you don't need sidewalks on that or you just were just
nodding your head.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: On the cul-de-sac side I don't think
they need sidewalks there because, you know, it's just a small --just
like on a cul-de-sac on any of the major roads, rather, communities,
when they have a little cul-de-sac, they don't usually have a sidewalk
on both sides. They just have one around one. So I don't see that as a
definite need there. I do see one in the major section of this.
But if-- I would vote to approve it with no deviation, but the rest
of it, I think, is a great community. I think it's in a good location.
I think it's going to be an asset to that community. It sounds
really good. People could plant their own side trees if they want, or the
developer can do that. It sounds like it's going to be a nicer
community, and he might want to do trees along both sides of the
street on sidewalks.
But that's the way I would make the motion, to approve it with no
deviation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Except for the right -- except for
the little cul-de-sac section?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, except for the cul-de-sac --
cul-de-sac side, excuse me.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor, you are seconding
and speaking, ma'am. The floor is yours.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
I would like to know what our staff-- what their recommendation
was before the Planning Commission.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And Commissioner Hiller has requested
information from staff also.
MR. REISCHL: Thank you. Fred Reischl with Zoning Division.
Page 132
June 9, 2015
We went to the Planning Commission with a recommendation for
approval with the addition of 5-foot sidewalk on each side or 8-foot on
one.
At the Planning Commission, the discussion turned to will anyone
use the sidewalk, and usability was what the Planning Commission -- I
don't remember who suggested. Somebody suggested reducing it to
six, and then the Planning Commission said reduce to six with the
addition of the street trees.
And staff felt that was a compromise that we could live with, and
we went along with their recommendation of approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: By the way, sidewalks on both sides,
they don't need to be 6-foot. They can be 5.
MR. REISCHL: Five.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah, five feet, yeah.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Call the question.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. No further -- hearing no further
questions, there's been a motion and a second to approve it without
deviations with the exception of the smaller -- the smaller cul-de-sac
parcel.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm sorry. For clarity, you have other
deviations than the sidewalk. All we're talking about is the first --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just the sidewalk deviation.
MR. KLATZKOW: Just for clarification.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yeah. Is that the intent of your motion,
ma'am?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, sir, it is.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. The sidewalks being the only one
that's excluded from the deviations.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Page 133
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
MR. YOVANOVICH: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You have a conflict.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I do. That's true. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You fought hard, and you fought
well, Rich.
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to Item 11F.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. Chair -- Mr. Chairman, with
your indulgence, a gentleman in the audience has been waiting since
this morning because I moved a consent-agenda item to 16A18 to 11I.
I wonder if we could just hear it. It's -- I did it rather -- I didn't do it
facetiously, but I did it because -- not that I'm questioning -- well, I
need to know whether it's okay if we could hear it, because he has
another meeting to go to.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: At the pleasure of the Board. Would the
Board like to hear 111 next?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing no objections, let's go to 11I,
Mr. Ochs.
Item #11I
A QUITCLAIM TO COLLIER COUNTY INTERESTS IN A 30
FOOT STRIP OF LAND TO JEFF DAMI, CALIXTO
MONTENEGRO AND WORLD STRATEGIC ALLIANCES, LLC,
Page 134
June 9, 2015
THAT WAS ORIGINALLY DEEDED TO COLLIER COUNTY
FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY BY A PREDECESSOR IN TITLE —
MOTION TO APPROVE — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. That is a recommendation to quitclaim
Collier County's interest in a 30-foot strip of land to Jeff Dami, Calixto
Montenegro and World Strategic Alliances, LLC, that was originally
deeded to Collier County for road right-of-way by a predecessor in
title.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And so I asked it to be pulled to --
for discussion, because I understand that you were willing to quitclaim
it with the easements, and the entity came -- the person that --
corporation came back to you and said no.
We -- why would you do that? We want to have the easements,
too.
So I just need to understand, as we have just gone through the
permitting for the Lely, and it's over a million dollars, and we're paying
for, you know, easements and things, that in this case you absolutely
know that we do not need any easement on this land.
MR. AHMAD: Good afternoon. Jay Ahmad, for the record.
You're correct, Commissioner. In the April meeting, we got the
item approved; this board approved the item with having the
easements.
Since then, the owner of that property came to us and says, if we
could remove the easements since those easements really never are
going to be needed.
We checked with our Stormwater Department. We've checked
also with our Utility Department, and no one needs those easements
that are on the land.
So we agreed with the owner, and we're making the
recommendation to you.
Page 135
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: All right. Okay. So I just wanted
it on the record. That would be it. So I'm quite satisfied if--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Make the motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'd like to make a motion to
approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
MR. MILLER: I do have a registered speaker.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right, sir.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Ken --
MR. CRUICKSHANK: There's no need for me to speak. I'm in
total agreement.
MR. MILLER: He waives, sir.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: He's the gentleman who's been
waiting.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. There's a motion and a second.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Item #1 1 F
Page 136
June 9, 2015
AWARDING INVITATION TO BID #15-6379 COLLIER AREA
TRANSIT (CAT) FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS - PHASE II FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS AT THE COLLIER
AREA TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATIONS
FACILITY TO DEC CONTRACTING GROUP, INC., IN THE
AMOUNT OF $1,454,508.67 AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN
TO SIGN THE ATTACHED CONTRACT — MOTION TO
APPROVE — FAILED; MOTION FOR STAFF TO REVIEW THE
PROJECT FOR BEST VALUE ENGINEERING AND BRING AN
EVALUATION BACK TO THE BOARD — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to Item 11F. It's a
recommendation to award Invitation to Bid 15-6379, Collier Area
Transit facility improvements, Phase 2, for construction of
improvements at the Collier Area Transit administration and
operations facility to DEC Contracting Group, Incorporated, in the
amount of$1,454,508.67, and authorize the Chairman to sign the
attached contract.
And Mr. Carnell can make a presentation or answer the Board's
questions.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any questions by the Board?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is this the administrative
building, the sales center of the old Germain -- or the Oldsmobile
place?
MR. CARNELL: Yes. It's that location, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know it's the location. What
are we doing for $1.4 million?
MR. CARNELL: Well, specifically, we're constructing a
bus-wash facility, a canopy to cover passengers entering and getting
off the bus now, protecting them from the weather and elements, and
Page 137
June 9, 2015
there's some additional security improvements to the site as well.
This is the second phase of a two-phase construction plan out
there. And it's --
MR. OCHS: Source of funding?
MR. CARNELL: Oh. The source of funding on this is entirely
federal grant dollars.
There was -- something I do need to clarify with the Board. If
you look at Page 2 of the executive summary, it lists a summary of our
operating and maintenance costs, and it has a line item for capital
outlay. And it says $25,000 -- $25,933 a year.
I just want to clarify with the Board, that is not an ongoing annual
operating expense. What that is is an acknowledgment of the fact that
we have a 20-year life expectancy on this bus-wash facility, and our
best guess, sitting here in 2015, is that when we need to replace that,
approximately 20 years from now, that would be the estimated cost of
$500,000. That's explained in the narrative, but it's incorrectly
included in the table.
So, really, the recurring operating costs are $25,000 lower than if
you look at that total net operating effect at the bottom. That number
should be about $6,300 a year. That's the effect on the operating cost
year to year. We will, obviously, 20 years from now when we need to
replace -- if and when we need to replace this facility, we'll need to
look to grant dollars or other funding sources at that time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: When Jim Mudd was the
County Manager, he said, we're going to have more transfer stations
throughout the county. We're not going to just direct it to this one. Is
that still the theme?
MS. SCOTT: For the record, Trinity Scott, Transportation
Planning Manager wearing my transit manager hat today.
Yes, that's still the theme. We're continuing forward with our --
in line with our continual use. We're not changing anything. What we
Page 138
June 9, 2015
are looking to do here is to be able to improve our operations and be
more efficient with our operations.
One of the major things we're going to be doing with this
improvement is a bus-wash facility. And currently we wash all of our
buses by hand. So having a reclaimed water system to be able to
utilize to wash our buses we think will not only save us time but also
save us money with our water costs.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. In part of the bid, I'm
seeing earthwork, drainage, and paving; is that correct? That's part of
this contract?
MS. SCOTT: Yes. If you'll recall in Phase 1, when we came to
the Board with our Phase 1 where we did the Americans with
Disabilities Act improvements, which included the elevator and
digging our lake, et cetera, those bids came in higher than we had
anticipated, and so we had to value engineer several items out, and
some of that was some of the bus parking that was in the -- near Davis
Boulevard. So it is adding that pavement back in with Phase 2 where
we do have the dollars to complete the project.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And part of the change to
the existing contractor, the work that's been going on now, which is
site improvements, was to remove the limerock from the site of the
lake to a different location. That limerock was owned by the
contractor.
MS. SCOTT: Yes, it was.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now we have an item in here for
limerock base, 8-inch, for 64,800.
MS. SCOTT: Yes. Unfortunately, our permit did not allow us to
stockpile on site, and we did not have the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Where do you get the permit to
stockpile on site?
MS. SCOTT: It was as part of our excavation permit through the
Page 139
June 9, 2015
county.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Through the county?
MS. SCOTT: It did not allow us to stockpile on site. And with
this, we did not have the funding to proceed forward with the
pavement at that time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And you want us to approve
this?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
MS. SCOTT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Other comments?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'd like Commissioner Henning to
explain a little bit more, understanding that I haven't got the history
you have.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Well -- yeah, I don't think
you were here when we approved the contract for the site
improvements. The stormwater improvements, which is quite large,
was digging a hole in the ground, and then the contractor owned the
dirt. We paid him to dig our dirt out, and then in the contract it was
that he owns the dirt.
And then they came back and said, well, we need approval to
remove it off site. Maybe that's because another department said you
can't store it on site, you know, so you can use it for Phase 2. I mean, I
don't know.
It just seems to me that we can do a better job in spending the
taxpayers' money. And $64,000 might seem to be chump change to
some, but it's probably somebody's salary sitting in this room; $64,000
is a lot. I imagine $64,000 is a lot to the taxpayers having to pay this
bill.
It just doesn't make sense. You pay somebody to dig it, they own
it, they take it off site and sell it, and now you're buying dirt back.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So what's the alternative besides
Page 140
June 9, 2015
denying it? What happens when --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know. That's something
the County Manager needs to figure out, unless he thinks that this is
the right thing to do. It's not my -- I'm not managing these contracts.
But it was a separate item that came to the Board to remove it off site.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, it's unfortunate. When we start
running afoul of our own regulations, and we're trying to protect
ourselves against ourselves, that's unfortunate. But I don't know what
we can do at this -- you know, it's not the last time we've paved over
something and turned around and dug it up again to put another pipe in
the ground, so...
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I remember Tom 011iff telling us
a story about there was three workers that planted trees on 5th Avenue.
He says it was a day that one of them wasn't there, so the hole was dug
but the tree wasn't planted. It's just joking. I mean, that's how
government works -- or couldn't bury the tree or something like that.
That's my only comment.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: What's the will of the Board? Is there a
motion to approve?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Is there a second? I'll second it.
Further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
Page 141
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. So it fails 2-3.
Is there another motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It doesn't pass for a lack of
majority.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, it doesn't pass, correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The question is, is there -- can this
be modified, staff, to adjust in some fashion? I don't know what could
be proposed as an alternative.
MR. CARNELL: Well, the problem is the dirt is gone from the
first phase. And what's unusual about this was we had two -- we had
the project broken in two phases, two grant cycles, and so we had this
sequence of events.
And at the moment, I don't really have -- I don't know if you have
any suggestions, Trinity, in terms of anything else we can do.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask why we are not allowed
by permit to -- I mean, what's the reason for the permit? Someone
from permitting -- could someone please explain? Is there a liability
issue? Is there -- why does the -- why do our permits disallow that
type of storage?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ma'am, for the record, Nick
Casalanguida. For the record -- at the time you did that project -- and
Commissioner Henning's spot on. He brought it up at the time and
said, why do we give away the dirt considering what happened at the
Immokalee airport? And staff took note and said that wasn't going to
happen again. We found a place to put the dirt.
On site -- because you don't know the next time you're going to
go back there -- they had no guarantee that this grant would come their
way -- you can't stockpile material on site indefinitely. And that's just a
matter of the code. You're just -- you're not allowed. You have a Site
Development Plan, so much time to do it, and so that -- at that point in
time the contractor already gave the dirt to the vendor. Even if you
Page 142
June 9, 2015
wanted to stockpile it back then, he owned the dirt at that point in time
by contract.
