Loading...
BCC Minutes 11/30/2001 W (Transportation)November 30, 2001 WORKSHOP MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NOVEMBER 30, 2001 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 1 p.m. In WORKSHOP SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE-CHAIRMAN: ABSENT: James D. Carter, Ph.D. Jim Coletta Donna Fiala Tom Henning Fred Coyle ALSO PRESENT: Tom Olliff, County Manager David C. Weigel, County Attorney James Mudd, Deputy County Manager Page 1 November 30, 2001 CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to this session of the Board of County Commissioners. This is a continuation of the meeting from Wednesday where we did not have an opportunity to finish all of the items on that workshop list the commissioners had submitted for discussion. It has been recommended by the county manager that we had a pretty extensive list and the fact that we're going to be starting another meeting in about 50 minutes on AUIR, which is your annual update on infrastructure review -- I believe I got that right -- I would suggest, as Mr. Olliff has suggested to me, at the pleasure of the board, that we move to the item that was put on the list by Commissioner Fiala, and that was on transportation. And based on the referendum decision, I think your question is, where do we go from here. I think all commissioners have been asked that question so at the indulgence of the board, perhaps we could move to that item, begin to have that discussion, and the other items we will have to continue into some other workshop at a later date. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, when-- when preparing for the AUIR, I realized transportation is going to be about the most prominent subject in there, and we're going to be talking about where we are and where we're going, and so I guess that I don't need to ask that question now. Right? If you'd like to just -- yeah, that's fine. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Norm Feder. MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, transportation administrator. Obviously, at the board's pleasure, but my observation to you is that there is one item that I had prepared for Wednesday that I thought was very important to respond to the issue that you placed on the agenda for the workshop and that is looking at our five-year work program now that we know the results of the vote on the half Page 2 November 30, 2001 penny and to establish a new work program that adds a new fifth year but brings it to available revenues. Now, that's important for us to go through to develop for a number of reasons, including my ability to work with contractors, deciding what projects to start up or not start up even in this current budget year as well as development reviews, but it's also important because that serves as the basis for AUIR. So you can either take that as the first part of the AUIR or take it as a continuation as you're doing now of your workshop and start addressing it now since we have a rather lengthy agenda. However, if you had other things on your workshop that you wanted to get to on that list, you may want to defer that as the first part of the AUIR. So that's your choice. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I had two other things and -- but one of them is yours anyway, and that is I just wanted to make sure that we're still moving toward considering all the surrounding developments when we're looking at level of service and-- because our hands have been kind of tied up here when we're only given, like, a snapshot of the big picture. And I was just wanting to make sure where we're heading in that direction. MR. FEDER: Yes. Commissioner, again, nothing ever totally gets separated from anything else, but I believe it's on the 4th you have a workshop, I believe it is, on the Land Development Code revisions. We're also working through revisions to the Growth Management Plan. Those items we've mentioned to you-- matter of fact -- transportation workshop we've been working through, some have been brought to your planning commission, others are working through the process. So we will be addressing that. That is something we're doing in our reviews. We're refining what's in the Land Development Code and the Growth Management Plan based on that direction that we received Page 3 November 30, 2001 from the board for some time, at least with this new board. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the other two things that I had, one of them was on health care and one of them was on the PUDs and work-force housing. And it was just an opportunity for us to chat amongst us, but this AUIR schedule looks like it's so heavy that I would prefer to just defer it, and we can just start if that would be the pleasure of the rest of the board. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I see them all interrelated in what you have talked with the exception of the health-care issue. I think the others are all interrelated, Commissioner, and perhaps if we begin to deal with the one that will begin to give some indication. Mr. Olliff. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I believe the actual AUIR portion of your meeting has been advertised for time specific at two o'clock, so maybe -- so why don't we work our way through the balance of this as quickly as we can because I do think that Norman can -- can talk to you about the revised five-year plan and some of that stuff that is outside of the AUIR and at least start to prep you a little bit in advance of some of our transportation discussions in the AUIR. If you'll just allow me, I believe that we've gone through your agenda items all the way through F already which was the budget reconsideration item. That was the last item we covered at the last meeting. Your next item was impact fee analysis, and I'm not sure what -- what the intention of that item was, but I can at least give you an update and tell you that you've -- you've already heard in exhaustive detail the water and sewer impact fee information. I can also tell you that your upcoming meeting will have the contract on the agenda for you to consider to update your jail impact fees and also to establish a new impact fee for law enforcement. The consultant selection committee should have that short listed on your agenda for the 1 lth. Page 4 November 30, 2001 There's also a consultant selection team working on the professionals who will be recommended to you to update your parks, your EMS and transportation-- transportation impact fees. All of those will be coming probably your first meeting in January for you to adopt a contract with that firm. So within the next six months you will be updating at least six of your impact fees, and that's all in keeping with the new every-other-year schedule for updates that the board adopted when we consolidated impact fees this year. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Tom, while you're talking about that, with regards to road impact fees, Island Advisory Board yesterday, my Marco people wanted to know when they pay their impact fee for roads, but we don't take care of their roads, where does their road impact fee go? MR. FEDER: Their impact fee -- they are within as -- your current impact fee process provides a zone. As a matter of fact, because there have not been major capacity projects on Marco and the balance of that zone, we have basically about seven and a half, almost eight million in surplus that can't be spent anywhere else but a project within that area. 951 is within that area, and we may be coming to you relative to some right-of-way along 951 out of that impact fee process. But again, that money doesn't go away. In this case, since we haven't developed a project within that zone to use those funds, those impacts fees are there and waiting on a project. COMMISSIONER FIALA: They -- they were telling me that it was spent within the district, and I said I didn't think it was district by district. What is the difference between a zone and a district? MR. FEDER: Well -- then district is what I'm-- what I call "zone" more appropriately is called a "district," ma'am, yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: So their $8 million that they've paid specifically on Marco can go anyplace in District 1; is that what you're saying? Page 5 November 30, 2001 MR. FEDER: It can go within that impact fee district, not necessarily District 1 as you have your boundaries of commission district. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think we have some confusing terms here. MR. FEDER: Yes. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think districts does not equate to impact fee districts, and I guess that's the question if I'm understanding that correctly. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You got it. MR. OLLIFF: Commission districts don't equate to impact fee districts. Impact fee districts were established to recognize that people within a certain area travel on certain county road networks more than perhaps they would in other areas. So the road impact fee districts were established based on transportation analysis, not on commission districts, but we do have segregated road impact fee districts. The revenues received are retained in separate funds per each individual district, and those funds can only be used within those districts and can only be used on county road projects within those districts. Now, I will tell you that -- MR. FEDER: Depending on capacity. MR. OLLIFF: -- on increased capacity you can resurface roads within a district. You can only do new construction, only things that adds capacity. The other thing that Norman and I have been talking about is whether or not it's an appropriate time for us as a community to look at whether the old district system still makes sense for us, and we may bring some things for you to consider fairly shortly. Because in a district-type system we are very much bound by the rules so that we can only spend those monies within the district. Well, I think that argument can certainly be made in this community today that we are urban enough that the entire system is a Page 6 November 30, 2001 system that is available and used by everybody who certainly lives in the urban area of this community. And there may be at least an opportunity to enlarge districts and provide more flexibility to the county in terms of how it spends that money. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good. Maybe I can even get -- oh, I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN CARTER: No, go ahead. Go ahead, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- a map of that district, Norm, and -- MR. FEDER: I'll be happy to do so. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'm sure that the Marco Islanders -- that's -- that's one thing I wanted to tie into this conversation, and being that we can't step into the other one anyway, I'm very happy I had the opportunity to do that. Any other enlightenment you could give me as to how -- and you don't have to do it now. You can even -- as to how I can answer questions from islanders on their impact fees, I would appreciate it. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Although I'm understanding that's a local ordinance, Mr. Olliff, in terms of that. It's not a state ordinance. MR. OLLIFF: No, sir. CHAIRMAN CARTER: So that we have the home-rule authority here to change that based on analysis of staff recommendations which I would encourage that to come back to us. I think that within urban boundary line makes an awful lot of sense. Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: In that zone or district for impact fees, is the calculation as far as increased services such as somebody needing to have their grass cut -- MR. FEDER: The fee process for impact fees is county-wide, but then the dollars once collected as they're collected are kept within Page 7 November 30, 2001 that impact fee district for projects -- capacity projects within that district. So, in effect, I collected on a formula basis which, of course, we're looking at updating and coming back to you right after the first of the year on transportation impact fees, but nonetheless it's on a county-wide basis and then retained within that particular impact fee district for distribution of projects within that district as it stands today. CHAIRMAN CARTER: As a tag question to that for me, Norman Feder, would be, as we look at this five-year update, new construction, and if we did have greater flexibility on utilizing impact fees, would this assist us in any way in our financing? MR. FEDER: In some respects, yes. What I will tell you generally because of the demand and the projects -- capacity projects we've had throughout the county, most of the impact fee districts and collections are being utilized. The one exception is the district that includes Marco and goes up 951 up near and just below Davis Boulevard. That is the one as I noted that I've got some collection reserve, if you will. Another one -- but it's about ready to be utilized, and so, therefore, would go away -- was the city where it went up a little bit further, but the City of Naples where we will be utilizing those funds on either Golden Gate Parkway or Goodlette-Frank Road, which is a roadway in an adjacent district which our law does allow you to use it on an adjacent district on a roadway that also by -- by section serves that particular impact-fee district. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you have, like, a breakdown for our -- the different impact districts as to how the money is spent so that -- MR. FEDER: Yes, we do. We budget it specifically, as I said. The monies are collected. The distribution -- and I will be happy to get back with you, show you both the map, and I've got a sense of Page 8 November 30, 2001 what you're asking for which is how many dollars have been collected, where they've been spent, what's available, and we have all that and can document it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great. Thank you. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Other items by other commissioners that you want to deal with before -- we could take the one piece that would move us towards the next workshop that we'll be entering in about 3 5 minutes, but you had a list. I'm sorry. MR. OLLIFF: I did. I'll just -- I'll run down the list, and if any commissioner feels that it's important for us to talk about it today, perhaps you can just jump in there and ask questions that you might have. The work-force housing within PUD ideas. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's important. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I think that's real important. This was an opportunity for-- for all of us, the commissioners, to talk together and -- and so I really wanted some input from you guys as to what you thought of this idea of each PUD containing a work-force element. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can comment on that. I think it's an excellent idea, but we may want to leave an option for a buyout so we can buy land close to it. For some reason if it isn't applicable for one reason or another, maybe the size of the development, like a large tower going in, we may want to have a consideration for cash so we can buy down the price of land nearby. This is a suggestion. I like it. Zoned quite a few localities within the country. It doesn't mean it's within the gated community itself. It means that it's within the confines of the property and they take charge of building it. We see a lot of it in Georgia. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you really? Well, that's great. The only thing I was worried about as far as buying property to mitigate more or less is that what's been happening is everybody Page 9 November 30, 2001 mitigates and -- and it goes right back to where it is, and I want to see -- I want to see our work force -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Spread out through the community. COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's right. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So they don't have to travel great distances and will lessen the impact on roads. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Take the pressure off the roads, yes. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, but that's all driven by land costs, Commissioners. That's the real bottom line here, and I don't know what the answer is, but I think that we can probably find maybe some tracts. As we get to look at the rural fringe and we begin to get close to that or maybe there's some others that we might have opportunities. But looking at the approved DRI that's coming up in the next workshop, there is so many things that have already been approved that you can't go back and -- well, you could suggest, but I don't think legally we can have any kind of an opportunity to do anything there. So I don't know if there's some vacant tracts within the greater urban area throughout that -- throughout the urban area that we could find an opportunity. We do have a thousand units now that can be -- TDRs. I don't know how that's -- how that's going to all fold into this whole process, but talking with a group yesterday I truly believe that we can accomplish the goal of work-force professional use slash -- I'm talking your firemen, your policemen, your nurses, your-- your engineers -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Teachers. CHAIRMAN CARTER: -- we're not talking what's, unfortunately, associated with that. Like they're saying, these are going to be people in some sort of entitled housing, you know -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: But I think people think of projects Page 10 November 30, 2001 like in the olden days; right? CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yeah. We get that idea communicated. That's not what we're talking about. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Affordable housing today is $650 for a single bedroom or $1,000 for a three bedroom. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. So-- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's the terminology that covers affordable housing which shows you what desperate situations we're in. CHAIRMAN CARTER: But in the group I visited with yesterday, they were telling me -- and you know what we have asked many times -- can we get equity-based affordable housing? They were telling me, you can do it. The key is to find the land and be able to work with government so that you can bundle up the impact-fee process in a package where we say, defer it, maybe you have a package of impact fees that people pay on a time basis. It's like your -- your mortgage and impact fee, if you please, but has a cost to it. If the person leaves that unit, then the next party buying it would have to assume the remainder of that. But you're looking for a deferral process in that. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just one thing before you start. Is there any way we might be able to get Greg Mihalic to come and sit in on this? MR. OLLIFF: Right now? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If he's available. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, he wouldn't be able to get up here in 30 minutes. MR. OLLIFF: He's at Horseshoe Drive. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we've got David Ellis, and he's on both the county's committee as well as my committee, so he's listening in to this as well. I've been conferring with him. Page 11 November 30, 2001 Back to availability of land that's why I wanted to include it in each PUD, because there isn't an availability of land where they're building these large PUDs, DRIs, and yet at the same time they require a lot of help on their property. And I want to -- I want to have their property available to house some of these people that are working in their communities. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I don't disagree with the concept at all. My concern is we're going to have to look at legally what you can do, and I don't know what the answers are to that. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Our committee's going to find out. I just thought -- I wanted to see what you guys felt. Tom, how do you feel about that? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, it's the legal part of it that I'm concerned about. It's almost like asking somebody to take in somebody into their own home, you know, property -- property rights, and that's my concern. I think it's a great idea. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good. The reason I'm saying that is if you guys think it's a great idea, being that they're doing it in other communities and other states, we -- we should be able to find out how we can legally do that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm glad you're there to assist us get us that way. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks. Okay. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think you got an agreement on this board that you want to pursue that, Commissioner Fiala, and looking at all options to do it, and you certainly have legal counsel that can guide us in that aspect too. I think it's going to end up being a public- private partnership, frankly, and that is you can get your lending institutions, you can get your landowners, and you can get government all working together to make this and put this together in a package. I don't know how we do that yet, but I think that's going Page 12 November 30, 2001 to be the ultimate. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Thank you. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One other point, I don't know if your committee brought it up or not, was -- is charging something similar to an impact fee for different commercial enterprises that are going in that will be employing X number of people to be able to use that money to offset the price of land towards affordable housing also. That might be an item they wish to discuss, or you may wish to take it up in your committee. COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're meeting again on December 13th, and -- and I'm so glad we had this time to talk amongst us so I can bring your thoughts back to our committee. MR. OLLIFF: I think Commissioner Fiala has already asked and we provided her, at least from what I knew, a list of communities that have what they call a linkage fee which is, in essence, a type of impact fee for affordable housing for commercial development, as well as ordinances that are called inclusionary zoning ordinances which is what she's talking about here. But if anyone else is aware of communities that have those type legislations, by all means let us know, because to help that committee try and go through some of those other communities' laws, maybe even talk to them directly to find out what went well, what's not gone well, to be able to provide this board back the best report that I'm sure that committee can, that would be helpful, so ... COMMISSIONER FIALA: I've been speaking with Ray Juddah, from Lee County -- MR. OLLIFF: Good. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- on this particular matter as well, and as -- as Tom has asked, any of you guys that happen to know anyplace, and Ray said he would also give me some information along that same line. Page 13 November 30, 2001 COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I suggest here also contact the Southwest Regional Planning Commission. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, that's you, isn't it? CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, they have staff up there through Wayne Daltry and his team that probably could give you -- would save you a lot of research time. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Tremendous amount, and they'll do it for you. We pay these people, don't we, Tom? MR. OLLIFF: Yes, we do. CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. And they could give you a jump start on your-- COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's a great idea. Thank you very much. MR. OLLIFF: Next item on your agenda, Mr. Chairman, was indigent health-care idea, and this was also an item placed on your agenda by Commissioner Fiala. And I'm not sure if you want to talk about it today or put that off until another meeting. COMMISSIONER FIALA: It depends on whether we can jump start on this traffic transportation. If there's any -- anything that we can get into before we actually start the AUIR, then we can just put that off. MR. OLLIFF: We can -- we're just trying to clip through this list to see if there's anything that was critical for today. Legislative representation from Collier County to lobby Tallahassee. Just because we are in the middle of a special session I felt that it was important for Leo to at least come and give you a verbal brief on where we are with that program. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Tom. Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Leo Ochs, assistant county manager. As the board -- board will recall at your meeting of November the Page 14 November 30, 2001 13th, you entered into an agreement with Keith Arnold piggyback contract with Lee County for lobbiest services on behalf of Collier County. We met with Keith on the 26th of this month, which was the day before the start of the special session. We shared the legislative delegation meeting minutes that you-all held earlier in the month, gave him the videotapes of that, and have arranged through his office to make appointments to meet individually with each of you sometime between now and the Christmas holiday break, so he'll have an opportunity to brief you on what's happening at the legislative special session and also do some preparation work with each one of you individually in terms of the regular session that will start early, as the board knows, this coming January because of redirecting. So that's what we're doing at this point, and Tom and I are monitoring that -- that contract with Mr. Arnold, and we'll be responsible for communicating back and forth between your offices and him. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think that's great, Leo. Good news. Tallahassee state -- or the house of representatives failed to get the 2/3's on cost, shifting Medicaid down, we're safe for this budget year. The senate cannot take any action since the house didn't, so we can take a sigh of relief. We're safe until they get into regular session, but don't think they won't come back, because if they lost the battle doesn't mean they think they lost the war. So that's kind of a sigh of relief to me in what we're going through in our bugetary process looking at what we've already done. MR. OCHS: Any questions? Thank you. MR. OLLIFF: I also want to make sure that the board doesn't -- didn't think that because we don't have a lobbyist that your presence in Tallahassee is not going to be any less important, and I think especially this session we're going to continue to look to you to -- to Page 15 November 30, 2001 go represent Collier County. Because I have just continued to hear how important it is for the elected officials of the community to actually be there in their faces a little bit. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I have met with the TDC -- not TDC, but the EDC with the CB IA and the chamber, and we want to unite and work all forces together under -- with -- along with elected officials and our lobbyist to make sure we get up to the committee meetings. That's where it happens, committee meetings. Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Chairman Carter, if I may, I haven't had a chance to talk to the other commissioners since that meeting, but one of the things that came up before them that I brought before them and was more or less of a last-minute thing but was well received was for the 1 percent tourist tax. Presently it's at 3 percent, and there's an option for a fourth penny if you use it for roads -- or not for roads, for coliseums or baseball parks. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I asked them if they would submit to the legislative body to have that changed so that it would read, "also for roads." It was very well received and it was included in the document that was sent on to Tallahassee, and that's an item that we should start to push this year. If we fail this year with it, it may be because of the fact that we started a little late, but the following year we might be successful in doing it. Will this solve our problems? No. But it's a little part of the whole puzzle that may help and, if I may one more time repeat myself, our roads are impacted the greatest from late November to early May during the tourist season. This will help to offset the impact upon our ad valorem taxes if this was successfully passed. CHAIRMAN CARTER: We've got four things on that agenda thanks to Norman Feder who is with us; gasoline tax, indexing, Page 16 November 30, 2001 returning the percentage that is collected by the Department of Revenues, since it went away from the incentive program. We want all of that back immediately so that we could use it towards our road progress, and you did the other one. And then there was one that slips my mind that we did, but, Norman, you can probably tell me what I'm forgetting here. MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, transportation administrator. Yes, and I have another thing to add to that as well, but it was the indexing, the gas tax, the return of the administrative 7 percent fee or at least a portion of that that is collected. It was the tourist development fourth cent, not only for conventions, for that. The other one was to fully fund with state funding the county incentive grant program as well as the TOPS program and to make sure that we get those monies that we worked so hard and application to get that are being considered up in Tallahassee right now. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Check didn't clear the bank. MR. FEDER: Yeah. The other thing that I will -- okay. And the other thing that I will point out to you is yesterday I was on conference call with the SWFT folks and their lobbiest. They are pursuing, basically, those items that weren't aware of the good work you two folks had done up in Orlando with the Florida Association of Counties or the Florida Association of Counties agenda. I gave them a name to contact there to coordinate those efforts because they were parallel. The other thing is their lobbiest hadn't thought about the idea of the tourist tax and thought it was an outstanding idea to add to some of what they're considering up there, so we just need to get more and more people talking about the same things and try to get it done. And, Leo, I am sorry. What -- okay. Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. Thank you. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, you have five items left, and-- Page 17 November 30, 2001 and I'll just -- I'll just go through these, and you decide if they're important enough for us to talk about today. The first one was the public information program. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I -- I think it was on my list. Public information. I'm really concerned that we don't have what I call a uniform look in Collier County Government. We have individual divisions that develop things and put them out, and they look great, but what do we want to look like? I keep asking that. What is our uniform umbrella, if you please? This is Collier County Government. This is what we're trying to accomplish. I'm also very concerned as we interact and do things and need news releases sent out that we don't do a very good job of-- of really getting ahead of the picture of providing the media with news releases and an opportunity of our position papers and what we're doing. We are pretty reactory. We react more than we get out in front of issues. And I'm not blaming anyone. I'm just saying I'd like to see us much more effective in our public-information effort. So hopefully as we go along we'll be able to consolidate that and get more of an interdivisional relationship through our public information office to accomplish those goals. I don't think we use Channel 54 as effectively as we could. I think it needs to be spruced up, if I can use that. Let's make it more interesting and exciting with some of the programming, and what about some infomercials, and what about some short two or three minutes that says this is what's happening on this subject. It's kind of like news flashes. Not that it is a news station, but we could use some of those things in between programs to do a better job to let people know what we're doing. For example, the four points that just went forth in the legislature. Probably the greatest secret in town. Nobody knows we do those things, so I just think we don't use the resources we have as Page 18 November 30, 2001 effectively as we could and hope that through budgetary and through staff processes we'll just get better at that. MR. OLLIFF: The next item and, again, we will have some other workshops so we can -- not that these aren't important, but I do want to get Norman up here as quickly as I can. There's a regular agenda versus the consent agenda. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pass. MR. OLLIFF: And I will provide you-all a policy of the resolution that established that in the first place for you to look at in the interim. Staff direction -- and in parens it was latitude to investigate all possibilities and bring back multiple suggestions versus narrow focus, and that was at your request. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, that was my request. Sometimes staff will say to us, "Well, you asked us to investigate that, and that's what we brought back to you." And we say, "What about this?" They say, "Well, you didn't ask us to do that." I'm asking when we give a direction from the dais if staff out there says, "You know, I think they missed three other points around that," I want them to tell me. I don't want to get a single-focused response. I want a broad-based response. Get outside the box. Give us the best of what you've got to offer, and don't let us inhibit the process. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, can I comment on that? CHAIRMAN CARTER: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just so thoroughly agree. I was just saying that same thing. We're only as good the information we receive, and being that we're not working in those different departments we don't know what brought us there. For instance, when we have something on a summary agenda that says to approve something, we don't even know if they've paid their impact fees from previous developments and-- so we're given this thing. How would Page 19 November 30, 2001 we know to go check on them that's -- but if we were given that information so we could make a better decision, that would help all of us. I'm glad you brought that up. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're speaking about possible history-- history of a particular petitioner. COMMISSIONER FIALA: We need all of that information. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Carter, I think you were speaking about if, we, the board of commissioners, give staff direction to go do something -- CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- bring back all -- all aspects of it. Here's my concern about that is that we might say, "Well, we didn't tell you to do that." And, you know, that's a little bit of my concern. We need to think as decision makers of giving them a directive to go assert a certain way. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Well, I can understand your concerns, but my concern is I sat here for three years, and sometimes I get single responses when there might have been two or three others around that would have been better. So I guess it's a matter of balance. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or, you know, say, "Check out other possibilities." MR. OLLIFF: I think we do need to be careful because Commissioner Henning is right, because I've been here on several occasions when the staff has gotten blistered for bringing back things when the board said, "We didn't give you direction to go spend time looking at that. We told you to go look at something specifically," and we brought back some other options and it didn't go well. I think it's probably more important for us on a case-by-case basis to be -- a lot of times what happens is we end up getting to the end of an item and we're in a hurry to get done with that item, and so we make the Page 20 November 30, 2001 motion to move on to be done with it. And I think that's why I keep trying to slow you down and get you to focus a little bit on the motion and the specific direction that you're taking, and I think that's probably where on a case-by-case basis we need to decide do we want staff to go out and flush up all the options here and bring back some things for the board to consider. Do we want the staff to go out and bring back this particular option and don't waste a lot of time and money doing some other things. And I think if we can remind each other as we get down to that point, that's probably the best lesson that we can learn here. CHAIRMAN CARTER: We want balance and creativity. That's what I'm looking for, and I think you're right. It's our obligation under those circumstances to say specifically we need this, but if there's some other things within these parameters, find it for us, and that would assist me in getting balance. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that you might get some -- all kinds of direction this afternoon. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think we might too. Next item was interdepartmental teams, including legal representation. CHAIRMAN CARTER: That was mine. My concern is sometimes we do throw over the wall. One division looks at it, looks good to them. They've taken everything in consideration as it applies to them and -- but how does it impact across the board. We make decisions not just based on one divisional input. It may be transportation, yes, but it may involve this and this and this. You know, I want more of the team approach, and I want legal inputs, not as an afterthought. I want it there in the process and not later find out, "Well, we weren't asked about that," and I'm like, if we had that input in the process, would we be in the trouble we are today. So I'm asking for that. MR. OLLIFF: And I'll take that as four nods on that one. And I Page 21 November 30, 2001 think you've got a good point. COMMISSIONER HENNING: A very good point and probably could handle that in your staff meetings. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right. And I'm not chastising and I'm not faulting anyone. I'm just asking us to get better. MR. OLLIFF: Last item was prioritizing board members' requests, and again that was at Commissioner Carter's request. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I think what happens is if we dump too many things down on staff and what is the priority. Everyone has a situation maybe from their district or constituents, how can we work with the county manager so that we don't overload a particular administrative area with a lot of requests, and they're sitting there. "Which comes first, Commissioner Coletta's or Commissioner Henning's or, you know, where are we?" I don't know if that's causing you any problems, Tom, but I threw it on the agenda just to say I think it behooves us to make sure if there's any conflicts that we all work together to get these things sorted out. MR. OLLIFF: I need to give that some thought. I will tell you that at the current moment I think your staff has got a lot on their plates. We were talking about it this morning, the fact that the staff is, frankly, a little tired at this point, and we need to do what we can to try and keep them focused and keep them motivated, especially work on the important things that we've got, and we do have a bunch of them. But perhaps developing some system where the board can see what all is being worked on from -- not only what's -- board, in a whole direction that we're getting but I think from individual members might give the board some appreciation of all of what's being done out there. And I think just seeing that might help us to recognize that the level of work being done out there is -- is large, and then from that we may be able to do some prioritizing. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Commissioner Henning. Page 22 November 30, 2001 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Carter, I know where you want to go with this, and I don't want anybody to think that you're saying that we don't want to serve our constituents. CHAIRMAN CARTER: No way. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What we need to do as members, as leaders of the community, how can we handle this and not overload the staff. And, yeah, we need assistance. CHAIRMAN CARTER: That's a good part of the equation. MR. OLLIFF: Yeah. And sometimes when we get things -- you know, getting a response back within 24 or 48 hours may not be as important on some of those things as some of the issues that we currently have on our plate, and we need to be able to stand up and tell you that too. You know, you need to -- sometimes we need to have the -- the spine, frankly, to stand up and tell you, "You need to remember the three things that you gave us yesterday that -- that are probably more important than the thing that you're giving us today." COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I think that we can all realize that, and this just kind of goes back to the county manager's ordinance. Are we, you know, creating an overload with the administration when we're going through a lot of people to get where we need to be. So you'll hear a lot of that from me when that comes back, the county manager's -- COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One other comment about that, too, is that as something -- what I've been doing, if it's not timely, I ask Tom to put it on the one that we have weekly, discuss it then rather than tie up the whole staff or ask for immediate reply. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll give you one example that I'm asked by one of my constituents to look at is a PUD, and -- and it is a DRI on what the developer's commitment is, and I'm going to find time to get down to community development to do that research because I know how busy they are down there. I'll send a written Page 23 November 30, 2001 request for your permission before I do that. MR. OLLIFF: Okay. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I'm sure we'll get that all sorted out. MR. OLLIFF: As -- as we head into the season, that's probably just a good thing for us to all keep in mind as we move into what is the busy time of the year for us, and we'll work on a system so that you can see what's on our plates, and we'll try and let you know when we're -- when we're drowning a little bit and then ask you to slow down on us a little bit. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Right now we're all drowning. But anyhow -- MR. OLLIFF: Jim, did you have anything else you wanted to add on this agenda? MR. MUDD: No, sir. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, the next thing on the agenda was public comment, and I don't know if we have anyone registered at all for this portion of our workshop. I don't believe we do, as David jumps up to check. No. MR. WEIGEL: Nothing here. MR. OLLIFF: With that-- CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do we need to adjourn this piece-- no, not yet. We can just take that piece and start? MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. I think you can just let Norman provide you some brief in advance of the AUIR. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. MR. FEDER: Thank you, Tom. For the record, Norman Feder, transportation administrator. For the AUIR today, at least the transportation component, we need to have a basis of where we stand today, if you will. As you know, when I came on board a little over a year ago, the first thing that became very obvious is we did not have a five-year work program, and my commitment to you was to Page 24 November 30, 2001 establish a five-year work program that was responsive to the needs. That was, in effect, to some degree the AUIR process we are trying to evolve into. That process identified a set of projects, many of which were beyond our available funding, and that was given to you as a five-year work program, both in black, that we could afford, and red, that required an additional funding source. And that was the basis -- I've got copies here of what I provided to you that we'll go over in a couple minutes, but that was the basis, if you will, of the workshop that we had in March a year ago at which time we evaluated what our options to respond and at that time decided to go to the referendum on the half penny. As we know today, that half penny did not pass. We do not have a funding for that red portion of that work program, and my commitment to you was to maintain a five-year work program at all times, and so now we're in the process of getting ready to add fiscal year '05-'06 or the fifth year of the program given that we're in fiscal year 2001-2002. So with that in mind what I wanted to do was to work with you to present, essentially, that series of information and to get your thoughts and, for that matter, hopefully as we move from here, your approval. I realize it's difficult to see. As I mentioned for anyone who needs it, we have hard copy, and you should have that in front of you. Each of you hopefully got that this morning. Does anyone need it? Okay. Thank you. The first item that you see in front of you, that first page in that package, is what we came to you -- basically is that first work program through 2005 that showed you basically what we needed to develop over that period of time, showed you the shortfall, and was the basis for that initial discussion on where do we go. The next -- the next page that's in your package -- and again, I'll put it on the overhead for the viewing audience. I realize it's difficult Page 25 November 30, 2001 to read, but it is essentially one that shows you the revenue streams we're talking about then. And I'll call your attention essentially to the top line right here that I'm pointing to (indicating), 188 million. That is the available funding from our existing revenue sources. If you look at that first page, and what I gave you last March, it's not inconsistent. That was 155 million of available dollars at that time, but remember we've added a new year of our gas tax and impact fees as a revenue source, so that's why it's the 188. Based on that revenue stream -- and I'll give you some backup to it and what we need to discuss today -- we have essentially revised by adding a new fiscal year '06 a program, that if you look in the lower left-hand comer shows that $188 million -- lower right-hand comer -- excuse me-- shows $188 million. So we've balanced it, in effect, to the existing revenue stream that we have, that being our gas tax and our impact fees as they are projected out through to 2006, that 188.1 million. Essentially, in this program you're going to see -- and that's what I want to discuss with you today -- some backoff in fiscal year '02, which is our current fiscal year, a product and even with that we reduce down from the original budget that we had, would roll forward of about 124 million. Reduce that down and instead of the shortfall we still have 33.9 million in a shortfall from existing revenue. So, therefore, even implementation of what is this constraint to existing revenues -- as we discussed it, unless you make some further adjustments, as I'm going to hit in a few minutes, we will have to do some short-term borrowing against our future stream of gas tax and impact fees. What I've shown you is a program in the following years out to 2006. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Do you have that collective number somewhere, 33 million, or am I missing it? MR. FEDER: Right at the very bottom, the very end. I'm Page 26 November 30, 2001 showing you in red at the bottom. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I see 216. Maybe I'm on the wrong sheet. MR. FEDER: On the third sheet. CHAIRMAN CARTER: Okay. I'm sorry, Norman. I have it. I see it. I was over too far. I was looking out for six years. Okay. MR. FEDER: So basically what that's saying is after the end of the first year here -- and that's what we're going to discuss in some detail -- because that's really our current budget, of course, that you approved. Even with backing off where we could, acknowledging in some cases we already have things out there and underway -- and I'll go through the details of that -- that we would end up about 33.9 million in excess of both roll forward and revenues collected this fiscal year. That's why in the program, as you see down here, we left -- if you will, we've programmed such that we're not using up all the funds such that at the end of the six years we come basically using the 188. So we come back and balance over that period of time of the five-year work program. Again, we're not necessarily recommending that this become our ultimate program. As you will see when we go into the AUIR discussions, we have some significant issues to address. But this does indicate what our work program should be and what I will ask you to adopt, for the reasons I mentioned previously and I will highlight again, as our program based on our existing revenue stream until we have decided basically program issues and possibly funding issues and how we go further. And then, of course, I will amend it and bring it back to you for your -- for your consideration and adoption. With that in mind, let me go through to explain some of what we did to come up to this point of this recommendation. But before I do Page 27 November 30, 2001 that, I do need to present the implications that will be shown to you more when you go through your AUIR. This becomes the other half of what was that picture before, and I separated out the portion that's unfunded that we will be discussing, and essentially as you can see on this there's considerable areas that we need to talk about that is shown as not funded with what we talked about previously as needs. These graphics are somewhat hard to read sometimes, so probably the one that's most useful for you is to look at it relative to a table, and that table basically shows you that in addition to the project we recently completed on the first phase of Livingston we have the five projects currently under construction. Obviously, all of those we've -- we've sought to maintain. That's one of the reasons for that 33.9 million that we will be in the hole this current fiscal year '02 as completion of those. To balance out that program and to come at the end of year '06, 188 in the balance, at least under major capacity -- and I'll hit some of the other areas in a minute -- you would basically only add four additional construction projects, Livingston Road Phase III in fiscal year '02. In other words, one more allowed in this fiscal year. Golden Gate Parkway, Airport to Santa Barbara in fiscal year '03, our next fiscal year. Again, to get that six-laning in advance or in concert actually with the opening of the interchange and 1-75, along with need that's out there for a level of service today. Livingston Road Phase V would be moved out to fiscal year '05 under this available- revenue-only scenario. And then, of course, Immokalee Road, shorten limits from Wilson to 43rd would be moved out into that new fifth year of'06. Now again, I'm not recommending that this is where we end up. You'll have a discussion of AUIR, and we'll have to make a number of decisions and choices. But what I'm saying is initially as a starting point to evaluate where we are and to decide what things we have to Page 28 November 30, 2001 do, we do need to have a program that's balanced to our existing revenue stream, which in this case is maxed out in impact fees and in local option gas taxes. And so that's what we need to talk about. If there's some priority shifting here we can look at, obviously that's the board's discretion. I'd entertain it before we went to adopt the five. And