Loading...
BCC Minutes 12/05/2001 W (Southern Golden Gate Estates)December 5,2001 WORKSHOP MEETING OF December 5,2001 OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 5:10 p.m. In WORKSHOP SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE CHAIRMAN: JAMES D. CARTER, PH.D JIM COLETTA DONNA FIALA TOM HENNING FRED COYLE ALSO PRESENT: DAVID WEIGEL, County Attorney JIM MUDD, Public Utilities Administrator MIKE PETTIT, Assistant County Attorney LEO OCHS, Assistant County Manager Page 1 NOTICE OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP Wednesday, December 5, 2001 5:00 P.M. Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold an informational workshop on WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2001, at 5:00 P.M. in the Third Floor Board Meeting Room, Harmon Turner Building (Administration) at the Collier County Government Complex, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida. The Board's informational topic(s) will include, but may not be limited to, an overview of the following subjects: · Miller Boulevard Extension Settlement · Southern Golden Gate Estates Hydrologic Restoration Project · Public Access to Southern Golden Gate Estates during the course of and following completion of the Hydrologic Restoration Project The meeting is open to the public. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA James D. Carter, Ph.D., Chairman DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By:/s/Maureen Kenyon Deputy Clerk December 5,2001 CHAIRMAN CARTER: Thank you-all, ladies and gentlemen, for being here. As is our tradition and our pleasure, would you stand with me in joining us for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN CARTER: Again, welcome, ladies and gentlemen to, this workshop. We appreciate the turnout, the opportunity to work with you on this specific matter. Commissioner Coletta, our vice chair, is the one that brought this to the board and requested that we meet to discuss this particular issue. So I am going to turn the workshop over to Commissioner Coletta so that he can conduct the proceedings of the evening. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank very much, Chairman Carter, and -- COMMISSIONER CARTER: You'll need that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Who knows, but I doubt it. This -- back -- well, this has been an ongoing situation for many years, as I can think of, at least 20, if not longer, trying to bring resolution to the problems out there. We have some people who will be making some presentations to us today that will give us the directions that they're proposing to us. And you'll hear from staff and a number of other people who are looking for the public input. In reality, this is something that only had come before the Board of Commissioners for consideration during a regular meeting, but I respectfully requested that we have a workshop so that we can involve the public on this one more time for a full disclosure, suggestions, comments, criticism, whatever it takes. And with that, who do we start with? COMMISSIONER CARTER: We start with -- Mr. Pettit is the one that is going to, I think, lead us forward. I also remind anyone that wants to speak this evening, you need to sign a signup slip which Mr. Weigel has over to my right. And if you have any cell phones, Page 2 December 5,2001 please turn those off. We appreciate that. I think that does all the housekeeping, Commissioner. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much. MR. PETTIT: Good evening, Commissioners. Mike Pettit, assistant county attorney. The program we have is fairly straightforward. The State of Florida in-- in Collier County, as well as Florida Wildlife Federation, as you know, have been involved in litigation and negotiation over the fate of Miller Boulevard Extension, a small dirt road that connects Miller Boulevard in the southern Golden Gate Estates to U.S. 41. That's been ongoing since 1999. But the issues surrounding that litigation have been going on for years before that. Tonight, we want to do two things. Clarence Tears, director of the Big Cypress Basin Board, is here to make a presentation, essentially on behalf of the state in this matter to explain the southern Golden Gate hydrologic restoration project, which is one of the -- which is the thing that, to some degree, has led to the disputes that have existed over the past few years. And once he's completed, I am going to discuss a recommended settlement agreement that will come before the Board of County Commissioners for action on December 11,2001. The attorney for the state in that litigation is assistant general counsel to the Department of Environmental Protection is here, also, to participate in that discussion as needed. In addition, if the board or anyone has questions, the state has brought its surveyors who are involved in preparing some of the maps you see around the room here and can explain what those maps show in terms of properties that have been acquired by the state and properties that will be acquired by the state and on what timetables. With that, I would ask Mr. Tears if he would like to begin his presentation. MR. TEARS: I'm going to use the overheads, if you don't mind. Page 3 December 5,2001 For the record, Clarence Tears, director of the Big Cypress Basin, South Florida Water-- VOICE IN AUDIENCE: Can't hear you. MR. TEARS: It's off. Can you hear me? COMMISSIONER CARTER: No. MR. TEARS: No? MR. MUDD: Testing, one, two, three. Clarence, can you-- MR. TEARS: Can you hear me now? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Much better. MR. TEARS: All right. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thanks. MR. TEARS: What I'd like to do is talk to you about the southern Golden Gate Estates restoration. And then what I'd like to do is talk to you about the secondary road plan, which is part of the Picayune State Forest management plan. That's the road plan, once this area is restored, that will be in place upon the conclusion of the restoration itself. The project area that we're talking about is what -- what everybody knows as southern Golden Gate Estates, but actually it's just part of Golden Gate Estates south of 1-75. It's roughly 94-square- mile area. It was overdrained in the early '60s as part of the development scheme, ditched and drained and sold all around the world. And what we're trying to do is restore this area. Some of the goals of the project is hydroperiod and sheet-flow restoration, improved water storage and aquifer recharge, reduce the point of discharge in the Fak -- Fakaunion Bay, Port of the Islands, and try to redistribute that flow over 18 linear miles to get that balance in the estuarine systems, enhance surface water deliveries, and -- and provide -- what's important is to still provide flood protection to the area north of 1-75. Page 4 December 5,2001 As I stated earlier, this was a ill-conceived real estate development that started in 1963. This project was included as part of Save Our Everglades program in 1985. Then it was put on the CARL list in 1985. And in 1992 Governor Chiles requested the Big Cypress Basin to design a conceptual plan. This restoration plan was submitted to the governor in 1996, and then we've been working on the implementation report and research since 1997. The goal is to take this plan to Congress in 2002 for funding, and we're currently working on the project implementation report which will be presented to Congress. In addition to that, there's a goal to acquire all the land in southern Golden Gate Estates by the end of 2002. The project mission here is given the understanding that all of the land is acquired to try to restore the hydrologic condition of southern Golden Gate Estates in considering adverse social, economic, and environmental impacts upstream. This -- this slide's a little complex, but what we did is we looked at existing hydrology. We looked at alternative restoration plans. We used spatial and temporal models. Basically what we did is we looked at various models and we mathematically modeled the southern Golden Gate Estates. We looked at historical conditions, current conditions, and future conditions based on restoration proposals and alternatives. As part of the model application, we simulated 23 years. We looked at data from 1970 to 1992. We looked at long-term runoff pedals -- patterns, soil store -- storages, hydropatterns (sic). The models used, we used a PERLND model which looks at soil storage and runoff. We used some of the corps models, routing hydroperiods. We calibrated the model at six various locations. And we used verification at the basin outlet which is Fakaunion No. 1. Currently the canals control the hydroperiods. The hydrology of Page 5 December 5,2001 the system has been altered so much by the canals. At certain times of the year the water flows to the canals. At other times of the year the water flows out. During the dry season these canals are overdraining the southern Golden Gate Estates and in the long term have dropped the groundwater levels as much as 10 feet adjacent to the canals. Some of the major flows -- flow-ways that used to exist in southern Golden Gate Estates are identified on this map. The blue area is the primary flow ways. The pink area is the secondary flow ways. And the goal of the restoration is to try to restore the primary flow ways in southern Golden Gate Estates. The Big Cypress Basin through the basin board looked at a various -- numerous alternatives before coming up with a conceptual plan that we're moving forward with. One of the plans was just leave it alone, pretty much do nothing. One of the other plans was remove everything in southern Golden Gate Estates, all of the roads, all the canals, and just have a spreader channel south of 1-75. Another alternative, 3-A, was just to look at a pump station south of 1-75, remove all of the roadways, and just have various blocks within the system. Another alternative was numerous blocks in the canals, three pumping stations, and removal of all the roadways. The plan that was selected was three spreaders, three pump stations south of 1-75 to provide flood protection to the north, numerous blocks in the canals to try to restore the sheet flow in southern Golden Gate Estates, and removal of 130 miles of roadway. After this is completed, what remains as part of this secondary and primary road system and which will be part of the Picayune Forest management plan is what you see on the screen. The green would be the primary road system. Everglades Boulevard would still be connected to Jane's Scenic Driveway -- Drive and move Page 6 December 5,2001 throughout southern Golden Gate Estates. Miller Boulevard would be primary road down to Sabal Palm. At that point it would become a secondary road stabilized at natural grade. And also these yellow lines south of Stewart on Everglades Boulevard and over here (indicating) on Patterson would be stabilized at natural grade, so they would have some type of fabric material and stabilized and placed at natural grade. And that would be part of the Picayune Forest Management Plan. Now, this component is not part of the Corps' restoration plan, but it's a component that the basin will take a lead on and probably have a change order added to that plan. What's really important about this project is we looked at predevelopment. This chart here shows restoration area. Predevelopment it was about 127 square miles. Plan 1-C restores roughly about 113 square miles. Predevelopment we had a decrease in runoff by 8 inches. The restoration plan that we're proposing will decrease runoffby 6 inches. The post development or predevelopment was at about.7 CFS. The best we can do through the restoration is reduce it or go back to 2 CFS. COMMISSIONER FIALA: What is CFS? MR. TEARS: Cubic feet per second, how water moves across the land. It's a little -- it's a little higher rate, but it's the best we can do, still providing flood protection to the north. There's still a voluminous amount of water moving toward the south. Predevelopment we're able to store between 18 and 24 inches in southern Golden Gate Estates. Under this plan, the increased storage will be about 12.7 inches average through southern Golden Gate Estates. The hydroperiod before development was 0 to 300 days. Through this restoration project, we can anticipate anywhere from 2 Page 7 December 5,2001 to 250, from 0 to 250. The hydroperiod depth predevelopment was at 30 inches, 0 to 30 inches. And with this restoration plan, our goal is to achieve between 0 and 14 inches. And it does meet all the upland criteria. The idea is the uplands and the pine flat woods near the pumping stations north in the south-- in the southern blocks but in the north end, we're trying to maintain those uplands, too, as a part of this restoration. The current cost of this project on this slide was in '96 dollars -- in 1996 dollar value was about 11,500 -- or 11,000,500. Today we're estimating it to be more like 25 million. So what's happening on this project is the state and federal government is spending close to $125 million in Collier County for land acquisition. On top of that, an additional $25 million will be spent to restore southern Golden Gate Estates. In addition to that, it becomes a state forest managed by the state for all the residents of Collier County. The recommended plan provides road access for maintenance and recreation. It's a phased implementation, which if you look on that chart over there, the chart farthest to the right, there's, like, four phases there. And the goal here is to start furthest to the east as phase 1, work the middle section, and work our way out of southern Golden Gate Estates. So it would be roughly a phase -- a four-phase process through the construction. So ultimately when you talk about Miller Boulevard Extension, that road probably won't even be part of the construction project for at least four to five years and-- at least four to five years. So the majority of the construction will start from the east and work its way to the west. Throughout this project we'll continue to take data readings, water quality, water levels. And as the phased approach, if we see some changes that we don't like, we can tweak it as we move through the construction. That's the reason we're doing a phased approach. Page 8 December 5,2001 Just take a look at the restoration as we go along, and then if some corrections need to be made, we can do that. Summary of the benefits, we're able to restore 113 square miles to near predevelopment conditions. Basin runoff is reduced by 6 inches, so that's water maintained in the system. Groundwater and soil storage is increased by 12 inches. Runoff at outlet reduced from 2 -- the runoff at Port of the Islands is reduced from 260 CFS to 2. That's a major reduction in point discharge. And point discharge in itself can be a water-quality problem. So we're reducing that by over 258 CFS and redistributing that over 18 linear miles. So the economic benefit to the estuaries, to your fishing in Collier County, to habitat, wildlife is enormous. And a lot of this we may not see, you know, in the next 10 or 15 years. It may take longer. But future generations will really appreciate the restoration that's taking place in Collier County. Some of the continued benefits, improve aquifer recharge for the City of Naples and Collier County well fields, improve water quality for receiving estuaries, improve maintenance of flood control north -- in northern Golden Gate Estates, natural ecosystem management and stewardship of southern Golden Gate Estates, large recreation area is created through the Picayune State Forest. And also we eliminate the costly public infrastructure and service that is currently being provided to southern Golden Gate Estates. Conclusion: The Big Cypress Basin really believes in the state. This was ranked number seven as one of the seven top projects in south Florida for critical restoration. It's highly beneficial project for Collier County. We assume that, you know, public ownership of all this property will have to take place. And this is a critical component of the Everglades Restoration Plan, and some of the issues we still need to resolve is completion of the land acquisition, but that's moving forward through condemnation. The state is currently paying Page 9 December 5,2001 125 percent of appraised value. And-- and they're extremely liberal on those values. I mean, they're -- they're on the higher end. They're comparing it to properties being sold north ofi-75 and to the -- to the west, not being sold in that area. They're looking at properties adjacent so that the values that they're paying are extremely good values. And everybody -- every court case that I've been going to settlement, at the last one there was an attorney from the other side there. And basically he raised his hands and said sold after he heard the prices the state was paying. So I think people so far have been extremely happy with the values that the state has been providing them. With the issue that you're dealing with today, the Miller Boulevard Extension, what's important is we've been working with the county and the state and the Picayune State Forest and Division of Forestry on creating the secondary road plan and the primary road plan to try as much as possible to provide access to the adjacent property owners to southern Golden Gate Estates. And this map here shows the primary road system, and it also shows the secondary road system which will be stabilized to provide access. Is there any questions? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: What kind of recreation are we talking about? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Swimming. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. MR. TEARS: Well, I -- I would probably ask the Division of Forestry to talk about the management plan. But the management plan is currently a work-- it's being worked on. There are a lot of different agencies involved. They're reviewing that plan, and also there's recreational vehicle users that come to the meetings and provide input. But they're looking at trying to provide access for all Page 10 December 5, 2001 various types of recreational uses. But what we have to understand, at the beginning of this restoration project, there's going to be a phase where the Corps of Engineer will have the lead on southern Golden Gate Estates, and it's a construction project. But after the construction project is completed, then we go into the management of the forest. So there's certain phases of the project -- certain areas will not have access because of construction. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may ask, the roads that they're going to remove, what are they going to do with the material that comes from those roads? MR. TEARS: Our goal to reduce the cost is the majority of the roads will be degraded and used to fill in the channels, the canals, and the swales. Any additional material that needs to be hauled out, I'm not quite sure what we'll do with that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I mean you're thinking of using asphalt in the canals? MR. TEARS: No. Those types of materials will have to be removed. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Lime rock -- you're planning to use the lime rock in the canal that's on those road beds right now? MR. TEARS: You know, trying to regrade some of the swales. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Clarence, what are you going to do with the -- the fill that came out of the canals that's on the side of the canals in southern Golden Gate Estates? MR. TEARS: Some of that may have to be removed to go back to natural state, yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, wouldn't you use the material next to the canal to fill the canal? MR. TEARS: Yes, if there's enough available. A lot of that material over time is eroded and, you know, through rain events has just been disbursed. So your natural grade has probably risen a little Page 11 December 5, 2001 bit in some of those areas. And some of that -- some of the filled material I've seen is just small -- small hills. They're not extremely large quantities. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Tears, do you have a summary of the benefit slides for the commissioners that we can have to review? MR. TEARS: Yes. I'll -- I'll make sure the commissioners get a copy. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I would appreciate that. MR. TEARS: Sure. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you. MR. TEARS: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Once again, for the benefit of the audience, tonight is a workshop only. We will not be reaching a final conclusion. We have to do that during a commission meeting. So once -- at that point in time which is on the 1 lth; is that correct? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We will -- this will come up as a regular agenda item which we will be voting on. And we'll be welcoming any input at that time also. Any other questions for Mr. -- yes, go ahead, Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. You stated that it was a ill-conceived development plan for southern Golden Gate Estates. Who's -- who's the one that approved the ill-conceived plan? MR. TEARS: Well, that was approved way back in the early '60s, so it would have been the commissioners at that time through whatever type of permitting process was in place. And I -- I think in the early '60s a permitting process probably wasn't as good as it is today. Also, it was probably approved by the state or some level of state. Page 12 December 5,2001 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Uh-huh. It was a part of the approval for all of Golden Gate? MR. TEARS: Yes. It was a large platted subdivision. That's correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Some years ago when they originally started this whole project, the direction was completely different than what it is today. It was to try to grow and to try to -- to bring in new people, to -- to grow the economy. Of course, I think we reached a balance some time ago, and that was the push to get out to the southern Golden Estate -- gates -- southern estates and also the northern estates, be able to have an area to grow into. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just wasn't sure who approved the ill-conceived development. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Probably a combination of county and state and, perhaps, even federal that allowed it to happen. At that time General Acceptance Corporation, I believe, is the one that did it. MR. TEARS: Yes. GAC. COMMISSIONER CARTER: For all you folks up north, this GAC bonds at that time, they had an amazing percent, somewhere around 10 percent. And a lot of people bought those because they thought they found the land of milk and honey until that all went sour. But that's kind of the financial history behind it. When you say ill conceived, anytime in that market when you see that kind of return on a bond, you better go the other way. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Tears, what is the possibility, Miller Boulevard, keeping it at its natural grade for the residents to the -- to the west? I mean, not -- not only its natural grade but being improved? MR. TEARS: Are we talking Sabal Palm or Miller Boulevard? Page 13 December 5,2001 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Miller Boulevard. That is the access to these people to the property; right? MR. TEARS: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And from what I understand -- correct me if I'm wrong -- from south of Sabal Palm that's going to be tom up to its natural grade and you're going to put some kind of stabilization on there. MR. TEARS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the possibility of improving it with asphalt? MR. TEARS: Because there's -- a lot of these flows will move through Seminole State Park, and we need that at natural grade for that to happen. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Which way is it flowing? East to west or -- MR. TEARS: South. South and southwest. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's flowing from the southwest or-- MR. TEARS: No. It's flowing from the north to the south -- VOICE IN AUDIENCE: Speak up, please. MR. TEARS: It's flowing from the north to the south, and in that area it starts flowing to the southwest toward Seminole State Park. There's some low topography. That's why Miller Boulevard Extension is so critical to keep it at natural grad. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So to the southwest in that area, who owns the land to the west? MR. TEARS: Most of that, as you can see, is owned by state over there. It's all in the green in the bottom half. Yeah, all that land there is Seminole State Park. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And the bone of contention, I guess, is the squiggly line up to Miller Boulevard; is that Page 14 December 5,2001 correct? No, that actually -- MR. TEARS: That's correct. That little red line. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Gotcha. MR. MUDD: That little red line right there? VOICE IN AUDIENCE: Yeah. MR. JONES: My name is Dan Jones. It comes down like this, Collier Seminole here (indicating). This is the west border of Golden Gate Estates south, down in through here; this is the Belle Meade project. There's the park; there's the extension. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Forward, sir, would you identify yourself. MR. JONES: My name is Dan Jones. VOICE IN AUDIENCE: Use the hand mike, please, right behind you. MR. WEIGEL: Well, he can't because the hand mike's being utilized there unfortunately. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't have any more questions. Thanks. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other questions from the board? COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was an interesting question. I didn't realize it was the little squiggly line we were mostly concerned with. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Should we go with-- if we have no more questions of Clarence Tears -- of course, we can come back to Clarence later if we think of something different. Michael, would you like to go ahead with your presentation? MR. PETTIT: Surely. Mike Pettit here from the county attorney's office, assistant county attorney. My presentation really deals with the settlement agreement that's going to come before you on December 1 lth. And, as you know, various versions of a proposed settlement have come back before this Page 15 December 5, 2001 commission over the last year or more. Most recently on September 25 this year we presented a settlement proposal. And the commission at that time had two concerns about that proposal. And I had a concern about an aspect of that proposal myself. And it boiled down to this: From the commission's point of view, the way that settlement was drafted, it provided that Miller Boulevard Extension, which is this -- I'll try to speak loudly while I walk away -- is this red line here (indicating), was going to be open to the county and for emergency vehicle use, but it didn't expressly state it would be open to public use. And the commission was concerned about that. The other issue that -- that we had brought to the commission's attention at that time was that there were a number of property owners, and they were in this area around Sabal Palm Road, if I can find it, right in here (indicating), west of this project. And they -- and I think some of them are here today and can speak to this if they wish, come down Miller Boulevard and cut across through here to access their property. And the State and Florida Wildlife Federation -- and I should note, I don't believe Florida Wildlife's Federation's attorney is here today. I know Nancy Payton is here as a representative. But they are also a party to the settlement agreement. The State of Florida Wildlife Federation were unwilling at that point to enter into an agreement that would simply bring the question of the ultimate abandonment of the county's rights or interests in Miller Boulevard proper, the paved road, back to a later date. And they desired that we agree in the settlement agreement to abandon. And, of course, the property owners who live on Sabal Palm are concerned, how are we going to get to our property. We had a meeting on October 24, further discussion that you, Commissioner Coletta, put together. And out of that meeting we have come back with a settlement agreement that addresses the question of the public's access. And I have an executive summary Page 16 December 5, 2001 here that will be on the agenda next week. And if you look at the pages, look at -- when I refer to page number, look at the page number underneath in the box that reversed the agenda item. That's the easiest to read. First, page No. 9 is from the settlement agreement. And in the "whereas" clause there, we have provided that public access to this area will be provided consistent with the overarching goals of the restoration project or plan. We also have provided -- I need to find the exact page -- and it's page 13. Again, using the agenda item square there at the bottom of the pape -- paper, page 13 we have provided that access will be available for not only county and emergency vehicles, sheriffs vehicles, independent fire district vehicles and so forth but also the public along Miller Boulevard Extension. So we've addressed those questions. The biggest question, the question of abandonment, is dealt with at pages 15 and 16. And what we have agreed and as Mr. Tears pointed out a moment ago is as follows: Once the -- the project is going to be constructed, as I understand it, east to west. And I had always anticipated -- and I had not heard an estimate until today, but I had anticipated it was going to be some years before any of this area was affected by the construction. Mr. Tears said today four to five years at least. But, in any event-- in any event, we're -- they have agreed -- the state and Florida Wildlife Federation have agreed to leave Miller Boulevard intact as it is now down to the intersection of 78, which should address the question of access to the Sabal Palm property owners' properties. VOICE IN AUDIENCE: And nobody else? MR. PETTIT: And I guess I would -- I would ask that the DEP attorney, that's your understanding of this agreement, that that access would continue indefinitely or in perpetuity in that -- in that form, or it may take a different form. There may be a change that goes off this Page 17 December 5,2001 way (indicating). But, in any event, there will be paved, graded access. South of 78 the agreement still provides for a road, as described by Mr. Tears, which is at natural grade that need not be paved, as he described it, likely will be a stabilized road. Those are the changes essentially that have been reached in this agreement. Everything else is the same essentially as it was as presented on September 25. And we think the -- the question on abandonment, therefore, is back in the agreement that we would agree to abandon. At that point in time when the state's project gets to this point, which is estimated to be four to five years, what that would do is allow the county and the public to use Miller Boulevard Extension during that period of time and also allow the county to do some improvements on Miller Boulevard Extension. Right now during substantial portions of the year it's not passable. There's some pretty substantial potholes and depressions. This agreement would allow the county to go in and do basic maintenance on those potholes and depressions. Mr. Kant is here today from transportation operations. And if you've got specific questions for him, he's available. But essentially what we've agreed is that the county would be allowed to fill in those potholes and depressions and fix them, if they were washouts. And although we can't guarantee Miller Boulevard Extension would be open 365 days a year, it would be open for a much larger period of the year than it is now to ordinary traffic. So that would be a benefit to the public, at least during this temporary period from this point until the state's project reaches the Miller Boulevard portion. So that essentially in a nutshell is the -- is the settlement agreement. There's one thing I want to call your attention to. In the executive summary for the board meeting on -- on the 1 !th, under the growth management section of that executive summary, which is at Page 18 December 5, 2001 page -- the agenda item page 2, it states that the county would ultimately gain some unknown and potentially small amount of monetary compensation for an easement that will necessarily be eradicated as part of the restoration project. I will take responsibility. I may have overstated that to the board. And I'll bring this up again on Tuesday. I believe the state will have strong arguments that they would have a right, if we -- and let me give you the hypothetical. We refuse to enter into this settlement agreement; we proceed forward with litigation -- and there's a lot of ifs here -- and if we prove that we have a judicial right to have a prescriptive easement along Miller Boulevard Extension, the state will still have strong arguments that once its construction project reaches that point, that they could condemn that easement. What I'm saying to you today is, those are not absolute and certain arguments. They are simply strong arguments. What we hope is to have a more definitive opinion to you on Tuesday on that issue because I think it's an issue you need to consider in the settlement. Obviously, if the state ultimately is going to be able to condemn any right we acquire in the court action, that needs to be taken into account and why we would settle the lawsuit at this point. That's pretty much my presentation. If you've got any questions for me -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How many residents would-- are still back there that we have to be concerned about for the -- before we reach that five-year deadline? We're not going to leave anyone out there stranded in the end that's basically what I'm hearing you say. MR. PETTIT: As this -- as this agreement is worded -- and I'm not sure I can answer that question. There may be somebody here from the state that can answer that question exactly. But as this agreement is worded -- this is a part answer: The state must own all Page 19 December 5,2001 of the property that abuts Miller Boulevard before we lose our access on -- that's one of the conditions to us ultimately losing the access to Miller Boulevard Extension. So that would mean, as -- as shown on this map, all of this property on either side of Miller Boulevard, at least, is going to be state owned or green, as it's shown on this map, before they can give us the written notice that we now no longer have the temporary access right of Miller Boulevard Extension. That's one of the conditions. Now, that may not necessarily address a question - - I want the board to be clear on this -- of people who are coming down Miller Boulevard today and getting to property over in here (indicating). I don't know whether there are any -- frankly, I don't know whether that situation exists. But clearly the properties that abut Miller Boulevard on either side would have to be state owned before we would lose our access to Miller Boulevard Extension. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Jim, if you could put that other map up that shows the acquired land to the west of Miller Boulevard, maybe you can give those in the -- the folks here an idea. Can you point out Sabal Palm Road? MR. MUDD: This is 78 right there (indicating). COMMISSIONER HENNING: So there is quite a few residents to the south of Miller Boulevard Extension. MR. PETTIT: The-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, no, to the right. Right there in the white and the gray and the yellow. MR. PETTIT: Correct. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And the green is what the state has acquired presently. MR. PETTIT: Yellow is a parcel under contract to the state. Green is state, and white is private. And gray is a land-owner request zone which -- which are -- are properties that are not subject to eminent domain at this time. Page 20 December 5,2001 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. So I guess my concern is, if these people want to hold onto their land on -- adjacent to Miller Boulevard Extension, how would they get legal access, and I guess the answer is, on a stabilized grade road. But you're saying that that's kind of iffy if they can even access that once they get to that point of the restoration over to Miller Boulevard. MR. PETTIT: From my understanding of the project -- and I'm going to ask Mr. Tears or the state's attorney, the DEP attorney that's here, Mr. Gould (phonetic), respond to that question too. My understanding of the project is that to the extent there is land abutting Miller Boulevard, the state will acquire it, which then, I guess, creates the -- the question of how you get across that state land if you own land here (indicating). COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or even further to the east, those white -- white blotches on there further to the east, even closer to Miller Boulevard Extension. MR. PETTIT: This is the -- this is the -- Commissioner, this is the -- this is the state's plan for 2002. Now, whether they're going to meet that deadline or not, I don't know because clearly they're in eminent domain litigation with some of these property owners already and going to be in eminent litigation with others. But the plan is there will be no private parcels here at that time as long as they're within the confines of the project. Is that correct, Clarence? MR. TEARS: Yes, that's correct. One thing you have to realize, those people gaining access to the west currently are through dirt roads. So basically what we're doing is providing them a stabilized access still to get to their properties. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That access is going to be in perpetuity as long as they own their property? MR. TEARS: It's going to be part of the Picayune State Forest Management Plan to provide access to adjacent property owners. Page 21 December 5,2001 COMMISSIONER HENNING: In perpetuity as long as they own it. MR. TEARS: I currently can't state that. I would have to defer to Division of Forestry for that one. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. And that access, would that be year-round? Once that-- the road comes out? MR. TEARS: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it would be stabilized. And that's going to be the grade. So whatever the depth -- MR. TEARS: That's correct. And I think between the road grade now and natural grade, it -- it may be a foot or less roughly. It's not that much difference between natural grade. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now, are you only going to allow certain types of vehicles to access that road? MR. TEARS: However -- however they access their property currently would be the access they probably would be provided. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. If I have a -- a dirt bike, are you going to allow a dirt bike down there to access this property or four-wheel drive or swamp buggy or a 747? Are you going to limit the vehicles that they use on that road? MR. TEARS: Well, the intent is to allow people to get to their property. I mean, that's what I've been trying to work out with the county and with the state and with the Division of Forestry is make sure people have access to their parcels. However they gain access to their parcels now, if it's through a swamp buggy, I assume they still would be able to use that swamp buggy to gain access to that property. COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: And I guess I need to feel comfortable that that's going to be a surety. MR. TEARS: Hank, do you have any thoughts on that because you'll be ultimately managing the state lands? Page 22 December 5,2001 COMMISSIONER CARTER: I think questions have been raised by -- for the DEP attorney to answer and also for the park management people to answer. MR. GRAHAM: For the record, my name's Hank Graham, district manager for the Division of Forestry. Again, what was the question? COMMISSIONER HENNING: The question is, are you going to limit what type of vehicle uses Miller Boulevard Extension once it becomes -- taken out the grade and put in some kind of stabilization? MR. GRAHAM: Difficult to answer that at this point, but the answer probably would be no. We would -- I think we would be obligated to -- to allow them access to their property. COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Any -- any type of vehicle? MR. GRAHAM: Within reason. We would-- we would probably permit it and get special-use permits and that sort of thing. We would have to go through those steps but -- for the simple reason, if-- if we allowed buggies, you know, certain landowners with buggies, how do we regulate that? How do we prevent the general public from going on the property? So we have to have some sort of restriction, some sort of permitting process or some -- some system in place to assure that just those landowners are -- are accessing the land by -- by whatever means. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean those landowners and their guests? VOICE IN AUDIENCE: No. They're taxpayers. MR. GRAHAM: We're reaching a point where there's so many issues -- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is going to get involved. We're talking some time down the road, and I simply don't have the answers to that right now. I'd be talking out of turn if I said this or that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me ask you another Page 23 December 5,2001 question, then. What is your goal as far as the public in the Picayune Strand? MR. GRAHAM: Again, once this restoration project is completed, the land is going to be considerably different than it is right now. You know, our philosophy, the Division of Forestry's philosophy, for managing land is to allow public use. And we will -- we will accommodate the public to the level that the regulations, the land, and the natural systems will allow. And that's -- you know, that may seem somewhat evasive, but that's -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I think I can phrase the question so you should be able to answer it quite easily. In like situations in other areas where you have the same situation, what do you permit? MR. GRAHAM: Typically on state forests we do not allow buggies. There's only one state forest in the state forest system that we allow off-road vehicles, ATVs and motorcycles and that sort of thing. At this point there are no other state forests that allow buggies, you know, unlicensed street-legal vehicles. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's work backwards on it and come back to buggies. Would you allow licensed vehicles even up to a dump truck if somebody wanted to take some fill back into their property that they owned that was licensed? MR. GRAHAM: Again, you're putting me on the spot. I would assume -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What do they do in the other forests, the other forests that you manage? Do they allow someone with a dump truck to go back in there and drop a load of lime rock on their own property? MR. GRAHAM: To answer that question honestly, I have no clue. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. That's an honest answer. Page 24 December 5,2001 MR. GRAHAM: I don't know. COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is maybe something, if this is what the public wants to -- for us to achieve in -- in an agreement, then maybe we can have it put in there. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think between now and the meeting date, you need to come back with something a little more definitive so we have something to be able to make a decision on. MR. GRAHAM: That's going to be real difficult to do. Our management plan process has public input. We hold public hearings. The management plan process is at least a year off. We would be extremely premature to come back on the 1 lth with definitive answers for you. MR. TEARS: Basically what I've tried to do is commit to this commission is that we're going to provide access for the adjacent property owners. I mean, what if they drive this, what if they drive that? We're providing them access. I can't give you all the answers today. The management plan still is a work of art. It still has to go through a lot of public input. But what I'm guaranteeing to this commissioner -- this commission is that they will have access to their properties. I extended Miller Boulevard to listen to the concerns of Sabal Palm. I've stabilized the road south of there to provide access to the people adjacent. And this is being -- these expenses are being paid by the basin because it's not part of the corps project. What I'm -- what I want this commission to understand is we're going to provide access to those people adjacent to the property. If they have a swamp buggy, they probably can get access many other ways than going down that road. That road will provide access to the vehicles like a pickup truck or probably cars. But off-road vehicles can gain access to the western part many other ways. But we will give access. I mean, that's part of the plan. That's what the basin is committed to. Access will be provided. Page 25 December 5, 2001 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: At this point we could go to public speakers and come back with more questions. I'm sure we're going to come up with a number of them. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that's a great idea. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Pettit. MR. PETTIT: Let me -- let me say one more thing. I hate it when lawyers say that to me, but I'm going to say this: Just so this issue is clear, this agreement clearly provides -- and I think Mr. Tears and Mr. Gould would agree -- that there will be access in perpetuity as described in this agreement. It does not -- maybe that's to some degree something I need to address just so the board understands and understands again on Tuesday, as drafted right now, it does not say anything other than access is going to be provided down Miller Boulevard. If somebody has a property over in here outside of the restoration project area and the way they've been getting to that property is going across this area, the agreement does not really provide for that. It provides for access down Miller Boulevard. And if that's something that needs to be clarified, then I think the board will need to direct me to clarify that. COMMISSIONER CARTER: You know, Commissioner-- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I -- I would think that that is an un -- that that is an unanswered question. And this commissioner would like to know what happens in that case. I know you can't answer every question, but I think that's a legitimate question. What do you do if you don't have property adjacent to Miller Boulevard? What is the future? I'm trying to get some -- some direction here as to how our decision impacts ending up landlocking property owners where they have no access. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And who are these property owners, and how many are there? Page 26 December 5,2001 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's hear from the public. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How many speakers do we have? MR. MUDD: Sir, when you -- when you -- Jim Mudd for the record. When you take a look at -- and just don't worry in a little bit, okay. You've got Miller Boulevard right here (indicating). When you put this map up, Miller Boulevard runs right down the middle, and then -- and then you've got-- Sabal Palm is up here (indicating). So when you go into the right, that area that was off the map that just isn't -- didn't show, these are the -- these are the areas. Now, also to orient a little bit, the stuff that's in green is state owned. The stuff in gray is land owned, request-zoned parcels. Private parcels are in white. Parcels under contract are in yellow. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, Jim, I think the concern is, if we take a look at Miller Boulevard, going to the west, you're still going across state land to get to those parcels. MR. MUDD: You are if you're down here (indicating). But when you get up into, like, 441, it -- it butts right up against -- Miller's right here (indicating), and you get to that process. 327 up here (indicating), runs into it, and then down here at 498, 248.1, 2 -- 298, and 248.2 are -- are straight shots. You're not going through state land in order to get to them. You would -- you would, when all of this is done and in green based on the program you just saw, supposedly in 2002, yes, there will be state land. It would be a buffer off of Miller to the west-hand side, yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I believe we have someone here from the park service who might be able to -- MS. DURRWACHTER: I just wanted to -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: For the record, identify yourself. MS. DURWALKFJR: I'm Sonya Durrwachter, Division of Forestry. I'm the senior forester for Picayune Strand State Forest. I just want to clear up a couple of things. These parcels here Page 27 December 5, 2001 MR. MUDD: have 12 speakers. Franklin Adams. (indicating) are -- are the farm fields. These are 6 Ls that are accessed off of 41. So our main -- our main problem here is, you know, Vince Doerr or Bernies that are down here (indicating). And then-- and then all of this -- all of this (indicating) is accessed off of 41. So from there -- from this point to this point we really don't have a problem. So we have a problem for this here and then-- and then up to 100th; and then from 100th up, then we have private property. But from 102 down to, I believe it's, like, 124 -- 124, it was all state property, and there's no access needed off of those parcels so -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. So-- MS. DURWALKFJR: If that -- if that cleans it up a little bit. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may, you say there's still a problem with the very last one down there? MS. DURWALKER: Yeah. They -- yeah. Their access right now is -- I would assume is through Miller extension. They can't -- they can't access right now through -- through Miller going to the north. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, that would make it a little bit easier. But maybe we have those people or somebody give us an idea what they're going to be up against when the time comes. MS. DURWALKER: I'm sure they're going to speak. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Mudd? Sir, you -- sir, you have commissioner-- you The first speaker is Mike Sorrell followed by CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'll ask for the second speaker to be on line and ready to step up, and then we'll be calling them in succession. And if for some reason you feel that someone else already stated what you want to say, you can just waive and we'll continue. MR. SORRELL: Good evening. I'm Mike Sorrell. I'm with the Page 28 December 5,2001 Collier Sportsmen and Conservation Club. I wear a couple hats. Tonight I'm here as -- as an individual. And you have people that own property out there that -- that want to keep their property that works in Fakahatchee Strand. You've got 3500 private property owners there. I have friends that have been issued checks for their property and demanded that they no longer own it. I don't understand when a -- when a person agrees to let you flood their property, let you take the roads out, all they want to do is own a piece of land that they can go camp on, I don't understand why it has to be taken. I've got several friends, several members of the club that have lost their property. And if you look at the -- when Clarence Tears put up the map for secondary and primary roads, I have the proposed management plan for Picayune Strand. And all the secondary roads are going to be gated. And they're going to be gated real close to Everglades Boulevard. All through the project I've heard from several different people of the forestry, I've heard from several different -- water management, the whole nine yards, gather as much information as I can. When you see the map and look at all these red and blue roads, it looks good. When you get the proposed management plan, the red roads, there's no access. They're going to be gated. So there aren't three boat ramps that the water management uses that are going to be allowed to be accessed. The manual plan says they'll be locked. I -- I feel that it's -- when this project came -- when I first heard about this project several years ago, I was told there would be free- range camping and a possibility we would be able to drive swamp buggies out there and have ATVs. And -- everything that I was told then and supported the project at that time, 99 percent of it's been turned around. My friends have lost their property. I don't have places to go camp. I've -- I've got friends that have been asked to Page 29 December 5,2001 leave Picayune Strand when they don't even own the property that was in question, was told that if you don't have it surveyed, you've got to leave. I think we can reclaim the Everglades and be a little bit friendlier to the taxpayers. Eighty-five percent of Collier County right now doesn't pay taxes because the state are federally owned. VOICE IN AUDIENCE: Here, here. MR. SORRELL: And I'm a little bit irritated that we have to decide whether or not we pay more money or half a cent sales tax or my property taxes are going to be doubled or my impact fee is going to be doubled. Last night on TV I saw a guy, said he's moving to Lee County because he can't afford to build in Collier County. And I think that the people that want to accept the responsibility of owning land that's going to be flooded should have access to it and should be allowed to do so. And also on another note, our club wants to -- to sponsor Turner River, Burdine, and Wagon Wheel Road. And we're working right now with -- with the county DOT. And I'm asking that the commissioners would take into consideration of waiving the $175 permit fee and letting us doing the repair and the garbage cleanup without them paying to do it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may interrupt you at that point -- and don't go because I'm taking your time from you -- we had a meeting last -- a couple days ago on this very subject with Ed Kant. What we're looking to do is, this private organization would like to take over the maintenance of the roads out there in the Big Cypress Preserve that the county owns where money is a situation for us. They have the equipment, the knowledge, and the materials to be able to maintain them and keep them maintained. They would do it under the direction of our own road department. There would be a fee. Now, I know that we're not in the business of waiving im -- or permit Page 30 December 5,2001 fees. But in this case we're talking about people that are donating their time and material to save the taxpayers money by maintaining the roads. And what I was hoping is we might be able to direct staff today because of the time element on this whole thing to bring this back to us at a future meeting. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Any input from our legal staff?. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I -- that's something that's going to have to be brought back too. But we need to direct them before we can ask them to do it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do I have enough nods for it? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think it's a great concept. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: A third nod? A third nod? I believe I've got a third nod, okay. Four nods, five nods, good. Okay. We're doing good at this. So I guess we've got sufficient direction from staff to bring it back to us at the meeting. MR. SORRELL: I was unable to get it on Tuesday's meeting, but it will be the one in January. I think it's the 8th. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hopefully they'll have it altogether at that time. MR. SORRELL: That's how serious that the people in Collier County are to want to make sure that they have access to public and private lands that we're willing to go out and take upon ourselves to do the maintenance to keep the roads there. And I'm sure with this Miller extension that you would have landowners that want to make sure that they have a way in and out to 41. It's -- it's 50 some miles to go around. If you can't go out Miller Extension, you're driving 52 miles around. That's -- that's not an easy thing to do, and I'm sure you can get the same thing there. People would be willing to help maintain the road just to have the right to use it. Thank you for your -- Page 31 December 5,2001 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Before you go -- MR. SORRELL: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: You stated that you have some friends that own property in the Fakahatchee? MR. SORRELL: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That was the first time -- I thought it was all -- MR. SORRELL: There's thirty -- as far as I know, there's 3500 private property owners in Fakahatchee Strand, and they still pay taxes. And their land has -- has been manipulated. To some extent I'm sure it's going to get wetter in the future. Why can't that work here? You know, I have a friend of mine that he bought land with intentions of retiring there. Now he can't retire there. Now -- he was sent a check, and now he doesn't even own it. He was told that your - - your vested interests in this parcel of property with the legal description no longer stands and do not return to that area and expect ownership. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I hope he seeks legal counsel on that. MR. SORRELL: Unfortunately, he's cashed his check already. And there's some people that are being directed now not to cash their checks that are going to get lawyers to see what they can do. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So how does the existing owners in the Fakahatchee access their land? MR. SORRELL: They have gates that are locked that they have combinations to, and it's on, you know, graded or nongraded property; they're allowed to use swamp buggies. And that question that you asked Division of Forestry that they didn't answer, their management plan doesn't allow for swamp buggies. It doesn't allow for very little access throughout the year, except for hunting season. I am a hunter, and I'm for that. But I also am for the private landowner Page 32 December 5,2001 that wants to keep his property out there. You know, maybe he wants to hunt on his own land. And there are maps that are a lot better that what was put up on the board that are floating around, that I wish I brought mine tonight. I wasn't aware we were going to get into that, or I would have had mine here. It hasn't been approved, but it is a proposed management plan. And I've gotten it from two different places as far as -- with Division of Forestry. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. We're going to make a decision on December 11 th so -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'm sure you'll be back at that time. MR. SORRELL: December 1 lth? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And hopefully we'll have answers coming your way on a lot of this as we go through it. MR. SORRELL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Thank your commit -- for your commitment out there on the roads. MR. SORRELL: No problem. MR. MUDD: Our next speaker is Franklin Adams followed by Jason Walls. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Commissioner Coletta, Mr. Kant does desire to speak a moment before he -- MR. KANT: If I may, before Mr. Adams speaks, I just wanted to -- to provide some information to you. Unfortunately I heard that before I got out the door. The Fakahatchee is serviced basically through Jane's Scenic Drive which is a road that the road and bridge section does maintain on a regular basis. It starts in Copeland off of Route 29 and comes up to Patterson Boulevard, which is almost in the middle on the east side of the southern Golden Gate Estates. It's just a lime rock road, about 24 feet wide. And it's got a few culverts in it, and that's about it. Page 33 December 5,2001 As far as the roads that Mr. Sorrell was referring to, those were much further east. They're east of 29. Well, tomorrow coincidentally we're going to be doing a site review on some of those roads as an outgrowth of the meeting we had earlier. But the -- that -- that's a different issue, frankly, than the issue you're dealing with this evening. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It is. MR. KANT: But I just wanted to give you that information, because it is different from what you're dealing. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's true. It was an opportunity to get it up and staff working in the direction -- MR. KANT: Well, yeah. I heard the direction that came. And, as I said, those roads are not part of what you're considering this evening. But-- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. MR. KANT: -- we hear the direction, and we will be prepared to come back probably in one of the January meetings with some type of a plan to present to the board if, in fact, that is the board's direction to us tonight. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Don't go too far. MR. KANT: Yes, sir. MR. ADAMS: My name is Franklin Adams, and I'm a board member of the Florida Wildlife Federation. And, as you know, the Wildlife Federation has supported the hydrological restoration of southern Golden Gate, I guess, since the idea was, you know, began. And particularly we worked with Governor Chiles when he was in office to focus attention on that area. We feel the hydrological restoration is a number-one priority. But we're also an organization of outdoor recreationists that use the land. So we're going to be following and being -- working with the Department of Forestry and with -- try to work with the feds too and bird dogging the Page 34 December 5,2001 management plan, having input, because we'd like to see public utilization and enjoyment of the area. It's a great resource for the citizens of Collier County. As Mr. Tears pointed out, there are a lot of economic reasons for restoring this area, and the federation continues to support that. Now, I'll speak to you as an individual. I knew that area before Alligator Alley was there and 951 was there, before any of those roads or canals were there. My family and I used to go in that area in swamp buggies. It looks a heck of a lot different now than it did back then. There are areas now that I can -- can't even identify the areas that I once knew; they have changed so much due to wildfires. But I'll tell you this: It's not a pristine area. You know, as part of Everglades restoration, it's a positive thing hydrologically. I'm a fishermen. I've seen major impacts in the Fakaunion system over the years. That river before it was dredged was probably the best snook fishing creek in North America. It's not that way anymore. And -- and the nursery benefits in Fakaunion Bay are largely gone. So the hydrological restoration will definitely have a positive effect on the estuaries. Mr. Henning had asked the question of Mr. Tears earlier about how did this problem we're trying to deal with get started, who permitted this? Well, in the early 1960s the State of Florida didn't have very many environmental permitting laws. There were essentially no federal laws. They began in the early '70s. The old Collier County News -- this is history -- which was the predecessor to the Naples Daily News, thought that Golden Gate Estates was the best thing in the world, you know. It was the best thing since white bread, and a lot of people, just about everybody else here, thought it was too. But it was the Gulf American Land Corporation, the Rosen brothers. And they were in the business of selling raw land, buying it cheap and selling it at a high price with no roads, no canals, no Page 35 December 5,2001 drainage, no access. A reporter from the Miami Herald got wind of this. He came over; he did a feature story on the boiler-room tactics and what they were selling these people. There were people coming up to me when I'd be out there and saying, "Where's my property?" I'd say, "Well, it's that way 2 miles, and it's under 3 foot of water." So the county commission came under the gun back then to get these roads and canals in there to provide a public benefit to the people buying this land because it was just -- it was just raw swamp land. It was $10 an acre property, bought it for $100 an acre on paper. That's what the deal with the Colliers back then. So it's not pristine area. It's going to be a whole lot better than it is now with the restoration. But the public ought to be able to use and enjoy that area and have access to that area. It's -- it's -- I don't think -- you know, if somebody -- there are camps down there, and I know people -- you know, they used to come in from the Tamiami Trail, swamp buggies. And they have camps, retreats down there. The camps are built up on stilts, most of them, because the water was high then. It was wet. Some of those people are willing to accept that today to be able to enjoy and still enjoy that area with their families. And if it takes a swamp buggy to get there in a responsible matter, I as an individual don't have any problem with that. Hopefully we can work some of those issues out. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Franklin, I couldn't agree with you more about access. That's one of the reasons I got so involved with your organization. Next speaker. MR. MUDD: Mark Muller. MR. WALLS: Our next speaker is Jason Walls followed by Hello. I'm Jason Walls, speaking as an individual. Page 36 December 5, 2001 My question -- I hear the rest -- restoration project is that future generations are going to enjoy it and how beautiful it's going to be. I just want to know how we're going to enjoy it, you know, what we are going to be able to use back there to access it. If it's going to be water, you know, walking through -- through water and fighting mosquitoes isn't, you know, a lot of enjoyment. I spend a lot of time out there myself now, and I know the mosquitoes are getting worse as the years go on as they are. In these parks, you know, there's no mosquito spraying. And to go walking 94 square miles, I don't know how much enjoyment that's going to be. ATVs -- as an ATV rider, you know, I haven't seen anything that ATVs destroy on -- on these trails. These are all hard trails that are out through there. I know my children have been riding ATVs. My youngest started when he was six weeks old, you know, riding with the family. And that is a lot of enjoyment. And I'd hate to see that right taken away. There's a lot of miles -- I've been riding back there ever since I was a kid riding through that area. So I'd like to -- I'm not hearing much from the Division of Forestry about what it is that we're going to be able to do to enjoy ourselves back there. That's my question. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Next speaker. MR. MUDD: Our next speaker is Mark Muller followed by Jeffrey Walls. MR. MULLER: Good evening. My name is Mark Muller. I'm an attorney with Quarles & Brady. I'm here representing property owners Jeff and Sherry Walls. They own property off of Sabal Palm Road. They access it off of Miller Boulevard. They're in a landowner request zone which we've heard is free from eminent domain, at least for the time being. They're not a party to this lawsuit, but this settlement agreement is definitely going to affect them because we're talking about a Page 37 December 5,2001 lawsuit that involves Miller Boulevard Extension. And the settlement agreement essentially gives Miller Boulevard the stake. A continued access to their property now, five years from now, and on into the future is essential to the use and enjoyment and value of their property. The overall plan for southern Golden Gate Estates has a lot of thought into it, a lot of engineering, and a lot of momentum from the state and federal governments. But with all due respect, the provisions relating to road access for people off of Sabal Palm, like my clients, is -- appears to be thrown together at the last minute to appease the county commissioners and to appease the landowners. The settlement agreement is devoid of any detail on how that access is going to be provided and maintained. It simply says, it shall continue to be available. That's the phrase. It doesn't say what happens in the four- or five-year period from now until the state gets all of this property or beyond. It doesn't say who's going to maintain the road. The state? The county? It doesn't say. It doesn't say if the road level can be raised if the surrounding properties are flooded, which is the whole point of this project. So if we raised the -- the flood plane for a part of the year or all of the year, what would that do to the road? What prevents the state or the county from changing their mind five years from now or ten years from now? And how do my clients make sure that they still get access to the road? Because, remember, they're not a party to this lawsuit. They don't have any rights under this settlement agreement other than what's spelled out in it. And as a litigator, that's what ! look for. And the reason they're not parties to this lawsuit is because ostensibly the lawsuit doesn't involve them. It involves Miller Boulevard Extension, and this settlement is a way to not only solve the lawsuit but solve much larger issues. Does the change in access that this settlement agreement sets Page 38 December 5, 2001 forth, as vague as it is, have an impact on my clients' access to their property? And would that change give rise to a Burt Harris claim? I think as it's set forth right now, it would. And that's a claim that my clients and a whole lot of property owners would have against the county. If you've got a $40,000 litigation budget and the trial goes poorly and you lose some sort of access to Miller Boulevard Extension, you'll have to deal with that. But that doesn't mean that you'll have to deal with my clients and all of their neighbors, because they're not really affected by Miller Boulevard Extension. They get access through the north side of the property. We don't want to derail this project. I mean, it's an Everglades restoration project, and this is a large part of it. But this settlement agreement tries to -- to do something that is not even part of the litigation. It needs to have a lot more thought and a lot more detail so that the county knows what's going to happen, the state knows what's going to happen, and my clients and the rest of the taxpayers of Collier County know what's going to happen in the future. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You raised some very good questions. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sir -- please don't go away, Mr. Muller. Just a -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Kant? No. Go ahead. Mr. Kant wanted to speak on this. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's say that the Board of Commissioners doesn't feel comfortable with this settlement agreement and let's say the Board of Commissioners would accept second parties to settle this in the court. Is your client ready to assist the county in this endeavor? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think it's our responsibility to try to make sure that we can put the wording together in such a way that we can give reasonable protection. Mr. Pettit, do you have anything to Page 39 December 5,2001 add to this? MR. PETTIT: I disagree with the characterization of access that Mr. Muller just gave us because if you look at page 16, I think it's pretty crystal clear, and this -- this provision, by the way, was put in exclusively for the benefit of Sabal Palm property owners. It states access for the public of the level and quality, e.g., paved and graded roadway currently available to property owners on or around Sabal Palm Road, shall continue to be available on or from Miller Boulevard south to and across the 78th Avenue Southeast, Sabal Palm Road intersection. That -- that's the language that Mr. Tears and the state agreed to to ensure that and -- and one man -- one fellow's name comes to mind, Mr. Biaz, (phonetic), who I've spoken to a number of times about this, who has property around the Sabal Palm area, to include in this agreement to assure that the access that exists today would not change. Now, it may be that between now and Tuesday I can talk with Mr. Tears and the state and talk about putting some additional language in that paragraph, but I think the intent -- I think I heard Mr. Tears say it tonight -- is that that access is going to be in perpetuity. And we could put that language in there, I suspect, and that won't necessarily change the situation as far as the State and Florida Wildlife Federation are concerned. Indeed, I suspect that they would agree to the access under paragraph 3 which talks about the access south of 78th Avenue, Sabal Palm. I think that they would be willing to put that same language there because that's what's contemplated by the language that's already in -- in the agreement. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is that what you're looking for, sir? MR. MULLER: Well, if I may respond, I understand what Mr. Pettit is saying. But I think that the language is -- is fairly loose. If you look at it and then look down the road as to what might happen, Page 40 December 5, 2001 this language has a lot of room for somebody to say that's not what we intended. Currently available to property owners, that means that they've got access on this -- this road. It's dry right now. It's only about a foot higher than natural grade. What happens when the natural grade becomes underwater and this road becomes underwater? Are they going to allow the state or the county to raise that road? That's not spelled out here. It doesn't say who's going to pay for that. It simply says it shall continue to be available. Who's going to do that? Does the county have the obligation, or because the state now owns it, does the state have the obligation? And how does my client force the state to do that? We're not even a party to the lawsuit. The -- the real estate lawyer in me, as small a part of that as it can be, because I usually defer all of that to other real estate lawyers in the office, you know, is this really a covenant running with the land? Is this something that every landowner that owns land that's affected has the right to make a claim against the state for not doing what they said they were going to do? VOICE IN AUDIENCE: Here, here. MR. MULLER: I don't see that in here. I don't -- I don't see that kind of enforcement mechanism. And it -- it may be that the county is approaching this case as -- as it should. It's litigation. It has litigators working on the case. But it may need to have some real estate expertise to make sure that the settlement agreement 20 years from now or 30 years from now is enforceable by the citizens of Collier County. MR. PETTIT: I think the agreement's enforceable by the county. I'm not going to -- I'm not going to hazard tonight whether some other individual has standing to come in and enforce this against the state. But I think the agreement's clearly enforceable by the county to the extent the state would take steps that would change Page 41 December 5,2001 the access. And, again, I point out that it talks about that the level and quality of access that exists today would remain which would preclude in any common sense reading of the language the state flooding-- flooding that land. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we're going to be able to review this again on the 1 lth. At that time I think we'll have enough time to think it over. You'll be prepared to make a presentation, and we'll take it from there. Next speaker-- MR. MUDD: Next speaker is Jeffrey Walls. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before Mr. Walls takes the floor, I'm going to give the court reporter a five-minute break. (A short break was held.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: This is not a test. Please take your seats. MR. MUDD: Commissioner Coletta, your next speaker is Jeffrey Walls followed by Ty Agosten. MR. WALLS: Hello. My name is Jeff Walls. I'm a-- a property owner off of Sabal Palm Road. I have 40 acres out there and a house and barn. I basically just want to kind of bring a couple points out, and -- and my biggest reason that I'm very, very aggravated right now is because to try to change my access through a lawsuit that I'm not even a part of, it's almost an act of avoiding the Sunshine Law if it wasn't for the fact that I have to keep up with these issues all the time because we do live in basically fear of our property being taken away, eminent domain, condemnation. You know, we hear all these different words all the time. So we have to watch everything and -- and to find out that my access is going to be changed through a lawsuit? I don't get a letter in the mail. I have to keep up with the lawsuit about something that has nothing to do with me. Page 42 December 5,2001 You know, with-- what's also frustrating is we heard a lot of questions from the commissioners to the State of Florida, to forestry, to Clarence Tears. And these guys have all worked very hard. Believe me, I am for the restoration plan. I think it is very important that it does get done. But I think that we need to be as con -- the considerations need to be made as well as they are worried about the water flow, as the people that it's going to affect. I mean, it's like having a big, giant boat coming down, okay, this is the massive project. It's 125 million. And we're sitting on some rowboats on the side. And now we have a wake coming through, and that wake's just throwing and flipping rowboats. And -- and, you know, I'm thankful that Commissioner Coletta and the county commission have listened to us. You know, we're not asking for a new road. We're not asking for any more than we have today. Clarence Tears said himself Miller Boulevard is a foot over grade. I can tell you the water flows north to south. I'm sure he can put a few culverts south of Sabal Palm Road and-- and work-- there's some other issues. I'm sure there's another way to work it. We're only talking about a road that's a foot over grade. Okay. It's 20 feet wide. You know, I think that some of this is getting a little bit crazy, you know, when it comes to not thinking about the people that live out there. We're not in the buyout agreement. You know, you need to consider-- take us into consideration as well as you take the animals and the fish and the birds. And all that is great because that's why I'm out there. But, also, we can work together. You know, there is a way to make it work. But I'm not going to sit and get ran over by the boat; I can tell you that. That's all I got to say. VOICE IN AUDIENCE: Here, here. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Next speaker? MR. MUDD: The next speaker is Ty Agosten followed by A1 Perkins. Page 43 December 5,2001 MR. AGOSTEN: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Ty Agosten. I'm a co-president of the Taxpayers' Action Group. I think I'm speaking for myself. You, ladies and gentlemen, bear an ethical burden of prior commissions committing financial rape of some 19,000 property owners in southern Golden Gate Estates. I was in New York City where there was a constant stream of advertising coming from Florida, come on down. Some of you who lived up there can recall this because the advertising was very frequent. A gentleman made a very enthusiastic statement that the people, the property owners, are getting overmarket prices. There is no market in southern Golden Gate Estates other than what the government takes away from the property owners. The proper comparison would be, there was a sign on Golden Gate Boulevard I'm sure you're familiar with, Jim, there's 2 1/2 acres for $75,000. Now, we're not going to get into the argument whether the 75,000 is fair or not. The fact of the matter is is that one of my co-presidents sold back to the state 2 1/2 acres for $3,000. Now, you guys can talk all day long about 75 or 3. The fact of the matter is, is that if you're looking for sales within southern Golden Gate Estates, you'll never get a fair comparison. And, you know, it angers me because these people -- I was here, I remember-- I retired, and I used to do this for entertainment. I was sitting here when a lady from the state Environmental Protection Agency claimed victory, and there was -- a little Cuban guy was sitting next to me. He says, "I paid $10,000 for my land, and they want to offer me 800." Gentlemen, I've spent a lifetime in New York City. I have met many hustlers. I myself had bought the Brooklyn Bridge, both sides, several times. So I -- it's not that I am innocent. What I do is when I see something like that being done by the government -- do you know we are getting to an Page 44 December 5, 2001 environment where a illustrious newspaper reporter uses a private- property advocate as a derogatory term? Well, ladies and gentlemen, as far as I know, there is no constitutional guarantees for the panthers. But if I remember right, there is a constitutional guarantee for property. So in terms of priorities, I think somewhere along the line we have lost it. We could also go into the need for the Miller Boulevard Extension. I go there every now and then. You know, we have a very heavily populated Marco Island. If there is a storm danger as an evacuation route that would probably be the most efficient. And if you make any agreements to close that road rather than spend the money, maybe pipe to ensure if-- and I'm -- I'm not going to get into the water end of this because as far as I'm concerned spend the money, buy desalination equipment and have the water and this whole thing goes all over creation. Aren't people important? The people's lives you endanger by not providing that evacuation route, you know, it just boggles my mind that we're talking about birds and the bees and whatever, but we're not talking about people. I have yet to hear, other than the people who are trying to defend their own land, you people have not mentioned people. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The next speaker. MR. MUDD: Is A1 Perkins followed by Vince Doerr. MR. PERKINS: Good afternoon, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, you people at home. Here we go again. Okay? I take exception to a whole bunch of this stuff because I've been here too long. There's only one other gentleman here that said he was out there when there were no roads, when there was no Golden Gate, when there was no 75. And I'm not even sure about 951, and I know doggoned right well I drove a four-wheel drive down a dirt road which is now called Pine Ridge. Now, does that tell you anything? I've been here too long. But I'm going to stay here until I die, and I'm Page 45 December 5,2001 going to fight you every bit of the way. Okay? Ill-conceived development, these are the words that are used. And don't forget, you people at home, you're being manipulated with words. You say, okay, who authorized this? The Corps of Engineers took the money and gave their stamp of approval. South Florida Water Management took the money and gave their approval. Collier County took the money, gave their approval. Then Collier County turned right around and stole the fill off the banks out there and sold it to anybody that would buy it to haul it to Marco Island to fill in the doggoned mangroves. Check the records, people. It's all in the records. When I hear Clarence Tears talking -- and I could hear the rest of these people talking how wonderful it is for restoration -- who screwed it up to start with? And now I want to take and put restoration in the same category as money, money, money, money, money. And you damned fools are paying it in tax. Natural grade after 75 or after 78, the road 78 out there down, natural grade. 250 days' worth of water, 7 inches. Just how far do you think that panther's little paws are going to take and stand for 150 days? I defy you people and you people at home, stand in your bathtub for 250 days, tell me what your feet look like. The same thing applies to the deer. What's the raccoon going to do? The back stroke? Think about it. What about the snakes? Do you think the snakes -- and even the alligators do not live in the water; they swim in the water. They hunt in the water, and they go up on the bank and sun themselves to get rid of any bacteria. Where's the Indians? If you want to know what the hell's going on in this town, ask an Indian. They are the biggest environmentalist going, and they'll tell you exactly what it is. And by the way, while I'm at it, you people want all this stuff; what about the mosquitoes? How did the Indians survive? Page 46 December 5,2001 They talk about $125 million, not a five to five -- 5 to 15 years. Tweak or change? Wow, do I tweak your cheek? Am I going to take and love you up? Is that what this is, tweak and change? Or is it, I'm going to tell you whatever I expect you-- you'll buy, one lie right after the other. Appraised value: you people at home, who the hell do you think hires the appraisers? The DEP. And they tell the DEP, you're an employee, you will do what I tell you. Bring it in low. And they do bring it in low. In fact, the appraisers never even go out on the property. They sit and have a cup of coffee and decide about what they want to play and what they can get away with because they want to get the next job in the next county screwing those people out of their land too. And as far as the DEP, right here in this room I proved the DEP lied through their teeth, lied to the commissioners about Jane's Scenic Drive and Marco Island Airport. They said they were going to close Marco Island Airport if we didn't trade Jane's Scenic Drive which is the Fakahatchee where these people live. And I just happened to bring in the compliance FAA, and I told them, he can't do that. Only the FAA can close that airport, any airport. I don't care what it is. South Florida Water Management, they're neat. Even the Naples Daily Breeze or Naples Daily News or the Naples Daily Pragda or whatever you want to call it caught the South Florida Water Management deliberately flooding the Golden Gate Estates south and all the way up to Bonita by 4 foot of water. 4 foot of water, people, is up here (indicating). CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Al, would you wrap it up, please? MR. PERKINS: Yes, I will. Let me go through here. When you talk about South Florida Water Management, Big Cypress Basin Board, Corps of Engineers, what a beautiful way to move money because when money moves, they can get their hands Page 47 December 5,2001 on it. Appraised value, my neighbor out there happens to be Florida waters. In 1981, 1981, they paid $260,000 for 160 acres. That's over 20 years ago, and they want to give them less? Come on now. Not only that, that water is headed to Marco Island when they take and put it in place. Now Marco Island, everybody writes Marco off. It's just over there. They don't show up. Everglades has never even heard of. Anyhow -- okay. I'll close it up. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. MR. PERKINS: One other thing is very important because I heard one other gentleman talking. You're talking about the Picayune State Forest, which is public monies, and the public should be able to get in there anytime and use it for recreation, whether it be in the summertime or in the wintertime because the impression is that that place is totally underwater, and it's not. This concludes the whole thing unless you want a lot of information pertaining to the fact that there was farm fields on both sides of Miller Boulevard years ago. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Al, we thank you very much for your presentation. MR. PERKINS: Okay. I don't think I've -- I don't think I missed anything. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You'll have a chance when it comes up before us again, of course, to present-- MR. PERKINS: Oh, you know I'll be here. I've been here for the last ten years, right, and when it gets down to money, and if you want to take and tear out Miller Boulevard, go right ahead, but I hope you got enough money because you're playing around with mega bucks with me. MR. MUDD: Nohel. MR. DOERR: Next speaker is Vince Doerr followed by Bernie It's hard to follow Al. Page 48 December 5,2001 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Name. Name. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Name, Vince. MR. DOERR: Vince Doerr, retired Ochopee fire chief, 22 years, worked under the county. I know the Blocks real well. I do want to start off and thank Mike for his presentation putting together and working with us and David, through the years. He's probably one of the old timers tired of hearing Miller Road. I gave them a lot of packets and stuff I had in my file because it was hard to dig up a lot of stuff, and I'm hoping that I helped that a lot. I want to say on the -- the natural grade thing that Mr. Tears and everybody is talking about or whoever, that's all well and good. To me it's about 8 inches above average table. I don't know what Tears was talking about on 0 to 250. I was confused where 0 starts, tide in, tide out, where do we say zero, you know? They use that basic thing that -- geodetic thing from Tallahassee down or whatever that water table they measured, you know. And that was confusing here. But I know right now if it's 8 or 10 inches, why do we have to tear out Miller? I mean, that's north to south. If it was Stewart, I could see it. I'm located right here (indicating), probably the thom in the side. And if you-all can hear me, all the sheet flow -- I'm going by a walk in the woods and everything. I'm not going by all this here high-class studies and stuff. And water does come south, southwest. There is some places once in a while that it will go due east. But that's because it's going for a culvert under 41, which is, like, down in here (indicating). But if-- if we could somehow or another-- my access would be to try to be out here. The 78 and above, sure, if they're happy, that's great there and tear this out. I was just telling Hank and Sonya a while ago, if the state acquires land on all these little -- 1320 feet, every quarter mile, if the state acquires the land on each side, who cares if you take it out? Scrape it up, if it's not asphalt, and dump it in here for your weirs or whatever, abutments. It doesn't Page 49 December 5,2001 matter. And from working from the east somebody said, "This way I'll be dead anyway probably the time they get out here to this way," but it doesn't matter. I would just like to see this (indicating), which is just barely above grade level now, you know, to stay. Now, at least from here out and -- and there up, which they say, yes, they agree on and taking out this (indicating), if you're just in the woods a lot and you watch year round, it's a lot different. We do have our dry times, and we do have our wet times. Hey, it flooded Bonita. I seen stuff up there I couldn't believe, and I'm from-- Ochopee swamps is where I live. So anyway, Bernie Nobel and Helen there have 20 acres next to me, and we kind of watch it and watch the flow and everything. And I think it all could be worked out. I -- once in a while I get yelled at. I'd like to see better control. I tell Hank and Sonya, we need control. I hate government control, hunting, killing turkeys, dumping trash in my roadways out there, yahoos out of Miami, so the park will take care of that in time. We do -- you cannot -- one thing I learned in -- living in Big Cypress before Big Cypress come along, you can't have a virgin area of land and say, public, do what you want. You can't -- they'll kill stuff, leave it in the road. It is misused. So we do need regulation. Maybe it will lead to a sticker on the buggy. Maybe it will lead to a sticker. Maybe it will take some mud flats. I'd like to see them get the mud flats away from 41 and have a designated area to play. People, I said it 18 years ago; this is Naples' last playground. It can be the state park of the state. It can be run by DOF, depart -- Department of Forestry. And you can go out there. David can take his sons out there, and he can have -- it can be used, and it can work out. This is the -- probably the best meeting I've been in 12 years where the heads got together, not settled, not everything answered, but everything is laid out. This is the best meeting I've been to, and I've been to a lot of Page 50 December 5,2001 them. I want Coletta to know that because I think things will come out of this meeting. Everybody ain't going to be happy, but at least we got more coming out of this tonight than anything I've ever been to. Maybe it be from Mr. Tears, maybe from the attorney what's going to happen when the water rises. Those are good questions. And it's hard to answer them all tonight, and it's hard to get up here and say in five minutes what's what and what our needs are. But I think it can be worked out. And the average people that are there to stay -- like I'm in the Belle Meade area, so I'm out of the purchase area for now -- I think I can work -- and I can live with anything, I mean, pretty well. I've been through the Big Cypress purchase and all their meetings. We used to even have them at our fire station because they didn't have no other public place, and it worked out. And Big Cypress gave a good price. The people I knew that had to sell that were condemned or wanted to sell got a good price. That was mentioned here about the levels of real estate values and this. So I think if everybody just put down the screen -- I've been in a lot of meetings here; Nancy Payton been in a lot of meetings. I just think we had a cleanup out there that got out of hand. I don't know. I got sued, 25 -- $10,000 which didn't lead nowhere, but the people took a lot of ton age. I think Ed here for the county, road and bridge or something, could tell you. There was a lot of crap brought out of there. And it saved Sonya and them a lot of time for cleanup. Of course, Brazilian pepper we had to push them out of the way to get the old refrigerator. We're talking about 20 years of dump and on the dump road better known as Miller Extension. And that was great cleanups, two one year and then one this last. But there was something said about the Brazilian pepper. I figured you got any idiot in this county wants to run up around and tear up Brazilian pepper and pick up trash, let them go. But the thing is they disturbed the soil, and it was a technical thing, which is all settled and growed Page 51 December 5,2001 back right now. So anyhow, I'll get off my high horse. I'm just glad to see tonight -- the biggest thing I got out of this meeting is Coletta is trying to do what he can. Mike and David, you know, I like what you-all put together; I think that is very good. And the 1 lth, this is coming to a head. Did I get that right? COMMISSIONER CARTER: Correct, sir. It will back in front of us on December 1 lth. MR. DOERR: Right. I'll -- I'll try to be at that meeting. But I'd like to point -- to say what -- who's going to take care of the roads when they're done? That was a good point. That was a good point, not just the higher elevation of water, like he pointed out, the attorney, but the people -- but who's going to look after it? And I think Mr. Tears -- and I've known many times, many meetings, you know, I think he's trying to work a lot better with it tonight than I've ever seen. I think he's trying to say, we're going to try and give these people access as long as there -- some day I might get condemned in the Belle Meade area; who knows? But the thing is -- well, Mr. Tears is saying no. I guess they want to stay out of that area. But as long as I've got a way to -- in and out of my property, I won't complain. Thank you very much. And I hope everybody keeps an open mind, and let's keep trying. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. MR. MUDD: Our next sper -- speaker is Bernie Nohel (phonetic) followed by Guadalupe Morera. MR. NOBEL: Bernie Nobel. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Excuse me. Before you start, who's got the timer? MR. MUDD: Do you want me to start it? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, sir. You've got to talk for three minutes. You can't leave until you do. Page 52 December 5,2001 MR. NOBEL: Bernie Nobel, property owner on 124 and Miller, on the end of it. And we have 20 acres there, and we have our buildings, which are all with the county. I mean, we've got permitting from the county, a driveway in; Corps of Engineers and DEP was also put in. And we're way down at the bottom part. VOICE IN AUDIENCE: Speak up, Bernie. MR. NOBEL: Right down here (indicating) on 248-1 and 248-2. And the way it's sounding when you hear people talk, we didn't know anything of this here suit that was going on with the county. I have no copy of it. I don't know what it's even about or what they're even proposing there to do with our pieces of property to get to and from, how they expect us to go in and out. So that's about the extent of it. I do hope that they do consider us a little bit down there on what they're doing. I don't see no reason whatsoever to take out the roads there outside of what they're talking of. But you can take the other crossroads out, a culvert or two here and there; we'll take care of it. And also the part about fire protection, and also upon the part of the emergency medical vehicles to come in and out, now, we live right close by, and we hear every Saturday night, Friday night it starts, and take their Sunday, it quiets down. And we spend an enormous amount of time there. We don't live there year-round and all the time. We do spend roughly three to four days a week, not probably every week but pretty well every week. We're down there now until Saturday. We come down yesterday again. We have a home in there. We got a septic tank; we got a well. And that's why we -- it's just something there that the way it's sounding like they're just going to put us out there on a limb. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're making a good point. Can someone address this, either Clarence or the lady from forest service? This gentleman lives at the end of Miller. He's got a residence there Page 53 December 5,2001 that he uses part time. And he -- I guess no one's approached him to tell him about what his access will be, how he's supposed to get to his property when this all takes place. MR. TEARS: It will be -- it will be a natural grade, so it will be similar to the access roads you have off of Miller Boulevard. So we believe you still will be able to get to your property. MR. NOBEL: If you go back to natural grade? What are you going to do, put us in the water? MR. TEARS: At certain times of the year that area is fairly wet now. It's-- MR. NOBEL: Right now that road goes in and out. We go in there all winter or all summer. We go back in there; we got air conditioning. I mean, we've got generators and solar and solar heat. And you take that away if you take your road -- the roads out and put them down, how are we going to get in there? And how is the emergency vehicles going to get into our area if we're sitting there needing help, which we have a lot of people come over, a lot of visitors that we need assistance for medical? How are they going to get there with roads being put down to natural grade? MR. TEARS: Well, that's the goal right now, is the natural grade south of Sabal Palm. MR. NOBEL: Well, then I think they're -- people have to start thinking about what -- what they're going to do with the -- allowing this to go through on this here suit. I mean, I don't know what the suit reads or anything. I mean, all I hear about is that it goes down to the natural grade. Now, are you talking natural grade? Who is setting natural grade? At what level is natural grade level going to be? MR. TEARS: It's the adjacent land surrounding that road bed. It's a natural -- natural grade of land. The road bed is raised. The natural grade of land adjacent to the road bed, that's the level -- the Page 54 December 5,2001 elevation that it will be set at. MR. NOBEL: Natural grade. So that will put us a foot underwater then. I mean, our road will be a foot of water coming in, then, off of 78 up there. What other way is there for us -- to get to us? You're talking all the way to 78 -- MR. TEARS: That's correct. MR. NOBEL: -- all the way down to 124. You're talking there roughly 8 to 9 miles. MR. TEARS: That's correct. MR. NOBEL: Are then are we going to ride -- or ambulance come down in there on that type of a road, a foot of water and even deeper, to go -- to assist people, because you got the same thing down at the flats, the flats there. We have there as high at night -- I've walk -- gone over there already with friends that do come over with their four wheelers and go to the flats there which is also called prairie, some prairie there. And that there is also as high as 50 to 60 vehicles in there that are running back in there. And if you got no access to go and get anything in it, just like Miller Extension right now, that's not an access right now for any emergency vehicles to get in there. You can't get no emergency vehicles in there. I mean, fire -- the fire departments will tell you that already, even for the fire -- when they have to go to fires, they've had three, four trucks already going through that thing once already. So this is -- I mean, all things that I would consider that the commissioners would look into and protect at least a few people that do enjoy the outside. It seems like a lot of people do not enjoy the outside weather. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I assure you that we all enjoy the outdoors. The reason I drew Clarence up here is that I was pretty sure that what -- the answer would already be. And we need to face all these things before we can make a decision. Are we going to come up with something that's going to totally satisfy everyone? You Page 55 December 5,2001 MR. NOBEL: MR. MUDD: by Justo Morera. bet your socks we're not. It's not going to happen. All these things have to be considered. You know, your rights to access to your vacation property, we're going to have to take all these into consideration when it comes up on the 1 lth, and I hope you come back again when you raise these kinds of questions, how I see -- if I can find the best answer I can for you. MR. NOBEL: Well, I got great grandchildren that I hope can use this property because this is why I got it for years ago so we could use it there as a family for the future. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I understand where you're coming from, sir. MR. NOBEL: If they take everything away, what is there left? I've seen this all over the property. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. Our next speaker is Guadalupe Morera followed MS. MORERA: Hi. My name is Lupe Morera. I've lived in Naples for 35 years, and I have 10 acres on Sabal Palm Road. My sister has 20. My brother has 98 acres on Sabal Palm Road. We love it out there. My concern is, if they plug the canals -- because right now when they close the weirs, 54th is underwater, and it's very hard for us to go out there and still -- you know, and then we start calling and everything and they open up the weirs, it's okay; we can go through. My concern is, you know, emergency vehicles going out there, if anything happens to my family or, you know, my kids. And we've had fires out there before or we have a tree farm. We have a home. We have a lake. It's beautiful. As a matter of fact, NBC News was out there today, and they couldn't believe how you just go over a mud puddle they called the bog and 3 miles, there's 951, 3 miles later, and Page 56 December 5,2001 we have to go all the way around to try to get to our home. It's unbelievable. I just hope that you, you know, take into consideration, you know, this is America, the home of the free, the land of the brave. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You got it. MS. MORERA: I love it here. I came from Cuba. I'm a United States citizen, and I love the United States. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: news to you out there. MS. MORERA: Did you? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: could get. MS. MORERA: Thank you. Thanks a lot. I really appreciate it. And I -- I was the one that sent the Thank you. You needed all the coverage you Yeah. They loved it out there too. We could just use your help. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. MS. MORERA: Okay. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Next speaker. MR. MUDD: Justo Morera is the next speaker followed by Stanley Fogg. MR. MORERA: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Justo Morera, not Jesus, Justo. MR. MUDD: I'm sorry. Thank you. MR. MORERA: Thank you. Anyway, I just wrote some little notes in here. Kind of everything has been pretty much covered, everybody speaking. You know, the main concern is access. But I did wrote some little notes. Especially when Clarence was speaking, I paid a lot of attention to what he was saying. And one thing he said that they -- the canals control the water -- the water flows out there. But right now it's not the canals that control the water flows. It's -- it's the weirs, however you call, excuse my language, but the weirs that open up. Page 57 December 5,2001 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's correct. MR. MORERA: Water management is the one that controls the water flow out there, not the canals because they do close and open the weirs. And if anyone here remembers when we had a lot of rain -- and this only happened this year. And I believe they were doing some kind of testing and all that. We had never had so much flooding on 52nd Lane. When my wife said 54, it was 52nd. That's the main road that takes you from Everglades Boulevard to Miller Road. And the county had to take a lot of loads of lime rock in there. They had never done that before. And that was because they closed the weirs for so long that the water just washed back. Also, my property was flooded very bad. We never had floodings in our property. We had them this year because the weirs, and also we had -- Commissioner Coletta knows about the pumping from-- from the farmers. But, anyway, another thing that I -- that I made a note of, how would you connect Miller to Sabal Palm when according to Miss -- Mrs. Payton, same -- Sabal Palm Road does not connect to Miller Road? This is what -- this is what-- this is what I've been told by you before that Sabal -- Sabal Palm Road, it's not a legal road to Miller Road. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm kind of confused. I'd rather you didn't direct your questions -- MR. MORERA: Okay. MR. COLETTA: -- to someone else in the audience. If there's some way that myself or Clarence Tears or someone else can -- MR. MORERA: Okay. Well -- okay. Just --just disregard that. But how-- if you-- if you connect-- when Clarence was saying earlier that using Sabal Palm Road as a secondary road, how could we use Sabal Palm Road as a secondary road when we can't get across at the puddle of water that's there, because we not allowed to, Page 58 December 5,2001 and we've been try -- this would solve all -- a whole bunch of problem if we could come up with a solution to get across the puddle of water. What is the -- what is the deal about that? Why -- and I wrote this very here. Why is this forestry allowed to make roads to go to the -- and have the access to the property and I can-- I mean, first they just did a road right across from the -- from the rock pit off Sabal Palm Road, and they have their own private gate, and it goes way out in the woods who knows where. We can't get in there because it has a sign on it, forestry, do not go across. They just built it up. I mean, land is land, whether it belongs to the forestry or belongs to me. The water flow flows the same way on the government land than it does on the private land, doesn't it? So why are they allowed to make this roads, and why can't we be allowed to make roads to get to our place? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You do have a MSTU there with money for roads for building it up. You're limited to what you can build and, you know, I -- I don't know how far it would go. We talked about this before. MR. MORERA: Right. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm not too sure what the limits are and what your problem with the waterway, the flow way that goes through there, how you could be ever breached to be able to get to the other side. But basically I think we agreed at that time that the majority of people get their access from Miller on Sabal Palm which do connect. I seen it myself. It's a physical thing. And to come from the other way would require millions and millions of dollars of someone's funds to build a permanent road to be able to make it work going all the way to the back. That's not something that will probably happen. By the way, Joe was very helpful. He took myself and Nancy Payton on trips down through there. We got to see the area like few people ever get to see it, and I thank you for that. Page 59 December 5, 2001 MR. MORERA: Thank you, Mr. Coletta. I'm sorry. I don't mean to interrupt you, but I -- I do know that I have limited time to speak, and I want to finish this up. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead. I didn't mean to take your time from you. MR. MORERA: We're not asking to -- to make a payroll. We're asking for a passable access like we have in the wintertime. We could have it in the summertime without interfering with-- with the animals or the water flow. I'm sure that's the way to do it. And if South Water Management or I might be confused, but -- but whoever needs to -- you have, like, one, two, three -- you have seven or eight homeowners in there that if you -- if-- if we -- you sign this to you, our work, our effort, South Water Management, forestry, everybody, county, everybody pitch in a little bit, we can come up with a solution that we can make it passable so we can get to our property, you know, for -- for the sake of-- because right now they're talking about five years down the road, what's going to happen with Miller Road. Now another thing you got to look at, when the fires come on. They always come from the south-- I mean from the east. The only way for us to get exit is to the west. And there has been a fire that comes from the west to the east since I've been out there, never. How are we going to get out? It's good thing that the fires happen in the wintertime when Sabal Palm Road is passable. But if it was in the summertime when it wasn't passable, we would -- we would drown or we would get fry because we wouldn't be able to get out. One more thing. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead. I took some of your time. MR. MORERA: I wrote something here, but I'm not even going to go there. I just want to ask, I've heard from someone that Clarence has a letter stating that we would never be forced to sell. I would like to get a copy of the letter, Mr. Clarence, if you do have it. Page 60 December 5,2001 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you, please, come up to the podium, Clarence. MR. TEARS: State of Florida has written me a letter stating that they will not condemn property in the Belle Meade area and that once they go through the willing seller program, they want to turn that project over to somebody. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That-- that's significant. I'd like to have a copy of it myself. MR. TEARS: Okay. MR. MORERA: And that concludes what I have to say. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Joe, thank you so much. And we've also been working very closely with Joe and the Sabal Palm Property Association and Nancy Payton with possible mitigation money for anyone that would like to sell in the future. We have miles and miles of roads here to build here in Collier County. We have to put up mitigation money to take care of the damage that these roads do going in. The money, for the most part, is being sent outside the county. And if we could have a mitigation bank here, we might be able to meet some of the residents' needs there with fair prices for their land if they were ever willing sellers. That's down the road yet. That's another option we're looking at. We want to make sure that we leave no one in the lurch. Sir, would you-- MR. MUDD: Next speaker is Stanley Fogg followed by Shannon Cromwell. MR. FOGG: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Is this on? I represent Jesse Hardy out there on his new agriculture farm. And I'm in the process of excavating the lakes that he plans on using to raise fish. I'm new at this because it's my first meeting but -- that I've been involved here, but it seems kind of out of place that we have a permit that's for at least 3 years, to be extended for a total of 12 years to do Page 61 December 5,2001 this farm, and we're going to be traveling over the roads that at some point are not going to be roads. I'm just wondering if somebody could maybe help me to find out how we're going to do this. I do want to say also that the Miller Road Extension, like several other people have talked about tonight, is really a very necessary road for a lot of the reasons: one, Marco Island acc -- evacuation route; two, the emergency-use vehicles, especially the fire department, and for some of these people who might need services. And I'll add myself now because it would be the exact -- and their best exit for material that's coming out of these lakes to go off of the property that we have that we're excavating now. And the property -- the material which is base rock or lime rock is one of the required items for all of the new road construction all over the county. There apparently is getting to be less and less of it around, and that would be a good place for the road materials to go, not only to build that little piece of road but all the people that are building out on Marco Island could use this material. And it's the shortest route. And the very last thing as far as I personally am concerned and Jesse is concerned is all this material which is in the range for a couple million tons, if it doesn't go out that way, it will all go out over Everglades Boulevard up to Golden Gate Parkway which is already a -- quite a traffic jam, and we would be adding more vehicles that way. Just things for the board to consider. I hope I can talk to somebody at some point to let me know what I am going to do. Thank you for your time. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Next speaker? MR. MUDD: Next speaker is Shannon Cromwell followed by Nettie Phillips. And Nettie is our last speaker. MS. CROMWELL: Hi. I'm Shannon Cromwell, and I'm representing The Conservancy of Southwest Florida. VOICE IN AUDIENCE: Can't hear you. Page 62 December 5,2001 VOICE IN AUDIENCE: Speak up. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: There you go. Lean forward a little. MS. CROMWELL: And on behalf of our 5800 -member family, over 600 volunteers and 32 member board of directors, I just wanted to say a few brief comments regarding this issue. And, first, I just wanted to bring up the point that The Conservancy is -- fully supports the restoration of the south Golden Gate Estate area and all the benefits that the restoration will provide. The Conservancy feels it will be counterproductive to make any significant improvements to Miller Boulevard Extension because it would slow down the already lengthy restoration process that's already inevitable at this point anyway and would oppose improvements also because of the possible environmental and/or ecological damage the improvements may cause. That's all. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Stanley? MS. PHILLIPS: For the record, my name is Nettie Phillips. I'm a 55-plus-year resident of Collier County, a property owner, a taxpayer, once a property owner in the Big Cypress Preserve that we can no longer go to the properties we once owned. I lost my question about the letter. Joe took it so -- but what I would like to make a statement on is having attended massive meetings in Collier County and other counties in the State of Florida, is mentioned numerous amount of time how peoples from around the country were frauded and bought properties in Collier County under a fraudulent guise, not being told that it was a wetlands or it was underwater or this or that. I can tell you, as having lived here most of my life, that I, too, bought properties in Collier County at the going price because the seller had a price. And if we wanted the property, we had to pay the price or we couldn't buy that property. And I wouldn't call it a fraud. I call it a fraud because no one told us at any time that they had already had plans for what they were going to do Page 63 December 5,2001 to Florida properties and the properties in the state and the United States for these parks and corps reserves and heritage sites and biospheres and all of the entities that we are now dealing with. So just speaking with the area that we are speaking about, without going into north Golden Gate Estates where I am a coming target, the -- I haven't heard anything ironclad or with legal standing that would protect the property owners in south Golden Gate Estates or in the Belle Meade area. I have heard a lot of talk, a lot of rhetoric, but I have not seen any legal standing in the settlement agreement. I have not heard anyone state any legal standing or ironclad guarantees for these property owners. And that's about what I would have to say. I've heard a lot. I agree with a lot of the property owners. I am -- having attended more meetings than I ever cared to across this state. I would like to say that it is sad. It is very sad to see what has happened to my county, my state, and my country. It no longer feels like America. It feels like I'm in a war zone in some foreign country where the peoples had no rights and never had any rights, and we're getting to the point that we have so few. And it's out in the open, and I don't see that the peoples are making much headway and protecting themselves because their rights are being taken away at such a great pace. That is what my country has come to. And I am a Native American -- I am part Native American, and I am a United States native citizen and a native Floridian. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. That's our last speaker, Mr. Mudd? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I want to, first, thank the commissioners for agreeing to this workshop in the evening. I believe it have been very beneficial. COMMISSIONER HENNING: We get paid extra for this; Page 64 December 5, 2001 right? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, Commissioner Henning, you do not get paid extra, but you get a free glass of water. So I open it up for discussion now if you have anything that you would like to add or anything that you would like to ask of the remaining staff, forestry or water management or whatever or our county attorney, please have a go at it. Donna Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I had a question. They were talking about gated roads in this area. I was wondering why roads are gated? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I'll tell you what, forest-- is the lady from forestry still here? If you would, please, come forward. And I think I'd like to expound upon Donna's question is why the roads are gated. I -- I know what the answer is for some of them, but would the roads be gated throughout the new area that's going to be -- result from Miller Boulevard closing? MS. DURRWACHTER: I'm Sonya Durrwachter, by the way, if you didn't get -- catch my name earlier. This is something we're going to address with our five-year management plan. And I know -- I know it's kind of confusing, but there's two separate things going on. There's a hydrologic restoration, which is water management. And then we're having -- we're writing our five-year plan on how we will manage the land, so it's two different things. And we have started our five-year plan, and there was so many changes in the hydrologic restoration that we have decided to wait until the restoration has finalized the plans so that we know, okay, what can we do. I don't want to set up camping that's going to be under 2 feet of water. So as soon as we know what the final plans are, then we will complete our plan. There's a public process; there's public meetings. We have been taking input for over six months already. So there will be ample time -- we have some very thorny issues that Page 65 December 5, 2001 we're going to have to deal with. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead. again. COMMISSIONER FIALA: are gated. Say -- say the question I didn't understand why the roads MS. DURRWACHTER: We occasionally gate roads if they're -- like, if they're underwater, whatever, and there's going to be resource damage to that road, if the road is under 2, 3 feet of water for several months, it often is very, very soft. If it's open and you have a lot of vehicles going through, the road is mined. So that would be one reason why roads are gated. So it can be a seasonal thing. It's also -- but those are all management issues that we'll be working through. So actually Jane's Scenic has a gate. It's open, so, I mean, that's something that -- you know, it just allows you to manage that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, Mr. Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that our meeting on December the 11 th we're going to be asked to make a decision. And -- and I don't know that we have enough information on which to base a decision, and I -- I would recommend that, perhaps, we give the staff and the other interested parties some guidance concerning what we would expect to -- to have at that time so we can make a decision. And based upon what I've heard tonight, almost everyone is in favor of the restoration project, but they want to preserve access to private property; they want to make sure that the roads are passable, and they want to make sure that somebody is responsible for maintaining them. And what I would suggest is we ask the people who have been working on this -- this agreement to come back to us with information which addresses all of those to see if there is not a way to Page 66 December 5, 2001 meet all these requirements without destroying the integrity of the restoration project. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And-- and I can concur with that. I think that's a great game plan. And my concern is -- what I hear is, it's the possibility the roads are going to be gated in there because of times of when-- when it's not-- when it's flooded. So, in essence, are we saying we're only going to give people access to their property certain times of the year? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Generally, if I'm not mistaken, those gates are gated -- that are gated are locked in such a way that the property owner can still have some sort of access? MS. DURRWACHTER: It's -- it's my understanding the property owner has access to their property, and it's -- if that gate was shut, then they would have a combination, or they would put their own lock on that gate. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I -- I misunderstand. MS. DURRWACHTER: Any -- any land-- any landowner, to my understanding, has access to their property. MR. TEARS: Well, what you have to realize is that a part of her access is for maintenance purposes only. Those are the areas where you could destroy a road. The roads that we're talking about, Miller Boulevard Extension, will be stabilized to deal with water. So the idea is, there's going to be some stabilization material placed under the road so even if there is a few inches of water above that road, it still is passable, and it will not damage the road. That's -- that's the goal. MS. DURRWACHTER: That's correct. And they've done this on other state forests so that -- you know, with the geoweb and some different -- you know, different technologies that will help us quite a bit. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, Commissioner, if these Page 67 December 5,2001 roads are going to go to grade and we don't know or it hasn't been said what the water level is going to be on this road and people want access to their property, are they going to be limited to any vehicle? So what I would like to see is, you know, if it's underwater-- the only way you get to it is by a swamp buggy. So I would like to see something in there about access by a vehicle. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All right. I think there's -- right now we have it built in where a person has a residence there -- I'm not too sure of the exact wording -- the -- Miller Boulevard won't be closed at that point in time that we -- that they buy the properties; is that correct? Am I getting the wording wrong? MR. PETTIT: Well, there's two -- two components to it. As -- as described right now in the settlement agreement, Miller Boulevard Extension will remain -- is open now to the extent anyone can get across it, depending on the season. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Terrible shape. MR. PETTIT: And the fact is, people do get across it and use it. And we know that. That will remain open until the project, the construction, reaches this final phase which is some years off at which point, my understanding is, that road will disappear, that dirt road, that connection to 41. What will remain is Miller Boulevard in two forms, down to 78 that will be paved and with gray -- and graded so that the access is at least as of the quality it is now to that point, and below 78 it will be a natural grade. And as I understand it from what Clarence said tonight, which I didn't know before, it's going to be stabilized so that it -- it is, to some degree, resistant to being washed out. But Miller Boulevard Extension under the -- under the terms of the agreement that's contemplated now will eventually go away. It won't exist. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Coming back to Commissioner Coyle's statements: What can we do here so that we take all the input Page 68 December 5, 2001 tonight so the Board of County Commissioners can digest all of this? What are your time lines in your next scenario negotiations? MR. PETTIT: Commissioner Carter, I -- as I've sat here tonight and listened to everything, lots of people won't like me for this, but I'm going to recommend that we postpone this until January 8th. I want to bring back as much accurate information as I can. I still favor that this lawsuit be resolved, and I believe that the state and the federation have -- have worked in -- in very good faith with us for quite awhile now to try to get it resolved and address the concerns we have. But I think I've heard some things tonight that I may be able to work on that will at least put away some of the concerns. I think it's going to take some time working with particularly the DEP attorney to work those things out, and I'm going to recommend we postpone that item until January 8th. And it may come back in a different form somewhat than it is now. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I think it makes all the sense in the world because, I believe, the DEP attorney may still be here. And this is all done in good faith. Everybody here in this room is in good faith. I didn't hear anger and yelling and screaming that everybody's stupid and all that kind of stuff. What I saw was a group of citizens here tonight voice their concerns asking us to protect their access rights, not only today but in perpetuity. And I believe that there are a lot of questions here that we can answer, Mike. And I think you made the right notes. And I think Commissioner Coyle summarized it well. So I think this has been a great benefit to the commissioners. Commissioner Coletta, thank you for that and that we can go forward. And by the 8th we will probably have -- know a lot more than we do tonight so that we can work to a workable solution. MR. PETTIT: I don't anticipate if we bring back a settlement agreement on the 8th that everyone who speaks on it that day will like it. Page 69 December 5, 2001 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I -- I'm sure that's not going to happen. MR. PETTIT: That's not going to happen. And all I'll be able to do on that day is tell you the pros and cons of signing it. But I think I can find -- I think the state and the federation, there are some areas in working with Mr. Tears, we may be able to fine tune this to address some of these concerns without jeopardizing the project. I could be wrong, but I think I've got some ideas about it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You say on January 8th all you'll be able to do is tell us the pros and cons of signing. Will you be able to answer the question they have here about providing access? MR. PETTIT: That's -- that's one of the things I would be looking to do with changes in the agreement and also trying to identify more clearly -- there were a couple of people who spoke tonight; I'd like to talk with them. And I'm going to try to get their addresses and so on -- well, Vince Doerr I know, another gentleman in particular I'd like to find out more about their access issues. I do think, with the agreement as drafted, has addressed the Sabal Palm Road concern. But I think there's some things we could do to -- for example -- and I'm not too proud to admit that things can't be made better that I helped write. An issue was raised about who could enforce this agreement. I suspect the state and the federation would agree that we could put a clause in here to allow those Sabal Palm property owners and others who rely on access along Miller Boulevard standing to enforce these access commitments so that they wouldn't be incumbent upon them to come to the county and ask the board to vote to allow the county attorney to sue the state or the federation or whoever was responsible in the future. So those are the kind of ideas I got from the meeting tonight. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's why we have these workshops Page 70 December 5, 2001 so we always can bring something up to a better and -- Commissioner Henning, something else? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I was just -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's it for me. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Conunissioner Carter? COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'm through. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think we're out of here. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do you want to say good night? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good night. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 7:40 p.m. Page 71 December 5,2001 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL ," .... '";,,, JIM COLETTA, CHAIRMAN " e,* .' ...... '. .-' &~/..-' ,.... '.,-,',~. These minutes approved by the Board on Da..,-. ,g., zo,~2, presented or as corrected , as TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING, INC., BY BARBARA A. DONOVAN, RMR, CRR Page 72