And I think staffs comment was, we got the message, we'll look
for places to put the dirt in the future that it can used in other places,
and we know it has value.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And it has value, and we
gave that value away.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We just heard a deviation of our
Land Development Code, and this deviation on sidewalks has been
going on forever.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But there's no deviation process
for government to save taxpayers' money?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, at that time, sir, we probably
could have explored that, but by contract you had already given that to
the contractor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. It's -- that could have been
-- you came back later on and said, we need an amendment so that this
contractor can take it off site.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The contract required -- the way it was
bid was that that contractor was taking it off site, and we couldn't
change it at that time. And that was -- we noted that. That was the one
thing we noted, and we said, going forward, when we have excavations
in the future, we would put probably in the bid specs and go out to
other county departments and say, where could we use this dirt or store
it somewhere? One would be the park that's at Big Corkscrew.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, even when we knew on
the first phase of this rehabilitation -- staff told us it's going to be a
two-phase project, okay. So your staff knows what they're going to be
Page 143
June 9, 2015
bidding out on what phase and what is not going to be done.
I mean, I don't know how simpler I can make my point. You
knew ahead of time that you were going to be doing this work of site
improvements.
MS. SCOTT: At the time when we came in for the new
excavation permit, which was, I believe, October of last year, we did
not have the grant funding secured for second phase.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know that, and that was stated,
but you knew it was going to be a two-phase project.
MS. SCOTT: Yes, we did, but we did not know when. We did
not have a time frame of when those grant dollars would be available
for the second phase of the project. And so that goes back to what Mr.
Casalanguida was saying; we did not have a time frame of how long
we would be keeping the material on site.
Also at that time we were not clear as to the quality of material
that was going to come out of the lake either. We didn't know if we
were going to hit muck or what was going to come out. So it was also
a --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There was no boring samples?
You're saying there was no boring samples during the design work of
it, and I find that very unlikely.
MS. SCOTT: I can get that answer. I don't remember off the top
of my head if there were or not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What I'm hearing is excuses.
I'm not hearing -- I'm not hearing answers, but you-all just need to do
better.
MS. SCOTT: I agree. And when we came in for the excavation
permit last time, exactly what Mr. Casalanguida said was that we had
committed that future projects, if we were going to be hauling material
off site, that we would be working with all county departments.
Unfortunately, that ship has already sailed for us on this project.
Page 144
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me start from the beginning.
From the beginning you knew it was going to be a two-phase project,
that you couldn't do it all in one; you didn't have enough grant funding.
MS. SCOTT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You knew what you were going
to do in Phase 1, and you knew what you had to do in Phase 2 because
it's not going to be done in Phase 1.
MS. SCOTT: When we bid Phase 1, the paving, which is what
this limerock goes towards, was included in Phase 1. It was pulled out
after the bids were opened. We had already had the agreement in place
about -- that the contractor was going to be pulling the material out.
We had to come in and amend our excavation permit, but we had to
pull that pavement back because the bids came in higher. And so we
could not afford to do that section of the project, and we
value-engineered that out.
At that time, from a staff perspective, we did not know when
Phase 2 was going to commence.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So even at Phase 1 you knew
that you were going to need limerock.
MS. SCOTT: For Phase 2 at an undetermined time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, at an undetermined time.
Well, I'm just saying, we deviate all the time. It should have been
a request from one department to another that we want a deviation
from that.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can we deviate from permits?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can you?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning, I think your
comments are absolutely well taken, and it's an unfortunate
circumstance. But I'm afraid that what -- this is just an example of a
foolish consistency where we came off an embarrassing situation at the
Page 145
June 9, 2015
Immokalee airport, and everybody made the decision that we weren't
going to do that again.
And in this instance, that was not the right decision to make, and
that's unfortunate.
Commissioner Fiala, then Commissioner Taylor, then
Commissioner Hiller.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
I think both of you have made points that are legitimate points,
and -- but now what do we do to move forward?
And what I'm thinking is, do you want to just eliminate Phase 2
entirely because -- because we stubbed our toe here? Do you want to
move forward and get this job done?
I think we need to solve this problem before we just discard it.
Does anybody have any suggestions here about moving forward?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's going to be on my evaluation
of the County Manager's annual evaluation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but I'm talking about this
particular project here.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, Commissioner Fiala, if I can
say one thing. I do have one concern. While I completely appreciate
what happened was not good in the past, I do have one concern
because one consideration that I think we need to keep in mind is that
this is grant funding that we've been awarded, and coming across grant
funding is difficult.
And if-- are we achieving -- what -- have you done the cost
analysis, like the carrying cost of this capital product, like what the
impact is going to be? I don't have my information in front of me on
that. I don't remember.
MR. CARNELL: Well, we have -- as we mentioned in the
executive summary, there is a small increase in operating cost, but
there's also savings in operating costs as well because we'll be using
Page 146
June 9, 2015
less water by using the bus wash instead of-- right now we're washing
all the buses by hand and hose.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What's going to happen to the
employees that are doing that, the hand and hose? How are they going
tobe --
MR. CARNELL: Likely redeploy them for other things.
MS. SCOTT: Yes. Currently we -- CAT operations are
contracted out to a vendor, and they have two people in the evenings
who wash the buses. What will happen is is that they will be
reallocated to other maintenance duties that we have. They'll be able
to finish sooner. Right now they're struggling to get finished by 9:00,
9:30 at night, so this will allow them to get home to their families
sooner, be able to have them out picking up trash from our bus-stop
sites. So the same maintenance staff, they care for the buses as well as
the shelters.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Ms. Scott, this is funded by grant
monies?
MS. SCOTT: Yes. It's funded by the Federal Transit
Administration.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. I'm going to make a motion to
have staff review this entire project for value engineering to make sure
that the costs that are being presented to the Board are accurate and
realistic and that they support everything that they're presenting to the
Board, and bring another proposal back before we decide to discard
this grant.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second the motion.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'll support that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second.
Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. Casalanguida, does the
county not have a staging area where you can store things?
Page 147
June 9, 2015
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It depends on the job, ma'am. We --
County Manager directed me -- after this item came forward in the fall,
he said, look at the different jobs we have around the county. One of
them is the Corkscrew Island Regional Park. And where can we begin
to place dirt when we have excess dirt. Most of your road jobs are
balanced.
So I've been tasked to kind of work with the division department
heads and make sure that we have -- when we have projects like this,
that we have a place to bring them and store them and use them for
future use.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. So -- but -- so that's in the
works right now?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Going forward, ma'am, yes, it is. That
was one of the --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And how does it look?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, one of the places we're looking
at is the master plan for Corkscrew Regional Park because that lake
can potentially be filled in, and we're going to look at putting dirt there
from a lot of county jobs and reclaiming some of that useful property
that's over there.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So what about just without having
a project to put it to? Do you have an area in the county where you can
store --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We have several areas. And the
challenge is, you know, they're to be zoned for a storage yard, in a
sense. You can keep them in the right-of-way in some locations. Road
and bridge right now keeps it in certain right-of-way locations on a
temporary basis and then redistributes them to other places.
We're looking to find one spot where we can bring all the dirt
when we have excess material, and that will probably be that Big
Corkscrew project.
Page 148
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Remember, you can't make money
moving dirt from pile to pile to pile. It costs more to move it than it
costs to buy it. It costs a dollar a yard to buy it. It costs multiple
dollars a yard to move it. So you can't move it around like a shell
game. There's no economy in that.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, no. I'm not suggesting that.
I'm just -- if there was a place where this is the yard -- and, you know,
it has to make sense financially. If this is where you could put things,
if that's what we're headed for.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I have one location, and that's where
we're headed for, and it's that Big Corkscrew park.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: We have so much vacant land that
we own in a number of the districts, and I'm not sure why we can't, to
the extent we're not using those lands yet, zone them to allow for
storage, and you could -- because, you know, a number of these vacant
parcels are throughout --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, it's exactly what the
Chairman said. The value of the dirt, depending on anytime of year,
it's been --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Buck a yard.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's been as low as a dollar or two
dollars a yard to as much as 11 or $12 a yard.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Right. But we know that the price
of dirt is going to go up because we see what's going on. And
whenever we're in an uptick with construction, the price of dirt goes
up.
And what I'm suggesting, of course, at the shell game -- and
Commissioner Nance is absolutely right, it is expensive to move it --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
Page 149
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: -- however, if you had -- you
know, if we know we're going to have development in eastern Collier,
you know, you could have one in -- if there's unused land in District 3,
you know, if there's unused land in District 5 and unused land in
District 1, for example, you could have three separate staging areas and
accommodate the zoning to allow for staging the materials to serve as,
you know, wherever it most likely will go.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ma'am --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And it makes sense to use that park
and to fill in that lake for right now. I mean, that's obviously most
logical at the moment because it can be used to fill in that lake, and
that does make sense.
But, you know, I just -- you're obviously researching it, and that's
positive. And, you know, it was unfortunate that it happened the way
it did, and Commissioner Henning is right, but I do think that -- I do
think we need to re-evaluate this, and I think, you know, a close look at
this project will serve to validate whether or not we should move
forward with it.
So I support what Commissioner Nance has said. I think it makes
perfect sense, and I think staff pursuing storage site alternatives, you
know, across parts of the county where we're going to have road
construction and other construction makes a lot of sense.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's happening with the
excess fill on the Collier Boulevard widening?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I think most of that, sir, is a balance
job. But if Jay is here, he can tell you what the quantities are. Most
everything we bid now with --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just send me an email. It's
unrelated to this item. But I don't know if that was a part of excess dirt
going to a county project, but I see a lot of it.
Page 150
June 9, 2015
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Most of our jobs recently, sir, as I've
seen them, Santa Barbara, Collier South, we balance those jobs where
we get the material -- even Collier/Davis -- and we put the material on
roadbed. Will do.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I ask just one question?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: What ultimately happens with that
-- I recall, Jeff, that -- wasn't there litigation with the firm that took the
soil off the airport, and how did that -- wasn't the Clerk pursuing that,
and didn't it ultimately resolve itself that the contractor was correct and
that -- in doing whatever he had done, or how did that -- I don't recall.
I just remember there was quite a dispute going on between the Clerk
and that contractor over the fill at the airport.
MR. KLATZKOW: The end result was that the county was
found in breach the contract and wrote a check to the construction
company for the value of the dirt.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But the Clerk felt that the
contractor was wrong; was that not what the claim was?
MR. KLATZKOW: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So the Clerk basically lost that
fight; is that correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: Well, the county lost that fight.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, we lose the fight as a whole;
same thing.
Okay. I just want to make sure I understood what happened. I
don't recall.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. There is a motion and a second
on the floor to re-evaluate the project and bring back a value --
evaluated engineering.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Great suggestion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any further discussion?
Page 151
June 9, 2015
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It passes 4-1 with Commissioner
Henning in dissent.
Item #11G
AMENDING PROCUREMENT ORDINANCE, NO. 2013-69, AS
RECOMMENDED AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY
ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE A FUTURE PUBLIC HEARING
DATE FOR ADOPTION — MOTION TO APPROVE — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Commissioners, next item is 11G. It's a
recommendation to amend the procurement ordinance, No. 2013-069,
as recommended, and authorize the County Attorney to advertise a
future public hearing date for adoption.
Commissioners, I placed this item on the agenda. Most of you
will recall you adopted a purchasing ordinance in December of 2013.
At that same time you exempted purchases of$50,000 or less from that
policy on the assumption that a procurement manual containing the
terms and conditions for those purchases would be forthcoming. It
obviously has not, at this point, been forthcoming.
We have staff and vendors and prospective vendors trying to
work out of two different documents, your 2013 ordinance and your
Page 152
June 9, 2015
2009 resolution that is still being used to govern purchases under
$50,000.
The attempt here is to put those two pieces back together again in
a single source document for ease of use and administration not only
by the staff but by the bidders and prospective providers of goods and
services for county projects.
So I'd ask for your approval.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm kind of perplexed. Looking
at the proposed ordinance, it's asking the Board of Commissioners to
delegate our authority to the County Manager and the procurement
service director; authorize to make purchases in -- contracts and
purchase awards in an amount not to exceed $50,000. And then it
says, the following formal action by the Board of Commissioners on
purchases greater than the formal competitive threshold the Board
delegates to the County Manager or designee the authority to carry out
administrative and ministerial actions necessary to effect -- effectuate
the Board's action including, but not limited to, subsequent issuance of
work orders and purchase orders.
Jeff, this is a legal question, because your staff signed off on this.
Is it your position that we're redefining administrative and ministerial
duties of the County Manager when clearly, in my opinion -- and I'll
read it -- it's already been defined under law, 125.74? These are the
county administrator's powers and duties, County Manager, negotiate
lease contracts and other agreements, including consultant services for
the county subject to the Board's approval and make recommendations
concerning the nature and location of county improvements.
So it's defined under Florida law. Here it's defined differently; is
that correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: If you're asking me do I believe that this
purchasing policy under $50,000 is legal, my answer to that is yes.