the other is to look at the current-year items, which is the next two sheets you have in your package. And, Commissioner, I see your interest. I will ask you to hold for a second, but I will be very brief so that you can jump in is to note that we need to go down that process. What I've shown there in blue were things that were in your adopted budget for this year that we're proposing to pull back on, and I would like to walk through those to some degree here in this discussion to make sure you understand them. You may have a different idea which things kept in the like. I may have to explain to you where we stand in the production process on them. In a number of cases, we're talking about taking design on some projects to 60 percent and putting them on hold rather than moving further until we know what our revenue stream is. In other cases we're talking about good and viable things, but they're not capacity and where we have not already committed to them trying to pull back. So I'll go through that in a little bit more detail and give you a chance to go through the issues. But, Commissioner Coletta, let me pull back and let you raise what I think was a question you had or a statement. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would you explain as brief as possible exactly where Immokalee Road was and where it's now under this scenario of events. That's the first question. MR. FEDER: Yes. If I can call your attention to the very first sheet that you had. Again, this was based on production capabilities. We're showing Immokalee Road funded in fiscal year '02, $32.9 Page 29 November 30, 2001 million. That was an assumption that we had the overall program funded. Once -- once we came to at least having -- at least establish this starting point for the AUIR which is a funded five-year work program to existing revenue stream, we looked at that cost relative to other priorities. Looked at the most critical segment of it which was the segment Wilson to 43rd and also to that balancing I tried to do over the six years, and that's why I showed it in year six. Now, if we do not come to any other income stream, I assume I'm going to have even further question from you as to the scheduling of that project and/or its reduction in scope. And conversely I imagine on a lot of other projects that are on this list -- and I'll call you back to the attention of this list -- that I will have folks asking me about schedule, and I think that's very important, priorities and issues that we're trying to deal with. But in answer to your question, yes, it was originally slated to be -- let this fiscal year all eight miles of it, later this fiscal year, and what I'm telling you that with basically 33.9 million as beyond roll forward and current year collections, and that's what we got to debate and look at and see if you have some other things I didn't modify that you think I should have. But I wasn't in a position to keep that in this fiscal year, but we did keep it in the five years of the program on a reduced basis to the most critical segment first. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I think you're doing an excellent job with the resources at hand, and possibly this should fall upon this commission to come up with a monetary solution and possibly a commitment to find the money, find out what we have to bond and do all the roads as we previously planned. MR. FEDER: Exactly. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If we have to mortgage this complex to do it, we made a promise to get these roads in. And I don't want to go to battle with any one of you over which road's more Page 30 November 30, 2001 important. They're all important. I think we're going to have to just sit down and find a way and find the money. MR. FEDER: Commissioner, please -- please bear with me for a second. I appreciate the comment. What I'm going to do is ask you to look at it with existing revenue sources is it a reasonable program so I know how to proceed on it. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't mean to get ahead on it. MR. FEDER: That's fine. Then you are going to be presented some of the implications of that under that under the AUIR, and then very definitely I hope our discussion is and it needs to be very specific because we have needs out there that are not addressed here that come within the first three years that we need to find what is our approach, what is our decision how we respond to it. So we will be coming back to those specific things. The only thing I'm trying to do here is, one, make sure you understand when we paint that picture of you -- for you of the AUIR and where we stand, what was the basis or the starting point of it, number one. Number two, we do need to have a five-year work program. Until it's amended with an additional resources or modified as you tell me to modify it today to reduce something or change something, to continue operating as we look forward to those decisions and to that additional funding. So that's what I'm trying to do today. CHAIRMAN CARTER: I understand that. I guess -- what's going to say to me, Commissioner Coletta, is how do we do what we need to do without mortgaging the future? And I don't know the answer to that, but we'll have to work through those issues as we probably go to the next workshop, but let me know where I need to break here. MR. OLLIFF: We're about ready. I think the one thing I want you to keep in mind as we go through, not only this information that Page 31 November 30, 2001 Norman's presented to you, but as we go through the AUIR, and in particular the transportation segment of the AUIR, we're not looking for you to solve the problem today. Okay. That is not the purpose of our meeting today. In particular on the transportation side, however, we want to paint for you at least the current situation that we are in, at least to get you to discuss in broad terms what are the options from this point forward, and to get some consensus from the board as to what information you would like for us to bring back in specific terms, because if we do any and everything we could spend an eternity bringing you back that level of information. And I think some things are clearly out of the question, and I don't want to waste Norman's time bringing you back and then doing that kind of research. We're just trying to get a feel for you -- from you about what types of information are you going to want us to bring back in terms of solution options, and then we will have a follow-up meeting to this one to discuss more specifically what are the options from this point solution-wise. So today is more a let's talk conceptually about how we -- where we can go and -- and for you to clearly understand exactly where we are. And that's all we want you to take from today's meeting. Let -- Mr. Chairman, unless Norman has anything else on this particular issue where I think he was trying to paint for you the current scenario in a broad brush and we can come back and talk about this in detail, that's probably a good point to -- to adjourn the workshop and open your specially advertised meeting. CHAIRMAN CARTER: All right. Thank you, Commissioners. I think it was a very healthy discussion. I will adjourn this workshop. We are adjourned for a changeover. Page 32 November 30, 2001 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL JAMES D. CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on i.,/,~. ,as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING, INC., BY CAROLYN J. FORD Page 33