Page 153
June 9, 2015
I understand that is the crux of the issue between a current lawsuit
between the Clerk and the County Manager. But if you're asking me
my opinion, it's a long-standing policy of this county as well as a score
of other counties through Florida to do this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's your opinion that we're
not redefining the administrative duties of the County Manager
prescribed by Florida law?
MR. KLATZKOW: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Interesting.
Okay. And I've heard several times that this has been a practice
over the past 20 years that staffs entering into these contracts, and you
stated it just now; is that correct?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's Board policy, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, let me just say to
everybody, including my colleagues, I read the Florida Statutes and I
read the Attorney General's opinion, and Attorney General's opinion in
several areas says the Board of Commissioners cannot delegate its
authority, it cannot delegate its duty, and it cannot delegate its duty
under the Florida ethics portion of the -- of Florida law, Statute 112.
And, furthermore, I checked to see -- I looked -- searched to see
what the ramifications of elected officials of delegating their authority
by past practices of governors, and I found one from Governor Jeb
Bush, and I found one from Governor Askew.
So for that reason I can't support the proposed changes.
But, furthermore, I found in Florida Statutes, Statute 112, that if
these practices have been going on for 20 years, it's a requirement
under the Florida Statutes for these people entering into these contracts
to file the proper forms with the Ethics Commission.
Now, as of late, those forms, or those filings, you could find them
online. So my request is to the County Manager: I want all the names
of the people that have been entering into these contracts for the last 20
Page 154
June 9, 2015
years. That's number one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think I'm next.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Are you finished, sir?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'm trying to --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, I'm shocked by the legal
advice that we're getting by the County Attorney that this is compliant
with Florida law.
I'm kind of concerned that, you know, there is -- there's no legal
representation to the board members of what their duties and powers
are.
That's my comment.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Thank you very much.
I listened carefully. I've read carefully. It's interesting, because
each one of us on this dais, every one of us, interprets things
differently. If we all read the same paragraph, we would all interpret it
differently.
We've -- and I think that's historic. When you pass -- when you
have a group of people and you pass a secret message around from
person to person to person, it comes out completely different than
when you started that message. It's because we all interpret differently.
So I understood Commissioner Henning said he read all of it
completely, and I believe that. I know that he's very, very good at that,
and that's his interpretation. Each one of us will interpret things
differently.
For 20 years we have interpreted this board policy, and it's ours to
set, our board policy. We have interpreted it one way, and we've acted
upon it just that way, so has the Clerk of Courts. He's paid all of these
bills because he also interpreted it the way we were interpreting it.
Somehow that interpretation has just changed. And I'm not criticizing
Page 155
June 9, 2015
anybody. It's just interpretations are to the eye of the beholder.
My suggestion would be, if this is a sticking point, then why don't
we just, as we've done every other time -- as long as we're not here --
like, for instance, we only have one meeting in December. We only
have one meeting in November. In the summertime we don't have any
meeting. After the first meeting in July, we don't have anything till
September. But business has to carry on.
You know, we're a county government. We've got a lot of people
depending on us to get our job done so that they get their job done.
And we can't just go about not conducting business because we're not
here to approve something.
So what do we do when that period ends, whether it be
November, December, the summertime? We tell the County Manager
to sign this for us because we're not even here to do that, and then we
will ratify it when we return because we have that much faith in him
that he's going to make a good decision, just like we have faith in our
other employees throughout Collier County. We expect them to do the
job and do it right.
And I say to you that this board policy that we've set -- and that's
our job; that's our responsibility to set policy. I think we've been
interpreting it the way it was meant to be interpreted.
And I understand that now interpretations are changing, but I
think that we can, just by ratifying -- as we have done all of these many
years when we're not here, to actually bring every $5 thing before us,
we ratify it. We even put them on here. All of the expenditures we
put, and we -- at the end of the meeting -- or it's in our consent agenda
-- we approve them so that all the expenditures are approved.
I don't see how things have changed. All of a sudden things have
changed, and it sometimes -- I feel that maybe an issue is being created
that didn't exist.
Thank you.
Page 156
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah. Commissioner Fiala, it's
actually interesting that you point out the agenda, because what
actually happens and what is in our ordinance is that we have now, as a
matter of law, the requirement that before the Clerk can actually make
the payment, which means pay the expenditure by releasing the check
or the electronic payment, it has to be approved by the Board, and that
is what completely changes the nature of what we are doing with the
County Manager, because we are not delegating discretionary
spending authority.
We are not saying that the County Manager can go out and that
the Clerk can pay for the expense ahead of us approving that
expenditure.
So we don't have to preapprove the PO in those lesser amounts
because no payment can be made on that PO before we approve it, and
that's not ratification. We are -- we are actually approving the payment
before it's made. And in doing so, we are also accepting all the
underlying documents that allowed for that transaction to occur,
whether it's a PO or a small contract, and that is what makes this
completely legal and, therefore, this policy has protected the county
because there has never been an expenditure that we did not approve
before payment in the normal course of business.
Now, I think putting this in the ordinance makes a lot of sense as
opposed to having it in the policy and then in the ordinance. That
makes no sense at all.
So I think we need to codify this as law, and the law already
provides that there shall be no expenditure -- there should be no
payment on the expenditure made before the Board has approved that
expenditure.
Now, from our perspective, it makes most sense for that
expenditure to be reviewed by the Clerk in the pre-audit process and
Page 157
June 9, 2015
then come to us after we know he's reviewed it, and then we say, yes,
this serves a valid public purpose and, yes, because the Clerk has done
the pre-audit, it's a legal expenditure, and we're satisfied with that, and
then the Clerk is allowed to make payment.
What, in fact, has been happening that I did not know about and I
have to share with you is that, as it turns out, the Clerk has been
violating our existing ordinance, and he has been making payments on
expenditures before the Board has validated them, exactly as our law
requires to protect.
So I think it's very clear. It's very clear. We're not delegating
discretionary spending authority. What we are delegating is the
administration of these smaller expenses under that $50,000 threshold,
and then we are not allowing payment on those before the Board
approves it subject to the Clerk's pre-audit to make sure, for example,
that the purchase was made, for example, for the benefit of the county,
you know, that they bought pencils that were used by the county as
opposed to for themselves privately.
And it's interesting because I've had -- after a -- you know, this
issue came back -- came up when this ordinance was first -- when the
purchasing ordinance was first being adopted by the Board, one of the
things that I had committed to do was to work with the Clerk's Office
and with the County Manager to figure out a process of how to satisfy
the legal requirement, you know, to ensure that there was approval
before payment.
And, you know, we went around and around, and there were
some very heated meetings where the Clerk was -- I mean, I have to,
unfortunately, say -- very rude. I mean, he had, in one of the last
meetings, literally, you know, got up from the boardroom table and,
you know, pushed his chair away and stamped his fists and walked out
on us, and it was really awful.
I mean, Crystal was at that meeting. Leo was at that meeting.
Page 158
June 9, 2015
Joanne was at that meeting. Len was at that meeting. And, I mean, he
wouldn't even entertain a short discussion. It was so difficult;
notwithstanding his promise that he would work with staff to figure out
a process so that the law could be satisfied.
And so I continued, you know, my review of how things were
done and, you know, followed the transactions through the system, and
when it became so clear to me that there could be no expenditure made
without the Board's approval prior to payment, it became so evident
that we were not delegating that spending authority.
Because the County Manager can't go to the Clerk and say, sure,
you can pay this. He doesn't have that authority. He can make the
purchase of these smaller goods and services within the budgetary
constraints that we've approved, and then the Clerk will review that
based on that, and then it comes back to us and can't be paid till we say
it serves a valid public purpose and it's -- it's a legitimate expenditure
of public funds, and you're done. And then at that point the payment
can be made.
But nobody, the Clerk nor the County Manager nor anybody else,
can actually expend, actually pay those county funds without the
Board's approval, and that's in our ordinance. That's in our ordinance.
And we -- and, you know, that's -- and it would be -- it would be
impossible for this county to function if we have to preapprove every
single PO, if we would have to preapprove every single tiny contract. I
mean, we wouldn't be able to get things done because, you know,
things move at a very fast pace and some things, you know, have to be
done when the issue (sic) presents themselves. And with smaller --
with smaller amounts and when there are exigencies, we have
procedures in place to ensure that the law is satisfied.
So, yeah, the law basically requires that he's got approval from
the Board as to those two things before payment is made, not before
the actual purchase is made, and that's the difference. It's the
Page 159
June 9, 2015
expenditure of the public funds, and that's where he's mistaken.
And he needs to follow that law. He needs to follow that law, and
he's not. He's, like, right now making payments using ACH before
bringing those expenditures to the Board for approval, and he can't do
that, just like the County -- wherever he is -- the County Manager can't
do that. Nobody can do that.
So I agree with what you're saying. And, you know, there's a
reason it's been going on this long. There's a reason it's a policy that's
been accepted both by the Clerk and in other counties. It's pretty -- it's
pretty crystal clear, you know, with an understanding of our procedure
and now our law.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Let me make a couple comments.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: The County Manager is the operational
and administrative functional arm of the county government. It's the
duty and sole responsibility of the Board of County Commissioners to
make sure that this government acts in the public interest at all time, is
as efficient as it can possibly be, and we provide all the policies for
which the operational manager, which is the County Manager,
functions. All of the policies that he operates under are established by
the Board of County Commissioners. He does not make any single
policy. We make the policies by which he's got to work.
And this county has got to function 24 hours a day, 365 days a
year; the Board of County Commissioners does not. The Board of
County Commissioners is out of session, the County Manager and his
staff are on the job 24 hours a day. When we're adjourned, he's
working. When we're sleeping, his staff is working. When we go on
vacation, his staff is working.
God forbid anything should happen to all of us one day, little note
to self, Collier County Government is going to continue to function,
and the reason why is that there's an enormous staff that's operating
Page 160
June 9, 2015
under the policies that are set forth.
All of these policies have to be efficient. Collier County has come
under much criticism for having all sorts of policies and arcane
ordinances and rules that have no purpose or are awkward.
It is -- everyone on this dais has made statements saying that we
should eliminate things that don't have a purpose. I simply do not see
what the purpose of this argument is. I do not see what is to be gained.
There's a policy that's been in force the entire time I've lived in Collier
County, the entire time every one of these commissioners has served
here, the entire time the Clerk has served here.
At the same time, the grand majority of all the other counties in
the state have functioned in the same way. They've determined that
there's a ministerial and de minimis amount, and they've given the
latitude of their staff to function in the absence of the Board's presence
in order to conduct the business of the government.
I completely endorse that policy. I think that that policy is
appropriate, and it's been validated over decades and decades and
decades. It's nothing we came up with. We continued on -- I guarantee
you that determination was made long before Collier County was even
in existence.
I do not believe it is in our interest to have a restrictive policy that
nobody else in their right mind has. I don't see what money there is to
be saved. I don't see what protection -- additional protections it's going
to provide to anybody.
The County Manager is a job that I really don't know who would
possibly want because he lives under the sword of Damo -- you know,
every hour that he's working, 24 hours a days, 365 days a year, he's
under the sword of Damocles, because if he does anything that three
board members don't much like, he's not going to have a job the next
day, and that's the control that is hanging over his head, and he has to
govern himself accordingly.
Page 161
June 9, 2015
I believe that if you aspire to excellence, the only way you're
going to get it is if you have people that make good decisions. And I
believe we have made, in the main, very good decisions. Always
perfect, always the right decisions? Of course not, never going to
happen. Ever make a mistake? I have, okay. They're going to make
mistakes, too.
And, you know, a lot of times we get up here and we
double-clutch and we Monday-morning quarterback the situation, and
they're going to make mistakes. And if anybody thinks they're perfect,
let them apply for the job and let's see how long they're perfect.
So I don't understand when this became an issue. I don't know
who thinks it's an issue besides the Clerk, because I don't see what is to
be gained.
And so I believe this is the only sensible thing we can do. I
certainly don't want to do anything that's illegal. If the courts in the
State of Florida say we're doing something illegal, I'll be the first one
to change the policy, but I don't see where everybody in county
government across the State of Florida is doing something that's illegal
and inappropriate. I don't think it would have lasted this long if it had
been that way. And I don't think the legislature feels like anything's at
jeopardy either, or they certainly would have chimed in on it.
So I'm going to support it.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Hiller, you said
it's in -- within this ordinance that the Clerk needs to bring back to the
Board ratification for public purposes for these expenditures; is that
correct?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, that's not what I said.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What did you say, what -- you
said the staff cannot make these expenditures without the Board's
approval.
Page 162
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, that's not what I said.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you're saying staff can make
purchases without Board's approval up to $50,000?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I'm saying something very
different than anything you're saying. I'm saying that the Clerk of
Courts cannot pay any expenditure of the Board of County
Commissioners whether that expenditure was incurred by --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fifty thousand or less?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Let me finish. It doesn't matter.
From zero to whatever. Every single expenditure prior to payment by
the Clerk must be approved by the Board of County Commissioners as
to legality and that it serves a valid public purpose, and that is what
happens, and that's what our law requires.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Where in the law can I find what
you're saying?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: County Manager?
MR. OCHS: In your purchasing ordinance, it's -- it actually is in
the 2013 ordinance, and I'll reference the ordinance in your backup. It's
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What page in our agenda?
MR. OCHS: I'll just put it on the visualizer, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's not in -- is it in our backup
material?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What page, so I can look at it on
my screen? What packet page?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: You're pushing it too high. Go
back up.
MR. OCHS: It's Section 7 of the 2013 board-approved
purchasing ordinance.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What page are we on?
Page 163
June 9, 2015
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm getting there, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The packet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 387.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: 397?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 387.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: 387.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It looks different.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's not right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Section 7 in my -- Section 7,
Paragraph A, Section 18 of the purchase ordinance is hereby amended
by adding the following clause: Standard cooperative purchases and
agreements and government contracts, A. Yeah, this is totally different.
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. The question when -- the question was,
where does it exist in the current purchasing ordinance. That's before
this action. Now, if you want to see what section it's in in the proposed
ordinance --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You mean -- are you saying that
we're amending an ordinance and that ordinance is not on our agenda?
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir, it's in your backup. It's the 2015 ordinance
amendment. That's the subject of your executive summary.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. This is a -- this ordinance
amendment -- or this ordinance amending an ordinance is 11-page, the
ordinance. How much on the 20 -- 2003 ordinance? How many pages
is that?
MR. OCHS: Come on up.
MS. MARKIEWICZ: Joanne Markiewicz, Procurement Director.
Thirty-four pages.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So this, in here, is 11 pages, but
the real actual ordinance is 34 pages?
MS. MARKIEWICZ: What --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How can you make an
Page 164
June 9, 2015
amendment to an ordinance if you can't even see the whole ordinance?
That's the first time. Besides the fact is, it's always been the policy of
the Board -- this is historical that staff is bringing to us an amendment
before it's amended, before asking for an amendment.
MR. OCHS: That's not true, sir. The executive summary is
asking for you to approve the amended ordinance and allow the
County Attorney to advertise a future public hearing for adoption.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Has this ordinance
amendment been advertised?
MS. MARKIEWICZ: Sir, that's what we're requesting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You haven't advertised it?
MS. MARKIEWICZ: No, sir.
MR. OCHS: We never advertise the first reading, sir. Always --
we bring it to the Board as a staff item. If you approve it, then we'd
schedule it through advertised hearing for a second reading where it's
adopted.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So show me in our packet page
of where the Clerk is directed to bring it to the Board of
Commissioners for approval. And is that being amended?
MR. OCHS: What section is this, Joanne? This is Section 6 in
the ordinance. Item F reads, prior to payment the Board shall approve
all expenditures with a finding that such expenditures serve a valid
public purpose. That same requirement was in your adopted 2013
purchasing ordinance.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's Packet Page 387.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, I find it interesting
that Commissioner Hiller, in 2013, who signed this ordinance, has
stated, so I think purchases up to $50,000 being made by staff
discretion without Board authority, I think that needs to be revisited
because obviously the Clerk has made it clear he's not going to pay
anymore.
Page 165
June 9, 2015
Mr. Ochs said, well, Chair, there's a question between -- on
whether that -- it's illegal and whether the Clerk is going to pay it on
his own (sic).
And Commissioner Hiller says, it sounds to me like this is -- you
know, reading this as it is today, it sounds like it is illegal. But now it's
okay for staff to approve contracts up to $50,000.
I don't remember from 2013 to today where the Florida law has
changed. So, you know, that's what the judge is going to look at. And
I think --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: May I speak?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- trying to win on this
amendment to an ordinance that is contrary to general law is not going
to make an impression on the judge.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Thank you.
Yeah. I had the opportunity to work very closely with the Clerk's
Office and with staff after this ordinance was adopted to come up with
a process. And what the Clerk had said on November 12, 2013, is that
he wanted to work with staff. And he said, I will work with you to
develop the least costly process to comply with the law.
But two things. All the future expenditures in this county will
meet the following two requirements: One is you have to have a
public-purpose determination by the Board through some method and
that, certainly, if you take that to mean that you bring back every item
to the Board, you know, that's non-sensible. That's not what that
means. You've got to do it in some formal process that you make the
determination of what the public purpose is.
And so he kept on saying that a process was needed. And I had to
learn the flow, which I learned after my statement and after we adopted
that ordinance, because the Clerk kept wanting things done a certain
way, which just was impractical notwithstanding that he was proposing
Page 166
June 9, 2015
that he wanted to work with staff and do it in the least costly fashion.
And then, finally, as, you know, I began to understand how these
expenditures were actually being incurred and what actually was
happening with respect to how they were coming back to the Board, in
effect, prior to payment for approval and for finding that those
expenditures served a valid public purpose.
It became very clear to me that there was no problem. And, in
fact, that was the meeting where the Clerk got very angry and bounced
back from his seat in a very irate and a rude fashion, like I said. He
stamped his tiny, little fists on the table like this and pushed back and
stampeded out of the room.
And Crystal was very gracious. I mean, she was very
embarrassed by what happened. And she said, you know, we've all
committed this time. Let's continue to work together. And we worked
very hard for the rest of the afternoon together. And, in fact, later that
meeting Jeff came in and helped us continue to work on, you know,
different Clerk staff issues to resolve those and, you know, in a
cooperative fashion move forward on procedural -- on procedural
questions.
So it's very, very clear now that I fully understand how the
transactions take place and what the Clerk wanted, that what the Clerk
wanted was, in fact, provided by what is now going to be section -- or
Subsection F of Section 6 of the ordinance -- the purchasing ordinance
as it will be advertised.
And, again, I'm going to read: Prior to payment, the Board shall
approve all expenditures with a finding that such expenditure serves a
valid public purpose. And that's what's required by law, and that's
what's being done. So there is no public dollar that's expended without
the Board's finding of a valid public purpose.
The County Manager cannot go out and approve payment. He
can't tell the Clerk, go ahead and pay. The Board has to make that
Page 167
June 9, 2015
determination after the finding of a valid public purpose.
So from a -- as a consequence of that step, we are clearly not
delegating discretionary spending authority to the County Manager.
What we are allowing him to do is purely ministerial, it's purely
administrative, and what he is able to do is go out and make these
purchases within the zero and 50,000 threshold, and then before they
are paid, we have to approve that those expenditures serve a valid
public purpose, and we do.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Ochs, do you have the
administrative methodology, and do you assert that this is going to be
the policy that you're going to adopt on all purchases whatsoever, this
Section 6(F), prior to payment the Board shall approve all expenditures
with a finding that such expenditures serve a valid public purpose?
MR. OCHS: Well, yes, sir, except that that's not my job to
perform, quite honestly. But I certainly acknowledge that that is the
policy of the Board.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: But you're going to go bring -- you're
going to bring all of these expenditures before the Board for approval
in one way or another?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's what we do.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Right.
MR. OCHS: The Clerk does on your disbursement report, I
believe.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's what we do every single
board meeting, and that's what's attached as the backup.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: And that's what we're going to do?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yep, that's what we do.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: That's what we have done, and we're not
going to do anything different?
MR. OCHS: I'm not going to do anything differently, no.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I'm going to move that -- I'm going to
Page 168
June 9, 2015
make a motion to amend the procurement ordinance as we see before
us and authorize the County Attorney to advertise a future public
hearing date for adoption.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. County Attorney, can we
create an ordinance telling an independent constitutional officer what
his duties are?
MR. KLATZKOW: Mr. Brock's duties are set forth in the State
Constitution by State Statute, not by your ordinances.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
Commissioner Hiller, you really should read the rest of the
excerpts on the November 12, '13, meeting that you're espousing.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I read those minutes, and what
you're not privy to is all the meetings that I had with the County
Manager and with the Clerk's Office on this matter subsequently.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you read only what you
wanted to hear in the minutes, and I'm saying that you should read, you
know, the rest of it so the Board understands. Clearly this amendment
is redefining Florida law of negotiating contracts and who approves
contracts. Now what we're defining is the County Manager can
approve contracts up to $50,000, contrary to law.
You know, it's your public duty. You need to govern yourself the
way you need -- see fit. I just can't support it because it's obviously not
legal.
So I'm ready to take a vote.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can I say one last thing, then we
can call the vote.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah.
And just to your point, I -- thank you for your comments,
Page 169
June 9, 2015
Commissioner Henning. When we, prior to payment as the Board,
approve the expenditures with a finding that it serves a valid public
purpose. The expenditures include all the underlying documents. And
so if you want to call that a ratification, you can. But the expenditure
is the entire transaction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, when you're entering into
a contract -- and in fact --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: And as you pointed out, I believe --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- this was to the point at the
airport, the staff amended the contract, and the Judge says you need to
honor the contract, okay. And staff, entering into these contracts, is
binding the Board to perform those contracts and have to make
payment on it.
So the real question is -- in the court is, does staff have the
authority to enter into a contract on the Board of Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Call the question.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Further comments?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I can't support this, and I can tell
you why. There's a lawsuit out there. It's between the Clerk's Office
or the Clerk and the County Manager and Ms. Markiewicz.
This is germane to that lawsuit, that's why I think it's before us.
It's been my training and my experience that when there's a lawsuit out
there, you don't tread in that water. So I cannot support this.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Can we call the question, please?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: There's a motion and a second.
Seeing no further discussion, all those in favor, signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Those opposed?
Page 170
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: It's approved 3-2 with Commissioners
Henning and Taylor in dissent.
Item #11H
RECOMMENDATION TO HEAR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENTS 5.05.05, AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATIONS
AND 2.03.09, OPEN SPACE ZONING DISTRICTS DURING TWO
REGULARLY SCHEDULED DAYTIME HEARINGS AND
WAIVE THE NIGHT HEARING REQUIREMENT; AMENDMENT
5.05.05, AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATIONS, PROPOSES TO
ADD A CONDITIONAL USE TO SEVERAL ZONING DISTRICTS
— MOTION TO DENY RECOMMENDATION OF A WAIVER AND
INSTEAD HOLD A 5:05 PM MEETING ON THE SAME DAY AS
THE REGULAR MEETING — APPROVED
MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes you to Item 11H. This
was an item moved from the consent agenda at Commissioner Taylor's
request. It's a recommendation to hear Land Development Code
amendments regarding automobile service stations, open space zoning
districts at two regularly scheduled daytime hearing and waive the
night-hearing requirement for these hearings.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I asked it to be brought
before us for a vote because I feel oftentimes, and certainly it's been
my experience since I've been newly elected, that the -- especially with
automobile service stations and open space zoning districts, but
specifically automobile service situations, it is of great concern to
neighbors in residential areas.
And, frankly, you don't see an automobile service station going
Page 171
June 9, 2015
up in the middle of Pelican Bay or Gulf Shore Boulevard. More likely
it's on 41 somewhere that it's -- and there's residential behind it. And
those folks work. They spend a lot of time in their day working, and I
feel that we need to keep that night meeting to allow maximum
participation by the residents who probably are going to be affected by
these issues coming forward.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I do agree with that. We have
-- out here, anyway, we've got two more big, huge gas stations coming
in. A couple Wawa's are now coming to East Naples. It seems like
the gas stations want to come to this area. Good, you know, let them
come, but just as long as the residents can also make their points about
how close these gas stations can be to their homes and how -- and the
proximity to other gas stations. I just feel that they would want to
weigh in on that, so I agree with you, and I'll second your motion.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: This is going to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: One day, one night.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So we're talking about --
MR. OCHS: It will be your July -- your last meeting, then, would
be an evening meeting, your last meeting before your break.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. So we would -- what do we have
to do, do it after 5:30?
MR. OCHS: After 5:05, I believe it is.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So what we'll do is we'll have our normal
meeting, and then we'll reconvene at 5:05 to hear this one item; is that
the plan?
MS. CILEK: Correct.
MR. OCHS: That would be the process if the Board decides to
do that.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. So is there a -- the motion --
Page 172
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll make a motion to deny the
recommendation.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: No, to change the recommendation
to --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: The recommendation is to waive.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The night hearings. I don't want
to waive them.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: So we're just --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Not waiving.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: The recommendation would be to
have one regularly scheduled daytime hearing and the night hearing --
and a night hearing in addition.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: So there's a motion by Commissioner
Taylor --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (No verbal response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Those opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay. It passes unanimously. We'll have
a nighttime 5:05 meeting. On the --
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: -- on the July -- the July meeting.
Page 173
June 9, 2015
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. OCHS: Yes, sir.
Mr. Chairman, that would take us to Item 15, staff and
commission general communications.
Commissioners, again, I'll just remind you of your upcoming
workshops just for calendaring purposes, if nothing else, and those
won't occur again till October and then November.
Speaking of the July meeting, Commissioners, I've had some
interest expressed or desire, if it could be arranged, to move your July
14th meeting up to July 7th if possible, and I'm just -- I'm looking for
some guidance or consensus from the Board.
Our primary concern was whether we would have taxable value
in time enough from the property appraiser in order to bring you an
item to set your maximum millage before you leave, and I think we'll
be able to do that, and then we'll have to work around this advertising
requirement for your 5:05 meeting on that same day.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'm fine with July 7th.
MR. OCHS: So should I try to plan for the 7th as opposed to the
14th?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, that works.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Great.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Okay by you, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I've got other people
I need to work with on kids, and I'm looking, and it's amazing it works.
It actually works.
MR. OCHS: That's all I have.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The force is with you, sir.
Page 174
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't have to ask for any other
approvals.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The force is with you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Somehow we got five votes on an item
after lunch. What happened?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Isn't it great?
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Came off the rails here. Okay. Thank
you, Commissioner Henning; that's good. Ending on a positive note.
Any other comments, sir?
MR. OCHS: No, not from me, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing, sir.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Taylor?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. You know, I'm developing a
theory, I guess, or maybe I had it before I was elected, so let me bring
it forward to you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: A theory?
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: A theory, yes.
But it's been my observation -- because I've had the benefit of
watching you and this county grow. I've been here for over 30 years --
that even though we represent districts, I think if the economic
downturn taught us anything is that we're closer than we think. What
happens countywide in different districts affects us all.
And as we go forward and certainly with all the exciting new
changes and the developments that we're looking at, and especially the
rural lands -- I mean, the rural lands could, in theory, bring triple the
size of this county. So what goes on in neighboring districts affect us
all.
And I say that in a very positive way and a very respectful way,
but I think those days of having these wide expanses of land that
separate these different districts is gone. It's here, and I know we'll
Page 175
June 9, 2015
work together, but I just wanted to bring that forward.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, you know, the expanses that
separate the highly developed parts of the county are actually already,
actually, solidified. They're there. They're in place now, if we allow
them to be that. If we allow and protect our conservation lands and we
honor and respect the low-density Estates, there's going to be quite a
distance between the two largest populated areas in the county, almost
an hour.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So what goes on in the City of
Naples affects the county.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Oh, sure.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And what goes on in East Naples
affects the City of Naples.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Always has.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And it is what it is. And it's a
good time because, you know, we do have to work together, and we do
have to see the county as a whole.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: If-- I agree with you, ma'am. And if we
are judicious in what we do, it can have a great, positive benefit. If we
fail, the opposite can definitely occur.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, what a segue to what I want to
talk about; beautiful, beautiful.
I was contacted by Victor Valdez. And many of you remember,
he was rather a controversial guy back in the days. But Victor has a
completely different change of heart. He wants to reach out to
everybody in the community in a very positive way. He especially
asked me to send his warmest regards to Commissioner Henning. He
said they've had their falling out before, but he's -- he wants to -- he
wants to extend a hand of friendship not only to Commissioner
Page 176
June 9, 2015
Henning but to all of us.
He and a group of wonderful people have been working together
to create a multicultural alliance. This is every culture that we have in
Collier County. It doesn't make any difference what color skins you
have, what country you were born in, they feel that they -- they wanted
to work together.
It's not anything that's going to be a county advisory board. It's
not going to be anything where they need any county money. They
just want to get together and reach out with the spirit of advocacy to
bring the community together in harmony, and they wanted you all to
be aware that that's something they're doing.
And Victor said personally that he wants to welcome you into this
group as well if anybody wants to come, but if not, he'll bring us
updates every once in a while on how they're doing.
They've already been meeting for months and sometimes once a
week and on just ways that they can be a functioning beneficial part of
our community and add to the wholesomeness of our community. And
I think it's such an admirable goal. And they're going to get there.
And so I just wanted to let you know that this multicultural
alliance is alive and well and moving forward. And so -- it's so nice to
talk about something peaceful and wonderful, isn't it? What a nice
way to end the meeting.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And, Victor, I give you a lot of
credit for making this happen. And then he's working with so many
other people on this. Mary Ellen Cash is another very important person
in this alliance, but there are many others, and -- so just to make you
aware that's happening.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Well, if they will be so kind as to let us
know, you know, when they're meeting and who is involved and where
it is, and if they would like to invite any of us to come and talk to them
Page 177
June 9, 2015
or meet with them on an occasion on a topic or if they have an interest,
I would volunteer to participate at their invitation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. That's a great offer.
Thank you very much. I'm sure that when they hear this message,
they'll hear your message.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Hiller?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Leo, I just want you to know, for
what it's worth, the Blackhawks are not going to win, and now I am
supporting the Rays all the way.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The Rays?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Tampa Bay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Lightning.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Lightning, sorry. Lightning. I'm
wrong.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: I thought you were supporting the
Blackhawks last year.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I never supported -- I mean
Lightning -- the Bolts. I can't keep up with all the teams that I follow.
The Bolts, the Lightning Bolts.
MR. OCHS: It's not over till it's over, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Well, I hope that Saturday night I
can get tickets to the game. That's all I can say, because it would be
amazing.
One piece of very good news to follow on Commissioner Fiala's
point, and that is that I got word from Trinity -- you know, one of the
things that the YMCA had asked is to see whether or not the bus routes
could be arranged in such a way that the kids from Golden Gate could
go straight from Golden Gate to the Y, and now there is a bus stop that
allows for that to happen. And she just told me this afternoon that
yesterday was the first official ride and, like, 40 kids were on that bus.
Page 178
June 9, 2015
That's awesome.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's great.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's CAT doing a good thing.
So thank you, Trinity and staff. That's a very happy moment.
I don't really have much more to add other than that. I mean, I'm
pretty -- is there anything else I should mention other than that Chicago
has no chance of winning? And we're not talking about the Rays.
We're talking about --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Those miracle fruits are amazing.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, the miracle fruits are
amazing. There's no question.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Commissioner Henning missed out on
that, so we'll ask him --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There's Trinity. You didn't hear it,
did you, Trinity?
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Oh, yeah. Did you hear what I
said? Thank you. Do you want to just step up to the podium and give
a better explanation of what I very briefly spoke about?
MS. SCOTT: Sorry. For the record, Trinity Scott. And I was
flying up the stairs as soon as you started talking about it.
We worked with the YMCA to do some trip planning with them.
And what the Y is doing is they are dispatching their counselors out to
the communities, and they are checking children in for summer camp
out at our bus stops with an iPad. So parents are not having to
transport their children to the Y.
So the camp counselor is out on -- at one of our bus stops in the
morning, they check in the children, and they put them on the bus with
them. And so yesterday we transported 44 children to the Y.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's so awesome.
MS. SCOTT: Yes, from Golden Gate City.
Page 179
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER HILLER: That's awesome. So that's one
piece of good news. The other piece of good news is that the Y has
also built a baseball diamond in conjunction with the Home Base
Program.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, that's so good.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: A special needs baseball diamond,
which is really great. And Home Base is a program that is part of our
Victim Advocacy Coalition, and they help the vets with PTSD.
And the next thing is on Saturday morning -- every time I think
about anyone who is a first responder getting killed, I just want to cry.
I'm sorry. But on -- I'm so sorry.
But on Saturday I had the honor of speaking in front of the
Brotherhood Riders, who are cyclists who have raised money for the
families of the fallen first responders in Florida. And when I tell you
this story, it's going to make you feel like I do.
I had my son there with me, and he was in Tallahassee on the day
that a man called fire rescue to come and put a fire out at his house for
no other reason other than to ambush these men and to shoot them
down.
And these firefighters came to put the fire out at his house only to
be faced with open fire against them, and one of them died. And I
can't believe that people would be so disgusting to do something like
that.
And so I commend these riders. They came before us last year. I
don't know if you remember, I did a proclamation for them for all they
did, and we had a young gentleman who sang who had written this
dedication song, and he sang for the Board of County Commissioners.
I'm not going to do a proclamation again this year unless the Board
would like to do so. I mean, we could. They're going to be arriving up
in Tallahassee this next Sunday.
But isn't that disgusting? I mean, I can't -- I'm sorry that I cry, but
Page 180
June 9, 2015
when I sit here and I think that anyone could do that, it's beyond belief.
And for as many in law enforcement and our paramedics and our
firefighters who have died in the line of duty to protect us, to save us,
you know, and to stand up for us to defend us, I just think that we have
to remember them, never forget them, and we have to support the
families, you know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They ambush people that they
knowingly know have no weapons on them. It's all they can do is to
fight for --
COMMISSIONER HILLER: But who came to rescue and
protect their property and protect them. I mean, who in their right
mind is going to open fire on a law enforcement officer because they
don't like police or open fire on a firefighter because they don't like
firemen? I mean, how can you -- how can you -- how can you even do
something like that?
And, unfortunately, with everything that's happened around the
United States, it's -- I just -- you know, when I think about what these
Brotherhood Riders are doing -- and they're literally riding, you know,
over 100 miles a day. And just so you know, every single one of these
cyclists is with law enforcement. And they're not just -- not just law
enforcement. They're all first responders, and not just from Florida,
they're from all around the country.
And beyond that, there was even one cyclist who was in law
enforcement from Germany riding. And I hope that what they're doing
becomes a national trend because it's unbelievable, right? Absolutely
unbelievable.
So, I mean, if you would like to recognize them again, I'd be
happy to suggest that the County Manager -- I'm sorry. I just -- so my
son was there with me because he was there that day when that fireman
was shot.
So do you want to do a proclamation for them again? I mean --
Page 181
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Would you -- would that be okay?
I mean --
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: I mean, I don't like to necessarily
repeat because there are so many people we want to recognize, but --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's worth repeating.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: Yeah, all right. Then let's do that.
And just again, so you understand, they're raising money, and they're
going from family to family to give them money and help them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's kind of like the Collier County
One Hundred Club.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It is the same as the One Hundred
Club except for the One Hundred Club, which I also have supported
over the years, is for local, you know, and we put it -- we pool the
money to help the families, and this initiative is for all the families
throughout the state.
And this year, so you know, 10 -- in 2014, 10 died in the line of
duty, and one was a K9 of the 10. So it's a big deal.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. There's a lot of sick
people out there. I mean, I just don't understand.
COMMISSIONER HILLER: It's horrible.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. One thing, it was brought
up in the last workshop, is about the fire chiefs all getting together. I
misunderstood Chief McLaughlin's statement. All the fire chiefs came
together a few years ago and did that same thing about consolidation,
and it ended up being more expensive, okay. So I think you need
everybody at the table myself, and Greater Naples is doing that right
now.
Page 182
June 9, 2015
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: With you, right? You're involved
in this.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'm involved.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I think that's all I have.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: All right. I try to make it a point every
year to go to the awards ceremonies at as many high schools as I can in
my district to see the success stories of the young men and women
going forward, and I am always amazed. I'm always inspired. Those
meetings and the awards -- to see them receive scholarship monies,
offerings from the community, offering -- offerings from the branches
of the service, from universities and colleges all over the United States
is truly inspiring.
It's amazing how many remarkable success stories there are in my
district, and I know they exist in all districts.
What you have to understand, the farther east that you go, the
greater the struggles sometimes exist and the background economics of
some of the families of the students and the things that they have to
overcome to be successful are -- seem monumental.
The things I had to do as a young person trying to work my way
through school pale in comparison to the hurdles that some of these
students have overcome, and they're obviously going to achieve
greatness.
Recently, also, the Chamber of Commerce in Immokalee started a
new program this year where they recommend -- they recognized 25
top readers at the fifth grade level. And they had a big dinner at I-Tech
to recognize the five best readers from each of the elementary schools,
and to see these young kids get up there and be recognized for their
achievement in reading was really remarkable.
I was able to take Gail with me and, of course, as a reading
teacher, you know, that's like blood in the water to sharks. It was just
Page 183
June 9, 2015
-- she just eats that stuff up, and that's just -- you know, no good can
come of that. She doesn't sleep ever that. So that was wonderful. It's
wonderful to see their achievement.
The University of Florida continues to build great relationships. I
think Mr. Carnell is going to bring a little item forward for the Board
to approve, but Dr. Shuckla, who's out there at the Southwest Research
and Education Center has received a grant from the district to look at
the Lake Trafford watershed and to model how water flows in and out
of Lake Trafford, and he's going to be. He's currently contacting all of
the property owners on the shores of the lake, and he will be also
reaching out to our Conservation Collier managers because we have
holdings on portions of the lake that he's going to be interesting in
monitoring just to model and collect information so that the water
dynamics in the lake are more. Better understood.
So I think it's very positive. A lot of things going on out there in
District 5. Everybody's excited to see a two-story Publix. Nobody
knows what one of those looks like. They're anxious to see Mr. Ochs
go up an escalator with a shopping cart.
MR. OCHS: So am I.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Other than that, any other comments?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I would love to make -- being
that you're talking about schoolchildren, can I just mention -- I'll go
quickly.
I went to a fifth grade -- I guess they call it moving-up ceremony
-- graduation for fifth grade. And this is in a very, very poor section of
town. I won't go into anything else except to tell you that it's a very
poor section. And you should have seen these children and parents.
Parents came out to watch their little children taking these flying-up
(sic) awards and recognition, and five of them were your reading ones
-- that's why I'm mentioning it -- that were then going on to this school.
And they were all dressed so cute. These kids were dressed up in
Page 184
June 9, 2015
their cute little sparkly earrings and sparkly necklaces and everything.
It was just darling. And how many parents were there having to take
off work to be there with these kids. It was beautiful.
Second thing I wanted to tell you was a girlfriend and I went to
the Philharmonic recently because we heard of some teachers that were
going to be playing with the Philharmonic. This was just like in a
practice session, and we heard that they were going to be playing there,
and these teachers -- and you could identify them because they all had
blue shirts on and the rest of the Philharmonic people were dressed
differently.
And it was a magnificent performance. And you could just see
the pride in all of these teachers. And they had each one of them listed
down there. And I looked at them with such pride, too, all of our
teachers right there in the Collier County public school system playing
together in this team, and that's what it's all about, isn't it? It's about
togetherness, working together for the benefit of the community, and
that's what we're talking about in many of these instances. We're all
better off if we work together.
CHAIRMAN NANCE: Very good.
Commissioners, thank you. We had a very ambitious and
detailed discussion today. I will thank everyone for your courtesy. I
think we had very difficult discussions, but I think they were all good
and needed, so thank you very much.
And if we have no other comments, we will stand adjourned.
**** Commissioner Henning 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
Page 185
June 9, 2015
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR RUNAWAY BAY AT FIDDLER'S CREEK,
PHASE 1, PL20120002610 AND AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL
OBLIGATION BOND IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO
THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED
AGENT— ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC UTILITIES STAFF
PERFORMED A FINAL INSPECTION DECEMBER 11, 2014 TO
UNCOVER DEFECTS AND FOUND THAT THE FACILITIES
WERE ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A2
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR RUNAWAY BAY AT FIDDLER'S CREEK,
PHASE 2, PL20130000531, AND AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY
MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL
OBLIGATION BOND IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $4,000 TO
THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED
AGENT— ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC UTILITIES STAFF
PERFORMED A FINAL INSPECTION DECEMBER 11, 2014 TO
UNCOVER DEFECTS AND FOUND THAT THE FACILITIES
WERE ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR RUNAWAY BAY AT FIDDLER'S CREEK,
PHASE 2-1, PL20130000543, AND AUTHORIZING THE
COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE
UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) AND FINAL
Page 186
June 9, 2015
OBLIGATION BOND IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $18,743 TO
THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED
AGENT — ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC UTILITIES STAFF
PERFORMED A FINAL INSPECTION DECEMBER 11, 2014 TO
UNCOVER DEFECTS AND FOUND THAT THE FACILITIES
WERE ACCEPTABLE
Item #16A4
AN EXTENSION TO COMPLETE THE SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH CORDOBA AT LELY
RESORT (AR-13078) — THIS IS THE SECOND EXTENSION
GRANTED TO COMPLETE IMPROVEMENTS AND PROVIDES
A NEW EXPIRATION DATE OF DECEMBER 14, 2016
Item #16A5
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF HACIENDA LAKES
BUSINESS PARK, (APPLICATION NUMBER PL20140000776)
APPROVING THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVING THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY —
W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A6
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF CORSICA AT TALIS PARK
REPLAT, (APPLICATION NUMBER PL20150000146)
APPROVING THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVING THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY —
Page 187
June 9, 2015
W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A7
RECORDING THE MINOR FINAL PLAT OF NAPLES CENTER
VILLAGE, APPLICATION NUMBER 20140002649 — THERE
ARE NO ISSUES WITH THIS PUD TO PREVENT THE PLAT
FROM BEING APPROVED AT THIS TIME
Item #16A8
RELEASING (2) CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS WITH A
COMBINED ACCRUED VALUE OF $346,374.58 FOR A
PAYMENT OF $674.58, IN CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION
ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. SAINT
HUBERT JEAN BAPTISTE AND FABIOLA ANTOINE, CODE
ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CASE NOS.
CEPM20110004442 AND CESD20110004443 RELATED TO
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4724 25TH AVENUE SW, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA — FOR VIOLATIONS INCLUDING
BROKEN AND/OR MISSING WINDOWS AND SCREENS AND
A STRUCTURE WITHOUT THE REQUIRED PERMITS ON
PROPERTY THAT WAS ACQUIRED BY SPECIAL WARRANTY
DEED MARCH 31, 2014 AND BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE
ON MARCH 18, 2014 AND MAY 16, 2014, RESPECTIVELY
Item #16A9
RELEASING A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $88,577.29 FOR THE PAYMENT OF
$2,027.29, IN CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED
Page 188
June 9, 2015
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. PAUL AND
JACQUELINE RICHARDS, CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD
CASE NO. CESD20100020099, RELATED TO PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 580 24TH AVENUE NE, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA — FOR VIOLATIONS INCLUDING AN UNSECURED
POOL WITH AN EXPIRED POOL BARRIER (PERMIT) AND NO
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION ON THE PROPERTY THAT
WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE AUGUST 17, 2012,
ACQUIRED BY BANK OF AMERICA VIA CERTIFICATE OF
TITLE RECORDED JANUARY 23, 2015 THEN CONVEYED TO
CURRENT OWNER VENTURES TRUST APRIL 9, 2015
Item #16A10
RELEASING A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $45,567.87 FOR PAYMENT OF $567.87
IN CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. KENNETH W. LIPKA, CODE
ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL MAGISTRATE CASE NO.
CEV20080016915, RELATED TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT
2675 43RD AVENUE NE, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA —
FINES RELATED TO AN UNLICENSED/INOPERABLE
VEHICLE PARKED/STORED IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA;
FOLLOWING FORECLOSURE AND SUBSEQUENT TITLE
CONVEYANCE THE PROPERTY WAS ACQUIRED BY THE
CURRENT OWNER US BANK, NA ON JANUARY 10, 2013
Item #1 6A 11 — Adding staff's proposed clarifications (Per Agenda
Change Sheet)
RESOLUTION 2015-111 : ESTABLISHING THE GROWTH
Page 189
June 9, 2015
MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE AS PROVIDED
FOR DURING THE MAY 26, 2015 BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS PUBLIC HEARING — AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16Al2 — Moved to Item #11H (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16A13
A PROPOSAL DATED MAY 8, 2015 FROM HUMISTON &
MOORE ENGINEERS FOR REVIEW AND CONFIRMATION OF
BEACH WIDTH/FILL ANALYSIS CONDUCTED BY COUNTY
STAFF TO DETERMINE IF BEACH RENOURISHMENT IS
REQUIRED IN NOVEMBER 2015; APPROVE A WORK ORDER
UNDER CONTRACT #13-6164-CZ FOR A NOT TO EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $4,984, AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY
MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE WORK ORDER,
AND MAKE A FINDING THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM
(PROJECT NO. 80165) — AN ANALYSIS PERFORMED FOR
VANDERBILT, PARK SHORE AND PELICAN BAY BEACHES
IN WHICH STAFF CONCLUDED, PENDING A SIGNIFICANT
STORM OR WAVE EVENT, THAT NO RENOURISHMENT IS
REQUIRED IN NOVEMBER, 2015 AND THAT THE HOT SPOTS
IDENTIFIED DO NOT WARRANT RENOURISHMENT AND
CAN BE HANDLED WITH TARGETED RENOURISHMENT IN
THE FUTURE, IF NECESSARY
Item #16A14
INCREASING PURCHASE ORDER #4500149729, FOR BAKER,
DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, P.C.,
Page 190
June 9, 2015
("BAKER DONELSON") $10,000, RELATED TO LEGAL
SERVICES IN THE FEMA BEACH RESTORATION
DEOBLIGATION SECOND APPEAL, DR-1609-DR-FL., PA
ID 021-99021-00 TO APPROVE WORK ORDERS WITH CB&I
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. AND ATKINS
NORTH AMERICA, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES FOR PHASE II CONTINGENCY FEMA RESPONSE
ASSISTANCE UNDER CONTRACT #13-6164-CZ WITH A TIME
AND MATERIAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5,000 FOR
EACH WORK ORDER (FUND NO. 001-103010), AUTHORIZING
THE BOARD CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED
WORK ORDERS — TO COVER FEMA'S UNEXPECTED
REQUESTS THAT REQUIRE EITHER LEGAL OR ADDITIONAL
ENGINEERING SERVICES SURROUNDING THE CASE THAT
WAS FILED TO APPEAL THE DEOBLIGATION OF FUNDS
RELATED TO HURRICANES KATRINA AND WILMA
Item #16A15
THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO ADVERTISE
AND BRING BACK A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO
ESTABLISH THE ADOPTION OF THE REQUIRED STATE
MANDATED FLORIDA BUILDING CODE FIFTH EDITION
(2014) UPDATE EFFECTIVE JUNE 30, 2015, INCORPORATING
EXISTING LOCAL AMENDMENTS AND CURRENT COUNTY
WIND MAPS. THE EXEMPTIONS IDENTIFIED IN ORDINANCE
2012-14 WILL REMAIN IN FULL EFFECT UNTIL THE FILING
OF THE NEW ORDINANCE — PROPOSED UPDATES INCLUDE
BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO ENERGY CODES, MECHANICAL
CORE EVALUATION, ELECTRICAL FAULT REQUIREMENTS
AND FIRE SEPARATION CRITERIA TO IMPROVE BUILDING
Page 191
June 9, 2015
EFFICIENCIES AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SAFETY
Item #16A16
AN ADOPT-A-ROAD PROGRAM AGREEMENT FOR A
ROADWAY SEGMENT ON VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
FROM US 41 TO GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD, WITH TWO (2)
RECOGNITION SIGNS AT A TOTAL COST OF $60 WITH THE
VOLUNTEER GROUP, PLATINUM DRY CLEANERS
Item #16A17
A WAIVER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GUIDELINES SET
FORTH IN ADVANCE STREET NAME SIGN GUIDELINES
POLICY AND RESOLUTION NO. 2012-114 FOR THE
PLACEMENT OF ADVANCE STREET NAME GUIDE SIGNS
ALONG IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR 846) AT THE APPROACHES
TO PEBBLEBROOKE DRIVE — WAIVING THE REQUIREMENT
THAT SIGNS ARE PLACED GOING IN BOTH DIRECTIONS BY
INSTALLING ONE SIGN THAT WILL BE SEEN WHEN YOU
APPROACH THE ENTRANCE ON IMMOKALEE ROAD AS THE
OTHER ENTRANCE OFF OF COLLIER BOULEVARD IS FOR
RESIDENTS ONLY
Item #16A18 — Moved to Item #11I (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16A19
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT
OF $46,237 FOR PARCEL 263RDUE IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. GANASH RAJARAM, ET AL., CASE NO.
Page 192
June 9, 2015
15-CA-379 (GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM EAST OF
WILSON BOULEVARD TO 20TH STREET EAST, PROJECT NO.
60040.) FISCAL IMPACT: $46,237 — AN EMINENT DOMAIN
CASE WITH A JULY 9, 2015 ORDER OF TAKING HEARING
SCHEDULED AND SURROUNDING A 4,500 SQUARE FOOT
EASEMENT NEEDED FOR THE GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD
ROAD WIDENING PROJECT
Item #16A20
RESOLUTION 2015-112: AUTHORIZING A LOCAL AGENCY
PROGRAM AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION IN WHICH COLLIER COUNTY WOULD
BE REIMBURSED UP TO $1,270,901 FOR CONSTRUCTION
AND ENGINEERING COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES OF NEW
MARKET ROAD (N. 15TH STREET TO E. MAIN STREET) IN
IMMOKALEE, AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE
THE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING A NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT (PROJECT NO. 33423)
Item #16A21
RESOLUTION 2015-113: APPROVING THE EXECUTION
OF AN ANNUAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE AND
COMPENSATION AGREEMENT FOR THE MAINTENANCE
OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT)
OWNED TRAFFIC SIGNAL DEVICES THAT ARE
MAINTAINED BY COLLIER COUNTY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
(CCTO) SECTION OF THE TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
DIVISION AND AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN
Page 193
June 9, 2015
THE AGREEMENT (FISCAL IMPACT: REVENUE $169,176)
Item #16A22
CONTRACT #15-6382, "GRANT FUNDED PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES FOR COASTAL ZONE" WITH THE ENGINEERING
FIRMS: ATKINS NORTH AMERICA, INC., CB&I
ENVIRONMENTAL & INFRASTRUCTURE, INC., HUMISTON
& MOORE ENGINEERS, P.A., AND OLSEN ASSOCIATES, INC.
— A 1-YEAR CONTRACT THAT MAY BE ANNUALLY
RENEWED AN ADDITIONAL 3-YEARS AND ALLOWING
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT THE ABILITY TO SECURE
SMALL WORK ORDERS (LESS THAN $200,000) FOR
ENGINEERING SERVICES WHILE MEETING ALL
REQUIREMENTS FOR GRANT FUNDING
Item #16B1
THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) TO
ACCEPT AN OFFER TO PURCHASE CRA-OWNED PROPERTY
KNOWN AS REBECCA WEEKS, LOTS 26 AND 27 RESERVING
AN EASEMENT OVER THE WESTERLY 25 FEET AND THE
SOUTHERLY 10 FEET FOR STORMWATER PURPOSES;
AUTHORIZE THE CRA CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE ALL
DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO FACILITATE THE SALE AND
AUTHORIZE STAFF TO DEPOSIT FUNDS FROM THE SALE
INTO THE APPROPRIATE ACCOUNT — GENERATING
$125,000 IN REVENUE AND CONSTRUCTION OF A HOME OR
HOMES RESTRICTED TO USES ALLOWED BY THE CRA'S
PLAN MUST COMMENCE BY JUNE 9, 2018
Page 194
June 9, 2015
Item #16C1
CONTRACT #14-6356 WITH DISNEY & ASSOCIATES, P.A.,
"RE-DESIGN OF THE NORTHEAST RECYCLING CENTER,"
PROJECT NUMBER 59009 — FOR A NEW COUNTY-OWNED
AND OPERATED RECYCLING CENTER THAT WILL BE
LOCATED EAST OF COLLIER COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS OFF
IMMOKALEE ROAD ON 39TH AVENUE PROVIDING THOSE
IN THE NORTHEAST PART OF THE COUNTY A LOCATION
TO BRING RECYCLABLES AND HOUSEHOLD CHEMICALS
Item #16C2
AWARDING RFQ #14-6213-33, "BAY VILLAS WATER MAIN
REPLACEMENT," TO DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS, INC., IN THE
AMOUNT OF $521,148, PROJECT NUMBERS 71010 AND 70043
— REPLACING POTABLE WATER MAINS AND INSTALLING
BACK FLOW PREVENTERS AND SEWER CLEAN OUTS FOR
THE 69 RESIDENTIAL CONNECTIONS IN THE AREA THAT
HAS EXPERIENCED MORE THAN 100 LINE BREAKS OVER
THE PAST 10-YEARS
Item #16C3
AWARDING RFQ #14-6213-24 "WIGGINS PASS WATER MAIN
REPLACEMENT," TO DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS, INC., IN THE
AMOUNT OF $623,897, PROJECT NUMBER 71010 — AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16C4
Page 195
June 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE AN INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT
THAT WILL ALLOW THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER
DISTRICT TO ASSUME OWNERSHIP OF FIRE HYDRANTS
NOW OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE GREATER
NAPLES FIRE DISTRICT (EXCLUDING HYDRANTS BEHIND
MASTER METERS), TOGETHER WITH THE ONGOING
RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, AND
REPLACEMENT; AND, AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY TO
ACCEPT A BILL OF SALE — AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D1
AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE
TO ELECTRONICALLY ENTER AN AMENDMENT IN THE
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION TRANSPORTATION
ELECTRONIC AWARD MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR A
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM/INTELLIGENT
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM GRANT AWARD REVISING THE
NUMBER OF SHELTERS THAT WILL CONSTRUCTED FROM
12 TO 24 AND REALLOCATING FUNDS FOR CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT — AMENDING A $336, 872 GRANT AWARDED
IN 2013 TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SHELTERS AND
REALLOCATE 5% ($16,844) IN FUNDS TO CONSTRUCTION
MANAGEMENT THAT STAFF WILL USE TO MANAGE THE
PROJECT AND MEET GRANT REQUIREMENTS
Item #16D2
"AFTER THE FACT," SUBMITTAL OF A PROPOSAL TO THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE
Page 196
June 9, 2015
STATE DISCRETIONARY TRANSIT SERVICE DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAM WITH A TOTAL FUNDING REQUEST OF $274,500
— CONTINGENT ON LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS FOR
THE STATE'S 2016/17 FISCAL YEAR AND WOULD BE USED
FOR A NEW COLLIER AREA TRANSIT ROUTE THAT WOULD
RUN DECEMBER 1 THROUGH APRIL 15, 7 DAYS A WEEK
FROM 9:00 A.M. TO 3:00 P.M. AND PROVIDE A PARK AND
RIDE BEACH ROUTE FROM NORTH COLLIER REGIONAL
PARK WITH TRANSIT SERVICE TO CONNOR PARK,
BLUEBILL BEACH ACCESS AND VANDERBILT BEACH AND
REVERSE DIRECTION RETURNING TO NORTH COLLIER
REGIONAL PARK AND WOULD PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY
TO CONNECT WITH 3 OTHER CAT ROUTES, AS WELL AS
LEETRAN'S LINC ROUTE (LEE COUNTY)
Item #16D3
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $93,877.23 IN
PROGRAM INCOME REVENUE GENERATED BY THE SALE
OF A COUNTY OWNED AFFORDABLE HOME ACQUIRED
UNDER THE NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM
(NSP1) — FOR PROPERTY AT 2975 4TH STREET NE
Item #16D4
AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT
WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY,
INC., TO EXTEND THE FAITH LANDING INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COMPLETION DATE AND
CLARIFY BENEFICIARY REQUIREMENTS AND DEADLINES
— THIS AMENDMENT INCLUDES A DEFINED SET OF
Page 197
June 9, 2015
MILESTONES REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT; CLARIFIES
BENEFICIARY REQUIREMENTS AND DEADLINES;
PROVIDES A REPAYMENT CLAUSE IF THE NATIONAL
OBJECTIVE IS NOT MET AND EXTENDS THE COMPLETION
DATE FROM JUNE 30, 2015 TO DECEMBER 31, 2017,
ALLOWING SUFFICIENT TIME TO BUILD AND SELL THE
REQUIRED NUMBER OF HOMES TO LOW TO MODERATE
INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
Item #16D5
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE A STUDENT SCHOOL YEAR
AGREEMENT WITH THE DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF
COLLIER COUNTY FOR TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR
COUNTY RECREATION PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS WITH
PARTICIPANT PROGRAM FEES FULLY COVERING COSTS —
AN AGREEMENT EFFECTIVE FROM JULY 1, 2015 THRU
JUNE 30, 2016 WITH ANNUAL ESTIMATED COSTS OF $50,000
THAT INCLUDES SUMMER PROGRAMS AND ALSO THOSE
HELD DURING THE 2015/2016 SCHOOL YEAR
Item #16D6
AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT
WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
DISASTER RECOVERY ENHANCEMENT FUNDS FOR THE
GEORGE WASHINGTON CARVER APARTMENTS AREA
STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT — ADDITIONAL
FUNDS WERE REQUESTED DUE TO A RECENT SOLICITED
BID AND REVISED COST ESTIMATES INCREASING GRANT
#12DB-P5-09-21-01-K39 $133,389.56 TO PROVIDE A REVISED
Page 198
June 9, 2015
FUNDING AMOUNT OF $189,389.56
Item #16D7
A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE A COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) SUBGRANT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $94,265 TO FUND DESIGN AND PERMITTING
FOR THE IMMOKALEE SPORTS COMPLEX FITNESS CENTER
EXPANSION PROJECT — INCLUDES A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY AND
HUMAN SERVICES AND COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND
RECREATION DIVISIONS FOR SUBGRANT #B-05-UC-12-0016,
PROJECT #33422-01
Item #16D8
RESOLUTION 2015-114: MEMORIALIZING BOARD
APPROVAL FOR THE JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION TO ACCEPT FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5339 BUS AND BUS FACILITY
FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $272,000 FOR IMPROVEMENTS
TO BUS STOPS IN RURAL AREAS IN COLLIER COUNTY IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES
ACT; A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO
SIGN THE AGREEMENT; AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENTS — UNLESS AN EXTENSION IS
PROVIDED ALL TERMS IN THE AGREEMENT ARE TO BE
COMPLETED ON OR BEFORE DECEMBER 31, 2017
Item #16D9
Page 199
June 9, 2015
RESOLUTION 2015-115: MEMORIALING BOARD APPROVAL
AND RECOGNIZING FY 2015/2016 TRANSPORTATION
DISADVANTAGED TRUST FUND TRIP/EQUIPMENT GRANT
REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $781,793 WITH A LOCAL
MATCH OF $86,866, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ITS
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE GRANT INFORMATION
SHEET AND GRANT AGREEMENT UPON RECEIPT FROM
THE STATE AND AFTER COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW, AND
APPROVE THE APPROPRIATE BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO
PREVENT DELAY OF THE USE OF GRANT FUNDS FOR THE
COLLIER AREA TRANSIT SYSTEM — FUNDING WILL BE
USED TO CONTINUE THE COLLIER AREA PARATRANSIT
PUBLIC DOOR-TO-DOOR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM
AND IS CONTINGENT UPON THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE
ADOPTING A BUDGET
Item #16D10
RECOGNIZING AND ACCEPTING REVENUE FOR A COLLIER
AREA TRANSIT BUS PURCHASE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$230,690.01 AND APPROVING ALL NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS — REVENUE FOR PROPORTIONATE-SHARE
FUNDS COLLECTED ABOVE AND BEYOND IMPACT FEES
REALTED TO THE MERCATO PUD DEVELOPMENT THAT
WERE PRIORITIZED AND TO BE USED FOR NON-SITE-
RELATED IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING PURCHASE AND
MAINTENANCE OF A COLLIER AREA TRANSIT BUS, US41/
VANDERBILT BEACH RD INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL ENHANCEMENTS
Page 200
June 9, 2015
Item #16D11
THE FY15 PROGRAM OF PROJECTS AND SUBMITTAL OF A
GRANT APPLICATION FOR $365,428 IN FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION, 49 USC § 5339 FY15 GRANT FUNDS
THROUGH THE TRANSPORTATION ELECTRONIC AWARD
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM — AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D12
RESOLUTION 2015-116: RE-ESTABLISHING THE ATV AD
HOC COMMITTEE THROUGH DECEMBER 12, 2015,
REAPPOINTING CURRENT MEMBERS AN ADDITIONAL SIX
MONTHS AND REJECTING THE ONLY PROPOSAL RECEIVED
FROM FLORIDA TRACKS AND TRAILS FOR RFP #14-6294,
ALL TERRAIN VEHICLE (ATV) SITE IDENTIFICATION WHO
WITHDREW THEIR PROPOSAL IN MAY, 2015
Item #16D13
WAIVING THE PURCHASING ORDINANCE ON PURCHASES
OVER $50,000 FOR A 5-YEAR PERIOD WITH SOLE SOURCE
SUPPLIER, COMMERCIAL ENERGY SPECIALISTS, TO
SUPPORT CHEMICAL AND POOL FILTRATION SYSTEMS —
TO SECURE ONGOING SERVICE FOR SEVEN (7) BECS
CHEMICAL CONTROLLERS THAT ARE USED AT SUN-N-FUN
LAGOON TO MONITOR POOL CHEMICALS AFTER IT WAS
DISCOVERED CONTOLLERS USED BY THE PARK WERE
NOT FUNCTIONING PROPERLY, CREATING A POTENTIAL
SAFETY ISSUE; COMMERCIAL ENERGY SPECIALISTS HAS
Page 201
June 9, 2015
AGREED TO PROVIDE A 15% DISCOUNT ON ALL BECS AND
EKO3 EQUIPMENT FOR 5-YEARS DURING WHICH TIME
STAFF WILL ANNUALLY EVALUATE PRICING, MARKET
CONDITIONS AND DISTRIBUTION
Item #16D14
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING REVENUE FOR
THE REPAYMENT OF 2007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT FUNDS FROM EMPOWERMENT ALLICANCE
OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WHEREBY A GRANT FUNDED
PROJECT DID NOT MEET A NATIONAL OBJECTIVE (TOTAL
FISCAL IMPACT: $59,001) — RECOGNIZING PAYBACK
REVENUE WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY SENIORS FUND 123,
PROJECT #34525 AT HATCHER'S PRESERVE IN IMMOKALEE
Item #16D15 — Language Added (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
STANDARD FACILITY USE AGREEMENTS FOR
COMMUNITY MARKETS, AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY
MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE THE SHORT-
TERM USE AGREEMENTS; AND DIRECT STAFF TO BRING
ANY LONG TERM USE AGREEMENTS BACK TO THE BOARD
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE — AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16D16
RESOLUTION 2015-117: REPEALING 2014-121 AND ALL
OTHER RESOLUTIONS ESTABLISHING LICENSE AND FEE
POLICIES FOR COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND REC
Page 202
June 9, 2015
DEPARTMENT AND ESTABLISHING THE POLICY ANEW TO
PROVIDE FOR OPEN SPACE RENTAL FEES IN ALL USER
CATEGORIES AT THE GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER
AND SUGDEN PARK — AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Item #16D17
AMENDING EIGHT (8) SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENTS FOR
CDBG AND HOME PROGRAMS TO CLARIFY THE DURATION
OF THE RECORDS RETENTION PERIOD — ESTABLISHING
A 5-YEAR UNIFORM RECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENT
FOR CDBG GRANT AGREEMENTS EXECUTED WITH YOUTH
HAVEN (11/18/14) WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, UNITED
CEREBRAL PALSY OF SWFL, INC., LEGAL AID OF COLLIER
COUNTY, DAVID LAWRENCE CENTER AND SAWCC
(9/23/14) AND A SUBRECEIPIENT AGREEMENT FOR HOME
PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS WITH COMMUNITY ASSISTED
AND SUPPORTIVE LIVING, INC. (9/23/14)
Item #16D18 — Fiscal Impact Revised (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
A STANDARD DONATION AGREEMENT ALLOWING
NAPLES NORTH, LLC TO DONATE A 2.50-ACRE PARCEL
AND A MANAGEMENT ENDOWMENT OF $4,050.80 $9,737.50
TO THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION
PROGRAM UNDER THE OFFSITE VEGETATION RETENTION
PROVISION OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AT NO
COST TO THE COUNTY, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN
TO SIGN THE DONATION AGREEMENT AND STAFF TO
TAKE ALL NECESSARY ACTIONS TO CLOSE — A PARCEL
Page 203
June 9, 2015
WITHIN THE RED MAPLE SWAMP IN NORTH GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES WHICH WILL BE CLEARED PRIOR TO DONATION
TO SATISFY OFFSITE PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE NORTH NAPLES MERCEDES BENZ DEVELOPMENT
Item #16E1
AMENDING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE GREATER NAPLES
FIRE DISTRICT TO PROVIDE A TIME EXTENSION TO
ALLOW FOR RECEIPT AND INSTALLATION OF EQUIPMENT
WITH RESPECT TO FUNDING BY THE GAC LAND TRUST —
AMENDING A 2014 AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $150,000 FOR GREATER NAPLES
FIRE DISTRIC F/K/A GOLDEN GATE FIRE CONTROL AND
RESCUE DISTRICT TO RETROFIT FIRE VEHICLES THAT
PROVIDED ALL FUNDS BE DISBURSED BY MAY 27, 2015
BY EXTENDING THE COMPLETION DATE TO JULY 31, 2016
Item #16E2
AMENDING AN AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION FOR SECOND YEAR FUNDING FOR
THE OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT FIRE STATION ON
I-75 AT MILE MARKER 63 AND AUTHORIZE A NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,522,069.60 —
AMENDING THE APRIL 8, 2014 AGREEMENT ALLOWS A
CONSUMER PRICING INDEX OF 1.6% CAN BE ADDED TO
EXPENSES AND ANNUAL FUNDING EACH FISCAL YEAR;
ADDING 1 .6% TO THE PREVIOUS $1,498,100 SFY 2014/15
BUDGET WILL BRING SFY 15/16 FUNDING TO $1,522,069.60
Page 204
June 9, 2015
Item #16E3
INVITATION TO BID #14-6333, "MOTOR OILS, LUBRICANTS,
AND FLUIDS" AWARDED TO: FLAMINGO OIL CORP. AS THE
PRIMARY VENDOR, PALMDAL E OIL COMPANY AS THE
SECONDARY VENDOR, AND COMBS OIL COMPANY THE
TERTIARY VENDOR — THE CURRENT CONTRACT EXPIRES
JUNE 14, 2015 AND PURCHASES WILL BE MADE USING A
PURCHASE ORDER OR PURCHASING CARD AND THOSE
FROM THE SECONDARY AND TERTIARY VENDORS MAY
BE MADE WHEN THE PRIMARY VENDOR CANNOT
DELIVER PRODUCTS WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD
STIPULATED IN THE BID SPECIFICATIONS
Item #16E4
INVITATION TO BID #15-6432 "PREVENTATIVE
MAINTENANCE INSPECTION SERVICES AND ON-CALL
MECHANICAL CONTRACTOR SERVICES" AWARDED TO
JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC. AS PRIMARY VENDOR AND
CONDITIONED AIR CORPORATION OF NAPLES, INC., AS
SECONDARY VENDOR FOR PREVENTATIVE
MAINTENANCE AND ON-CALL SERVICES; AUTHORIZE
A PAYMENT OF $17,058.67 TO CONDITIONED AIR
CORPORATION OF NAPLES, INC. ON THE PREDECESSOR
CONTRACT; AND, DIRECT THE CLERK OF COURTS TO
ISSUE PAYMENT TO CONDITIONED AIR — FOR INSPECTION,
PURCHASE, REPAIR, MAINTENANCE, ENGINEERING AND
INSTALLATION OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT INCLUDING
CHILLED WATER SYSTEMS, PUMPS, OUTSIDE AIR UNITS
(DEHUMIDIFICATION), FANS, COMPRESSORS AND
Page 205
June 9, 2015
CONDENSERS AND A PAYMENT TO CONDITIONED AIR
FOR WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT #13-6057
Item #16E5
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS,
ALLOWING THE CITY'S FIRE ACADEMY PARAMEDIC
TRAINEES TO OBTAIN STATE-REQUIRED FIELD
INTERNSHIP EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING UNDER
APPROPRIATE SUPERVISION OF COLLIER COUNTY
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES — A 1-YEAR AGREEMENT
THAT MAY BE RENEWED THREE FOR (3) ADDITIONAL
1-YEAR TERMS
Item #16E6
ACCEPTING REPORTS AND RATIFYING STAFF-APPROVED
CHANGE ORDERS AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS — FOR
THE PERIOD OF APRIL 22, 2015 TO MAY 18, 2015
Item #16F1
A REPORT COVERING BUDGET AMENDMENTS IMPACTING
RESERVES AND MOVING FUNDS FOR AN AMOUNT UP TO
AND INCLUDING $25,000 AND $50,000, RESPECTIVELY —
BUDGET AMENDMENTS #15-440 (FUND 778) AND
#15-443 (FUND 109)
Item #16F2
RESOLUTION 2015-118: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
Page 206
June 9, 2015
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO FY 14/15 ADOPTED BUDGET
Item #16F3 — Added (Per the Agenda Change Sheet)
SUSPENDING CONTRACTS WITH BQ CONCRETE LLC.,
PENDING COMPLETION OF THE COUNTY MANAGER'S
INTERNAL REVIEW OF THE CONTRACTOR AND
SUBSEQUENT PRESENTATION OF A REPORT TO THE
BOARD
Item #16G1
AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY AND THE
CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY FOR EMERGENCY
AND ON-CALL SUPPORT SERVICES AS NEEDED — A 3-YEAR
AGREEMENT THAT MAY BE RENEWED BY WRITTEN
AGREEMENT OF BOTH PARTIES PERMITTING THE CITY OF
NAPLES AUTHORITY TO SERVE AS A RESOURCE FOR
CCAA UPON REQUEST FOR THE BENEFIT AND SAFETY OF
CITIZENS ESPECIALLY DURING AN EMERGENCY
SITUATION AT THE MARCO ISLAND, IMMOKALEE AND
EVERGLADES AIRPORTS
Item #16H1
RESOLUTION 2015-119: REAPPOINTING MAURICE JAMES
BURKE, JOSEPH A. MORELAND AND CITY OF MARCO
ISLAND REPRESENTATIVE COUNCILMAN ROBERT
BROWN TO THE COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO
Page 207
June 9, 2015
TERMS THAT WILL EXPIRE ON MAY 22, 2019
Item #16H2
RESOLUTION 2015-120: APPOINTING CORPORAL JAMES A.
SPARTZ (LAW ENFORCEMENT CATEGORY) AND JAMES
RICH (ANIMAL ACTIVIST CATEGORY) TO THE ANIMAL
SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD WITH TERMS THAT WILL
EXPIRE ON APRIL 13, 2019
Item #16H3
RESOLUTION 2015-121 : REAPPOINTING VAUGHN YOUNG
AND LAVERNE FRANKLIN TO THE BLACK AFFAIRS
ADVISORY BOARD FOR TERMS EXPIRING JUNE 25, 2019
Item #16J1
AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ELECTION SERVICES
FOR THE NOVEMBER 24, 2015 CITY OF EVERGLADES CITY
MUNICIPAL ELECTION — AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
BOARD OF COMISSIONERS, OWNER OF THE VOTING AND
BALLOT TABULATION EQUIPMENT, COLLIER COUNTY
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS, CUSTODIAN OF COUNTY
VOTING AND BALLOT TABULATION EQUIPMENT AND
THE CITY OF EVERGLADES CITY, THE PARTY HOLDING
THE ELECTION AND PAYING FOR THE SERVICES
Item #16J2
USING $25,000 FROM THE CONFISCATED TRUST FUNDS TO
Page 208
June 9, 2015
SUPPORT THE COLLIER 211 CAMPAIGN — IN SUPPORT OF
THE UNITED WAY OF COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16J3
DESIGNATING THE SHERIFF THE OFFICIAL APPLICANT
AND POINT OF CONTACT FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS, BUREAU OF
JUSTICE ASSISTANCE EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL
JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) FY15 LOCAL
STANDARD GRANT, AUTHORIZING THE ELECTRONIC
SUBMISSION OF THE APPLICATION, ACCEPING THE GRANT
WHEN AWARDED, APPROVING ASSOCIATED BUDGET
AMENDMENTS AND APPROVING THE COLLIER COUNTY
SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO RECEIVE AND EXPEND 2015 JAG
STANDARD GRANT FUNDS — JAG FUNDS OF $56,809 WILL
SUPPORT COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH A LICENSED MENTAL
HEALTH COUNSELOR TO CONTINUE JUVENILES AT RISK
COMPREHENSIVE ACTION PROGRAM AN ADDITIONAL 12
MONTHS FOR PROGRAMS THAT ADDRESS JUVENILE
DELINQUENCY IN THE COMMUNITY
Item #16J4
BOARD DECLARATION OF EXPENDITURES SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE AND APPROVAL OF
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 20 THROUGH
MAY 27, 2015
Item #16J5
Page 209
June 9, 2015
BOARD DECLARATION OF EXPENDITURES SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE AND APPROVAL OF
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MAY 28 THROUGH
JUNE 3, 2015
Item #16J6
PROVIDING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT'S INTERNAL AUDIT
REPORT 2015-3, JOB CREATION INVESTMENT PROGRAM:
ARTHREX, INC., AND ARTHREX MANUFACTURING, INC.,
ISSUED ON JUNE 3, 2015
Item #16K1
INCREASING THE PURCHASE ORDER FOR NABORS, GIBLIN
& NICKERSON, P.A. ("NABORS GIBLIN") $50,000 RELATED
TO LEGAL SERVICES IN THE CASE OF COLLIER COUNTY V.
ORANGE TREE UTILITY CO., ET AL, CASE NO. 2014-CA-
001434 AND ALL WORK RELATED TO CONCLUDE THE
ACQUISITION AND INTEGRATION OF THE ORANGE TREE
UTILITY COMPANY INTO THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-
SEWER DISTRICT — THE PARTIES PARTICIPATED IN
MEDIATION MAY 18, 2015 AND ARRIVED AT A TENTATIVE
AGREEMENT THAT WILL BE BROUGHT TO THE BOARD
FOR CONSIDERATION AT A FUTURE MEETING
*****
Page 210
June 9, 2015
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 3:36 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
TIM NANCE, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
arLu,tac .
Attest as to Chairman's:
signature only. :4.
These min7 approved by the Board on Jt..(1 1)206, as presented
or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT
REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 211