The URL can be used to link to this page

BCC Minutes 02/26/2002 RFebruary 26, 2002 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NAPLES, FLORIDA, FEBRUARY 26, 2002 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9 a.m. In REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE-CHAIRMAN: JIM COLETTA TOM HENNING JAMES CARTER, Ph.D. FRED COYLE DONNA FIALA ALSO PRESENT: TOM OLIFF, County Manager DAVID WEIGEL, County Attorney Page 1 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA February 26, 2002 9:00 a.m. NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMI'i-rED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS". ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (941) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M. 1 February 26, 2002 1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. Reverend Susan Diamond, First Christian Church 2. AGENDA AND MINUTES A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.) B. January 29, 2002 - Workshop C. January 29, 2002 - Arnold and Blair Contract Approval D. February 5, 2002 - Sheriff Workshop E. February 5, 2002 - District 1 Town Hall Meeting F. February 6, 2002 - Special LDC Meeting 3. PROCLAMATIONS A. Dm Em (Ex Proclamation to recognize the Friends of the Library. To be accepted by Mr. Jay Wolff, President, Friends of the Library. Proclamation to acknowledge the work of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. To be accepted by Dr. Lunney, Karen Dresbach and Krista Fitzsimmons. Proclamation to recognize Peter Bolton for his Outstanding Safety Record. To be accepted by Peter Bolton, Helicopter Operations. Proclamation to recognize Dale Huguley for Volunteer of the Year for Collier County Emergency Management. To be accepted by Dale Huguley. Proclamation for Aviation Day. To be accepted by Peter Manion and Ted Soliday. SERVICE AWARDS Five-Year Attendees: 1) Jason Toreky, Code Enforcement 2) Joseph Thomas, Water Treatment 3) Maria Ramsey, Parks and Recreation Ten-Year Attendees: 2 February 26, 2002 4) Steven Preston, Stormwater Management Twenty-Year Attendees: 5) Ephrim McMullen, Ochopee Fire Department PRESENTATIONS PUBLIC PETITIONS AND COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS A. Public Comments on General Topics BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS This item was continued from the February 12, 2002 BCC Meetin.q. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUD-2000-22, William L. Hoover, AICP, of Hoover Planning and Wayne Arnold of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., representing Pine Ridge Redevelopment Group, requesting a rezone from "RSF-4" Residential Single Family and "C-1" Professional Commercial District to "PUD" Planned Unit Development to be known as Goodlette Corners PUD for the purpose of permitting commercial, office and service land uses for property located on the southwest corner of Pine Ridge Road, (CR 896) and Goodlette-Frank Road (CR 851) in Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. This item was continued from the February 12, 2002 BCC Meetinq. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Public Hearing to consider adoption of an Ordinance establishing the Flow Way Community Development District (CDD) pursuant to Section 190.005, Florida Statutes. 9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS A. Discussion regarding increasing fines for red-light running. (Commissioner Carter) B. Report to Board of County Commissioners regarding Florida Association of Counties Legislative Day Activities. (Commissioner Carter) 10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT A. Reconsideration of 2002 Tourism Agreement between Collier County and Prutos Public Relations, Inc. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development) B. Request by Adrienne Cozette, representing Friends of Art at the Naples Museum of Art and Galleries, for a Waiver of Right-of-Way permit fees for 3 February 26, 2002 temporary parking in the Right-of-Way. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development) C. This item has been deleted. Authorize an agreement in the amount of $53,217 to fulfill a commitment of the Olde Cypress Planned Unit Development. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development) Adopt a Resolution authorizing condemnation of right-of-way and/or easements required for the construction of a four-lane section of Immokalee Road between Wilson Boulevard and 43rd Avenue N.E., Capital Improvement Element No. 71 (Project No. 60018). (Norman E. Feder, AICP, Administrator, Transportation Services) F. This item to be heard as last item to Board Meeting: Strategic Planning Follow Up. (Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager) 11. AIRPORT AUTHORITY 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT Am This item to be heard at 2:00 p.m. or at the conclusion of the regular meeting agenda, whichever occurs first. Closed Attorney-Client Session requested by County Attorney at February 12, 2002 Board Meeting pursuant to Section 286.011 (8), Fla. Stat., to discuss settlement negotiations and/or strategy related to litigation expenditures in Thomas Wajerski, v. Collier County, Case Nos. 95-3067-CA-01 and 95-2955-CA in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida and Case No. 99-303 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. This item to be heard immediately following Item 12 A. This item was continued from the February 12, 2002 BCC MeetinR. Recommendation that the Board approve the settlement of all pending litigation and claims involving Thomas Wajerski, including, without limitation, Case Nos. 95-3067-CA-01 and 95-2955-CA in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida and Case no. 99-303 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, and authorize the Chairman to sign all necessary settlement documents. 13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 14. FUTURE AGENDAS 15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS 16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. 4 February 26, 2002 A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Island Walk Phase One- 2) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Island Walk Phase Seven" and approval of the Standard Form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. 3) Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements for the final plat of "Grey Oaks Unit Ten". 4) Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements for the final plat of "Grey Oaks Unit Twelve". 5) Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and sewer improvements for the final plat of "Grey Oaks Unit Thirteen". 6) Request to approve for recording the final plat of "Runaway Bay at Fiddler's Creek" and approval of the Standard Form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. 7) Approve committee selection of Henderson, Young and Company for contract negotiations for RFP 02-3317 "Consultant Services for Impact Fee Update Studies-Educational Facilities". 8) Adopt Resolutions enforcing liens on properties for Code Violations. 9) Adoption of a Resolution approving two (2) applications for Impact Fee Waivers for eligible charitable organizations. Approval of a lease between C.P.O.C. Realty and Collier County for office space to be utilized by the Natural Resources Department and a Budget Amendment to fund the relocation of the Natural Resources Department. B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES 1) Adopt a Resolution authorizing the conveyance of Collier County owned real estate to the State of Florida Department of Transportation for the construction of roadway interchange improvements to State Road 93 (I- 75) at the overpass of County Road 886 (Golden Gate Parkway). 2) Approve a Donation Agreement and accept a drainage easement for the benefit of the Wiggins Pass Drainage Basin. 3) Approve an Easement Agreement and accept a drainage easement for the Lely Stormwater Improvement Project. 5 February 26, 2002 4) Approve Amendment No. 1 to the contract for professional engineering services by CH2M Hill for Immokalee Road (CR 951 to 43ra Avenue NE) four-lane design, Project No. 60018 in the amount of $230,444.00. 5) Authorization for staff to amend the current agreement with McDonald Transit Associates Inc., to implement operational and management modifications to the Collier Area Transit (CAT) system in the amount of $234,307.00. 6) Approve award of a construction contract to the lowest bidder, APAC, Inc., for right turn lane from Immokalee Road to 47th Avenue NE in the amount of $53,613.90, Bid No. 02-3340. 7) Approve the piggybacking of a Village of Wellington (Palm Beach County) contract to purchase a front-end loader for the Road and Bridge section, approximate cost $70,000. 8) Approve an agreement for construction of access improvements for Pebblebrooke Plaza located at Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard (CR 951). 9) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners extend the present Services Agreement for the Pelican Bay Services Division until December 31, 2002. C. PUBLIC UTILITIES 1) Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received payment and said liens are satisfied in full for the 1991 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact is $34.50 to record the liens. 2) Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received payment and said liens are satisfied in full for the 1992 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact is $70.50 to record the liens. 3) Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received payment and said liens are satisfied in full for the 1993 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact is $58.50 to record the liens. 4) Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received payment and said liens are satisfied in full for the 1994 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact is $82.50 to record the liens. 5) Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received payment and said 6 February 26, 2002 liens are satisfied in full for the 1995 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact is $184.50 to record the liens. 6) Adopt a Resolution approving the Satisfaction of Liens for Solid Waste Residential Accounts wherein the County has received payment and said liens are satisfied in full for the 1996 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact is $226.50 to record the liens. 7) Approve the Satisfaction of Lien documents filed against Real Property for abatement of nuisance and direct the Clerk of Courts to record same in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Fiscal Impact is $76.00 to record the liens. 8) Approval and Execution of Satisfactions of Notice of Promise to pay and agreement to extend payment of water and/or sewer system impact fees. Fiscal Impact is $91.50 to record the liens. 9) Approve a contract for engineering services to Agnoli, Barber and Brundage for the relocation of utilities in advance of widening US 41 from Old 41 to the County line. The project number is 70045 and the contract amount is $41,900. 10) Approve a design build contract with Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., for new reverse osmosis raw water supply wells for the North County Regional Water Treatment Plant, ProJect 70075, in the amount of $4,193.196. 11) Approve Work Order GH-FT-02-1 with Greeley and Hansen LLC, to perform field excavation and investigation on the existing 30-inch sewer force main, Project 73943 in the amount of $108,120. 12) Approve new escrow account for County utility relocations in conjunction with US 41 road widening from Myrtle Road to Old US 41, Projects 70047, 70048 and 73048. 13) Waive purchasing competitive bid policy and approve the use of the Parkson Corporation to assist with the rebuilding of the North County Water Reclamation Facility Mechanical Bar Screens for the amount of $58,052.00. 14) Approve Waiver of Single Job Cap of $200,000-Contract 99-2915 with Lightner Contracting, Inc. for up to $700,000. 15) Approve a Resolution authorizing declarations of official intent under U.S. Treasury Regulations with respect to reimbursements from note and bond proceeds of temporary advances made for payments prior to issuance, and other related matters, for the North County Water Reclamation Facility, Project 73077. 16) Approval to enter an agreement with the Community Affairs for the reimbursement of Measure Expenditures. 7 February 26, 2002 Florida Department of Emergency Protective D. PUBLIC SERVICES 1) Approve a Transportation Agreement with the Collier County School Board for camp participants in the amount of $47,000. 2) Approve a Budget Amendment to recognize revenue from insurance proceeds to replace two stolen mOwers in the amount of $9,678. 3) Approve application from National Recreation and Parks Association for accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies. 4) Approve the Older Americans Act Continuation Grant and authorize the Chairman to sign the contract between Collier County Board of County Commissioners and the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc., DBA/Senior Solutions of Southwest Florida, and authorize increase of one permanent part time position to permanent full time status in the amount of $658,100. 5) Approve the Master Agreement relating to Services for Seniors' Grant Programs and authorize the Chairman to sign the Master Agreement between Collier County Board of County Commissioners and the Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc., DBA/Senior Solutions of Southwest Florida. 6) Award Bid #02-3323 boardwalk deck and handrail replacement at Barefoot Beach Access, Barefoot Beach Preserve park, and South Marco Beach Access in the amount of $194,427. E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 1) Approve Committee Selection of six firms for contract negotiations for RFP 02-3324 "Fixed Term Surveying and Photogrametric Services". 2) Approve staff's short list for architectural services for the design of the Grey Oaks Public Safety Facility, RFP #02-3326. 3) Approve the Budget Amendments to transfer reserves from Fund 517, Group Health and Life, to the new Fund 519, Short-Term and Long-Term Disability in the amount of $250,000. 4) Approval of a Resolution establishing an Employee Health and Wellness Prevention, Incentive and Reimbursement Program to reward employees who participate in County sponsored or endorsed health and wellness programs. Estimated annual cost $35,000. 5) Authorize the Chairman to sign five applications submitted by Collier County Government to the National Association of Counties (NACo) Awards Program. 6) . Recommendation to declare certain county-owned property as surplus and authorize a sale of the surplus property on March 16, 2002. 8 February 26, 2002 7) ReJect Bid received on Bid #02-3341 "Laboratory Chemicals and Supplies". 8) Approve and execute an agreement with the Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District providing for a maximum expenditure of $35,850.00 from the GAC Land Trust to purchase personal protective equipment. 9) Approve and execute an agreement with the Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue District providing for the trade-in value of $40,500 for an older pumper truck to be applied towards the purchase of a new pumper truck. 10) Approve Master Purchase Agreement for RFP 01-3282 Wireless Application Systems. F. EMERGENCY SERVICES 1) Approval of a Disaster Relief Funding Agreement between the Florida Department of Community Affairs and the Ochopee Fire and Rescue Control District for the reimbursement of disaster related expenses in the amount of $36,280, approval of the associated resolution, and approval of the necessary budget amendment to recognize and appropriate additional revenue and appropriate funds from reserves. G. COUNTY MANAGER 1) Approval of Budget Amendment Report - Budget Amendment #02-189. AIRPORT AUTHORITY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 1) Commissioner request for approval for payment to attend function serving a valid public purpose. (Commissioner Coletta) 2) Commissioner request for approval for payment to attend function serving a valid public purpose. (Commissioner Fiala) 3) Commissioner request for approval for payment to attend function serving a valid public purpose. (Commissioner Coletta) J. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE 1) Satisfaction of Lien: NEED MOTION authorizing the Chairman to sign Satisfaction of Lien for Services for the Public Defender for Case No's: C1 K020130-12. RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. 2) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed. 9 February 26, 2002 K. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 1) Approve agreement with The City of Naples for Election Services. L. COUNTY ATTORNEY 1) Recommendation that the Board ratify and authorize the County Attorney's retention of expert witnesses/consultants/outside counsel for the County in Aquaport, LC v. Collier County, Case No. 2:01-CV-341-FTM- 29DNF in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, exempt the County Attorney from the purchasing policy if and to the extent the purchasing policy is applicable and authorize the Chairman to sign any necessary retention documents. 2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Resolution of a potential lien by the Social Services Department of Collier County against Wanda Hensley by way of acceptance of the sum of fifteen hundred dollars ($1,500) from Wanda Hensley and in return Collier County would release all claims against Wanda Hensley for payment of medical services provided on behalf of Wanda Hensley up to and including July 1999 but not subsequent thereto. 3) Recommendation that the Board approve Amendment Number 4 to the Legal Services Agreement with the Law Firm of Carlton, Fields, Ward Emmanuel, Smith and Cutler, P.A. 4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Supplemental and Amended Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the easement acquisition on Parcels 106A, 106B, 706 and 806 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Naples Italian American Club, Inc., et al, Case No. 98-1672-CA-01 (Airport Road Six-Laning Project from Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road). 5) Approve the Agreed Order awarding expert fees relative to the fee simple and easement acquisition of Parcels 155 and 855 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Ronald G. Bender and Michele J. Bender, Trustees Under That Certain Declaration of Trust Dated the 17th Day of May, 1991, et al, Case No. 99-1394-CA (Livingston Road, Project No. 60061). 6) Approve attorney's fees associated with the acquisition of Parcel 163 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Russell Baisley, et al, Case No. 01- 0758-CA (Livingston Road six-laning project from Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road, Project No. 60071). 7) Approve two mediated settlement agreement and two stipulated final judgments incorporating the same terms and conditions as the mediated settlement agreements relative to the acquisition of Parcels 2.4T and 53T in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. John B. Fassett, Trustee of the Anne M. Fassett Trust Dated 6/5/86, et al, Case No. 99-3040-CA, Project No. 65041. 10 February 26, 2002 17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. SHOULD ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS BE MOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. VA-2001-AR-1442, Kirk Sanders, requesting a 2.3 foot after-the-fact variance from the required 10-foot rear yard setback establishing for accessory structures to 7.7 feet for property located at 1139 Sperling Avenue, further described as Lot 14, Block B, Sperlings Subdivision, in Section 22, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. This item was continued from the January 22, 2002 BCC Meetinq. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. CU-2001-AR-1420, William L. Hoover, AICP, Hoover Planning and Development, Incorporated, representing Pastor Colin Rampton, of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, requesting conditional uses "7" and "11" of the "A-MHO" Rural Agricultural Zoning District/Mobile Home Zoning Overlay, for a church and child care on property located at the northwest corner of Lilac Lane and Immokalee Road in Section 23, Township 47 South, Range 27 East. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. VA-2001-AR-1526, Kraft Construction Company, Inc., representing Diocese of Venice Catholic Church, requesting a 6.5 foot variance from the required 30-foot front yard setback to 23.5 feet for property located at 5225 Golden Gate Parkway, in Section 28, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition AVPLAT-2001-AR1835 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and the public's interest in the 15' wide drainage easement located along the lot line common to Lots 7 and 8, according to the plat of "Mediterra Parcel 111" as recorded in Plat Book 37, Pages 8 through 9, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 11, Township 48 South, Range 25 East. 18. ADJOURN INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGESTOTHEBOARD'SAGENDASHOULDBE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383. 11 February 26, 2002 February 26, 2002 Item #2A REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA- APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please join us for the invocation by Pastor Susan Diamond. PASTOR DIAMOND: Let us pray. Oh, God, this day as we came here today, we all have the opportunity to look and to see the beauty of your creation. And we are reminded of how blessed we are to live in this community that you have given to us. And we thank you, oh God, for the opportunities this day that we have to praise your name for the gift of this day. Lord, as we come together to do your will and your work in this place, we are especially reminded of those who have been placed in authority, and we give you thanks for those our leaders. We would ask, oh God, a special pouring out of your spirit of wisdom and discernment to them as they carefully consider actions that may impact us for years to come. God, remind them of the great responsibility of stewardship you have given to them. And, oh God, as we together form your community, remind us that we must work together so that we can have a community of justice and peace and kindness and love, all these values that you regard so highly. Bless us this day as we do your work; may it reflect your will, for we pray these things in your holy name. Amen. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Amen. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Amen. Thank you, Reverend Susan Diamond from the First Christian Church. Very inspiring. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Good morning. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good morning. Page 2 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: First off, is there any disclosures on the part of the commissioners on this summary agenda starting with Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't you come back to me. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sure there must be. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I see you are looking, too, so we'll go on to Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No disclosures on the summary. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Commissioner Carter. COMMISSIONER CARTER: No disclosures on the summary. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No disclosures. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: No disclosures. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I have no disclosures either, and with that, is there any from the consent agenda, summary agenda, Mr. Olliff? MR. OLLIFF: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and commissioners. I'll walk you through your change sheet this morning. The first item is an addition to your agenda. It's Item 9-C. It's under the Board of County Commissioners, and it's a discussion by the board to reconvene at 6 p.m. The March 4, 2002, rural fringe final hearing, and then the intention of that is to allow the public that may not be able to attend the daytime meeting to attend in the evening and make their public comments. That's Item 9-C. Item 10--G is also in addition to your agenda, and it is a resolution which is opposing legislation that would rescind the eminent domain of Collier County or might in any other way restrict the county's jurisdiction over local water and wastewater utilities. Page 3 February 26, 2002 For the board members who were on the board last year, you will recall this was an effort made by certain private and quasi-private utility companies through the legislature last year to approve a bill that would curtail the county's legal abilities on utilities, eminent domain proceedings. We are told that a similar legislation is being floated around in Tallahassee and may even not be a separate bill but just a strap-on portion of an amendment to another bill which could quietly work its way through. We're trying to raise the profile of this and ask the board to consider a resolution opposing that. The next item is a move from the consent agenda of Item 16-B-5 to your regular agenda, which is 10-H under the county manager's portion of the agenda. The item is an authorization for staff to amend the current agreement with McDonald Transit Associates, Inc., and that's to implement operational and management modifications for our CAT or Collier Area Transit System. That's being moved to the regular agenda at the request of Commissioner Coyle. We're actually adding Item 16--B-10 to your consent agenda, which is another routine approval, but -- an agreement with the Florida Department of Community Affairs for reimbursement of emergency protective measure expenditures. That is simply an item where the county is being reimbursed by the Florida DCA. MR. MUDD: That's for the Hurricane Gabriel cleanup, and it has to do with the transportation side of it. All the other divisions had put their paperwork in, and it has to be in before 1 March, and that's why it's being added. MR. OLLIFF: The next two items are simply corrections to your agenda on items that are on your consent agenda. 16-C-10, we need to correct the dollar amount in the title, which should have read three thousand nine hundred and seventy -- I'm sorry. 3,973, 196 rather than the 4,193,196 that's shown. All the information within that executive summary is correct. It was a typo in the title. Page 4 February 26, 2002 Corrections to Item 16-C-16, it's simply a correction to the contract number in the executive summary, and bear with me, the contract number should be #02-RM-'2-21-20-017 rather than the number that's shown in the executive summary. Next item is a deletion of Item 16-1-2 off of your consent agenda. And, finally, Mr. Chairman, it's a continuation off of your summary agenda of 17-B, as in "boy," which was Conditional Use 2001-AR-1420, which was the Seventh Day Adventist Church requesting a constitutional use. That item has been continued at the petitioner's request. Mr. Chairman, that's all the changes that your staff has. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Commissioner Henning, any changes with the consent agenda? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll voting "no" on 16-E-5. COMMISSIONER CARTER: pulled if we're going to take a vote. Just let the record reflect that 16-E-5, it would have to be COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So you'd like to pull 16-E-57 (Overlapping dialogue.) REPORTER: I'm sorry, Mr. Carter. I did not hear your last comment. COMMISSIONER CARTER: The comment I made is I asked counsel if that would be proper procedure if we're going to vote on an item, it has to be pulled from the agenda -- consent agenda and put on a regular agenda. MR. WEIGEL: And the answer is, "That is correct." CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So at this point in time, we're going to pull it; right? MR. WEIGEL: That's right. Page 5 February 26, 2002 MR. OLLIFF: We'll move 16-E-5 to Item 10-I on your agenda. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Anything else, Mr. Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would like to pull 16-C-10 just for a brief discussion. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 16-C- 10. MR. OLLIFF: That would become 10-J on your agenda. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Anything else, Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nothing, thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Carter. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I have no pulls. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And also with myself. MR. WEIGEL: Chairman Coletta? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Weigel. MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. Just to bring to the record early that under county attorney Item 12-A on the regular agenda is the item addressed as the closed attorney/client session. And that will be heard at two o'clock or at the conclusion of the regular meeting, whichever occurs first. This is in regard to the Thomas Wajerski (phonetic) versus Collier County lawsuit. And I'll mention now and we'll mention later that the persons attending this meeting, closed session meeting, with the Board of County Commissioners will be county manager, Tom Olliff; myself, David Weigel, attorney; assistant county attorney Mike Pettit; and outside counsel on the case, David Bryant. So I just make that announcement for the record, and one other brief mention I'll make is under consent agenda, Board of County Page 6 February 26, 2002 Commissioners is an approval item in regard to attending a function at the Friends of the Library with the opening of the new library. And if other commissioners wish to attend, also, and have approval, that might be included in part of the motion today, and Mr. Monulege (phonetic), chief assistant county attorney, is here in case there is any discussion about the item. It is proper to go forward for the board to approve as a public function. We think that that, in fact, is absolutely the correct way to go on this. But if there's any discussion, we're here to respond to that, and in regard to the ordinances that we have in place. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, I would just advise the board I plan to attend that function, whatever is due process, legal procedure, put my name on it. MR. WEIGEL: What I'd state then is that the board in approving that consent agenda item or those consent agenda items recognize that that approval is good for any and all commissioners that would go and that the board is approving the payment toward that function in the public interest and responsibility of the commissioners -- for all commissioners that who should attend, in fact, in essence, have the approval of the board today for that payment to be made by the county. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Weigel. Do I hear a motion to approve the-- COMMISSIONER CARTER: Before you do that, Mr. Chairman, I think we need to ask if there is any public comment on the consent or summary agenda CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Correct. Is there any public comment on the consent agenda, summary agenda, or public comments in general? COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'll move for approval if there's no .... Page 7 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I haven't got an answer yet. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I didn't see anybody jump out of their seats. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there any speakers -- let me put it that way. MS. FILSON: No, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. And we have a move for approval by Commissioner Carter. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sorry, Commissioner Henning -- your comments, please. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. The item -- the function is the Friends of the Library? COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have that on my calendar, so I'm going to go to that function. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm planning on going. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So we have a motion; we have a second. Is there any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor indicate by saying COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. Page 8 AGENDA CHANGES BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING February 26, 2002 ADD ITEM 9C: Discussion by the Board to reconvene at 6:00 p.m., March 4, 2002, the Rural Fringe Final Hearing to allow attendance of the public that are not able to attend meeting during the day. (Commissioner Henning.) ADD ITEM 10(G): A Resolution opposing legislation to rescind the eminent domain authority of Collier County or to otherwise restrict or limit Collier County jurisdiction over local water and wastewater utilities. (Staff request.) MOVE ITEM 16(B)5 TO 10(H): Authorization for staff to amend the current agreement with McDonald Transit Associates, Inc., to implement operational and management modifications to the Collier Area Transit (CAT) system in the amount of $234,307. (Commissioner Coyle request.) ADD ITEM 16(B)10: Approval to enter into an Agreement with the Florida Department of Community Affairs for the reimbursement of emergency protective measure expenditures. (Staff request.) CORRECTION TO ITEM 16(C)10: Correction to dollar amount in the title should have been "$3,973,196" (rather than $4,193,196.) Executive Summary information is correct. (Staff request.) CORRECTION TO ITEM 16(C)16: Correction to contract number in the Executive Summary, which should have been Contract # #02-RM-'2-09-21- 20-017 (rather than #02-RM-'2-09-21-20-016). (Staff request.) DELETE ITEM 16(I)2: Commissioner request for approval for payment to attend function service a valid public purpose. (Commissioner Fiala request.) CONTINUE ITEM 17(B) TO MARCH 26, 2002 BCC MEETING: CU-2001-AR-1420, William L. Hoover, AICP, Hoover Planning and Development, Incorporated, representing Pastor Colin Rampton, of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, requesting conditional uses "7" and "11" of the "A-MHO" Rural Agricultural Zoning District/Mobile Home Zoning Overlay, for a church and child care on property located at the northwest corner of Lilac Lane and Immokalee Road in Section 23, Township 47 South, Range 27 East. (Petitioner request.) February 26, 2002 Item #2B-F MINUTES OF WORKSHOP MEETING OF JANUARY 29, 2002; SPECIAL MEETING OF JANUARY 29, 2002; SHERIFF WORKSHOP MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5; SPECIAL DISTRICT 1 TOWN HALL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2002; AND SPECIAL LDC MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 2002 - APPROVED AS PRESENTED COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, I'd move for approval of the January 29th workshop; January 29, Arnold and Blair contract approval; February 5, sheriff workshop; February 5, District 1 town hall meeting; February 6, special LDC meeting. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second that also. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Carter, a second by Commissioner Fiala. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ayes have it 5 to 0. Item #3A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY- ADOPTED Page 9 February 26, 2002 Now we're to our proclamations. And, Mr. Carter, I believe you're up first. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes, sir. It's my privilege this morning to do the proclamation for the Friends of the Library. And at this time I'd like to invite Mr. Jay Wolffe, President, Friends of the Library, to step forward, and also, Mr. John Jones, our library director, to step up here. There's never enough opportunities to recognize the fine work of both of these organizations. If you come right up here, right in front of the chairman, turn around and face TV land, we want them all to see two very nice smiling faces this morning. "Whereas, the County Collier Public Library was established by the Friends of the Library in 1957; and, Whereas, the group incorporated as a nonprofit organization in 1961 with the assistance of the Lee family who purchased the square block of land on Central Avenue in downtown Naples and deeded the site to the Friends of the Library as a site for library structure; and, Whereas, in 1996 the first free public library in the county opened it's doors constructed with funds raised entirely by the Friends of the Library; and, Whereas, presently there are eight libraries within the system with the ninth, the new headquarters division library in North Naples, scheduled to open this week; and, Whereas, over the past 45 years the support received from the Friends of the Library has been paramount in providing funding for equipment, furniture, staff training, and special programs; and, Whereas, during the last seven years the Friends of the Library have contributed nearly $750,000 for books, children and adult programs, the library's adult literacy classes, children story times, Page 10 February 26, 2002 educational and enrichment programs, technology upgrades, audit and visual aid equipment, and much more. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, recognize the Friends of the Library for their dedication and support for the county's library system. Done and ordered this 26th day of February 2002, Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, James M. Coletta, Chairman." Mr. Chairman, I move for approval. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Let's congratulate this great group. (Audience applause.) COMMISSIONER CARTER: And here's just a small token of our appreciation. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before you leave they are going to want to take a picture. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We will never forget it; honest, we won't. Wait, don't go. Come back, please. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Get one more shot if you can. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Turn around and face the camera. COMMISSIONER CARTER: We're going to blow this up and Page 11 February 26, 2002 put it over your couch. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Wolffe would like to say something. MR. WOLFFE: I would like to say as the president of the Friends our function is, of course, to help the library, and it's very easy in this county with the support and help of the commissioners. I think that we have a library system in this county that's the equal of or superior to probably any other community of equal size anywhere in the country. The Friends has over the years given over three-quarters of a million dollars. This year we will budget in addition to our grants and donations $90,000 in regular income that we contribute to the library. This week our new headquarters branch opened. Yesterday was the first day that the public could use it. Over 1500 people were in that library yesterday. Over 7,000 items were checked out. It seems clear that we're doing something that the public approves of, and we greatly thank the commissioners for their support. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. (Audience applause.) Item #3B PROCLAMATION ACKNOWLEDGING THE WORK OF THE NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY- ADOPTED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Karen, would you like to come up here? Thank you. "Whereas, multiple sclerosis is one of the most common Page 12 February 26, 2002 diseases of the central nervous system affecting over 14,000 people in Florida; 4,000 people in South Florida; and over 200 people in Collier County alone; and, Whereas, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society with its 1500 staff and 800,000 volunteers nationally has, since 1946, served as the primary source for research funding, information, and services to people with MS and their loved ones; and, Whereas, the South Florida chapter of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society provides a wide variety of programs and services to people with MS and their families in Collier County; and, Whereas, these free services include support groups, T'ai chi classes, women's retreat, information and referral, advocacy, lending library, peer counseling, and education; and, Whereas, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society has had an active chamber in Collier County since 1980 and has provided support group services in Collier County since 1993; and, Whereas, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society has held an annual MS walk in Collier County since 1994 for the purpose of raising public awareness of multiple sclerosis and to raise critical funds for local programs. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners with Collier County, Florida, that the work of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, South Florida chapter, be acknowledged for its continuing efforts to improve the lives of Collier County residents and their loved ones who are coping with multiple sclerosis. We encourage all residents of Collier County to take part in the National Annual Naples/Collier MS Walk on Sunday, March 17, 2002." Done and ordered this 26th day of February 2002. I hope everybody will be there, and I move to approve COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second. Page 13 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion and a second; all those in favor. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ayes have it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just want to tell you how proud we are that we're giving you this proclamation today. I have some close friends -- as I was telling Karen-- myself who have MS, and I'm so glad that they have a place to turn and caring people who offer them assistance. And I hope everyone out there in our audience will show up this day and support the MS walk. Thank you so much. (Audience applause.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please face the camera there. Thank you. Use the podium. MS. DRESBACH: Thank you, members of the county commission, ladies and gentlemen. I applaud and I'm grateful to Commissioner Fiala and to Chairman Jim Coletta and the entire commission for introducing this proclamation and for citing the important work of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. As president of the South Florida chapter, I humbly accept this proclamation on behalf of 350,000 individuals with MS across this country with MS. You have truly paid honor to them today. Multiple sclerosis is a prime-of-life disease diagnosed during the young adult years of 20 to 40. People have no idea how they'll be affected. It's so unpredictable. Imagine at that age wondering will I become paralyzed, blind, or have trouble walking. Will I be able to raise my family or continue my career? The National Multiple Page 14 February 26, 2002 Sclerosis Society has provided hope and help for people with MS, hope through our extensive and promising national and international research programs and help through local client programs such as the one described here in Collier County, which make daily life better for people with MS and their families. National MS Society is deeply committed to research. In fact, the society invests more money into MS research than any national volunteer health organization in the entire world. Last year alone over $30 million was invested to support more than 300 MS researchers working in the U.S. And abroad. South Florida contributed over a half-a-million dollars. This investment has made possible significant advancements toward finding treatments and approving diagnosis, rehabilitation, and symptomatic therapy for people with all forms of MS, as well as bringing us closer to a cure. Thanks to this investment in research, there are now four MS drug therapies available. Yet there are tough issues that individuals with MS and their families face on a daily basis, for it is true that it is a disease that affects the entire family, not just the individual with MS. We believe it is about empowerment, helping those in need through education and a support network. It's about education and having access to sound information available through our library, online programs, and teleconferences, and it's about making educated decisions. It's about people like Dr. Sparks Lunney who inspires our MS support group at Naples Community Hospital or Krista Fitzsimmons who joined me at the podium, a devoted National MS Society staff member who gives selflessly of her time to Collier County. And, incidentally, both her mother and grandmother have multiple sclerosis. It's about helping those in need like Joanne of Collier County who cannot afford a wheelchair was forced to be homebound. The Society provided one, and she now has access to the outside world, or Page 15 February 26, 2002 John whose companion dog died and did not know where to mm for replacement. It's about providing physical therapy and aquatic therapy at the Wellness Center for all to benefit regardless of financial means. And it's about sending Christine, age seven, to a kids' coping retreat with children throughout the state of Florida. You see, Christine is just like a lot of other kids, but she has to learn to adjust to living with a parent with MS and learn once again what it means just to be a kid, and there's so much more. I applaud the County Commission of Collier County for revealing your heart. The message you reiterate time and time again, you care. You care about Collier County. You care about the community. You care about your residents. You care about the 240,000 people who reside here including those less fortunate. And you have shown today that you are dedicated to those whose daily lives are challenged by a devastating disease, multiple sclerosis. I thank you. I want to invite all of you, as Commissioner Fiala said, to join Commissioners Jim Coletta, Commissioner Fiala as our honorary co - chairs of our MS walk in Collier County on Sunday, March 17th at Lowdermilk Park. Let us walk together for the cause and work together for a cure. Thank you to all of you and God bless. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. (Audience applause.) Item #3C PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING PETER BOLTON FOR HIS OUTSTANDING SAFETY RECORD AND PILOT SKILLS & RECOGNITION FOR RECEIVING THE HELICOPTER ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONAL PILOT SAFETY AWARD- Page 16 February 26, 2002 ADOPTED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would Peter Bolton please come forward and be recognized for his extraordinary service to Collier County. Good morning, Peter. "Whereas, Peter G. Bolton has faithfully executed as medic flight helicopter pilot for Collier County since 1988; and, Whereas, Mr. Bolton, during this period flew hundreds of missions during both daytime and nighttime in all types of weather in support of Collier County Emergency Medical Service and other county agencies; and, Whereas, Mr. Bolton completed over 5,000 accident-free hours with no flight violations for the past 14 years; and, Whereas, the Helicopter Association International says that he has met the very stringent standards as set forth by the association and the Federal Aviation Administration, and Mr. Bolton has been awarded the pilot safety award. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that Peter G. Bolton be recognized for his outstanding safety record and pilot skills and applauded for receiving the Helicopter Association International Pilot safety award. Done and ordered this 26th day of February 2002, James Coletta, Chairman." COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion approved. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. Page 17 February 26, 2002 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Five to 0. (Audience applause.) Item #3D PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING DALE HUGULEY AS VOLUNTEER OF THE YEAR FOR COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT - ADOPTED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, you're next. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner -- Chairman Coletta, I'm going to step down to the podium to read this. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please do. COMMISSIONER HENNING: This next award is to honor -- recognize Dale Huguley. Is Dale here? Why don't you step up in front of the chairman over there. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, distinguished county manager, Tom Olliff, I have the honor and the privilege to read this proclamation today and also hand out a plaque to Dale Huguley. Dale, let me read the proclamation. "Whereas, Dave Huguley has been a valued member of the emergency management team and has volunteered many years; and, Whereas, Mr. Huguley has developed several innovative software programs to benefit the National Amateur Radio Community; and, Whereas, Mr. Huguley has presented several seminars in amateur radio communications at the Annual Governor's Hurricane Conference at his own expense; and, Whereas, Mr. Huguley has donated hundreds of hours over the Page 18 February 26, 2002 past decade to ensure that the amateur radio systems in emergency management are operating flawlessly; and, Whereas, from May 2001 to September 2001, Dale Huguley provided outstanding communication and web site administration for the Emergency Management Department; and, Whereas, Mr. Huguley has recently been named "volunteer of the year" by the Florida Emergency Preparedness Association for his outstanding support to the statewide emergency preparedness community. Now, therefore, by the Board of Commissioners of Collier county, Florida, that Dale Huguley has been recognized as volunteer of the year for Collier County Emergency Management for his outstanding support in disaster preparedness program Done on this day, the 26th day of February 2002, and signed by our chairman. Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we approve this proclamation today COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I second that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion and a second. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ayes have it. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, one other thing I want to -- why I'm at the mike, and I will come up there and give it to Mr. Huguley for his -- we have a plaque here for him, Volunteer of the Year Award presented to Dale and his numbers -- communication numbers, I guess you would call it isKG5QD for his tireless and Page 19 February 26, 2002 unselfish efforts in providing outstanding radio communication and Intemet technology support for Collier County government and its citizen -- for citizens and visitors. And this is a beautiful plaque, and I just want to thank you for your service, and people must recognize what service it is. In case of an emergency here in Collier County, two-way communications is vital communication, not only just in Collier County but throughout the nation and the world. People in case of hurricane want to know what's happening in Naples to try to contact their loved ones. And in some cases in hurricanes this is the only communication that communities do have, so I want to thank you, and I applaud you for your efforts. (Audience applause.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you like to say a couple of words? MR. HUGULEY: Yes. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank all the volunteers in the Collier County areas and the Collier County Emergency Radio Association that have helped me and put in many, many, many hours to keep our emergency communications top notch and ready in case of an emergency. Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Item #3E PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING SATURDAY, MARCH 2, 2002 AS AVIATION DAY- ADOPTED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to call down Mr. Peter Manion, and he's chairman of the Page 20 February 26, 2002 Naples Municipal Airport Authority, and Mr. Ted Soliday, the executive director. And Scott Cameron, do you want to join them? Scott Cameron is, I think, still president of Friends of Naples Airport. I would like to read a proclamation. All of you come down here, if you don't mind. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Need to get right over there in the center, Ted. You're not bashful; I know that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: "Whereas, the Naples Municipal Airport has served the community well since World War II and continues to be an integral part of the infracture, economic fabric, and quality of life in our community; and, Whereas, Aviation Day was started by the Civil Air Patrol to educate the public as to all aspects of general aviation; and, Whereas, the tradition has continued with the support of the Civil Air Patrol, the Experimental Aircraft Association, the Naples Pilot Association, the Naples Airport Authority, and the Friends of the Naples Municipal Airport; and, Whereas, Aviation Day provides access to information about the field; and, Whereas, Aviation Day will host vintage military aircraft and invite the participation of the men and women who were pilots, ground crew, and support staff in the armed services. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that March the 2nd, 2002, be designated as Aviation Day in Collier County and urge all citizens to celebrate by attending the festivities to be held on the field at Naples Municipal Airport from 10 a.m. To 4 p.m. Done and ordered this 26th day of February 2002, Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Jim Coletta, Chairman." Mr. Chairman, I would also like to express my personal Page 21 February 26, 2002 appreciation for the fine job that the airport association has done -- the authority has done and the executive director, Mr. Ted Soliday, with reference to being responsive to citizens' concerns about noise control and their very courageous and tenacious defense of the Stage II jet ban. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I also would like to add the aesthetics of the airport. It is truly a nice presence on Airport Road. COMMISSIONER COYLE: COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's going to get better; right? Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion and a second. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. (Audience applause.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Before you go, one more. We've got to save something for history here in case a hundred years from now they wonder what we were doing today. I have one more award -- forgive me. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Manion wants to say something. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, sir. MR. MANION: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. We have Scott here who's going to do the paid political advertisement for Aviation Day, but we really have a double celebration on Saturday because we are going to be completing the most significant project that the airport authority has ever undertaken. Page 22 February 26, 2002 And we would like to -- Commissioner Henning has indicated the aesthetics of our facility. We are extremely proud that we have significantly changed the gateway to our community. We've added -- we have a new pond, a gazebo, bike and walking paths around our facility, but we've also improved the safety of the airport, the road network, and just a tremendous amount of facilities - - things that were going on all at the same time. That whole project was done on time, and if we can just complete our or maybe lose our punch list, we will have a totally completed project. But it couldn't have been done without the support of your organization. It was a multi-faceted government agency. We had the federal government, the state, the city, and Tom Olliff and his organization working to assist us in this outstanding effort. And I think that we can all justifiably be proud of what we accomplished in that facility. We're getting tremendous feedback from the citizens of our community, and it's with the help and support of your organization, and for that we thank you very much. And we will now have our paid political advertisement. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, you got a --. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd just love to comment. I think it's -- I so agree that's such a beautiful place. I want to tell you when I first started working at the airport maybe 72 years ago, or at least feels that way, I worked MR. CAMERON: COMMISSIONER MR. CAMERON: in a hut on the airport property. It's come a long way. FIALA: It has come a long way. As have you. Airplanes tend to be fast; so, too, will be my comments. This Saturday is a great celebration of Naples Municipal Airport, but it's also a celebration of veterans this year. And in these rather troubled or difficult and patriotic times here in our nation, we are going to be celebrating with a special facility at Aviation Day. Page 23 February 26, 2002 We have a B-17 and B-24 Liberator coming to the event. First National Bank of Naples has underwritten the touring for children to be able to tour those two World War II bombers and actually get up -- they can crawl all through the aircraft, all underwritten, so there will be no fee to children. We also have a special event from the Civil Air Patrol. They will be collecting flags that may be worn or tattered or ready to repair and will subsequently at a later date hold a proper and formal burning of those flags in the appropriate manner. But I urge all citizens to come out and see what a magnificent facility Naples Municipal Airport is. I thank you as much for your support for this important communitY asset, and we'll look forward to seeing you on Saturday. We also have a A-51 Mustang, a 1929 Barnstormer, B-25 standard, one of only four in the world that are flying. It's going to be an exciting, exciting day. Some great stuff going on. COMMISSIONER FIALA: This Saturday. MR. CAMERON: This Saturday, March 2nd, 10 a.m. To 4 p.m. We've got over 45,000 veterans in Collier County, so we expect one heck of a turnout, and we'd love to see you there to join it. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Scott. MR. CAMERON: The event is free; that's free to the public, and I think that's very, very important, so thank you. Item #3F PRESENTATION TO COMMISSIONER JAMES CARTER FOR OUTSTANDING LEADERSHIP IN COLLIER COUNTY - ADOPTED Page 24 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Now, it's indeed an honor on my part to recognize Dr. Carter who was our previous chair for the time that he spent. Dr. Carter was elected to the Board of Collier Commissioners in November of'98 as commissioner for District 2 and began serving as vice-chair on January 11, 2000. On October 10th, Commissioner Carter was elected chairman of the Board of Collier County Commissioners and re-elected to chair position on January 9th of 2001. He has also served as the chairman of the Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Tourist Development Council during 2000 and 2001. In January 2002, he was appointed to represent Collier County on the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations. Commissioner Carter is currently the chairman of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, and he also serves on the Southwest Regional Planning Council Transportation and Water Issues subcommittee. And he was also previously on the board of the directors of the Florida Association of Counties. And I just want to personally thank Mr. Carter for the time that he spent as chair. Being a commissioner is definitely a full-time job, as I'm sure all the commissioners can attest to. Taking on the position of chair -- and I never realized until I got blessed, and thank you very much for the added responsibilities -- it adds a new dimension. In fact, it's almost like taking on a second job on top of your first one. And so I can truly appreciate what you have done for us, and I want to thank you. And this just sums it up in grateful appreciation for outstanding leadership. (Audience applause.) COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why don't we group right around Dr. Carter here for one picture. Page 25 February 26, 2002 How are we doing? We can't move back any farther. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you, thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you like to say a couple words, Dr. Carter? COMMISSIONER CARTER: First time in my life I think I'm almost speechless. I am truly grateful for this award, the opportunity to have served in the many capacities as a commissioner, to be a commissioner in Collier County through what I consider to be a rather difficult period. But today we're coming out on the other side of that. And we have an outstanding management team. We have a great board, and there's nothing in my mind that says only one thing for the future. It's getting better, and the best is yet to come. So thank you all for your confidence. Thank you all for your hard work, and I truly believe that you'll be able to say very soon, if you don't already believe it, "I'm proud to live in Collier County, and I'm proud of my government" because we are doing the right things. So thank you all and God bless. (AudienCe applause.) Item #4 EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS - PRESENTED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And now it's time for the service awards and, Commissioner Henning, you'll be handing them out. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, thank you. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, as the board makes its way to the floor, I'll call up your first three attendees this morning, and all three are here receiving certificates and awards for being Collier County employees and in reaching their five-year milestones. Page 26 February 26, 2002 The first is Jason Toreky with code enforcement. Second is Joe Thomas with your water treatment department, and the third is your parks and recreation director, Marla Ramsey. COMMISSIONER FIALA: This guy, you ought to see him at work. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, your next attendee is a ten-year attendee, Steve Preston with your storm water department. Your last award, Mr. Chairman, we have the honor of presenting to Walter McMullen with your Ochopee Fire Department. Mr. Chairman, that's all of your awards this morning. Item #6A1-2 PUBLIC PETITIONS AND COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. The next item will require all people that wish to participate to be sworn in. Will you stand, please. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Comments? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, forgive me. We're jumping Public petitions and comments on general topics. ahead of ourselves. Do we. MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. You have two speakers. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. MS. FILSON: First one will be Mr. Ken Thompson, and he'll be followed by Colin Kelly. MR. THOMPSON: I'm Ken Thompson and, Mr. Carter, there's nobody can hold that meeting like you can. I keep telling you that. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you, sir. MR. THOMPSON: You're okay, too, but that airport is built on the dump. No offense to you. That's where we used to put all the garbage right there. I put a load of garbage in that dump, but getting Page 27 February 26, 2002 back to the motorcycles. I've asked you; I've played (inaudible), and it just gets worse. Not they are taking the bafflers out of the mufflers. They come right in front of the house. They're drunk when they go over there, and they're even drunker when they leave. I've asked you. I've called Don Hunter. I've talked to him. He give me a letter stating that Mr. - - Captain (inaudible) -- Captain Davis talked to Lieutenant Anderson, and they would beef up security -- the police department. You don't even see a cop so help me God. I hired me a man to photograph that whole Bayshore Drive, and if you want them, I'll be glad to give them to you. And Don Hunter is one of the worst liars that God has ever put on this earth. Matter of fact, I don't even want to use the word "God." It's terrible. He just don't know his job, and it is terrible what he does. His officers come out yesterday. We called. They come off of Bayshore Drive down (inaudible) Avenue over the speed bumps. They bottom out. Nobody listens. But he better listen right now because I've had it. I can't keep going to doctors and living the way I'm living and have to put up with that bar. We hired an investigator one time before. He still owes the State of Florida $192,000 sales tax. And why he put it back in there to aggravate people for, I do not know. You wouldn't give him the sign, and I was told to give him the sign on account of my wife got the beauty parlor. Well, it's not my fault. I went and out there in 1989, and I set it all up. Somebody screwed it up. We hold two state licenses, three county licenses, and all I've ever had it on that thing was 32 inches. And I've got enough permits for that 32 inches to build this building out of paper. And I don't believe I have ever been so damned humiliated in my life, and if Don Hunter don't stop it, he's going to look for a lawsuit because I'm damn sure going to do it. Page 28 February 26, 2002 I don't like suing anybody. I never have, but he don't listen. Scott Anderson, I was told by Jerry Kelly he's trying to be a role model for his deputies out there, show them just what they can do and can't do. Well, Scott Anderson, I'll sue him in a minute. I know when he went on the force at 17 years old, and for him to treat people this way is a rotten, low-down trick. You get them -- you come out there -- the deputies, when you get them, they all talk about how do you like this one, how do you like that. Then they go back and lie like hell to one another. But it is just getting out of hand now, and I can't take it anymore. And I'm just all to pieces. I'm slowly went to the doctor today, but it's worth $180 for me to pay him than it is to come here. I'd rather come here, but I don't like coming here complaining about nobody. But those cones on Bayshore Drive, they're all flattened, knocked down. They need to be removed or put whatever what you're going to put on there. But it is a hell of a neighborhood to live in. I never know a neighborhood could be like -- and then you want to talk about Bin Laden. By God, we're living in the rules of Bin Laden right here, and I'm telling you it's got to stop. I asked you; I'm asking you again in a nice way to please help me because Don Hunter is not going to help anybody but his own self. And I want to know why you giving him so much money, and it's never put in the paper. I'd like to know just how much money -- and everybody else would like to know what he's using the money for. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Thompson, I have to ask you to wrap it up. MR. THOMPSON: Okay. But I'm the first one you ever asked that to every time I come here. But, you know, I appreciate it anyway. I had to go anyway, but -- and if you don't help me and if he don't do something pretty soon, I'm going to sue the hell out of him Page 29 February 26, 2002 because I've had it. And I've got the proper man, and it's not in this town either. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Mr. Kelly. MS. FILSON: I've just been advised that Mr. Kelly may be at the (inaudible) meeting. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then that's it for the--. COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, here he is. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. MR. KELLY: My name is Colin Kelly with the Parker Beach Restoration. I just wanted to, No. 1, reinvite this commission down to see Collier County's most beautiful beach and the way the beach looked 15, 20 years ago. Take your shoes off; walk in the sand; enjoy it; it's beautiful. And I'd like to also inform you briefly in my five minutes that if these two pieces -- there's two pieces there I'd like to hand out to you, No. 1, showing that a little over two months -- actually, we counted for three months but took three weeks to get the system up. We put a little under 15,000 cubic yards to make the numbers easy for you. That 15,000 cubic yards is the same amount of sand and dry sand on the dry beach that essentially put at Park Shore for 10,000 cubic yards at the cost of $200,000 approximately. We can do it for $85,000. Now, the other pieces shows you the funding for this that the state has gone ahead and said -- that the legislators said that we are an economy in shambles as the president said, and we are a country at war, and the state of the union is as strong as its ever been, but the business is going to be done somewhat a little differently. The State of Florida will fund the sand web system up to 75 percent of its cost, and I would like to implore this -- first of all, I'd like to beseech this commission to go look at the beach, look what's happened -- we've Page 30 February 26, 2002 had a relatively mild winter. But our first little stormfront last week - - I think you'll see a beautiful beach that's undeniably the finest in Collier County. I'd like to encourage you to be open-minded to doing another mile of Collier County being that we have funding from the state. And this is the proviso language that's being voted on right now, and we feel confident enough to show you ahead of time because we are confident that it will be passed, and the funding will be there for Collier County. And I implore you to look at another mile of beach because it won't happen till November of next year. And if you direct your staff at this time to apply for the funding, it will be there. And I appreciate your efforts on behalf of Collier County, and I would like to see -- and I think you would too -- Collier County to have the native, pristine beaches that made it a world-class designation and have beautiful turtle nesting for our turtles. Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: yotl. I don't want to interrupt you. Are MR. KELLY: That was it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: office. MR. KELLY: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I really wanted to do some homework, as you know, went down there not once, not twice, but three different times on three different occasions and started interviewing people up and down the beach who were on there. MR. KELLY: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I had thought with all of those sand webs and everything ' it would be an obstruction, and instead some of them find that they like to sun in between them. Other people feel that the walkway, it's easy to walk. I was amazed at how much sand You got the whole nine yards. Okay. Since you came down to my Page 31 February 26, 2002 they are bringing up and how quickly. I was very impressed. So then I started going -- knocking on doors with people in the area. And no one had a problem with it. I'm really pleased. MR. KELLY: Commissioner, a few times in our life we get to participate in a right thing, and I think that once you look at the beach and see how beautiful it is -- and certainly it's obtrusive somewhat, no more than other methods and less than most. At the same time, look at the beach. Go down and take your shoes off. Walk on the beach. I invite all of Collier County go down and look at the way that Naples was made -- made famous, a world- class destination. Maybe not as pretty and white as some of the Panhandle beaches, but it's beautiful and white and fine sand, and that's the way Naples should look. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And it's not sand that we had to pay to bring on there that might be washed away from a storm. If it's washed away, it's just the same sand we're going to bring back up again. I would--. MR. KELLY: Commissioner, let me make a point, if you will allow me just one thing. If all beach sand erodes, which it does, and you pay -- this commission and the State of Florida paid well over $200,000 a year to post (inaudible) for our pumping and dredging efforts, and I think the number that comes up is we have a -- we truck in at least 50,000 cubic yards a year just to stabilize the beach. Now, do the mathematics. If we put 15,000 thousand yards in three months on the beach, if we had a mile and a half, we would put 50,000 cubic yards on the beach at two and a half-- 2.3 times more beach you could do with the same dollar. So you could have 2.3 times more beach than what you're paying right now to truck in sand. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman-- and maybe Mr. Mudd wants to comment on this, but my question -- have you ever met with Pelican Bay MSTBU, our own taxing authority? We have Page 32 February 26, 2002 looked into restoration of that beach, has been a pretty thoroughly discussed subject, and also I think they would be very interested in listening to you and, also, I just need to know more about the core and permitting processes and how we might expand upon this success that I'm hearing this morning. MR. MUDD: Jim Mudd, deputy county manager for the record. I think it's a great time for Mr. Kelly to bring this particular item up in front of the CAC, the Coastal Advisory Committee, which is your arm to do the technical aspects and recommend the beach projects for the next year, and they are working on a ten-year program. It would be -- that's a good thing for them to do, and they are doing that, and I think you have a committee that's working on that process right now. Mr. Kelly has talked with Ron Havell (phonetic), our beach project manager for renovation in that process. And I will also say, as a matter of fact, that the beach the Naples Beach and the sand web system is under test right now. The webs come out before turtle season, I think, Mr. Kelly. Is that correct? MR. KELLY: That's correct, Mr. Mudd. It comes out last of April. MR. MUDD: And there's a series of a year-and-a-half monitoring program that they have to do in that process in order to finish that test. This particular test does show promise, and as I said before that it could be become a viable piece of how we restore the beach in Collier County from one end to the other of our 30-plus miles of beach, sir. MR. KELLY: Commissioners, I would like to just say in response to that that your legislators in Tallahassee says that the testing is over with. They are going to fund this. Now, the question that we have is to play the 20 questions is, first of all, the naysayers said, "Does it work?" Well, it works. Now Page 33 February 26, 2002 they say, "What will happen to the sand when you take it out?" Well, I ask you again to go down and take off your shoes and walk in that sand and tell me that Mother Nature that layered that sand one wave by one wave and built it compact and solid -- does a rational think (sic) will tell you if you truck in sand and fluff it up and aerate it, or you pump and dredge it, that that's going to last longer. Rational people aren't going to come to that conclusion, and neither did your legislators in Tallahassee. The funding is there if you want it. They are making it available to you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's 75 percent you say, 75 percent. MR. KELLY: Seventy-five percent funding. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Kelly. And that's it for public speakers? MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're moving on to the advertised public hearings, 8-A, PUD-2000-22. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- known as the Goodlette Comers will require that all people -- Item #3G PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING BRIAN SHIMER FOR HIS OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT AND CLAIMING MARCH 1, 2002 AS BRIAN SHIMER DAY- ADOPTED MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to ask you to indulge me for one second. There was one item that I wanted to add to your general, which I failed to add to your agenda, and it will require, I Page 34 February 26, 2002 believe, a motion for you to reconsider the agenda and add a single item on there, but it was a last-minute item. A proclamation to recognize Brian Shimer and to declare Brian Shimer Day and, frankly, I would like for the Commission to appoint one of the members who could attend Friday's ceremony and present Mr. Shimer with a copy of our proclamation. And if the board is so willing, I would also like to suggest that the board present to Mr. Shimer a flag that has flown over the county courthouse in recognition of his achievements and, also, some recognition that we would -- unless there is some board opposition -- name the closest thing that we can come up to a bobsled course here in Collier County, which would be the next water slide that we put at one of our county parks, the Brian Shimer Water Park Slide. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hopefully it's at East Naples Park. COMMISSIONER CARTER: You'll get a fight on that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: To add to that, by the way, I talked with Bonnie McKenzie, and the city is also doing this sort of thing, so I think it's important that the county get involved in recognizing Brian, and the city will be presenting him the keys to the city on Friday of this week. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we add this item onto the agenda -- COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we're going to need a volunteer Page 35 February 26, 2002 for Friday. I don't know what my schedule is yet, but we'll find someone. We'll take care of this after the meeting; find out what the schedule is. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I don't have any plans, so I'd be happy to go if you'd like. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'd like to take just a minute to read this proclamation. "Brian Shimer, life-long Naples resident, competed in the Fifth (sic) Olympic Winter Games, steered a four-man bobsled team in an impressive final run to earn the Olympic Bronze Metal and, Whereas, Brian in 1993 became the first American driver to win a World Cup title in the four-man bobsled and the three world- championship metals in a sport normally dominated by European competitors" -- and I might add probably from a cooler climate -- ''and, Whereas, Brian has brought notoriety to the United States, Collier County, and Naples, Florida, as an Olympic bobsledder as well as an outstanding athlete and model of determination; and, Whereas, Brian has set a wonderful example for our youth that with hard work and fortitude they too can become champions. Therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Friday, March 1st be proclaimed throughout Collier County as Brian Shimer day. Done and order this 26th day of February 2002, James Coletta, Chairman." COMMISSIONER CARTER: Motion for approval. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I suggest a short addition which I think is significant? It has been 47 years since the United States won a medal in the bobsled competition. I think recognition of that in this proclamation would be very helpful. MR. OLLIFF: We will include a paragraph that-- Page 36 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think so too. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I would move for that including Commissioner Coyle's suggested statement. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's unanimous. Brian, wherever you are, thank you very much. COMMISSIONER COYLE: He's on his way home. Item #8A ORDINANCE 2002-08 REGARDING PUD-2000-22, WILLIAM L. HOOVER, AICP, OF HOOVER PLANNING AND WAYNE ARNOLD OF Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES, P.A., REPRESENTING PINE RIDGE REDEVELOPMENT GROUP, REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "RSF-4" RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND "C-I" PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS GOODLETTE CORNERS PUD FOR THE PURPOSE OF PERMITTING COMMERCIAL, OFFICE AND SERVICE LAND USES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PINE RIDGE ROAD AND GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA- ADOPTED WITH CHANGES Page 37 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Can we move on now, Mr. Olliff?. MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir, Item 8 -A. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we're going to be required to swear in anyone that cares to participate with the stenographer, so do so, please. (The oath was administered.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any disclosures on the part of the board, Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just an add-on. What I had the last time I heard this was an e-mail with changes to the uses from Wayne Arnold; that's it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have met with many of the residents in the area and representatives of the residents. I have also met with the petitioner and the petitioner's agents concerning this issue and also in a joint meeting of the neighbors and the commissioner's agents. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have -- other than what I stated before -- and I've spoken with Rich -- I can't remember if it was this time or last time. MR. YOVANOVICH: Last time. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Last time maybe, but I did get the e-mail as well. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I met with Rich briefly yesterday on this and received the e-mail on the subject changes. And all my other disclosures stand from the past board meeting. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the same as Carter for myself. I might hope that we'll be able to cut right to the chase on this, since we have already reviewed this in great detail, and pick up to possibly Page 38 February 26, 2002 where we left off and, of course, don't hesitate if you have any questions or you need to be refreshed on any items of the agenda. MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows, and that was going to be my suggestion, that since this was continued from February 12th, that the petitioner present the results of his meetings with the residents and with the commissioner. MR. YOVANOVICH: For the record, Rich Yovanovich. We've handed out to you -- and I believe you received from Wayne -- copies of the agreements we've reached with the affected property owners. We did have a joint meeting, as Mr. Coyle pointed out, to hash out all the issues. We have -- there are a couple things I want to clarify on the record for Mr. Glancy. We did commit to him -- and I want to put on the record -- that the elevation on the rear of the building will be similar to the elevation on the front of the building without windows. We do agree -- he has a concern. They want to be able to run perpendicular chain-link fences that connect to our solid fence. And we are in agreement with that; however, if we do have perpendicular running fences, it now becomes impossible for us to maintain the plantings on their side of the fence. I think he's in agreement with exchanging the ability to connect to our fence for not having maintenance responsibilities for the landscaping on their side of our wall. We have included -- there's a PUD amendment provision that we've included that I wanted to again state on the record for Mr. Clancy's benefit that that requires the same public notice provisions for the adoption of a PUD, so it goes through the same basic tests when you try to amend a PUD, and that's pretty typical so in case there's a use or we come back with a specific plan for a use, we can come back and discuss in the public forum a PUD amendment. The fence will be eight-foot tall instead of six-feet tall as we Page 39 February 26, 2002 previously represented. It was a request of theirs. We eliminated a whole host of uses. Basically --and we increased the rear setback from 25 feet to 35 feet, and we included everything we went through the last time, so I'm not going to reiterate all of the changes we agreed to on the floor of the last meeting. What we're down to -- there's only one use we would like to keep that we've been requested to withdraw, and that is the ability to have a seafood store similar to a butcher shop -- maybe it could be in conjunction with a butcher shop, or it can be separate from a butcher shop, but we would like to be able to have a seafood store. I think that's the only use we have not reached an agreement on with Mr. Glancy, and we hope that with all the other points we were able to agree on, that we could keep the fish house, and I know Mr. Glancy is probably going to want to address you on that specific item. But other than that, I think the list we have in front of you has been agreed to. Everybody's comfortable with it. It was a very reasonable meeting. I think Mr. Coyle can say that. I think we all quickly resolved all of our issues, and that's the only one that we had said we had to go back and talk to our clients on, and that's the only issue that we would respectfully disagree with them and ask the commission to include that use. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ladies first. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry, Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's all right. Just as a point of clarification with this fence--. MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you guys were going to put up now an eight-foot fence--. MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. Page 40 February 26, 2002 COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you were going to do all of the decorative landscaping and so forth --. MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And did I understand you to say they're going to put up a chain-link fence there? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, perpendicular on their property so they can separate their own properties from one another that would then connect to our wall. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And does that mean, then, that they will take care of the landscaping? What I'm think of is how beautiful it could be, and then if nobody takes care of it, if it's not watered, it would be dead. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, there's a tremendous amount of landscaping on our side of the wall, okay, that most of the landscaping is on our side of the wall and, obviously, we're going to take care of that. There'll be some lower-level plantings in front of their side of the wall, which they will now have to maintain. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just as a point of clarification on that issue. You might not have noticed that what the petitioner has done is they have moved the wall back from the property line of the adjoining residents by 7 1/2 or 8 feet. That extends the yard of the residents to the south. Consequently, it's not going to be landscaped on the south, is it, by you? MR. YOVANOVICH: It'll be lower-level plantings. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Lower-level landscaping. MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But it will be maintained by the (overlapping) on the south end. MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- and it seems to me -- I think Page 41 February 26, 2002 Mr. Glancy -- that neighbors are in agreement with that because they essentially get an extension of their yard. They won't own it --. MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- but they'll at least be able to use. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Let me ask this question, Commissioner Coyle. Why would anybody want to put up a chain- link fence when you already have a beautiful wall and landscaping as I'm understanding this? COMMISSIONER COYLE: To separate the houses, the homes that are in a row. COMMISSIONER CARTER: They want to separate their own yards? COMMISSIONER COYLE: They want to gate -- or have the option to put fences between their. COMMISSIONER CARTER: They want to separate their own property. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. COMMISSIONER CARTER: but it's not a condition of the PUD. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But they want to connect to the wall itself rather than stopping 7 1/2 feet short of the wall. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And putting a chain -link fence 7 1/2 feet from the wall. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, Commissioner Henning, and I'll follow after you. COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: So what you're doing is you're giving the residents more land, basically. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, we're giving them permission to use our land, yes. Page 42 February 26, 2002 COMMISSIONER HENNING: The question on the seafood operation, is this going to be a retail use? MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the coolers are going to be inside? MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Filet tables are going to be inside? MR. YOVANOVICH: Everything will be inside. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: My question was, is what happened to the lake and the view of the lake? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, we have worked through that, and everybody understands that the lake will be filled it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: At worst case and more than likely. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I want to thank you, Commissioner Coyle, for raising the bar another inch. It's one more step forward. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's just an example how the residents and developers can get together and work out their problems, and I'm very happy that you've done that, and I congratulate you both for doing that, Mr. Glancy and neighbors. MR. YOVANOVICH: It was very productive, thank you. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, based on what I'm hearing, Commissioner Coyle -- and the fine work that you did on this -- is always been what I've advocated, that if we get reasonable people to the table, and they talk long enough, it's easy to reach an agreement. And that's where it needs to be when it comes in front of us. I thank you personally for your effort. It certainly beats my spec for what we've been trying to do to community character, and it's just another opportunity to piggyback on that. And, therefore, if you're Page 43 February 26, 2002 not objecting, I will move for approval. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think we have some more public -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We do, but we can go ahead and get the motion and the second and move to the -- and vote on it after we hear from the audience. COMMISSIONER HENNING: residents first, Mr. Chairman. I would like to hear from the CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Would you hold your motion. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yes, absolutely. My motion would not preclude hearing from the public. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Of course not. MS. FILSON: We only have one registered speaker, sir, and that's Mr. Don Glancy. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That in itself is remarkable. You did a good job, Rich, and so did you, Commissioner Coyle. Whichever -- this one over here will work fine for you. MR. GLANCY: I started to say, "Not so fast." I'm Don Glancy. I live on Milano Drive in the area affected by this development. And the scenario you have heard is correct. We have had meetings with residents. We've had meetings with Commissioner Coyle. This past week we met with Commissioner Coyle, Mr. Yovanovich briefly was there and then the developer's representatives. We went over a lengthy list of permitted uses, and from that list of permitted uses, we asked for some removals, some adjustments of things. For the most part, we didn't have any problem with that. I had a problem with the meat and seafood store because I work in a building that is near one of those, and sometimes that dumpster will take the paint off your car. But I understand that there are regulations for that kind of thing, so if there is an odor problem, we can address Page 44 February 26, 2002 that through some other process. I talked to Mr. Yovanovich about the fence itself, the grade, the fact that the wall or fence will be from grade rather than from some swale. He assured me that that was the case. On building -- excuse me -- on the matter of landscaping standards, the developer agreed to instead of putting oak trees -- those rather scraggly oak trees -- to use mahoganies instead. And we wondered if they were going to be 30 feet on center for the mahoganies; is that correct? MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. MR. GLANCY: Okay, make that part of the record. Building heights, we wanted to be assured -- we have the building height at 45 feet. We want to be assured that the building facade at the rear would be as attractive as they promise the front will be and we would be looking at similar elevations, and that we won't be looking at air conditioners, that sort of thing. MR. YOVANOVICH: That's correct. MR. GLANCY: And we're assured of that. On the matter of residential fences -- would be D in the e-mail you received. It reads (as read): "With the written authorization from the adjoining property owner within the Goodlette Comers PUD, Sorrento Gardens residential property owners may extend fencing into the 7 foot offset area." We'd like that opening part of the sentence struck. MR. YOVANOVICH: And that's what I tried to clarify on the record. You have our permission. MR. GLANCY: Okay. And we didn't ask for permission to, nor if I were he, would I grant permission to attach to their wall because that's their property. But to be able to put the fence to it so that my dog doesn't get out would be -- that would satisfy me. Under PUD amendments, that last can of worms, if that reads as I think it reads (as read): "The developer may whenever he finds it Page 45 February 26, 2002 necessary or chooses to do so apply for changes to what we have agreed to." Is that correct? He may do that, and Mr. Yovanovich assured me -- I hope you will assure me that if, in fact, there are any applications for changes to this -- the basics of this PUD, that residents will also be informed because there could be a circumstance where you would see me again. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a whole process for that, sir that will guarantee you that you'll be notified. MR. GLANCY: I thank you. Another question came up regarding the electrical power lines. There is an easement, a utility easement, at the north side of those properties on the south side of the lake. The PUD, the businesses there will require a lot more power to operate. We're wondering where that power will come from. Will they run that from Pine Ridge Road? Will we be putting in new power lines, big power poles? Would there be the possibility that if there's an increase in that service that it could be subsurface? We'd like some information on that also. Storm water, we know there will be. The lake will be gone, and we know there will be storm water, but we also want the assurance that the storm water drainage will be north of the wall and not a swale or ditch in that 7 feet to the south of the wall. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Wouldn't the wall in itself be an impediment for the water to be able to move in your direction? MR. GLANCY: I'm sure it would, but water moves underground as well. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're correct. MR. GLANCY: What I'm concerned about is whether or not they're going to keep the grade level from the wall rather than making a drainage swale south of the wall. I don't want a drainage ditch as part of my backyard. Page 46 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If we could, sir, I'd like to address these questions as they come up rather than wait till the end, and we might miss something. You also raised a couple of them, and possibly the petitioner might like to address it. MR. GLANCY: That's fine. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Don't go away. MR. GLANCY: I'm simply letting you know what our concerns are. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, I know. But let's get the answers as we go into it rather than wait to the end. MR. GLANCY: I have no problem with that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- and maybe miss something. MR. GLANCY: No problem. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If you could step aside and we'll get the answers to that and then come back to the rest of your questions. MR. ARNOLD: Hi. I'm Wayne Arnold with Grady Minor Engineering. In reference to the two questions that Mr. Glancy just raised, we have not designed the specific water management system for the project. It's not our intent to provide a swale or a ditch or anything like that on his side of this wall. We may have to create a depression near the wall to channel water to weep holes or catch basins to get it under if there is drainage coming from their yards onto our property. We need to accommodate that and continue to accommodate it, but I can tell you that probably what will end up happening is we'll have a very slight berm on our property that will have the effect of having a slight slope on their side within our 7 feet. That's probably the best I can tell you, but we intend to collect whatever minimal yard drainage that's coming off of their property onto ours in the present condition. COMMISSIONER CARTER: And then really pipe it down to Page 47 February 26, 2002 Goodlette Road. MR. ARNOLD: Correct. Road, yes. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: with respect --. It's our intent to pipe to Goodlette And there was one other question MR. ARNOLD: With respect to the electric power lines. Currently the homes that are along Pine Ridge Road on our property draw service from the power lines that are on Pine Ridge Road. There is a Florida Power & Light easement on our southern property boundary. It's my understanding that that service is only for the neighbors of Mr. Glancy's and their neighborhood, that that's not our service area. Of course, Florida Power & Light may dictate some of that more than we do, but it's not our intent to add power lines or poles or anything of the sort. I know there are some power lines very close to the lake edge on that property, so I can't assure him that there may not be some modifications to some of those poles but, obviously, that will have to occur within the easement that exists. CHAIRMAN. COLETTA: Sir, you can continue. MR. GLANCY: All right, thank you very much. That answers most of the questions that I have. I would like to say a couple of things however. I hope that what has happened with this is instructional for future planning because our concern, as you remember from the beginning, was a significant change to the way we live, to the appearance of our neighborhood, to the value of our property. We certainly understand the law. I certainly understand the laws of owning property, but I think we must -- you folks in particular must pay close attention to any proposition that comes before you and that you become more inclusive of the concerns of the people in the area Page 48 February 26, 2002 than has been the case heretofore. I would suggest, also, that if anyone watching this, listening to this gets a letter regarding this kind of thing, participate. Get out there. Call your commissioner. Write to all your commissioners. Get together with your neighbors because if you don't, these things sail through. I had no idea what we were getting into when we started doing this. I sort of feel like the fellow trying to put pantyhose on an octopus, but I think we've arrived -- COMMISSIONER CARTER: That, sir, would be a real challenge. MR. GLANCY: Well, as I said, we hope it will go well, but if not, you'll probably see us again. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. And on behalf of my fellow commissioners, I'd like to tell you that we've been raising the bar collectively for sometime now, and what we require the developer to do with public meetings and public notice, these were rules that did not exist six months ago that are in effect now. And unless someone who thinks -- some future commission decides to change it, this will be the rule from now on out. The partaking of what items are permitted and not permitted, that was a new item, and we thank Commissioner Coyle for that and your neighborhood for being involved. Anyone that thinks that this process is totally up to the commissioners and the staff is totally wrong. It belongs to the community, and you're a perfect example of that and your neighborhood. MR. GLANCY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Is there any other public speakers? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question for Mr. Glancy. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, go ahead, Commissioner Page 49 February 26, 2002 Henning. One more Question for you, sir. You're not through yet. COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I understood you right, you said that you don't have a problem with the meat, slash, seafood use. MR. GLANCY: Oh, I do. I do. I don't want it to be there. If, however, it is to be there, I would like to know that there is some recourse if the odor is offensive; there's someone I can call who will do something about it, not someone charged with doing it, but who will. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that is the health department. MR. GLANCY: Okay. I thank you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It is regulated, and we have them throughout all the communities. We have them, you know, Park Shore, Moorings, there are seafood retail uses there. I don't think you're going to find that offensable (sic). MR. GLANCY: I hope not. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, I wish you well. On your last final comments, I think that if you take a look at the past, previous, recent meetings of the Board of Commissioners, we are tweaking these commercial PUDs in great detail. MR. GLANCY: I think that's a step in the right direction. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, and Commissioner Coyle has -- since it is in his future district, he has taken a special interest in it, and that's basically what the Board of Commissioners do; if it's in their district, they want to meet with the residents, inform them through the public process, public-participation process. MR. GLANCY: Well, he has done that, and he has done that effectively. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. So you got great representation, not only from Commissioner Coyle but the rest of the Board of Commissioners. Page 50 February 26, 2002 MR. GLANCY: I think so. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I thank you, sir. MR. GLANCY: Anything else? COMMISSIONER CARTER: No, sir. I just, again, compliment you for what you did. I will tell you as the senior member of this board it is refreshing to look down the line and get people willing to participate in what we've been through because when I came here, you and I, neither one, would have been successful at getting this level of discussion. We would have been shut off at the pass in a heartbeat, and it's now a pleasure to sit here and have this take place. And I thank you all for coming and working toward this. And that's a result of not only your communities -- where we requested this in the past, it is now the law. And, secondly, we have a professional staff that walks hand-in-hand with us to do this, and that wasn't always there in the past, so thank you. MR. GLANCY: Thankyou. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, I'm going to close the public part of the hearing and, Commissioner Carter, would you like to make your motion now, and then we'll get a second? COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'll make a motion inclusive of all the comments made, and for the record, Mr. Yovanovich, I saw you shake your head out there. Do you want to affirm all of those statements that were made? MR. YOVANOVICH: Absolutely, and they were made with the intent that they would be part of the record, and we would revise the PUD document to incorporate all of the changes we've agreed to and, again, still would like the seafood. COMMISSIONER CARTER: And I thank you for that, and I know our legal counsel will follow through. In the past sometimes Page 51 February 26, 2002 we have gotten the agreement here, and later on we find out somewhere it didn't get all documented the way it needed to be with the "T's" crossed and the 'Ts" dotted. But that won't happen now. And with your cooperation and what was stated here on public record, Mr. Chairman, I would include all that in the motion, and we have a second? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner Carter and a second by Commissioner Henning. Is there any other questions, discussions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, I'll call for the motion. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Olliff. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Olliff. MR. OLLIFF: I just need to make sure and clarify whether that motion does or does not include the meat market, seafood retail store, which is not in any of the -- COMMISSIONER CARTER: It does include it, sir. MR. OLLIFF: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And do you agree, Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I affirm. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there any other comments or questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hearing none, I'll call for the motion. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. Page 52 February 26, 2002 COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And with that we're going to take a five-minute break for the stenographer, and then we're going to continue from there. (A break was held.) Item #8B ORDINANCE 2002-09 ESTABLISHING THE FLOW WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (CDD) PURSUANT TO SECTION 190.005, FLORIDA STATUTES - ADOPTED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please take your seats. Almost back. Next item is 8-B, and that is also going to require the participants to be sworn in that will partake, and will you stand at this time. All right. Will the stenographer please swear them in. (The oath was administered.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And now for disclosures, Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I talked to the applicant and applicant's representative. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I talked with the applicant's representative and also with Nancy Payton. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I can say the same for myself. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I spoke with Nancy Payton and with Karen Bishop. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I spoke with Karen Bishop and Nancy Payton. Page 53 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Now, of course, this was an item that was at a previous meeting, and there was a small discrepancy that's been totally resolved, so you may wish to pick up from where we left off. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Was with a motion? COMMISSIONER CARTER: I think we're ready for a motion. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think so too. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion approved. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Second. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion to approve by Commissioner Henning, seconded by Commissioner Carter. Any questions or discussions -- oh, before we go to that, do we have any public speakers? MS. FILSON: Yes, sir, we do. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We're going to hold off on the vote and motion. And who is that? MS. FILSON: Nancy Payton. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Hello. MS. PAYTON: Thank you very much, very quick. Yes, we withdrew our objections. We had considerable amount of staff time to research and answer questions with Glen Heath and Patrick White, and I thank them very much for the time spent. We did ask for one clarification on the record today, and that deals with the Section 15, which is outside the urban service boundary -- the urban service area-- the urban boundary and to clarify central water and sewer, which currently is not available to receive but potentially it can receive. And we did want it clarified on the record by staff. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And there is no -- and this has nothing to do with the CDD that we're approving today? MS. PAYTON: Well, my concern was CDD is based upon the Page 54 February 26, 2002 PUD. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the PUD is where we discussed where services go. This is just a funding mechanism for the improvements of the flow-way. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's address the questions of staff regardless. MR. HEATH: For the record, my name is Glen Heath. I'm the principal planner with the comprehensive planning section of the county. As Ms. Payton said, we worked extensively with her, with the applicant. And I've worked with Mr. White and Mr. Litsinger, and we met with both of you and discussed this item. I'm going to steal some language from Mr. Whittey, your utility director who's back there today, and that this is not a "slam dunk." First off, the applicant has to submit a PUD amendment to get the area service. Of course, they have to construct the actual utilities infrastructure in the development. And, secondly, the rural fringe amendments have to be approved. Because those contain the district expansions, the governor has to sign off on the rural fringe amendments. The utility districts have to be expanded, and once that happens the applicant and the county have to come to an agreement as to the terms of the utility service. And finally, of course, the county utility system has to have the capacity to handle the new area. So there's nothing, certainly in the CDD that directs or authorizes a county to have to hook up to the project. All that is on down the line. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mrs. Payton, do you have any other questions? MS. PAYTON: That's all the clarification that we were seeking today. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you so much for your Page 55 February 26, 2002 participation. MS. PAYTON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And with that there is no other speakers today? MS. FILSON: She's the final speaker. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Then I close the public hearing. We have a motion. We have a second. Is there any other questions or discussion? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just one discussion item. I hope that if everybody has the opportunity to read the Florida Statutes 190 that spells out what a CDD is. It's very informative. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Henning. Any other comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that I'll call for the motion. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. Item #9A STAFF TO WORK WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE ON INCREASING RED-LIGHT RUNNING FINES, PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO INCLUDE A $500 FINE, AND COME BACK TO THE BOARD- APPROVED Now we move on to the Board of County Commissioners and Page 56 February 26, 2002 discussion regarding the increase of fines for red light running. And, Commissioner Carter, thank you for bringing this to us. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you, Commissioner Coletta -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion already. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I guess I don't have to say anything, the importance of that. I guess my question to the legal department is we just give staff directions this morning on this to come back with an ordinance that would make inclusive the fact that you would be fined $500 for running a red light that is the prerogative, of course, of the citing deputy. As we all know today, if you run a red light, a red light only, the fine is $83. But that may then be just one of several violations as you go through that intersection, if there's an accident, etc. But I want $500 up front, and then you can go from there. Maybe that will be a wake-up call to some of these people out there who think that they are some privileged group who are not being responsible and putting people's lives at risk because they are in a big hurry to get down to Joe's Bar or over to the 7 -Eleven. Lord, I don't know where they think they're going, but I'm tired of sitting there and watching near misses. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead this time, and then Commissioner Fiala next. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it too late to add blocking intersections to this? COMMISSIONER CARTER: No, sir. If you want to amend this -- blocking intersections and, in fact, that has been discussed where in some cities they actually paint the major intersections. And you get in there -- now sometimes you might get trapped in there and it's out of your control. Again, an officer had discretion, but you know and I know that a lot of people, they don't care. They are going Page 57 February 26, 2002 to hog themselves in there. And, again, I don't know where they think they're going. We don't have a traffic problem in Collier County, but we sure have a driver problem. COMMISSIONER FIALA: They're racing up there to wait at the light. And interesting, I was wondering if we could add running stop signs as well. That seems that stop signs, especially at major intersections, have been the cause of many deaths. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're on a roll here. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I mean, you started it. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, red lights are very blatantly obvious. I'd be happy to -- again, it's the pleasure of the board. I think maybe we bite the apple a chunk at a time here. We did include intersections, and we did include traffic -- red-light running, and that might be a big warning. And then if we're not successful there, maybe we go to your idea. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think we're-- we're headed in the right direction, but we may be adding too many items. Mr. Weigel, do you have any comments on this? MR. WEIGEL: Just a few, and that is the county attorney office, if authorized, will come back with the appropriate resolution and ordinance language for your direction. We will work with the sheriff's office in regard to putting something together that works for him and is enforceable maybe even simpler than what I'm thinking of right now. But we want to make sure we coordinate with them have so that you and your decision-making process have all the information as how to accomplish this goal. You mentioned $500 but something to the degree of the discretion of the officer issuing the ticket, if I understood correctly. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, I think that's always the case. The officer has discretion of citing an action. I'm not going to get in the sheriff deputy's job. Page 58 February 26, 2002 MR. WEIGEL: Right. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I think what we're going to do is give him the authority. He sees a red light run. He cites the person. He can write a ticket for $500. That's what I'm going to do is give him the authority. MR. WEIGEL: Well, the ticket is a $500 ticket not that we have a range in deciding the egregiousness -- I think that can be problematical that a violation is a violation is a violation. COMMISSIONER CARTER: As far as I am concerned, it's a violation. Now, if he wants to give a warning because it's a question of whether the person did it or not --. MR. WEIGEL: That's something else. COMMISSIONER CARTER: -- that's his job. I want to give him the authority that when he sees it, then it's automatic 500 bucks and goes from there. MR. WEIGEL: Got you. That's very important. Thank you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would support Commissioner Carter's proposal, and I recommend that we approve or make a motion to approve $500 fine for running red lights and for blocking intersections if that would be acceptable. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Fiala. Is there anyone to speak on this particular item? MS. FILSON: No, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there any questions, discussion? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I guess I better watch myself from now on. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I suppose the most ironic thing is if we pass it and we make headlines in the Naples newspaper, "Commissioner caught running red light, gets fined $500." Page 59 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And there might be some truth to that because I know xvhenever we put up speed traps out in the estates to catch people that are speeding on certain streets, the people that usually complain, it's the members of their family that get caught first. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yeah, we did it in Pelican Bay, and most of them were the residents there and, you know, we just haven't heard anything about that since. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: My only comment would be is that if we do pass this, we might all want to consider taking the public bus. With that I'll call for the motion. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. Thank you very much, Commissioner Carter. Item #9B REPORT TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGARDING FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES LEGISLATIVE DAY ACTIVITIES - ACCEPTED We've got one more report from the Board of County Commissioners regarding the Florida Association of County Legislative Day Activities. Page 60 February 26, 2002 COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is an update for our listening audience. Our Commissioners Coletta and Fiala and myself along with Leo Ochs, our assistant county manager, with our-- obvious, Keith Arnold with a tremendous amount of help from Senator Saunders and Dudley Goodlette's office -- Steve Hart and Dudley Goodlette's office was just outstanding in the number of appointments he was able to arrange for us, and this is what took place. First of all, we were briefed by the Florida Association of Counties on legislation that's currently being proposed by both the house and the senate in a wide variety of topical areas, everything from reapportionments to tax reform to the state budgets. And these are three very key issues in the legislature today. While we were there, the house took tax reform, went to the committee of the whole -- which had not -- no one there could really remember the last time the house did this and they defeated Senator Mackey's tax reform bill in the house. To say that the atmosphere between the house and senate is very cool these days would probably be the understatement of the year. Now they are going to be forced to really work on reapportionment in the state budget, and tax reform in my judgment probably is one thing that will not get very far in this session. There will be an awful lot of jockeying on all positions up there on a wide variety of topics, but the ones that are of the most concern to us are two that we focused on very heavily. One was the Transportation Opportunities Program known as TOPS. Again, for a variety -- the reason we spent the time there is that this was a program where seven people were appointed from around the state to hear all the projects for almost a 12-month period. And we went through this whole process with that committee. We were in Orlando, made a very strong presentation, and that committee Page 61 February 26, 2002 awarded Collier County about 8 1/2 million dollars out of the 9.9 that we were seeking for the Golden Gate/Airport interchange. Don't confuse that with the interstate. This is the one at Golden Gate Parkway and Airport Road. This is the last amount of dollars that we needed to complete this project. It was such a strong project that we ranked very high and were successful as was Mayor Paul Pass from the City of Bonita for improvements on 41 as was the City of Fort Myers for work that they wanted. Now, we were applauding and we were saying, "Wow, this is great." And then the governor decided he's canceling the TOPS program. He took it out of his budget. Why? There was heat from everybody about this, and then he backed away and said, "Well, we will look at another way to formulate this." Now, what that means is that we played by the rules. We did everything that's been going on for the last two years, and then we win. And it's like opening the bids and saying, "You know, I guess we'll change the specs." We just -- it's outrageous what happened to US. Now, the house has looked at all this and said, "You know, we want to save this TOPS program," and the house has worked diligently to get us the money. It probably won't be eight-and-a-half million, maybe closer to seven-and-a-half million. Well, we'll take that because that keeps that out of our general fund, and it allows us not to have to expand our property taxes on road construction. The senate, on the other hand, has done nothing. We sat with the transportation chairman of the senate and went through this point by point by point, and he kept raising all these objections. "Well, did you get the land donated around the (inaudible)?" "Yes, sir, we did, this we did this, we did this; we did this, and we think that it is wrong that you change the rules in the middle of Page 62 February 26, 2002 the game." And he got out of his chair and he said to me, "Commissioner, you got to get over this." So he told me that the senate is really not interested in preserving the TOPS funds. They want to take it through a new system driven through Florida Department of Transportation, which would mean at the end of the day, ladies and gentlemen, we don't get -- if we got anything, it would be what I call "walking around money" compared to seven-and-a-half million dollars. So we're working with Senator Saunders. We know that (inaudible) chairman of transportation of the senate, how strongly he is against this. But we also would not begin to work with the appropriations chair in the senate to see if we can't salvage something out of this. So we haven't given up the battle, and our delegation worked very hard on this. The second thing that we are in a defense position on is on Medicaid for nursing home payments. Currently the county pays about $347,000 -- is the -- this represents -- today we are spending about $50 per patient per month while the house budget proposes to more than double the contribution to $140 per participant per month. This represents a $340,000 annual increase cost shift to Collier County; $347,000 out of our general fund. Now, we have presented this very strongly to Dudley Goodlette and how opposed we are to it to Representative Green. Our delegation, I think, is okay. At least I think we are going to have a good chance with them. The senate hasn't taken action on this, and we will be pursuing this item in the senate. So while I would love to say that we are making headway in Tallahassee, what's going to happen in Tallahassee is that they are going to hold the line on budget. They are not going to do any tax reform, and they are going to cost shift to the counties as much as they can. Now, that's just exactly where these guys are going -- Page 63 February 26, 2002 guys -- women -- men and women are going, and we don't like it. And it behooves everyone in Collier County to e-mail the governor, e-mail these representatives, and tell them that we think this is atrocious in what they are doing to us. And then they are redistricting, three redistricting; House of Representatives for the state, Senate in the state and for the Congress. We're looking pretty good in the house. I think we're going to pick up another house seat out of this area. We may end up with a rural senator out of this area encompassing Lee, Collier, maybe part of some eastern counties, and maybe up into Hendry; that looks promising. Congressional redistricting, my crystal ball isn't that good. I really don't know what's going to happen. And that may end up in court. So our position with our lobbyist is to try to get the money out of the TOPS program, which we think we can get through the house, work something out with the senate. We're doing everything that we can do to prevent cost shifting and Medicaid nursing. That's the two major things. And the third thing is we continue to fight for Collier County in the redistricting, and that's just about what's going to happen in the legislature this period. And several senators told us up there your home and your children and your lands are pretty safe this time because not much is going to happen. And it's almost like it's in slow motion up there in terms ofjust trying to get through this session. And all the other things that we wanted out of transportation, indexing, looking at the incentive programs, have all been cut out of Representative Goodlette's transportation bill and pushed in committee to study this summer. Quickest way to kill any legislation is put it in committee. So that's where we are. Our delegation's worked hard. Our lobbyists are working hard. Steve Hart, Dudley Goodlette -- I mean, Page 64 February 26, 2002 they all -- they've been wonderful to us, and they are working very, very hard for us. But you need to support them with the e-mails, letters, or phone calls about how strongly you feel about these areas. Any questions by the board or anyone else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do we need a motion to accept Commissioner Carter's report? Do we have a motion? COMMISSIONER FIALA: But Tom said we don't need a motion. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, why don't we go through it since we're already there. Further comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I did ask they Wayne Arnold brief Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner Henning To bring them up to date --. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Keith Arnold? COMMISSIONER CARTER: Keith Arnold, right. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Keith Arnold, our lobbyist, and I concur with what Commissioner Carter said. At times it was quite frustrating trying to accomplish our goals. Definitely there's everyone out there looking for their own interest. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Right. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But I'm sure that we did make a difference, and I want to make sure that we do understand, though, that when it comes to the senate, I know that Senator Saunders will come through in a big way for us when the time does come. I know that he's pushing very hard behind the scenes to make things happen that will be favorable for Collier County, and with that, if there's no other comments -- COMMISSIONER CARTER: Just quickly, we did meet with the Lieutenant Governor Frank Brogan. He was gracious to give us Page 65 February 26, 2002 some time and, again, our pitch to him was on the redistricting, and he was very gracious. The same way with the TOPS program, very fine person. At least he knows who we are. And also our lobbyist gave us the opportunity not only to visit with the Republican members who dominate both houses, but we did meet with minority members there which gave us an opportunity to try to build some allegiance on the other side of aisle for some of the things that we're trying to get accomplished. So we have to cover it all, and I think it's a good investment in what I'm doing, and I'm glad that they will be briefing Commissioners Henning and Coyle. He will be briefing you on what's taken place today. Last thing, Commissioner, I will be leaving at one o'clock with Norm Feder and Jack Pointer. We are going to the Fort Myers News Press. We will be meeting with their editorial board to, again, one more time to plead our case on TOPS funding. I've also requested from Jeff Lytle that we have a similar meeting March the 7th with the Naples Daily News. I have not gotten a reply on whether that date is acceptable to the editorial board, but we are hoping that they will meet with this joint delegation from Lee and Collier as we're looking for our local publications to again editorialize on behalf of the taxpayers of both counties to get as much funding as we can for the TOPS program. So stay tuned. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Carter. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion passed 5 to 0. Page 66 February 26, 2002 Item #9C THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO MEET AT 9:00 A.M. AND RECONVENE AT 6:00 P.M. ON MARCH 4, 2002, FOR THE RURAL F1NGE FINAL HEARING, TO ALLOW ATTENDANCE OF THE PUBLIC THAT ARE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING DURING THE DAY Next is add-on 9-C, a discussion of the rural fringe meeting for 3/4, and Commissioner Henning brought this issue to us. Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, the reason it's on the agenda is that this has to deal with the rural fringe. It's my understanding that people that own small properties or even large properties in the rural fringe area that we're going to make decision on next week and the following week are the working people. Our meetings are scheduled for the daytime, so what I am proposing is we are going to have our meeting starting at Max Hasse Park at 9 a.m. And not going to have enough time to finish. Then we're going to reconvene at Monday at 9 a.m. Here in this chambers, and all I'm asking for is to is recess when we're finished with the presentations and reconvene at 6 p.m. On Monday to get any public testimony of the landowners in that area so they have the opportunity not only to work during the day, but also give us input in the evening on Monday. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, it's an excellent idea, and when you first sent the suggestion through, I passed it right on to staff and the ability to be able to work the schedule a little. I asked that it be done as you suggested. Previously I asked that the rural fringe meetings be held in the evening, the total Page 67 February 26, 2002 meetings when it comes back to us from Tallahassee. And also with the rural lands, that those meetings be held in the evening so that we can accommodate the working people. Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just two fast things. No. 1, if we meet at 6 p.m. On Monday, doesn't the Republican Executive Committee meet here also at seven? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think this might take a little precedence. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yeah, I think they might just have to go over to the board of county Elections and meet over there. I don't consider their meeting a priority. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just to bring it up and if we want to do -- and, secondly, I've already been to speak -- deliver an opening presentation to the Marco Island City Council, but if you don't mind me coming in a little late -- it won't be but 20 minutes and then I'll race here, but I probably won't get here till seven. And in no way do I want to turn my back on anybody's comments; it's just that I'm already committed to do that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let's go to Mr. Olliff first, and then we'll come back. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yeah, I need to get comments from Mr. Litsinger and Mr. Olliff on this on procedural aspects on this because I don't disagree with the idea, but I think in the way that we take straw voting as we go through this for the transmittal is now going to cause us some problems if we split this meeting. Secondly, everyone when it comes back from Tallahassee, all of this will be an evening meeting that starts what, at seven and goes --. MR. LITSINGER: 5:05. COMMISSIONER CARTER: -- and far as into the next morning if it's necessary to have everybody's input. So I just need to hear the procedural process on this as part of the consideration. Page 68 February 26, 2002 MR. LITSINGER: For the record, Stan Litsinger, comprehensive planning manager. Our game plan, if you will, for your meeting beginning tomorrow morning at 9 a.m. Out at Max Haase is what we hope to accomplish tomorrow prior to our need to continue the meeting at approximately 2:30 due to the fact that a couple of commissioners need to leave and the fact that there's an after-school program in that room until Monday morning is what we're hoping to do is get through most of the staff presentations and presentations by the various consultants and, hopefully, most of the interveners who have presentations on various plans relative to the proposal that we have given you to send to Tallahassee. And the game plan beyond that was to come back on Monday morning for your deliberations, your reception of general public comment that is not item specific, which we hope to try to concentrate on tomorrow morning and early tomorrow afternoon, and to have the board make its motions and votes on the various items that we will be sending to Tallahassee in the period between 9 a.m. and approximately 1 in the afternoon on Monday the 4th. The only logistical problem I see would be relative to Commissioner Carter's comments that if we meet again at 6 p.m. To receive additional public input, then the issue will be if you have taken motions and votes and positions on your plan amendments that you're going to send forward, will we then again revisit your previous motions based on some testimony that you may receive that evening, and that's your discretion. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think what we're doing is we're approving each item individually. We do it as a straw vote. MR. LITSINGER: That's correct. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- without any binding part until we get to the very end that we can ask how we need to amend whatever Page 69 February 26, 2002 parts when we get to that point in time. But the important part is the public participation after hours. And I think we need to hold to the schedule. If I remember correctly, and I do remember very correctly, the Planning Commission required two days to get through this. And usually the Planning Commission has a tendency to sift it down a little bit so the time when it hits us is a little less. And I think we can even speed that process up if tonight we use every available hour to review all the material, including the tapes from the Planning Commission that I had supplied to each commissioner. But one of the things I do want to mention -- and I want to it perfectly clear that the Max Haase Community Park, Louise Haase building has got a limitation of how many people can fit in there. And I'm hoping that we've made arrangements next door at the school that if we do have an overflow crowd, we can move the meeting over there. MR. LITSINGER: Commissioner, the fire rating is 165 people, which I believe is larger than this room. We are arranging -- this afternoon we're going over to work on the logistics, the setup and the sound system to have sound in some of the anterooms there associated with the facility. The school, because it's a school day and it's an elementary school being primarily a cafeteria, is not a likely target to move the meeting, and the logistics probably would not support us moving the meeting if we were to have an overflow crowd. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: My comments would be that we have 165 in the one room, and the other rooms will probably reach a total of over 200; is that correct? MR. LITSINGER: I would think so, yes. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now, I don't expect an extremely large crowd, but fair warning, if we get to the point where we have to Page 70 February 26, 2002 turn people away, I'm going to ask for the meeting be cancelled and redone at another date. MR. LITSINGER: I understand, or we can continue it until March the 4th where we have the morning and, in fact, except between 1 or 2, where I believe Mr. Brock is having a tax deed sale, we have the room for the entire 24-hour period. But I do believe we will be able to handle the expected crowd tomorrow. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: One of the things I believe we're all very concerned about is the public participation part of this, and-- COMMISSIONER CARTER: With all due respect, Commissioner -- Mr. Chairman, the public has had an opportunity to participate in this process at I don't know how many meetings that's going on with this rural fringe and the rural committees. It's not like they have been frozen out at any time. So a lot of the public has been and said what they had to say. I don't think you're going to have overwhelming numbers at any of these meetings. You're going to get interested people, and that's fine as long as procedurally we can get through this on a timely basis because this is just a transmittal to Tallahassee, and they are going to come back with comments, and this is not the final -- this is like Phase 1. So as long as we can stay to some reasonable schedule -- is my concern -- and accommodate everyone that is necessary, and that certainly includes primarily the public. But I have not heard a lot of people from the public saying that they are concerned about the schedule in which we're doing this. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I have. A number of people comment that they felt like they were being left out because of the hours that the meetings were taking place, and if it only boiled down to one or two people that showed up for that 6 o'clock hearing, I think that the public needs -- I don't think this is one that we can -- we've Page 71 February 26, 2002 been working on this plan for over two years. Actually, it goes back about 15 years leading up to this point in time. And I think we are reaching the very end of this whole thing where we're going to come up with a final answer for it. And I definitely want to hear from everybody out there that has any opinion at all on it. And I wouldn't want to do anything to cut off their ability or make it difficult for them to be able to appear before us. I'm sorry, Ms. Filson. MS. FILSON: I just confirmed for you that there are no scheduled meetings for the boardroom for Monday night. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: There are no scheduled meetings. Okay, so fine. So we don't have that as a handicap. The only thing we have happening is the Dwight Brock two o'clock certain for the tax deed sale. MS. FILSON: Yeah. I believe that's from one to two. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: One to two. And what we can do is if we're going hot and heavy, we'll just take a nice one-hour lunchhour. I'll give you a full hour for a change, and then we'll continue after Dwight Brock's out. And with that, I don't know if we need a motion since we already have this done. MR. LITSINGER: We have your direction-- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, I appreciate you bringing it up so we can get it out in front of the public what we are doing. Was there anything you wished to address on that? COMMISSIONER HENNING: On this item? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: No. Item # 10A Page 72 February 26, 2002 30-DAY NOTICE GIVEN TO PRUTOS PUBLIC RELATIONS, TERMINATING CONTRACT REGARDING 2002 TOURISM AGREEMENT. STAFF TO ADVERTISE FOR TOURISM DIRECTOR- APPROVED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Let's move on. We're at the county manager's report, Item A, reconsideration, Mr. Wallace. MR. WALLACE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record, Bleu Wallace, Director of Community Development Operation. Since 4 December 2001, Community Development Operations has been performing the functions in support of Tourist Development Council had to do with tourist development tax, etc. On 12 December this board approved tourism contracts with four vendors. One of those was Prutos Public Relations. Then on 8 January the board asked for that contract to come back for reconsideration. We bring it back to you now along with recommendations since 8 January of the Tourist Development Council, the Tourism Alliance, and also for your consideration, the staffs input and the fact that the Naples Visitors' Bureau is conducting a series of workshops on tourism. And with that, unless you have questions of staff, Ms. Prutos is here if you have any questions of her. I'd like to turn the podium over to Assistant County Attorney Jackie Hubbard Robinson. MS. ROBINSON: Good morning, Commissioners. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good morning. MS. ROBINSON: There are a couple of matters that staff feels should be brought to your attention, and I'll just briefly mention them. One is that we have noted a few irregularities in two matters. One has to do with a series of invoices that were submitted to the county a couple of weeks ago that was pulled from the prior Board of County Page 73 February 26, 2002 Commissioners agenda. And those items are currently being reviewed by the finance department. Mr. Mitchell is reviewing those. And, secondly, we have received a second invoice that appears to have items on it that need to also be reviewed by Mr. Mitchell's office in finance. And Ms. Prutos is aware of both of these matters, and we just felt that both of them merited being brought to your attention. The review has not been completed, and so I can't report to you what the ultimate findings will be, but I thought it important that these irregularities be brought to your attention. They appear to be irregularities in any event. They may prove to be not so. But they were significant enough that they were referred over to his office for a review. The first one involves a series of invoices in which at least one of them, although submitted for payment, we were told should not be paid. And that was in an amount of about $3,000. And the second one involves a series of requests that were initially denied and appear to be resubmitted with a different title. So both of those items are being reviewed and as soon as some conclusion is reached regarding those, I'm sure you will be informed about it. MR. WALLACE: Mr. Chairman, I don't know how you want to proceed. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, Mt. Wallace, could you I know you've done some research on how they do this in other counties. Could you share that with us? MR. WALLACE: Yes, sir. One of the staff members and I went to Charlotte County and met with the tourism director there. They have a staff of three. The next budget year they are going to ask for three more on their staff, but right now they have a tourism director, a marketing assistant or a marketing manager, and an Page 74 February 26, 2002 administrative assistant to handle about a $2 million annual budget. Our annual budget's around 9 million. However, they perform the coordination functions among the three other vendors that you do have to have. You have to have the marketing and advertising vendor, which we have in KSR; the fulfillment vendor that answers the 800 numbers and mails out the brochures and the like and responds to the calls; and also the person to perform the statistical analysis. Staff in Charlotte County coordinate among those vendors and seems to have an effective program. There's no one on our staff that's qualified to do the coordination effort of those duties that are performed by Ms. Prutos, no one to my knowledge. Also, in St. Johns County they have a very similar arrangement of three individuals that run the tourism effort; a director, a marketing assistant, and a secretary type. St. Johns has a situation similar to ours in that for past years the Chamber of Commerce -- at a very high price tag, over $200,000 a year -- was operating their tourism and marketing campaign until their clerk questioned how they were operating, and they brought it in-house. And for the last year and a half, that has been operating successfully. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's my understanding when we discussed this in December it was going to be just a short time when the tourism industry was going to bring back to the board for recommendations of how we operate the tourism and a lot of talk about bringing it in-house. And I'm very concerned about continuing these discretionary invoices to the county for payment. Therefore, that I make a motion that we expire Prutos Public Relations, Incorporated, contract with the county giving notice -- I think it's a 30-day notice. Page 75 February 26, 2002 MR. WALLACE: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- starting today, and direct staff to advertise for a tourism director to bring that in-house here in the county. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any guidance as far as the bills that have been unpaid? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Those are in the clerk's office, and if he kicks them back, I'm sure that whoever submitted them can also come to the Board of Commissioners for clarification of-- justification for those bills. But during the seeking out of a tourism director, my recommendation is to have somebody from the TDC to sit in on the interviewing process. You know, that's a great group. They've been in operation for a number of years, and I know Chairman Carter -- Commissioner Carter has sat on that for over a year. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Commissioner Henning, I don't disagree with your direction. My concern is we still have a visioning process going on with the Tourism Alliance. And I do want to get that input from them -- and I think the feeling I'm getting from this board, and it seems that we want to take it in-house; we want to establish our marketing director much like Charlotte or St. Johns has. We have about a three-person team working with three primary vendors and get the feed from your TDC or alliance in terms of (inaudible). My concern is can we fill the position in 30 days? If you would be willing to amend your motion for that not to exceed, let's say, three or four months while we search and find somebody, and if we find somebody sooner, we would terminate the contract with the outside group, then I would feel more comfortable with that so that we, A, get it established in-house and, B, we don't have a void in this critical period when we've got things ongoing and, C, the invoices are Page 76 February 26, 2002 still under investigation by the clerk's office, which I don't have enough information to say what we do or don't do here, but I'll wait for the guidance to come down on that issue. And that's kind of where I'm in sorting through and with talking with alliance people, and some of the members of the TDS have voiced -- you know, kind of weighed in with their opinions. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I have two comments. We know -- from the sounds I hear, we know this is the direction we're marching anyway, that we're going to get somebody in-house to manage this. I think one of the mistakes that were made originally through no fault of anybody's, by the way, is we hired an outstanding -- or the tourism group -- hired an outstanding advertising and PR firm to actually come in and manage another advertising firm. So instead, we are paying an advertising firm to actually do managing of another advertising firm, which seems like a lot of waste of money. I think what we need to do is get somebody in here who's a good manager to manage these things and who has a knowledge of the tourism industry; that comment I wanted to make. I believe that we need to move forward, and we need to start looking right now to hire somebody. I think that's the way we're going. I think Cathy Prutos has done a fine job. She's an outstanding lady, but we need to move forward, and so I'm going to second that motion. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Comments, I'd like to make one. I think, Commissioner Henning, that I can support your motion with 30 days simply because when you come to the end of a relationship with a vendor, it's always best to be able to bring that relationship to a termination as soon as possible. We may be able to at that point in time if we are running into a problem reconsider what we're doing. Page 77 February 26, 2002 But I for one support Commissioner Henning's motion. Any other comments.`? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question for Mr. Wallace. Do you feel that you can fill this position within 30 days ? MR. WALLACE: No, sir, not within 30 days; however, there is a possibility that we could revamp one of the other vendor contracts so they could take a more coordination role among the other vendors. That's a possibility too. We can take a look at it and see what the recruitment looks like out there, and then come back to you. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I guess I need to echo Commissioner Carter's concern. We need to get aggressive so we don't have a lapse in going forward with promotion of Collier County. I don't feel comfortable with what you said. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'm willing to shorten it. Mr. Wallace has given us another key. If we can take that action and do it in a 30-day time frame, I'm fine with that. If he needs 60 days outside, maybe that does it. Pick a number, but I think the message is we want to sever the relationship, want it in-house, and we need some guidance so that we don't have any shortfalls when we're going through this. If you have a vendor that could pick up the slack to keep the ball rolling, I'm comfortable with that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. MR. WALLACE: We have an advertising and marketing vendor already on the contract, and I think a modification of that contract, we could probably -- COMMISSIONER CARTER: Then, Mr. Henning, I wouldn't have any trouble supporting your motion. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So we do have a motion; we have a second. Why don't we take a minute here to hear from the public Page 78 February 26, 2002 speakers. MS. FILSON: We have no public speakers; only David Weigel. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Weigel. MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Thank you. I wanted to just note for clarification of the motion, there's some discussion in regard to having aTDC member assist in the selection process or something to that effect with the county manager. The county manager under the county manager ordinance -- in his contract, of course -- is responsible for hiring employees under the county manager agency, and two things come to mind is that I didn't want to jump in and speak for Tom, but I think that's something that we need to keep in mind is that Tom typically would hire a person into the fold, understanding the direction of the board in the first place, and do an admirable job at it. And, secondly, if we have a member of a committee -- in this case at the request of this committee directed to become part of the interviewing process, we may enter that ever encroaching area of Sunshine Law and deliberation, which may not be part of the situation that Tom has in his normal administrative process of securing -- soliciting and securing an employee in this position. So I thought I'd mention that to you. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I think translated, sir, that it belongs to the county manager to do this, and we cannot have an outside person involved in the process. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That wasn't part of your motion, though, was it? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think it was, and I will remove that part of it. But I do think it's a good idea from that organization -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I'm sure we'll be weighing in on it being the chair of the TDC. Commissioner Fiala, do you have Page 79 February 26, 2002 any problem with that? COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I did hear you right. There are no public speakers? MS. FILSON: No, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other questions or comments? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand where we're going with respect to hiring people to manage this process. I still remain concerned about the process we use to manage the process. I am concerned about the fact that we are reviewing a lot of these expenditures and then questioning why the expenditures were made. And I would hope that if we proceed in this direction that what we will do is depend upon the TDC to provide direction with respect to the kinds of advertising programs that we should pursue and then we develop a budget to pursue those specific programs just like we do in the rest of our departments in the county. And that will give us greater assurance that the funds being expended are being expended for public purpose because they have been approved in advance by the TDC and possibly by the Board of County Commissioners at the time that the budget was prepared so you're actually operating from a pre-approved budget of specific advertising projects.And I think that gives us a little better control over this process. I bring this up at this time only because if the board agrees with that, it must be taken into consideration when you decide what kind of person you want to hire to administer this function. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I concur with you, Commissioner Coyle, but that has to be part of the specs. Reading your brain wavelengths down here, I totally concur that you do your budgets; you follow the budgets; you've got your advice; and we Page 80 February 26, 2002 don't keep doing this dance all the time about should we or shouldn't we have done something. And it takes the quirk out of a bad position, puts us in the right position, and we begin to get a smooth organization running to deal with this. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Olliff. MR. OLLIFF: To be very clear, if the board desires for this to become something that is directly managed within the county manager's portion of the organization, I want to tell you I think the way it is structured and the way it is operated will be significantly different than it has been historically. And I envision, and I believe I hear the board saying that they share that same vision, that this department would have a much curtailed-type role in terms of the types of expenditures that we would authorize as part of the county government budget, if you will. I believe in some of my previous conversations with members of the industry I don't think there's a lot of opposition to that. And I think they expect that. I believe that if you're asking for it to come under your direct control and wing, it's going to have to be a different process where you are going to pre-approve an annual work plan that is going to be very specific, and then we would actually bring to you, then, expenditures just like we do for all the rest of your county departments that should not be anything different from what you already have seen as part of that annual work plan. This should be a very positive program for this community, and if you want to bring it back in-house, I will tell you that that's going to be our mission to try and end limit it to curtail it so that it is something that you can get your arms around. The pantyhose on the octopus analogy perhaps in the past may have applied. But I think this can be a very positive thing, and if that's what the board envisions, then we can make that happen for you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And if I may, Mr. Wallace, I again Page 81 February 26, 2002 ask the question because I knew the answer, but let's share it with everyone else. The money to be able to underwrite this program, the three new people that would have to be employed, where would this money come from? MR. WALLACE: Right now there's around $60,000 that is dedicated toward a one full-time position, and also if you terminate the Prutos contract, that frees up $144,000 a year. So for roughly $200,000 1 think you could get a very attractive staff for this function. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So we're not talking new expenses. We're just talking about redirecting the funds that are there in a more constructive manner -- at least we hope it's a more constructive manner. MR. WALLACE: That's how I see it, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Any other questions? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Commissioner Fiala has a question. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Carter. Yes, Tom, actually this question is direct to you. I was going to wait until after our vote, but being that you brought the subject up about maybe looking at this department in a different way. I would hope that maybe as you look at it, you might think of separating it out from the housing and urban area so that you have the (inaudible) and the housing and all of those problems in one separate department from tourism. I don't think the two work together, and they've been grouped together for a while, and it never made any sense to me. So as long as you're reevaluating, possibly you could take a look at that. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I see Mr. Schmitt's ready to bound out of his chair because he's shaking his head like, yes, yes, Page 82 February 26, 2002 yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, good. MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, administrator, Community Development and Environmental Services. That move has been accomplished. That's been done a while ago. Bleu is the operations manager for my division, and the tourism part of that operation is under Bleu Wallace's supervision. It's not part of the housing and urban improvement portion anymore. So that's been done. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. You're one up on me. Thank you. MR. OLLIFF: The only other thing, Mr. Chairman, that I'll add for the record is giving the timing that the board has discussed, obviously, we'll take as an indication that you want to remove this program or exempt this program at this particular position from the current hiring deferral program where we are leaving vacancies open for a minimum of 90 days, and we'll go ahead and fill this as quickly as possible. COMMISSIONER CARTER: If I had seconded it, Commissioner Henning -- that, I don't know if he seconded it. Commissioner Fiala, I would ask the seconder, the motioner -- geez, that's terrible grammar; I'll hear about that -- to include that in your motion. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that, is there any other question or discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll call the question. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. Page 83 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. I really like how we worked together on that to come up with that. Commissioner Coyle, Commissioner Fiala, you both did a -- and Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Carter also -- all did an excellent job. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yeah, I know it's hard to remember me down here. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, I know. You got to make a little more noise. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Yeah, right. Item #1 OB FRIENDS OF ART AT THE MUSEUM OF ART AND GALLERIES REQUESTING A WAIVER OF RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT FEES FOR TEMPORARY PARKING IN THE RIGHT- OF-WAY - DENIED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Now we're at under county manager's report, 10-B. MR. REISCHL: Good morning, Commissioners, Fred Reischl, planning services. This is a request for a waiver of the fee for a right-of-way permit for a nonprofit organization. COMMISSIONER CARTER: I'll move for approval. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, oh, oh, excuse me. I'm sorry. Page 84 February 26, 2002 I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER CARTER: What did I do here? COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's see your hands. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, let's have some discussions. I want to remind you that several times now we refused Willoughby Acres, we refused the Golden Gate Civic and the Golden Gate Estates Civic when they came to us for funds like this. How common is it that we give this particular money away? MR. REISCHL: This is two years ago. This used to be more common. Then the board amended the code to allow temporary use permits. Nonprofit organizations have two free temporary-use permits per year; however, the last several that have come to you have been right-of-way permits, and as my memory serves the Willoughby Acres one was withdrawn. It was not denied. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That was because it was heading toward being refused. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, that was a different issue. That was on a permit for lighting. This is an event, a fund raiser for not-for-profit organization, and they need a place to park cars during this event as I understand it. MR. REISCHL: Parking in the right-of-way during a special event. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, just so the board knows, consistently we will always be recommending against a fee waiver. In this particular case -- and it is a good cause, and I won't argue that for a second, but there are over 200 not-for-profit organizations in this community all of which generally at one time or another are holding an event where they are going to look for a right-of-way permit. And the right-of-way permit does take your staff time to Page 85 February 26, 2002 review and to monitor out there in your right-of-ways, so we would always consistently recommend against it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I am going to vote against it, and I'll tell you what I would recommend is that possibly in the future when we put the permitting fees together and permitting regulations, that we might come up with some sort of exemption to be able to meet this need because just the time that's spent to get this on the agenda for $120 has got to exceed that amount to begin with. I don't -- I can't understand what the purpose for these coming to us one at a time. And the fact that we did refuse about three or four of them right in a row and now all of a sudden we're going to make an exception and go back to what we're doing before. That's my own personal opinion. Whatever the wish of the board -- meanwhile, do we have anyone to speak on it? MS. FILSON: We have one speaker, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please, go ahead. MS. FILSON: Jean Skinner. MS. SKINNER: Mr. Chairman, I'm Jean Skinner. I'm on the board of the Friends of Art for the Philharmonic Center and Galleries and also co-chairman of this event. This event will take place on the 17th and 18th of March, and what we're asking for is a waiver -- parking variance and a waiver of the $125 for Rail Head Road, which is a road that is in an industrial area north of-- in North Collier County. It is not a through road. We will have 600 people in attendance on Sunday and 600 people in attendance on Monday afternoon. And there is no street parking permitted now, and we ask that that be permitted. The fund-raising event helps raise money to bus in over 5,000 Collier County students to the museum each year at no cost to them. It provides all kinds of services to the museum. The museum last year had over 100,000 visitors, and every one of those visitors was Page 86 February 26, 2002 serviced by one of the volunteers of this organization. So we ask your permission to have a variance on the parking and have the fee excused. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, and I'll follow. COMMISSIONER HENNING: What other one came to us recently for right-of-way waiver? MR. REISCHL: It was a right-of-way permit fee waiver for landscaping in the median of a county road, and that was withdrawn before it got to you. COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: I'm going to remove my second on the motion. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may help you a little bit with this, when the one came from Willoughby Acre, I got together with Jack Pointer, and we said if necessary we would find the funds within the community to cover the cost. The one in Golden Gate Estates I offered to pay a part of it and then go out and help raise the rest of the money. I just don't think this is the part of county government to be paying these fees indiscriminately. I will ask one question, and if you did grant it to them at no cost, then I will go ahead with the second and even vote for it. Florida Sports Park is coming up, and they got a right-of-way permit. Did they pay for theirs? MR. REISCHL: I don't know the answer to that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I mean, if they did they'd have to come before us; is that correct? MR. REISCHL: Yes. MR. OLLIFF: You haven't seen a waiver on your agenda for it as yet, and there may be a request coming, but you haven't approved one as yet. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And how about St. Katherine's Greek Page 87 February 26, 2002 Festival, their right-of-way permit? MR. REISCHL: I'm not sure if they needed a right-of-way permit. There's was a temporary-use permit, and each nonprofit is allowed two temporary-use permits, not right-of-way; two different permits. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: They might have failed to file for it this year. I used to get it for them in years past, and they always had to pay for it. I'm just bringing up some points, and it's not a question of we're trying to deny your charity $120. I mean, if there's anyone that's tied into social-service organizations and charity, it's the members of this commission and especially yours truly. It's just that this has no beginning and no end once it gets started. And that's not because I see anything wrong with what you're doing. And I'll help you if I can with your event, but I just don't think it's in the public's best interest to spend the. MS. SKINNER: Does that mean the parking variance is also denied if we pay the fee? MR. REISCHL: Mr. Chairman, it's a right-of-way permit, and the engineering department has certain criteria, and apparently they meet the criteria for this special event. The only reason that they are here is for the fee waiver. So that the right-of-way permit is administrative, and our engineering department doesn't have a problem with them meeting those criteria. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, but there's some commissioners and, obviously, county staff has a problem with it, you know, with the fee -- the fee being indiscriminately charged for some and not others. MR. OLLIFF: Her question is: Can she continue to park on the right -of-way. And as long as she meets the criteria, she can get her permit, and it will be allowed (Overlapping dialogue). CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah, we're not denying you the Page 88 February 26, 2002 permit, no way. We're just denying the county paying for the $120 for your permit. That's if we do vote that way. Okay. Where are we with this? We got a motion. We don't have a second. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Motion dies for lack of a second. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then I'll save you the embarrassment of having to do it. I'll make a motion that we deny -- COMMISSIONER CARTER: You won't embarrass me at all. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other discussion or questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll call the motion. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed? COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 4 to 1. Mr. Carter is the dissenting vote. Thank you very much. MR. OLLIFF: Just for the record, Mr. Chairman, we support that event. We'll work with them to quickly issue a right-of-way permit and then try and make sure that we can accommodate the parking that they need as quickly as we can. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And if you need some volunteers to help with parking, I'll volunteer my fellow commissioners. No, give me a call if I can help you. Item # 1 OD Page 89 February 26, 2002 AGREEMENT TO FULFILL A COMMITMENT OF THE OLDE CYPRESS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) IN THE AMOUNT OF $53,217 - APPROVED C has been deleted. We're moving on to authorize an agreement, Item D. MR. SCHMITT: Okay. This is to authorize an agreement in the amount of $53,217 to fulfill the commitment of the Olde Cypress planned unit development. For the record, I'm Joe Schmitt, administrator, community development and environmental services. This is based on the original language in the Olde Cypress PUD. An invoice was issued to the developer for $106,542. It was to pay for its pro-rated fair share of contribution of the construction of a master weir section completed by the Big Cypress Basin Commission of South Florida Water Management District. The PUD language require that the developer contribute the fair share toward the construction of the master weir based on the tributary area and run-off volumes. $106,542 amount of the impact to the canal watershed was calculated by the Big Cypress Basin engineers and submitted to the county. In response to requests for payment, representatives of Olde Cypress, Limited, challenged the methodology that was utilized by the basin. The basic premise centered on the intent of the original PUD language and the size of the total watershed to be utilized as part of the calculation. It was argued that the calculation to determine a run-off volume contributed to the Olde Cypress tract could not be calculated in any number -- could be calculated a number of ways based on the parameters defined in the PUD. Subsequently, Olde Cypress, Limited, argued that the amount should be no higher than $36,888 based on an analysis by an engineering firm that recently completed Page 90 February 26, 2002 the South Lee watershed study or South Lee County watershed study. Recognizing -- the staff, recognizing That the case was arguable and absent a defined methodology to support the original delineation of the mn-off area, both the staff and the developer recognize that this case could be argued as far as the total amount of money. I think in order to avoid a lengthy battle -- legal battle, and based upon information to date, the difficulties associated with calculating the exact mn-off and the impacts, the developer agreed to pay a sum of half the amount, which is calculated to be $53,272. Staff as well as the director of the Big Cypress Basin fully supports this recommendation, and with me in the audience today is Clarence Tears, director of the Big Cypress Basin, in case you have any questions of him. At this time the board has two options. You require the original amount be paid, which is $106,542, and recognize that that option is likely going to lead to a lengthy legal battle, or we can accept the offer, an offer brokered after I discussed with the applicant that possibly we could go to arbitration or mediation to come to a solution, and it was proposed that we split the difference. And that's how we arrived at the $53,217 payment to fulfill this PUD commitment. So it's based upon the recommendation of both the legal staff and the staff in my division and supported by representatives of the Big Cypress Basin -- and you can certainly ask Clarence that as well that we fulfill this requirement with the payment of $53,217. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Chairman, I would like, for the record, Mr. Clarence Tears to state his agreement on that, and then I will move for approval. MR. TEARS: Clarence Tears. Good morning, Chairman and Commissioners. I was part of this lengthy process. I think it began in 1996 Page 91 February 26, 2002 through a letter in our office, but then recently with county staff and the developer, the real issue is methodology, is how do yOu calculate the mn-off?. And the intent of the law through the ordinance that the county put on this project clearly doesn't state that. So after hearing both sides of the argument, I believe our staff used the methodology that they feel best to look at mn-off rates, and the developer utilized what they feel is the best methodology to use on their behalf. My concern is that if we do go to court with this is it is not clearly defined in the ordinance. So I basically do support the county getting at least $53,000 recovery for these efforts, and I do support that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Of course, Mr. Tears, we want to do what's right, not only by Big Cypress but by the taxpayers. MR. TEARS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And so it's your feeling that this offer here is more than fair? MR. TEARS: Yes, I do because there's other costs involved when you do go to court and then, also, if you read the intent of the law, I still believe there's an opportunity for the county to get less than $53,000. So based on all the issues and all the variables involved in the decision-making process, I think it is in the best interest of the commissioners and the taxpayers of Collier County to accept this agreement. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other questions of Mr. Tears? COMMISSIONER COYLE: This development was -- the money for this weir was approved by Big Cypress Basin. It was your money, right, it came out of your budget? MR. TEARS: All the money came out of the Big Cypress Basin's budget; that's correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And it's my understanding Page 92 February 26, 2002 that Quail Creek Village was assessed $30,641 for this water improvement; right? MR. TEARS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we're collecting more from Olde Cypress than we did from any other participant -- · MR. TEARS: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- in this area. MR. TEARS: That's correct. And it's all based on county ordinances that were implemented during the development process. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And are those ordinances still in effect? Have they been tightened up because you say they are a little bit confusing? MR. TEARS: Well, this ordinance basically just says they'll pay for their fair share of surface flow contributions at a pro-rated basis, and that's specifically what the ordinance states. It doesn't state the methodology that should be utilized to compute that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So all facts being considered, do you support the settlement --. MR. TEARS: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- that's been proposed? (Chairman Coletta leaves the meeting.) MR. TEARS: With one other suggestion that I suggest that the money given to Collier County from the developer be given directly to storm water management in Collier County. I think storm water management's budget has been hit extremely hard over the last few years, and I recommend those dollars received go directly to storm water management. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Carter. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Well, that last request, I think, is administratively -- and I don't know where the monies came from Page 93 February 26, 2002 originally. That may be problematic as the word goes. Mr. Olliff, would you like to comment? MR. OLLIFF: The storm water department's funded out of your general fund, so I am not sure that a special dedication within your general fund works. And not to contradict Mr. Tears because he has been a great partner of your county government in helping do a lot of the storm water management in this county, but we have in most recent years bolstered your storm water department more than you ever have in probably the history of the department. We almost doubled the staff two years ago in order to try to get aggressive about actually making some progress on some of these storm water-related projects. I believe that they have as much on their plate as they can possibly handle, and I think we've resourced them sufficiently so that this money probably ought to go back into your general fund reserves would be my recommendation. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Thank you. Then my motion stands for approval of this. We've got on the record Mr. Tears' input and that these monies go back to the general fund. Now we need a second. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'll second it. COMMISSIONER CARTER: Mr. Vice-Chairman, it's up to you to make the call. VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. Do we have any public speakers? MS. FILSON: No, sir. VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: So we have a motion and a second to approve the recommendation by staff, all in favor-- go ahead, Mr. Tears. MR. TEARS: I just want to clarify in storm water management recently there's been a lot of funds cut out of the budget. You Page 94 February 26, 2002 approved the budget for storm water management, but funds have been taken out of their budget. Just to clarify. VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: The budget hearing is coming up shortly. MR. TEARS: Okay. But, I mean, approved dollars within the budget have been reduced for master planning, and, actually, the Basin has taken on those responsibilities because of the reductions in Collier County's budget. So that's why I was trying to direct these funds back to storm water management. Thank you. (Chairman Coletta returns to meeting.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Questions? Motion? COMMISSIONER CARTER: I've made the motion, and it has a second, and Mr. Henning is about ready to call the motion, I believe. VICE -CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. VICE-CHAIRMAN HENNING: I called the motion if you want to take the vote. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We'll do that, Commissioner Henning. You must be getting hungry just like Mr. Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor indicate by saying COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 5 to 0. Page 95 February 26, 2002 MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to take a moment just to make a note. When we go through PUD reviews, it would be a good thing for the board to make a mental note when we develop these languages that Mr. Tears was referring to back an ordinance, he was referring to the actually PUD document, that ordinance. Whenever we've got something that simply says the development is going to pay its "fair share" towards whether it be a water- management structure or whether it be an intersection improvement, we probably as we go back through these PUDs need to be a little more specific about the methodology that's going to be used in determining what is that development's fair share so that we don't find ourselves in this position on each and every development project that comes down the road. Because if it doesn't clearly specify -- and I promise you whatever method we develop, the development community on the other side will probably want to have a different type methodology than the one that we develop. And I think there are some reasonable and fair methodologies that everybody can agree to, and we just simply ought to put those in the PUD documents. Item # 10E RESOLUTION 2002-125 AUTHORIZING CONDEMNATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY AND/OR EASEMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FOUR-LANE SECTION OF IMMOKALEE ROAD BETWEEN WILSON BOULEVARD AND 43P~ AVENUE N.E., CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT NO. 71 (PROJECT NO. 60018) - ADOPTED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Feder? Okay. We're at Item 10-E now, Mr. Page 96 February 26, 2002 (Commissioner Carter leaves the meeting.) MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, for the record, Norman Feder, transportation administrator. I'm going to need to seek your indulgence, although I'll try to be brief. What we're talking about is adopting a resolution authorizing condemnation of right-of-way and/or easements required for the construction of the four-laning, the section of Immokalee Road between Wilson Boulevard and 43rd Avenue NE, which is capital Improvement Element No. 71, Project No. 60018. This is Phase 1, if you will, of that overall project from Wilson to 43rd, as I mentioned, the overall project being from 951 all the way to 43rd. In your efforts you have in the past, May 9th of 2000, adopted Ordinance 2000-31, and following that Ordinance No. 2000-32 that established the four-laning as a priority project, incorporated that into your capital improvement element, and made it part of your transportation element of your Comprehensive Plan. Initial authorization to purchase the right-of-way for both phases, if you will, on Immokalee Road was given by the Board of County Commissioners on November 27th, 2001. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Feder, I don't mean to interrupt you, but your presentation is wonderful, and we've been through this literature. I'm going to make a motion to approve. MR. FEDER: And what I'm going to ask with your indulgence, Mr. Chairman, that this information needs to get on the record as part of these proceedings. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please continue. MR. FEDER: -- before we go to condemnation. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thanks. MR. FEDER: We wouldn't want to have any questions as we go out in this process to make sure we acquire the right-of-way. So with your indulgence, I'll try to be quick. Page 97 February 26, 2002 Under Resolution No. 2001-450 authorization to proceed on acquisition of right -of-way, public notices have been sent to all property owners along the corridor, real estate appraisals have been recorded --. REPORTER: Mr. Feder, can I ask you to please slow down if you want a record. (Commissioner Coyle leaves the meeting.) MR. FEDER: I'm sorry. Initial authorization for purchase of right-of-way for both phases of the Immokalee project was given by the Board of County Commissions on November 27th, 2001, under Resolution No. 2001- 450. Project notices have been sent to all property owners along the corridor, and Real estate appraisals have been ordered. Construction improvements to this roadway segments should commence later this year, and the board is advised that the condemnation of property will most likely be necessary in order to meet the schedule. While staff will attempt to negotiate settlements without resorting to the county's power of eminent domain, should the condemnation be required in order to meet the schedule commensurate with construction, the cost to acquire all remaining unsecured right-of-way and other easements as may be required is estimated at approximately $3.8 million. Numerous public meetings, MPO meetings, metropolitan planning meetings, documentation of various alternative routes and typical roadway sections considered by staff and consultants, environmental impacts, cost of environmental alternatives, has been determined through the legal descriptions to be an interest in the real property specified in the legal descriptions. Part of the attached resolution and in all the considerations provided for in a memorandum provided to the board of February 19th, 2002, we're requesting that, subject to any public comment, that Page 98 February 26, 2002 the board adopt the resolution authorizing proceeding forward with condemnation as necessary to bring forward this important project. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, and I make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second your motion. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle, from where you are, do you think you might be able to vote on this? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor-- are there any questions or any comments? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Not from me, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much, Commissioner Coyle. You look very impressive from behind the podium. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much. Maybe I should stay here. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That would be a great idea. No discussion. We have a motion; we have a second. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 4 to 0 with Commissioner Carter being absent. Item # 10G RESOLUTION 2002-126 OPPOSING LEGISLATION TO RESCIND THE EMINENT DOMAIN AUTHORITY OF COLLIER Page 99 February 26, 2002 COUNTY OR TO OTHERWISE RESTRICT OR LIMIT COLLIER COUNTY JURISDICTION OVER LOCAL WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITIES - ADOPTED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Moving right along. Item F we're saving for later; G is an add-on. I believe this is you, Mr. Wallace. (Commissioner Carter returns to meeting.) (Commissioner Coyle leaves meeting.) MR. WALLACE: Yes, sir, thank you. For the record, Bleu Wallace, Director of Community Operations. Mr. Olliff explained this item perfectly this morning, same resolution as you passed last year opposing any kind of action that would diminish your powers under eminent domain. Staff would recommend approval. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know who pulled it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. It was an add-on. MR. WALLACE: It was an add-on. I received a call yesterday. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve. MR. WALLACE: -- Hernando County. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and also would like to recommend that you contact the folks in Marco Island since they have a private utility company down there. This could directly affect them also. MR. WALLACE: Yes, sir, I will. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion from Commissioner Henning and a second from Commissioner Fiala. Are there any questions or discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor indicate by saying Page 100 February 26, 2002 COMMISSIONER CARTER: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. MR. WALLACE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 4 to 0 with Commissioner Coyle being absent. Item #1 OH CURRENT AGREEMENT WITH MCDONALD TRANSIT ASSOCIATES, INC., TO IMPLEMENT OPERATIONAL AND MANAGEMENT MODIFICATIONS TO THE COLLIER AREA TRANSIT (CAT) SYSTEM IN THE AMOUNT OF $234,307 - APPROVED. SALARY RELATED ISSUES WILL BE BROUGHT BACK ON MARCH 12, 2002 Moving right along with Item H, which originally was 10. COMMISSIONER FIALA: 16. MR. OLLIFF: 16-B-5. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 16-B-5, McDonald Transit Association. MR. HARRINGTON: Good morning, for the record I'm Bob Harrington, Metropolitan Planning Organization manager. This morning I come to you with a request for some managerial and operational changes to your Collier Area Transit System. As you know on November 28th of 2001, the Board of County Commission entered into an agreement with McDonald Transit Associates, Page 101 February 26, 2002 Incorporated, to provide transit system service in support for Collier County. The services that were provided by McDonald were managed by staff person. REPORTER: I'm sorry, you're going to have to slow down. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you like to take a five-minute break? Why don't we do that? REPORTER: No, I'm all right. You're going to break for lunch soon anyway. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We'll get through this agenda item. Mr. Olliff, you've got a comment to make. MR. OLLIFF: Just a suggestion. Commissioner Coyle was the commissioner who requested this item be moved to the regular agenda, and since he's not present, perhaps you just want to go ahead and just take a break now, Mr. Chairman, for lunch since I'm not sure what his questions are. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why don't we do that. COMMISSIONER CARTER: The only difficulty is at 1 o'clock, Mr. Chairman, I will be leaving, and for the record I just want to -- as the county manager will be coming with the last item in terms of strategic plan, I'm going to go on the record that I support that strategic plan. This is absolutely the right direction for us to be going, and we need to look at those three key strategies that tie to customer service, because our customers out there are everyone that lives in Collier County. And that's where we're going, and I support that by doing what we did, like, in rural lands and in rural fringe that you methodically go through the Land Development Codes, the Growth Management Plan, and let's get it right so that we don't rush in to try to accomplish something and end up not looking like we need to. It is the best of the strategic planning process, and this county Page 102 February 26, 2002 manager and his professional staff has it right. So I'm going to go on the record supporting that, Mr. Olliff, even though I won't be here. MR. OLLIFF: Thank you very much. CHAIRlVIAN COLETTA: And with that we'll adjourn for lunch and will be meeting back here at a quarter of one, 45 minutes. (A lunch break was held from 12 p.m. To 12:45 p.m.) (Lunch recess taken from 12 p.m. To 12:45 p.m.) (Commissioner Carter not present.) MR. MUDD: You're live, Commissioner. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Reconvening. We're on Item -- help me with this now. COMMISSIONER FIALA: 16-B-5. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 16-B-5, McDonald Transit. There you go. You got to start before. Now you got to start over again. MR. HERRINGTON: Oh, okay. Good afternoon. I hope your lunch was enjoyable. I'm Bob Herrington with the -- I'm the MPO manager. This afternoon we're here to talk to you about some operational/managerial changes to our Collier Area Transit system. A little background history. In November of 2000 Collier County Board of County Commission entered into an agreement with McDonald Transit to provide transit system service and support for Collier County. The services are provided by McDonald and Associates, and we're managed by a staff person in the Transportation Planning Department for Collier County Government. In September the staff person left to pursue other interests causing a void in the oversight in the para-transit program or in the transit program. Unable to fill the vacancy with a qualified manager, the duties of the program were assumed by numerous individuals in the transportation planning staff. The transit system continues to exceed our first-year projections. Page 103 February 26, 2002 As you may or may not know, we projected rider ship of approximately 11,000 people a month. In the last few months of our past year, we were carrying and exceeding 24,000, and in doing that, the majority of some of our relative -- the majority of the midmorning and afternoon trips are requiring additional vehicles to follow the set buses that are on some of the routes to ensure that everybody is being picked up. Some of these buses are leaving their starting point, the main transfer point full, which means that as they pass bus stops along the way going to either the mall or Edison College, if there's people waiting at the bus stops, they are unable to stop and pick these folks up. What the system has been doing is supplementing these buses with vans using either clerical staff or even office management staff to drive these to make sure that we get everyone picked up. Recently McDonald Transit presented our -- your county staff with proposals to modify both the operational and management aspects of Collier Area Transit. The operational modifications would include the following: Additional buses to the two primary routes as I was -- the ones I was speaking of that were running at overloads. It would also provide half-hour service on those routes, thereby adding capacity, which they are ensuring me that this will add rider ship and revenues to the buses. These modifications could be made without any purchase of additional capital equipment or buses. It would, however, ask for five additional bus drivers, three full time and two part time, and also a rate -- a rate-of-pay adjustment for the drivers and office staff to ensure the comparability or compatibility with other local organizations providing similar services, such as your school bus drivers and taxi drivers. We're having now a problem keeping our bus drivers. What happens is they come in and get the training for the specialized CDL license to drive one of our vehicles. Once they have that they move on to the school board or one of the higher- Page 104 February 26, 2002 paying transportation providers in the area. And so we are seeking a rate-of-pay adjustment for these drivers and office staff. The managerial modifications would require the expansion of the management responsibilities at McDonald Transit to assume the duties that were previously provided by the transportation planning transit manager. Those new responsibilities would include but not be limited to the following: The preparation, administration of all federal and state grants; marketing promotion; customer service and public relations; administration of all federal, state, and local regulations; and budgetary assistance. I also have with me here today some representatives of McDonald Transit that will be, after my presentation, available to answer any of your questions regarding their proposal for managerial changes. Additional office staff would also be required to assist with the additional management. All managerial activities would still continue to be overseen by county transportation planning staff to ensure service quality. The fiscal impacts of this item would call for currently we are paying McDonald $153,660 a year for their managerial services. It would increase to 189,000, an increase of approximately $35,500. Once the restructuring has been completed and within a four-year time limit, the annual fee would decrease to $147,561. The cost of the two additional staff to assist with the additional management responsibilities would be approximately $64,700. The total increase in the managerial fee would be approximately $100,307. The adjustments for the drivers and office staff would require an increase of 134,000 for the year. Total additional cost to implement the managerial and operation modifications would be $234,000. These funds are currently available in Fund 313, the gas tax, Transit Enhancement Project No. 610. Basically staff is requesting authorization for staff to amend the Page 105 February 26, 2002 current agreement between Collier County and McDonald Associates to include the proposed managerial and operational modifications and to utilize the gas tax funds for the implementation of the proposed managerial and operational modifications. Any questions? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Questions? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. Yes. I have a number of questions, and let me tell you that the -- the reason for these questions is essentially, at some point in time, if we were to continue the transportation program, it seems to me we're going to have to pick it up under General Fund revenues once the state funds are no longer available to operate for a continued operation of this program. If we're going to get to that point, I think it's absolutely essential that the taxpayers have to understand that we have been managing their -- the expenditure of these funds in a responsible manner. And I have a number of questions concerning these increases. We're talking about a quarter-of-a-million-dollar increase in expenses and we do not have information, which provides an anticipated increase in revenues resulting from the supposed increase in rider ship. I believe a cost-effectiveness analysis with respect to this particular decision is important. There also is a situation where we are adding two administrative personnel and adding two -- two drivers. It seems to me that the increase in administrative personnel to support the program is disproportionate to the increase in the number of drivers that are going to be provided. So it just appears to me that, in addition to those things, there are functions identified in the proposed contract-- such as oversight of the facility and equipment maintenance. I have -- I have raised the question about whether or not we couldn't do this oversight and maintenance in our existing facility and if so why would it be a contract obligation to the subcontactor. There are many other functions that we perform at county government. Personnel and Page 106 February 26, 2002 labor actions, relations, personnel matter including training and development purchasing, accidents, claims, and safety administrative policies, budgetary assistance. And -- and I just think we need to perform a complete and thorough analysis to ensure this is the most cost-effective way to proceed, rather than taking advantage of many of the services that we provide already to our employees in Collier County Government. So I'm -- I'm not going to stand in the way of the board's desire to move ahead with this thing, but I'm just hopefully providing some caution that when the time comes to vote General Fund revenues for this program, people are going to be looking very carefully at how effectively we have spent their money in the past. And I think now is a really, really good time to make sure that the public understands the decisions we are making are sound fiscal decisions. And, I'm sorry, perhaps I don't understand all of the issues, but I simply can't find at the present time that they are sound fiscal decisions pertaining to this. MR. HERRINGTON: IfI could, Mr. Chairman, I can respond to a few of his questions. Regarding maintenance of the fleet, that is currently and will continue to be done by the county. What is meant in this description here is the requirements by the state means these are paid for with federal and state dollars for statewide or -- statewide annual inspection requirements that they still would have to oversee as the managers of the program. But any of the maintenance done to these vehicles is done and will continue to be done by the county. So that will not change. Regarding the proportion of managerial employees to drivers, in the transit world they work 13 hours a day. One of the requests -- one of the supervisory positions would call for a road supervisor. The road supervisors cannot work 13 hours a day. So basically what they do is work-- one works an eight-hour shift, say, from starting in the morning, opening up the transit. Some of these buses hit the road Page 107 February 26, 2002 at 4:30 in the morning and then he works for his eight-hour shift. The other gentleman or lady comes on and continues and closes the system at the end of the day. They do that through the week, and they also have to have supervisory on Saturdays. So, basically, the number -- you can't proportion the management staff to the drivers. There's only one management staff or, say, one road supervisor working at a time with the drivers on the road. It's just because of the long hours a day that they have to have two -- that would call for two, because it's part of the expansion of these routes. One of the routes that was currently running, like, six hours a day is going to expand to 13 hours, so that'll put all of our routes running 13 hours a day. So it would call for another road supervisor to help support the supervision of the operators during the daytime. As far as the projected revenues and rider ship, can McDonald speak to that? Mr. Ken Fisher from McDonald is here, and he may be able to give you some insight into those projections. MR. FISHER: Ken Fisher with McDonald Transit. I -- I would be happy to come back with anticipated rider ship and revenue figures for you, Commissioner. Right now, right off the top of my head, I would be concerned about giving that. Within a week we could come back with anticipated rider ship and revenue figures for you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good. Thank you. MR. HERRINGTON: Regarding your other questions, I totally agree that before we would get into using the General Fund dollars that we would do a thorough look at -- what has happened, as I started out my presentation with, the transit in this area has just grown so fast that the managerial changes and the operational changes we weren't expecting these to have -- to be taking or taking place at this time, and the way it's happening we figured to keep our Page 108 February 26, 2002 service going at the rate that it's going, we need to make some changes to the service that we're providing. That's why you notice we're not asking to expand or add new routes. We want to meet the need that we've got in the area we're already serving first before we look at expansion area in the future. COMMISSIONER COYLE: What is the total revenue we're obtaining from the fares that we're selling now? MR. HERRINGTON: Our total revenue is 13,000 a month from our fare boxes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. HERRINGTON: That does not include your federal transit grants that we get yearly, our statewide block grant. We also get a state grant for rural transportation for the elderly and handicapped. These are all state and federal dollars that come on board, but we are about $13,000 a month in fare box. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. MR. HERRINGTON: Which is way over and above what we were projecting that 11,000 passengers a month as compared to 24,000, so it's quite a bit more than we were expecting. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- any transit system from my understanding does not show a profit or even a breakeven. The problem is -- is our jobs are on the coast, and our working people are on the -- in the rural areas. These people need to get to work. I think it's -- you know, a good thing the government provides a vehicle for them to get to work. And otherwise we would potentially have more unemployment because somebody doesn't have a means of transportation. It's one of those functions that I never feel comfortable with about a local government involved, but it's something that before you or I or a commissioner -- that the Board of County Commissioners stepped up with it, it is a -- it is a good Page 109 February 26, 2002 program, but I do share some of the concerns. It's one of the concerns about this particular item today is quite a bit of increase in the bus drivers' annual pay. And I do understand that we -- we are competing with other entities out there, such as the schools and some of the private-sector people who hold CLD licenses. So that is one concern that I have that we're amending the contract to reflect a raise in that and, you know, this -- how long is this contract good for? MR. HERRINGTON: In the amendment -- I think the current contract was good for four years, and in the amendment we would probably continue with that or maybe look at lengthening the contract depending on what -- how the discussions went in the contract amendment. But currently this current contract that we're asking to amend is for four years. They're beginning their second year of the contract, so we have approximately three more years of this. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And hopefully we don't have to come back for another amendment. Good. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let me see, Commissioner Fiala. Go ahead, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just --just an additional item. With respect to the across-the-board pay increases, according to the executive summary, we're really not talking about just bus drivers. You're talking about across-the-board pay increase for secretaries, dispatcher, road supervisor, manager of operations, and a general manager. Now, I've heard the explanation that we need increases for the drivers because we're losing them to other transportation organizations. I question whether or not we need an across-the-board pay increase, but that is -- that is one of my concerns. And -- and a lot like Commissioner Henning, I don't -- I believe that the government has to perform some level of social service within the Page 110 February 26, 2002 county, and that's exactly what I consider this to be, a social service program, because it never pays for itself. And -- but I think that the decisions we make with respect to it must be prudent decisions and -- and I'm merely trying to lay the groundwork for the time when it is necessary for us to struggle with the issue of continuing this program and -- and subsidizing it tremendously. So -- so I just think it's a good idea to start now to begin to demonstrate that we're making prudent decisions with respect to this program, and then perhaps we'll be in a better decision to evaluate its continuance once we have to absorb the cost ourselves. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you care to make a motion? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, not yet. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning, go ahead. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Somehow I missed that about pay increase across the board, so I would like to talk to the representatives of McDonald to see what we can do about that. What are we doing with the secretary? MR. FISHER: I think what we're recommending is that we evaluate the whole pay structure. If you bump up your drivers, then you have to take a look at how that compares with the existing pay rates. You could have a dispatcher getting paid less than a driver. So all we're doing is trying to adjust the remaining pay rates be commensurate with where we're at with drivers. COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we're talking about drivers and a dispatch person? MR. FISHER: Drivers, dispatch, supervisors, and clerical. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Yeah. I don't know in -- is this going to come back to us? I mean, you're going to evaluate it now? Is that -- is this item going to come back to the Board of County Commissioners? Page 111 February 26, 2002 MR. HERRINGTON: Basically, we've-- they have -- we have already worked out the figures to bring our-- not only our drivers but our clerical staff up to par to where they would need to be as Mr. Fisher just said to make the clerical staff-- it's all part of the figures that you're looking at today. COMMISSIONER HENNING: But there's not a breakdown that I see. MR. HERRINGTON: For the clerical staff or for the drivers, no. We can come back to you with a breakdown on that, if you would like. What we did was came up with an overall figure of what we would need to do the overall rate adjustments for the pay grade. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. You know, I don't know if there's any justification for clerical increase, or I don't even know how much that is. MR. HERRINGTON: Basically, they're clerical staff that work for McDonald's that are currently making way below what the county, city, and such staff are making here. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, they're not government, though. MR. HERRINGTON: No, they're not government employees. We had to look at the dispatching staff and clerical staff of the other providers such as your Intellitran, your paratransit provider. Their clerical staff and such are making way over and above what McDonald staff are making, and we have had a turnover-- a slight turnover anyway in -- in the clerical staff. So we felt that in the transit world it tends to be word of mouth gets out that the drivers got a raise and the clerical staff didn't, and so staff starts turning over, and we figured instead of wasting the money to train, we could possibly look at bringing up their pay grades. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may, I understand your concerns and the fact that everything that you would like to work with isn't Page 112 February 26, 2002 included in your agenda package, and I respect that; however, I want to remind you that this is a vital service that we perform. And there's a lot of services we perform in the county, even such as things like the library, the parks, the fire departments, the sheriff department, but we don't expect a payback. It's a service we perform for the public for the better good of the public, and at some point in time we may have to spend more money. I hope that we can hold the line really tight, but also I'd like to remind you that the majority of the service by far is being used in the urban area. If I'm not mistaken, it's along the 41-Airport corridor; right? By far, that's where the biggest demand for the service is, which was a little bit of a surprise for me, but I think there was people out there a little more known about the thing and that they could expect it. The people that are availing themselves of this have no other means of transportation, and it is saving a lot of extra vehicles on the road. If these people were forced to buy cars or whatever, they would be on the road. So you got to weigh all these things. But I agree with you; if you're looking for a continuance to be able to have a better breakdown of the cost analysis to be able to make your decision, then by all means make a motion for it, and we'll go forward. Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I could just make one additional comment so that if the continuance is -- is determined that you could be prepared to come back and answer some of the questions. I am relatively new at this process, and I don't entirely understand the contracting relationship between us and the management company that does this. It's -- it's always been my experience that if you contract with a management company to do something for you, you don't also get involved in telling them how much they pay their secretaries and how much they pay their dispatchers and so forth. Page 113 February 26, 2002 We contract with them to provide a function to fit a certain set of specifications. How they manage to do that internally is their job, not ours, and I think we get excessively involved in the process when we start trying to make decisions at the BCC level with respect to pay levels for a subcontractor. Now, perhaps I don't understand the process, and there's no point in belaboring it today, but -- but if a continuance is granted, perhaps at least you could provide us some explanation of that next time. MR. HERRINGTON: Sure. What I could do is make available to you the contract that was initially signed between them. A lot of this took place before I even came on board, but that might better explain how the contracting process took place. I know that it was contracted at a set rate per year which included all of their staffing, but to make the additions to the staffing and to the drivers and that, we would, of course, have to boost that amount of money. But I can what I can do is make available to you a copy of the contract which may better explain it the way the process is done. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's not so much a copy of the contract; it's more a question, is that the form of contractual relationship that we should be involved in? Is there not another form of a contractual relationship that might be better for both us and the subcontactor? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Can I -- can I help you out with that, Commissioner Coyle? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think what you're asking, would it be cheaper for us as the county to be able to do the service ourselves. COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. No. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're not asking that question? COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. No. Page 114 February 26, 2002 MR. OLLIFF: No, he raises a good question. Generally in a contract that we have from management services in particular we don't get involved in determining salary ranges or certainly not into the level of determining specific salary issues. I think that's sort of a separate issue to what's in front of the board today and one that I'll write down and take direction to go back because this is a multi-year contract. I'll go back and look at the form of this particular contract, and if there are some amendments of the -- the form of that item that would make some sense, I'll bring those back to the board for consideration. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, Tom, I think that -- I'm sure this went out for RFP and -- you know, a year later here we are opening up the contract and saying, "Well, we don't have enough money." You know -- can't -- was it that the other contractors were close? MR. HERRINGTON: I wasn't -- it's not a part of the process. Mr. Fisher can probably better explain. He was part of the process and can explain the concept of the contract to you, if you would like. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I don't think today is a good time to do that, maybe individually -- MR. FISHER: If I could, the contract was set up as a fixed fee plus cost, so all the costs are reimbursable. The amendment that you're seeing before you deals with the management side of it. So that would only include the general manager's salary, the assistants for McDonald Transit. The costs are reimbursable and approved by the county government as part of your budget is the way this contract was set up. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, I think we probably need to take a little closer look at that contract. MR. OLLIFF: And my suggestion to the board today, if you want to at least move this off dead center a little bit, is perhaps in Page 115 February 26, 2002 general concept you could approve all of the portions that are in front of you with the exception of the salary-related issues, and we could bring those back on March 12th under separate executive summary and at least show you the comparison between these salary ranges because that is trying to deal with a separate issue, if you will. But if you will approve the addition to the positions, approve the amendment to the contract, and simply allow us to bring that information back on a salary-range issues under separate executive summary, that might at least help to move this one along. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'll also move on that-- the wording of that suggested motion. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And the question I have, does that mean that the action we're taking today is not the approval of the across-the-board salary increase? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's correct. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it's the approval of additional drivers and extending the bus routes. MR. HERRINGTON: Exactly. To do one, we'd have to do the other. It's my understanding what Mr. Olliffs asking is to pull the section regarding the -- any of the pay raises, and we'll come back to you with that with a better explanation of how the contract -- what the concept of the contract was and a comparison of these pay rates as compared to other people in those positions. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. My only problem -- and I'm not going to stand in the way of this issue. My only problem is -- is being asked to make a partial decision without understanding the overall issue with respect to contracting, but that's something we can discuss later. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And with that, is there any other Page 116 February 26, 2002 discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. All those in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Aye. Opposed? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 3-! with a dissenting vote being Commissioner Coyle. MR. HERRINGTON: Thank you. Item #10I FIVE APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED BY COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES (NACo) AWARDS PROGRAM- APPROVED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now we're at, I believe, it's FI Florida Department of Community Affairs; is that correct? COMMISSIONER FIALA: 16-A-9 is the -- MR. MUDD: This would be 10-I, and it was -- it was pulled as 16-E-5, which has to do with grants. MR. OLLIFF: Right. I think-- COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I made a mistake. That really wasn't the item that I wanted to pull. My understanding I missed the opportunity to -- the item that I want to discuss or actually just vote "no" on is to do it consistent of what I have been doing before, and that's 16-A-9, adopt a resolution approving two applicants for impact fee waivers for -- eligible for charitable organizations. I missed that opportunity. This item, I Page 117 February 26, 2002 move that we approve the item that I mistakenly pulled. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I will second your motion. any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: aye. (Unanimous response.) Is there All those in favor indicate by saying Item #10J DESIGN BUILD CONTRACT WITH METCALF AND EDDY, INC., FOR NEW REVERSE OSMOSIS RAW WATER SUPPLY WELLS FOR THE NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT, PROJECT 70075, IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,973.196 - APPROVED W/STIPULATIONS CHAIRMAN COLETTA: it? MR. MUDD: MR. WIDES: And now where are we, 16-C-10, is 16-10-J which is 16-C-10. Commissioners, good afternoon. Tom Wides, interim public utility administrator for the record. This is an executive summary for the design built contract with Metcalfe and Eddy for the reverse osmosis well water wells. Back in January, I believe, the board at that point in time approved this as an emergency situation that we wanted to get these wells in place. And I believe this was pulled today as part of a further questions from the Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: May I? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes. COMMISSIONER COYLE: My concern is essentially this: We are asked to approve an expenditure of $3,795,813 for a contract Page 118 February 26, 2002 where something must be accomplished in the quickest possible time, and I have no difficulty with that. My problem is that the penalty for failure to meet the target date is so small and insignificant with respect to the total cost of the contract that I don't see that it is -- it is sufficient motivation for a contractor to deliver the desired services and products on time. So I would -- in fact, it tums out to be less than 1/10 of 1 percent if I remember correctly if they were late for 100 days. So it's -- it's an issue I would like -- if the board agrees, like staff to take a look at. Because if we have something that is very critical from a time standpoint, I think we should provide substantial incentives to complete it on time, particularly if we're doing this on a sole-source basis, and I understand why we're doing that. You don't want two contractors involved and wind up being late and having them point fingers at each other as you've informed me. So -- and I fully agree with that concept. It's just that we must have greater incentives to assure that this thing is accomplished on time on schedule. MR. WIDES: Commissioner, ifI may respond to a couple of those concerns. As we did discuss, yes, this is a design build where we have one contractor involved with both the design work and the construction, so it removes that opportunity or that situation of potential "this is your fault, this is my fault." In addition to that, this is a lump-sum contract to the point that, in fact, there is all the gain in the world for this contractor to be on time or in advance. If he's late this becomes their penalty, not the county's. Further, in fact, we do have a 100 percent payment end performance bond tied to this contract. So if, in fact, they do not perform, we would invent -- we would be pulling them off site and -- and that would be the end of that contract. Basically, on top of that this has been a very sound contractor. We've had very good performance with them on both the south and north water plants on Page 119 February 26, 2002 the design work they've done there. And, in addition, based on the size of this project, just looking at the $500 per day liquidated damages, okay; we found that to be in line with this size of a contract for the type of request we're looking at. So really what we're saying is that the $500 per day is -- in fact, as you said, that is really a minimal liability for them. The real factors that we have insulating the county on this project is, in fact, the concept of it being a lump-sum contract. It is in their very best interest to get this contract done on time or in advance. COMMISSIONER COYLE: What does a lump-sum contract really mean? MR. WIDES: We are paying them to, in fact, put all these wells in the ground, get them up to an operating speed and if, in fact, they are late in doing that, that falls to their cost, not to the county's cost. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But then if they decide not to continue performing and if-- if they are late and we are assessed any penalties, do they pick up that liability? MR. WIDES: If they are late, that becomes their cost. That moves away from the county, and this becomes where the performance bond starts to get into play here. COMMISSIONER COYLE: So the state -- has the state assessed us any -- any damages of any kind or fined us, this contractor would be obligated to pick up that cost? MR. WIDES: Let me just verify that with our experts, if I may. MR. MUDD: Ten percent retain age too. MR. WIDES: And there is also the 10 percent retain age on this too. So we would actually have the monies coming back to us if there were any delays. COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you said "also 10 percent." Does that mean in addition to any fines that are assessed against the county, the contractor would be required to pay an Page 120 February 26, 2002 additional 10 percent penalty? MR. WIDES: I believe the ! 0 percent penalty will apply specifically to any late costs that come in that we would hold from that contractor. Now, in terms of any penalties, did we speak to that? MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I got to -- I got to tell you, I don't think there's anything in the contract that says that they would pay the penalties of the county. That's where the retain age comes in, and in this particular contract you're talking about $390,000 that we would hold to the very end to make sure that they finished on time and that we didn't have any penalties, and we would withdraw from the retain age before we would give him that. So we would basically complete the contract, make sure it's complete work, and then pay them what's left of that retain age. COMMISSIONER COYLE: The contract does permit you to net out any penalties charged to the county as a result of nonperformance? MR. MUDD: You'd have to -- the contract doesn't specifically state that, okay, where it would be a fee that we would have a fine. What you would get into it, would be a negotiation mechanism because he's got to basically complete at 100 percent on time as far as this contract is concerned, and if the penalties come because he's late okay. I'm not saying they're going to come. I'm just saying if they do come because they're late, then that would become a negotiating mechanism that we would have with that contractor, and the retain age would be used as that lever. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, but I don't like it. I understand what you're telling me, you know. But I think if-- if what you're asking us to do is give to -- give you approval to spend $3.9 million sole source, not advertised on something that is really very critical to us -- and I understand and agree with you why you want to do that, but if it is that critical I believe our contract should Page 121 February 26, 2002 provide for this company to perform on time or suffer all the penalties which are relevant to their -- their -- their failure to complete on time, including any penalties we are assessed as a result of their failures. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may ask a question, what is the policy in other counties? Is this -- would this be a standard operating procedure, something that could be implemented, or is this something that would be totally unacceptable by the industry? I have no idea. MR. OLLIFF: This is a pretty standard construction-type contract. What Commissioner Coyle is indicating -- and he's probably got a good point -- this is an unusual circumstance where we have unusual time deadlines, and we probably should consider that when we're negotiating these agreements. We've written this agreement pretty much like a standard construction contract with a 10 percent retain age which generally works. I mean, when you're holding $390,000 on the total contract, that's pretty good incentive to make a contractor get their job done on time. We believe it's -- it's sufficient in this case, but I -- it's a point well taken. When we've got a time deadline that's as critical as these and utilities are, we probably need to either provide additional incentive or additional stick, if you will, to make sure that the contractor gets it done on time. MR. MUDD: Commissioners, can I -- let me help a little bit in this one. I think you've got a very, very good point, and what I -- what I would ask the board to do in this particular proposal, because it is -- it is a time-sensitive issue and it's a very, very good point that staff might not have been on because we used standard contract language when we do these things. If you go before with a motion on this particular one, make it contingent upon that agreement as far as penalty be put into that contract in negotiation with Metcalfe and Eddy on that, and then once that's done give the chair the authority to sign that agreement and -- and I think we're -- we're in good shape. Page 122 February 26, 2002 And if we don't get it in the contract, we'll come back to you on 12 March at your next meeting and let you know what happened. COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's perfectly comfortable for me if it's -- if it is a legal procedure to permit us to do that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm sure Mr. Weigel would have weighed in by now. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just -- I know from personal experience how this works. Okay. And -- and a contract that requires a contractor to accept the penalties that he causes to the person he's working for is a very substantial motivator to get it done on time, but -- but holding back money from a contract is always open to negotiation just like the negotiation on this -- this weir that we talked earlier today. You really haven't defined in advance how that -- that fine is going to be assessed. So there will be negotiations. There will be experts. People will determine who was responsible for what, how much overtime you should pay them, and so forth, and we never get anywhere there. But if it clearly states that we're assessed a penalty because of their failure, they pay that penalty. MR. OLLIFF: In fairness, though, you know, too, that whenever you negotiate that as much as risk you move across the table, you're probably going to pay for. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Price goes up. MR. OLLIFF: But that's a very good observation. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: My -- my only question would be, is this delay -- well, if we approve it, then we're going forward. If the contractor rejects it, then we're in a worse position than we were before, is that correct, time wise? MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. But I think we should be able to get some kind of revolution -- yeah, revolution -- some kind of. MR. OLLIFF: That too. MR. MUDD: Yeah, that too. We should be able to bring this -- Page 123 February 26, 2002 this item to fruition, and we still have some time with the board. You have a continuing meeting for the rural fringe, and if we had to we could make a part of that agenda this item if it goes south on us. So you've got some time when the whole board's going to be together where we can get after it doesn't -- if the contractor rejects this clause. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle, would you like to make a motion? COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll make a motion that we approve this contract with those stipulations. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: The stipulation that Jim Mudd outlined, and I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We already have a second with Commissioner Fiala, but we'll use you as a backup. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're welcome. We have a motion from Commissioner Coyle, a second from Commissioner Fiala, a backup from Commissioner Henning. And with that is there any other questions or discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: indicate by saying aye. (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: MR. WIDES: Call the motion. All those in favor And the ayes have it 4-0. Commissioners, thank you. Item # 1 OF STRATEGIC PLANNING FOLLOW-UP ON THREE DIFFERENT ISSUES DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AS Page 124 February 26, 2002 RECOMMENDED BY STAFF- APPROVED CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Now we have -- we're past all those changes. I believe right now we got two items competing to be on at the same time, 10-F. Okay, 10-F, 10-F is the strategic follow-up from Tom Olliff. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, thank you. This is the last regular item on your agenda, and the board had as a result of its strategic planning workshop which you held in the Supervisor of Elections meeting room directed me to take the information that had been developed and put on the big remarkable board, if you'll remember that session, and try and bring something back that -- that could try and get our arms around that big list and try and create something that we could create in the way of something that would might be a three- or a four-point strategic plan that we could then carry to the staff so that the staff could clearly understand what was important to the board. The whole purpose being to develop a budget that reflected the priorities that the board established for us. What you see on the visualizer right now is the full list that was on that remarkable board on the conclusion of our -- our workshop. Most of it is still on that board because I realized halfway through writing that I was using a permanent marker. COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's no longer remarkable. MR. OLLIFF: We are working with the supervisor to try and clean offher board for her. When we looked through this list, though, we did see what I believe are some -- some recurring themes, if you will. And I believe in your executive summary we walked you through the evolution of this where we seemed to see these things grouping themselves naturally under three key headings, and those would be the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code, public infrastructure, and what I call resource management. Page 125 February 26, 2002 And that tried to get at our ability to manage not only natural resources but resources like your potable water supply. And then the last item was financial planning and management where items such as transportation funding and road building, diversification of your revenues, and growth paying for growth seemed to naturally fall. There were two items I believe were indicated in your executive summary that didn't seem to perfectly fit under either of those three -- any of those three headings, but the one which we show at the top here seemed to be almost an umbrella encompassing everything that we were trying to get at, and it was the idea of public trust. And I would offer to the board that if we were looking for one strategic mission, if you will, or a single overriding strategic goal, the idea of trying to regain, rebuild, and maintain that public trust. There's probably no better overall heading, and I don't think there's probably no idea that captures better what it is that we're really trying to do than that. If if the board agrees in terms of the three different headings, then we would look to the board to have some discussion about that, frankly, this afternoon. And -- and whatever it is the board decides are its strategic goals as a result of that, we want to take back to the staff and we want to present to you a work plan, then, that would take No. 1, for instance, and I would want to provide back to you a list of work products that we would intend to produce for you in fiscal year '03 that would further the No. 1 item on your strategic plan. We would do the same thing with No. 2, and we would do the same thing with No. 3. We would want to make assignments, provide you dates, and allow you to hold us accountable making sure that, then, we are moving forward with three major items that you tell us are important for you. With that, that's really all the presentation that I had, and I'm -- I'm happy to answer any questions that the board might have. Page 126 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I-- I fully support the county manager's conclusions here, and I'd like to commend him for pulling these things together under the heading of Regaining the Public's Trust. MR. OLLIFF: Thankyou. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think that is the overall goal of all of the things we're trying to do, and I strongly support this particular categorization of activities. I would like to ask at the same time that -- that the board consider the recommendation that I have made in a memorandum to all of you concerning managing growth. My recommendation at that point or in that memorandum was that we -- we undertake a comprehensive review of the Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan, and that fits in perfectly with our first strategic goal here. And if-- if in approving this report by the county manager we could also provide direction to the county staff with respect to beginning a comprehensive review of the Land Development Code and the Growth Management Plan, I would very much appreciate that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Isn't that one of the objectives that we have already established, or we're going to do a complete rewrite? MR. OLLIFF: No, sir. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That should be part of this. Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, this is -- this memo that you sent us is -- is great. I think Commissioner Carter's been talking about this, let's control growth instead of growth controlling us. We never did put anything in writing, but we did have a lot of things that we say, and this really spells it all out where we need to be this year as far as making amendments to the Growth Management Plan and the Land Development Code. And if I just Page 127 February 26, 2002 might add a couple of things. We need to amend the commercial districts height and put some height restrictions in it. We need to move -- remove some of that fuzzy language in these commercial PUDs and, yeah, it's going to be a tremendous amount of work. It will probably take up the rest of our work period for over -- about a year -- MR. OLLIFF: At least. COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- for overhauling these two plans, but -- you know, I commend Commissioner Coyle for putting this together, this memo, with detailed suggestions on getting where we need to be. And this is very fitting to the community's character and what I hear the citizens want here in Collier County. So with that I say to the county manager, let's roll. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would like to add that what I've provided you really is just a beginning. I know that all of you have suggestions yourself that you'd like to see us deal with, and rather than trying to have the staff deal with these things sort of as they come up without really taking them in a comprehensive plan, I -- I think it would be confusing if we did it on a case-by-case basis, and that's why I'm asking for really a comprehensive effort to begin immediately, to really as Tom says, "Let's roll." I think it's a thing we need to do quickly, and we're going to need a lot of help and input from the public and -- and all the segments of the public, as a matter of fact. MR. OLLIFF: I want the board to clearly understand what it is you're asking to do because this is no small task. When you start talking about the Golden Gate Master Plan Update, for example, that is one very small portion component of your overall Growth Management Plan. The original Growth Management Plan took over 200 and I believe -- 20 public meetings in order to be able to bring it to its final adoption point. I'm not suggesting to you that you need to Page 128 February 26, 2002 have 200 meetings in order to be able to update it, but I'm telling you it is a very big, a very detailed, and a very difficult book to go through because there are nine separate elements each that gets into excruciating detail about how we are going to manage the future development growth and those issues in this community. And I think we need to bring you back different ways for us from this point to get to where you're actually going to sit down on an element-by-element basis and actually go through the amendment process, because there's a number of different ways that you can do that. But if you understand that and you're willing to take on that job, I can't think of anything more important that we could do over the course of the next 12 months. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm willing to commit to two meetings a week if that's what it takes. And I think maybe probably evening meetings would be the best idea so we can get the public's input. Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Donna was first. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry, Donna. COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's all right. That's all right. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All right, Donna. You're first. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I totally agree that I would be more than willing to spend any time necessary. For a year now we've been talking about concurrency and way back when we were doing the Mirasol thing we were talking about the traffic and coming out of all of the different areas, and we were -- I brought this up saying that I didn't want to approve Mirasol because of all of the traffic and the other surrounding areas. And I was told I couldn't look at the surrounding areas; I had to only look at the Mirasol PUD, and I said, "But the thing is they're all going to be coming out onto Immokalee." So I've been told all along that -- though I'll never put it in such great words as you did -- we have to Page 129 February 26, 2002 fix this, but we don't have the means to do it. Now we're going to have the means to do it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And the commitment. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. IfI could just suggest one thing with respect to how we proceed. We need to depend upon your guidance because it is a big, big project, but having done something like this on a much smaller scale before, my experience was that there's no way you can do it for the entire county at one time. And I found it useful to take a subset and use the examples of a prior comprehensive or community redevelopment district plan as a guide and try to find where those -- those principles would fit within the area that we were trying to redevelop. And the areas within the county vary tremendously with respect to the -- the kinds of things we might wish to achieve in those areas. If we could begin with some of the principles we have already worked out and we believe that those principles are important, then we can start looking for areas in the county where those principles can first be applied, and that way we build upon the -- the accomplishments of our other community redevelopment plans and overlays and hopefully can move a little more quickly than we would if we just started from scratch. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think what he's saying is over the past few years that you have seen some of the heartburns that the board of commissioners had of citizens' concerns, and our hands are tied and also things to do with concurrency and smart growth. MR. OLLIFF: Yeah. And I think the board has currently got two horizon committees that should probably meld into this effort very, very well in terms of workforce housing and smart growth and our hope -- I would hope that as we bring this process along that we can certainly merge a lot of recommendations, and the timing ought to be perfect for a lot of that. Commissioner Coyle, just for my staffs sake and then perhaps Page 130 February 26, 2002 the public's sake, they've not had the ability to see the memo that you've provided, and you may have, at least in a thumbnail way, at least explained a little bit about what it is that you provided in that memo. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, basically it was a summary of many of the activities that have already been taken or been accomplished in the past year or so with respect to Land Development Code changes and-- and funding issues. It's a summary of the ability of the Board of County Commissioners and the staff to find the necessary funds to undertake the five-year road building program, a brief discussion of smart growth where targeted growth can go a long way toward relieving overcrowding in certain segments of the county. For example, if-- if people have to drive from Golden Gate or Immokalee to downtown Naples to shop or to work, that with some targeted development further east in the county, we can provide those kinds of services and jobs, shopping areas further east and relieve some of the overcrowding on the roads. And then with respect to the Growth Management Plan, a number of Land Development Code changes which include the checkbook process that the staff has already been working on that will account for the cumulative effect of traffic on our roads, and the -- the conduct of the traffic analysis procedure to be done by county staff rather than by developers. But the funding is to be provided as a fee to -- by developers. And the the process of getting advanced public facility availabilities without really submitting a detailed plan has caused us some difficulty in the past, and I'm suggesting that we terminate that process. We also need to reduce -- we've already reduced the number of years for the review of PUD from five to three. And I think that will help us go back and get a better assessment of where we really are. You've heard me say in the past that there are 80,000 unbuilt Page 131 February 26, 2002 units, dwelling units out there. I think when we go back and review some of these PUDs, we will find that the people who hold those PUDs will voluntarily substantially reduce that number and, of course, connector roads which the staff is already working on so that we can keep traffic off the arterials and permit movement back and forth between residential and commercial areas without getting out on major, major roads. And removing the -- the authority of the county staff to make decisions concerning zoning and land-use changes I think is important. We have seen times in the past where a member of the planning staff has given an interpretation that has gotten us into difficulty. Controversy is a mild term. Lawsuits also which can be very, very expensive, and what I would suggest is that -- that we develop a more streamlined procedure which will permit those kinds of changes to come before the Board of County Commissioners and be reviewed before they are approved. It still uses the staff in a advisory capacity but leaves those land-use decisions up to the board which is where I really think they should be. And then, of course, we've reviewed the impact-fee process and recovery of existing capacity or recovery of capacity on the existing roads. Our transportation administrator is already coming up with lots of good ideas about how we can use our existing roads more effectively. And I think that with the completion of some of the construction that we have been doing on roads this fall and the recovery process that permits us to get more effective road throughput, we can do a lot with what we have right now. So, basically, that's a thumbnail sketch of the whole thing, and I appreciate your support of that process, and I would like to also acknowledge publicly that -- that these are not all my recommendations. They have come from lots of people on the staff, Board of Page 132 February 26, 2002 County Commissioners, people have mentioned these things before. A lot of them were done before I ever got here. So -- so I have just pulled them together into a more comprehensive plan, and I just recommend that we continue along that process. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Excuse me. Some of these things I do say -- see is a creative first-time thing that -- that is -- it is your thoughts. So don't discount-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: A few of them. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Don't discount the work that you've done here and suggest -- I see this is going to be a long process, so I hope you're here to help us out with it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. We'll see. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, with that I think as a recommendation I would propose, if the board is supportive, again, of this three-point strategic plan, the board could approve that today. But I would also ask that board members as they look at those three points and they read Commissioner Coyle's memo -- and I know you've all been making notes on these same type issues yourselves -- if you send us those items that you think we can be working on that are supportive of any of those three plans, we will begin working on that work plan that you will see as part of your budget. And I think what we will try and do is put together a schedule, a plan how to get from here to there, and then we will put together the funding plan as part of your FY'03 budget that will tie all of this together. And just so you know what the end result of this will be, when you tell us what direction you want this organization to go in, that will become the mission and work plan for not only us as an organization to meet in this room, but that will become the work plan for the divisions. And that will become the work plan for each individual department under that all the way down to the actual Page 133 February 26, 2002 action plans and the individual employee in the street. So hopefully this entire organization will be heading towards this direction if that's where you want us to go today. COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion we approve the three -- three items that are on the screen. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Including regaining the trust. I second that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala. Is there any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor indicate by saying (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 4-0. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Implicit in that is guidance to do the comprehensive review of the Land Development Code, or does that require something separate? CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, we expand it. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Expanded it out from there. Good work, Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you all of you. You're all contributing. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's a very nice thing to say. Again, your humbleness is shining through. Item # 12A CLOSED ATTORNEY-CLIENT SESSION REQUESTED BY COUNTY ATTORNEY AT FEBRUARY 12, 2002 BOARD Page 134 February 26, 2002 MEETING PURSUANT TO SECTION 286.011 (8), FLA. STAT., TO DISCUSS SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS AND/OR STRATEGY RELATED TO LITIGATION EXPENDITURES IN THOMAS WAJERSKI, V. COLLIER COUNTY; CASE NO'S. 95- 3067-CA-01 AND 95-2955-CA IN THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND CASE NO. 99-303 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now, we're to the county attorney's report, and I believe we're ready to do our two o'clock closed attorney-client session, and would you like to do the formal announcement again, Mr. Weigel? MR. WEIGEL: I would. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And as you recall and the agenda indicates, Item 12-B was on the agenda on February 12th, and in the preliminary discussion to the item I made the request to the Board of County Commissioners to bring this matter back for a closed session for discussion in regard to strategy and advice to the county attorney concerning proposed settlement in the cases involving Thomas Wajerski. So we, at the board's direction, took care of all the appropriate notices prior to today's meeting, and I have provided you with a copy of that notice. You'll note that the session commences at an open meeting at which the person chairing the meeting shall announce the commencement, an estimated length of attorney-client session, and I can tell you that I think this will be no longer than -- I expect shorter than 30 minutes -- as far as the discussion we may have depending on questions brought up, and the names of persons attending. And the notice proclaimed it, I mentioned it this morning, and I'll mention again, that persons in attendance along with the Board of County Commissioners attendant Page 135 February 26, 2002 will be the county manager, Tom Olliff; county attorney, David Weigel; assistant county attorney, Mike Pettit; and outside counsel, David Bryant, former assistant county attorney. And at this point in time if you wish to you may indicate that the regular meeting is on hold, that we're going into closed session, and we will ask our court reporter, to relocate with you in your Board of County Commissioners' conference room. And as again the notice indicates, this is a closed session, but it is entirely on the record to be recorded by the court reporter and pursuant to statute the court reporter will provide that record. It will be under seal with the clerk until the case is terminated in the judicial proceeding. So with that, you may wish to call us to the private chamber. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So moved. (Closed session meeting was had in Board of County Commissioners' boardroom at 2 p.m. And proceedings continued in regular meeting at 2:50 p.m. As follows:) MR. WEIGEL: Mr. Chairman, I'll note -- hello, are we on? Okay. Thank you. I'll note that as we have indicated in the notice I've highlighted, at the conclusion of the attorney-client session the meeting, meaning this meeting, shall be reopened and the person chairing the meeting shall announce the termination of the closed session, so if you would do that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Termination of the closed session. Item #12B SETTLEMENT OF ALL PEND1NG LITIGATION AND CLAIMS INVOLVING THOMAS WAJERSKI, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, CASE NO'S. 95-3067-CA-01 AND 95-2955-CA IN THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND CASE NO. 99-303 IN THE UNITED Page 136 February 26, 2002 STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, AND CHAIRMAN TO SIGN ALL NECESSARY SETTLEMENT DOCUMENTS - APPROVED WITH STIPLULATIONS MR. WEIGEL: Okay. The board shall then proceed to hear Agenda Item 12-B regarding settlement of all pending litigation and claims involving Thomas Wajerski including without limitation Case Nos. 95-3067 and 95-2955 in the 20th Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, and Case No. 99-303 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. And at this point the meeting is back before the chairman, and I believe Mr. Pettit, assistant county attorney, will make a brief presentation. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Pettit. MR. PETTIT: Commissioners, for the record, Mike Pettit, assistant county attorney. Before you is a proposed recommended settlement of three lawsuits and with releases involving both the county and a number of individuals who are -- been associated with the county one way or another, whether it was independent contractors, employees past or present with a Mr. Wajerski for $85,000. And as indicated, I think, in the executive summary, $67,500 of that sum is to be paid by our excess carrier with the county to bear the remainder. And I want to advise you that this morning I had discussions with the counsel for the sheriff who also is a party to this suit along with an individual sheriff deputy, and the sheriff is prepared to contribute $2,500 to that $85,000 sum if the sheriff also and the deputy are released from the suit in which they're parties and also receive the same release as the county. I should add that that issue has not been discussed with Mr. Wajerski at the time that the claims adjuster has indicated in the executive summary, and the excess carrier work with Mr. Wajerski to come up with this Page 137 February 26, 2002 recommendation. That issue is not before Mr. Wajerski, and I don't know what his response would be. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Questions on the part of the Commissioners? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we take the recommendations of our legal -- legal team to settle this case and also include stipulations of the settlement of releasing the sheriff and sheriffs employees and the county employees in this matter. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I second. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion and a second. Comments from the commissioners? Mr. Weigel. MR. WEIGEL: Just one for clarity of the record and the motion, and that is that the $2,500 discussed concerning the sheriff contribution is toward the total figure of $85,000 and would, in fact, net reduce the expenditure of the county of the amount of 17,500 which comprises part of the total settlement; that is the sheriff, if approved by Mr. Wajerski, for the release of the sheriffs claims as well as all those of the county, the sheriff would contribute $2,500 reducing the amount of $17,500 to $15,000 that Collier County would be paying as the package of settlement dollars to be paid here. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That -- that's correct. MR. PETTIT: And one other point for clarification of the motion that the release is to be given by Mr. Wajerski would be such that all claims against the county or any county associated individuals, independent contractors or the like, would be released forever and forever discharged and barred through the date of this settlement. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's correct. That's part of the motion. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And at what point will the private Page 138 February 26, 2002 session meeting records become public records? MR. WEIGEL: The transcript of this will be created by the court reporter. It will be tendered to the clerk, fourth floor of this building, and held confidentially until the termination of the judicial proceedings, until the case is concluded in court, at which time it will become part of the public record of this meeting. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Well, I'm opposed to the motion for reasons that took -- for events that took place within the private meeting that we had and the discussion that took place. Other than that I won't deliberate on it and put ourselves in a disadvantage. But at that point is there any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then I'll call the motion. All those in favor of the motion indicate by saying aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed. Aye. With Commissioner Coletta being the dissenting vote. And with that coming to the end of the day. MR. PETTIT: Thank you, Commissioners. Item #15 STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Olliff. MR. OLLIFF: Just a couple of little items, Mr. Chairman. The -- there was a memo that was provided -- actually indicating that the Florida Division of Forestry has got a meeting scheduled, I believe, it is March 20th with the Golden Gate Estates Association -- civic Page 139 February 26, 2002 association where they want to talk about providing some wildfire- related information to the community who, in particular, lives in the estates and the area most impacted by wildfire season. They've asked for some assistance from us in notifying the public about that meeting. And even though it is another government agency, I am always cautious on what to bring to the board and get board's direction before I go start using PIO staff time or Channel 11 now, as the case is, before I start advertising those type of meetings for another government agency, even though I think this one is a great idea, and my recommendation is that the board give me that direction. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I -- I would like to see this happen. We have an obligation to keep the public aware of the dangers of brush fires, especially in the rural areas of this county. When the day the day will come when we'll pay a price for the overgrowth, the brush and the problems that exist out there. The only way we can mitigate the severity of the extent of the chance it will probably happen is to keep people well informed. Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a health, welfare, and safety, so I concur. Not that it has anything to do with District 5 or anything. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, you know, District 5 is where you have all your natural resources and the lack of four-lane roads, and so it's a good idea to get the word out. We do have television in some cases. MR. OLLIFF: I'll take that as direction. The next item that I've got -- and I hate to bring this up, frankly, without Commissioner Carter being here, but timing sort of dictates that I do. I want to just clarify and make sure that you-all got a copy of the letter that I sent to Dr. Forenz regarding the ethics audit and that the approach that I'm taking does reflect what I think the board's Page 140 February 26, 2002 direction was for that. And my letter to Dr. Forenz simply indicated that we would provide him with a copy of any and all of the documents we had here in county government we thought were in any way, shape, or form related to ethics-related issues which we have provided him with the assistance of the county attorney's office. And it was a binder about that thick (indicating). Following Dr. Forenz's review I asked him to provide us with a scope of work. Even though he is going to be providing his services at no cost, I read from the board that there was a concern, that day at least, in understanding what was the length of time, what was the expected work product out of Dr. Forenz, and what was the expected expenditure of staff time and resource that was going to be necessary in order for Dr. Forenz to do that. And the board wanted some understanding of that commitment that we as an organization were going to make before we actually formally committed to a contract term with him. So I've asked him to provide us back a scope of work after he's had a chance to review that material, and I would bring that scope of work back in the form of a formalized agreement back to the board for approval. And that's -- that's the course that I'm working toward, unless the board wants to do something different. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do you have a time line on this, Mr. Olliff?. MR. OLLIFF: It's -- it's really going to depend on how long it's going to take Dr. Forenz to get through that binder of material that we provided him. I had heard indirectly that he was about two-thirds of the way through. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's correct. I had a meeting with him, and he expressed that to me. MR. OLLIFF: So I would expect in the month of March that I'm going to get something back from him and either the last meeting in March or probably the first meeting in April have something back Page 141 February 26, 2002 to the board to consider. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. Any comments on that? (No response.) MR. OLLIFF: Okay. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Anything else, Mr. Olliff?. MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, that's all I have. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Weigel. MR. WEIGEL: Yes, thanks. You know, in the area of difficult decisions on lawsuits, I've got another one for you, and that is EMS working with our assigned assistant county attorney note that from time to time outstanding bills for EMS services, transportation services, are not paid by persons who pass on to their greater reward. And so what happens, the outstanding bill has an opportunity to be collected as a claim against the estate of those deceased. And what we also find is that if we comply with the limited period of time to file a claim on behalf of the county, the EMS, that the personal administrator for the estates have the opportunity to either approve the claim, typically $315 or something a little above that, approve it or deny it, and if they deny it then the county as a claimant has a 30- day window to file an independent small lawsuit in county court to proceed to try to collect. We have these coming through the pike with not great regularity but they do come through. See, once again, maybe call it diminishing returns with some of the effort that may be provided, but what I'd like to advise you and -- and tell you is that we'd like to go forward on these cases on kind of a provisional basis and report back to you as to the kind of time it takes because we may find the Court -- the personal representatives may find that it's to their advantage, too, in the efficient administration of their estates to pay these things and not go to trial. It usually requires two hearings at pretrial and then a hearing on the thing. So it costs them -- it costs us about $70.50 to Page 142 February 26, 2002 file and a little bit extra for service and things of that nature. It will reduce what we collect if we collect the fees in total. But I'd like to go forward and let the public know, too, that the process is one of being responsible for one's bills, and those who take on the obligation of estates should be equally responsible for a service well provided. And we'll monitor this over a six- to eight- month period and come back to you with a report indicating to you the kind of expenditures in human resource and cost and filing on those matters. And if you have no -- no problem with that, call it attitude or aptitude toward this, we'll proceed that way. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Fine with me. COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine. And we talk about small claims. MR. WEIGEL: It's essentially that. It's the equivalent of small claims, yes. COMMISSIONER HENNING: And can't you recoup the cost? MR. WEIGEL: Potentially, but not absolutely. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Great. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All right. MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Anything else, Mr. Weigel? MR. WEIGEL: No, that's it. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Comments from the commissioners starting with Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I would like to ask how you guys feel about an idea that I have. I'm the liaison for the board for the workforce housing task force, and at our last meeting we learned that the state is in the process of possibly diverting SHIP funds from the SHIP program into the Everglades Restoration Program. And a few organizations have already written to our state government saying, "Don't do that to us." It was brought up at our meeting. Page 143 February 26, 2002 Now, I have nothing against the Everglades Restoration in fact, our future water supply depends on that, I believe. On the other hand, I can't see taking SHIP funds and targeting toward Everglades Restoration. I feel that they should come up with the funds in other ways, but not -- not attacking the SHIP program. And I was wondering if I could ask you folks, you other commissioners, if we could as a board write a letter to the state asking them to or stating that we oppose diverting these SHIP funds to the Everglades Restoration or we want to keep them where they're at. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I think that's an excellent idea. Possibly you might give us a little reminder by e-mail, and possibly you might want to have a proclamation put together for the board's consideration at the next meeting. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to do that. COMMISSIONER HENNING: We might have to act on that sooner than that. You're talking about the house and the state voting on it and the governor where he's at. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're right, Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: We probably need to do that -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How about next -- I'm sorry, you're waving your head "no." MR. OLLIFF: If the board wants -- generally in these kind of cases, the board simply authorizes the chair to sign a letter that it would send to at least our legislative delegation that we could draft up just indicating as -- as a policy statement that the board opposes any diversion of SHIP funds towards the Everglades Restoration project, and that way you don't have to have a specific bill reference or anything else, and we can authorize the chairman to send that letter. Page 144 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We probably should do that with a motion. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'd like to make the motion that we ask our chairman to write a letter to send to all five of our representatives for Collier County. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Speaking for the commission? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Speaking for the commission asking them to oppose diverting SHIP funds to the Everglades Restoration. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do we have a second? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion and a second. Any All those in favor indicate by saying (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 4-1 -- or 4-0. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I appreciate that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. And, Commissioner Coyle, do you have anything? COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, just two things briefly. With respect to the proclamation for Brian Shimer, since I was the one who requested this proclamation and since he is in my district, I would like to have the honor of presenting the proclamation to him and whatever other awards we're going to bestow upon him. And, secondly, I'd like to ask the staff to coordinate with the activity that is planned for this Friday and to assure that -- that we can make that presentation at that time. And then, secondly, the East Naples Civic Association, I believe, has talked with most of the commissioners, and they are Page 145 February 26, 2002 asking for help in a study, an overlay district, for the 41 corridor, and I would like to explore the possibility of having one of the consultants or the consultant that we have working on some -- some redevelopment plans for some other areas of our community work with a group from East Naples Civic Association to help them begin to establish a plan. They do not want a CRA. They would prefer to do this essentially themselves, but they are going to require some assistance, of course, from the staff. And if we could provide them also the assistance of the consultant that's working in some of the other areas, it would be greatly helpful. MR. OLLIFF: They are scheduled to -- in fact, they submitted a letter requesting a public petition at your first meeting in March. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. MR. OLLIFF: I think they have a very detailed package they put together, and just in fair warning I'm probably going to tell you that this is as likely to be the straw that breaks the staff's camel back on this one. And we're probably going to have to ask you in conjunction with this, if you want to do it -- and I think it's a very worthwhile goal here -- but for some additional staff help on the planning side to be able to manage that project if you want to go that way. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is there some benefit to including this effort in our comprehensive review of the Land Development Code or at least -- MR. OLLIFF: You can, but every -- every one of these ends up being what we call an overlay on top of-- because what you're talking about are some specific and separate land development regulations that are going to be in place for a particular set of issues. Bayshore, for instance, has a specific set of issues that you were trying to accomplish with some specific overlays. I think East Naples 41 will be the same way. Page 146 February 26, 2002 COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I understand. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, one thing. I think just to let everybody know -- and I'm sure some of you are aware about the young lady, Jennifer Knight, that needs a lung transplant. Jennifer has cystic fibrosis, and she's had it since she was a young child. She went before the legislation delegation because the issue of Medicaid when you once you turn 21 you lose that transplant ability, and that's through the State of Florida. The doctor is recommending that they hold off at this time for a transplant for a lung. She's at the age of 20, and the cost is over a quarter of a million dollars for this lung transplant, and Senator Saunders and all the delegation is very supportive of that. But Jennifer's mother, Heather Knight, sent me an e-mail that I'd like to share. It says (as read): "Dear Tom, just want to let you know that yesterday was a huge success. We had the bill passed out in the house health regulation committee with everyone voting yes. Then we went to meet with Senator Silvers and Representative LaCosta who chairs the appropriation committee in the Senate in house who gave their promise of support of the bill -- the money for the bill. Bob Sharp who heads ACHA" -- which I don't know what that is -- ''promised to -- promised money for the bill also, then went to meet with Lieutenant Governor Frank Brogan, which I'm sure Representative Dudley Goodlette's office helped out tremendously on getting into the governor's cabinet office door. And also is very supportive. Without putting the cart before the horse, I think that many of the" -- I'm sorry -- "we may have won this challenge, and I play -- plan to go back to watch the bills pass on the floor of the House and Senate and then, of course, watch the governor sign -- sign it into law. So thanks for caring about the ongoing efforts. I'll keep Page 147 February 26, 2002 you posted of things, and by the way, it took five years of fighting to get a heart transplant to cover Medicaid," and she's saying that "I have worked only on this for six months." But I think it's because of Heather, and Jennifer has touched everybody's heart in the plight of Jennifer's needs, and so I personally want to thank our legislation delegation for their hard work and taking a real personal interest in this. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm so glad you brought that up. If I might just make a little comment on that same -- I got to know the family just peripherally when I started -- well, Rich King and I put together that Ricky King Fund. She was one of our very first requests. She needed something to -- it was a special machine that clears out your lungs that you have to be hooked up to a couple times a day, $ ! 9,000 for this machine, by the way, and we had $7,500 in the bank. And other states actually have Medicaid that pays for this machine. Florida does not. Being that they lived here, they had no financial help whatsoever. And let me tell you, we got that -- we got that machine for her in a couple weeks' time. We put that money together, and she was taken care of. And, of course, that's what brought her to this point, but I'm so glad that you brought this up and supported their plight because it's people like you and her mom, Heather, that are going to make life a little bit better for other people in that same position. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for your efforts in that direction, Commissioner Henning. Thank you. Just one comment on that. There is 26 elements to Medicaid. I don't know if you know that, and the states weigh in for whatever pans they want to take and pay for. Twenty-six elements would bankrupt us. Like, they have some of the states in the Northeast where the majority of the property taxes are going to that. Of course, Page 148 February 26, 2002 we may be a little bit more to the other direction. When elements like this come up where a special need is needed in the community, thank God they got the contacts to get it done. But you often wonder how many other people are out there that don't have the ability to make these contacts. They may be isolated for one reason or another, maybe their age or lack of a second language. With that, we're adjourned. Page 149 February 26, 2002 ***** Commissioner Carter moved, seconded by Commissioner Henning and carried 5/0, that the following items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted: ***** Item #16Al F1NAL PLAT OF "ISLAND WALK PHASE ONE-B" LOCATED IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST WITH STIPULATIONS Item #16A2 FINAL PLAT OF "ISLAND WALK PHASE SEVEN" LOCATED 1N SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST - SUBJECT TO CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, PERFORMANCE SECURITY AND STIPULATION Item #16A3 RESOLUTION 2002-99 GRANTING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "GREY OAKS - UNIT TEN" Item #16A4 RESOLUTION 2002-100 GRANTING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "GREY OAKS- UNIT TWELVE" Page 150 February 26, 2002 Item #16A5 RESOLUTION 2002-101 GRANTING FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "GREY OAKS - UNIT THIRTEEN" Item #16A6 FINAL PLAT OF "RUNAWAY BAY AT FIDDLERS CREEK", LOCATED IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST - SUBJECT TO CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, PERFORMANCE SECURITY AND STIPULATION Item # 16A7 HENDERSON, YOUNG & COMPANY SELECTED FOR CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS FOR RFP 02-3317 "CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDIES - EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES" Item # 16A8 RESOLUTION 2002-102 THROUGH 2002-110 PROVIDING FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF LIENS FOR THE COST OF THE ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE ON PROPERTIES RE CODE VIOLATIONS Item # 16A9 Page 151 February 26, 2002 RESOLUTION 2002-111 GRANTING IMPACT FEE WAIVERS OF $7,500 FOR EACH ELIGIBLE CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION- THE NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTH CLINIC AND PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF COLLIER COUNTY, INC.- FOR BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED AFTER 09/07/01 AND BEFORE 10/13/01 Item # 16A 10 A TWO-YEAR LEASE, COMMENCING MARCH 1, 2002, BETWEEN C.P.O.C. REALTY AND COLLIER COUNTY FOR OFFICE SPACE TO BE UTILIZED BY THE NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Item #16B 1 RESOLUTION 2002-112 CONVEYING A FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN REAL ESTATE TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROADWAY INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS TO STATE ROAD 93 (1-75) AT THE OVERPASS OF COUNTY ROAD 886 (GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY) Item #16B2 APPROVAL OF DONATION AGREEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE WIGGINS PASS DRAINAGE BASIN Page 152 February 26, 2002 Item #16B3 APPROVAL OF EASEMENT AGREEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR THE LELY STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Item #16B4 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES BY CH2M HILL FOR THE IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R. 951 TO 43P'v AVE. NE) FOUR LANE DESIGN, PROJECT NO. 60018 Item #16B5 - Moved to Item #10H Item #16B6 BID NO. 02-3340, FOR A RIGHT TURN LANE FROM IMMOKALEE ROAD TO 47TM AVE. N.E., - AWARDED TO APAC, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $53,613.90 Item #16B7 APPROVAL OF PIGGYBACKING ONTO THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON'S CONTRACT (#44-01) WITH NORTRAX EQUIPMENT COMPANY FOR THE PURCHASE OF A FRONT- END LOADER WITH ATTACHMENTS FOR THE ROAD AND BRIDGE SECTION OF THE TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT Item # 16B8 Page 153 February 26, 2002 AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS, WITH REGENCY REALTY GROUP, INC., FOR PEBBLEROOKE PLAZA LOCATED AT IMMOKALEE ROAD AND COLLIER BOUEVARD (C.R. 951) Item #16B9 CONTRACT WITH SEVERN TRENT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. FOR THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION EXTENDED UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 2002 Item # 16B 10 - Added AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF EMERGENCY PROTECTIVE MEASURE EXPENDITURES (STAFF REQUEST) Item # 16C 1 RESOLUTION 2002-113 APPROVING THE FOUR (4) SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1991 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Item # 16C2 Page 154 February 26, 2002 RESOLUTION 2002-114 APPROVING THE TEN (10) SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1992 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Item #16C3 RESOLUTION 2002-115 APPROVING THE EIGHT (8) SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1993 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Item #16C4 RESOLUTION 2002-116 APPROVING THE TWELVE (12) SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1994 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Item # 16C5 RESOLUTION 2002-117 APPROVING THE TWENTY-NINE (29) SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR Page 155 February 26, 2002 THE 1995 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Item #16C6 RESOLUTION 2002-118 APPROVING THE THIRTY-SIX (36) SATISFACTION OF LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1996 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Item #16C7 SATISFACTION OF LIEN DOCUMENTS FILED AGAINST REAL PROPERTY FOR ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE Item #16C8 SATISFACTIONS OF NOTICE OF PROMISE TO PAY AND AGREEMENT TO EXTEND PAYMENT OF WATER AND/OR SEWER SYSTEM IMPACT FEES Item #16C9 ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT TO AGNOLI, BARBER, AND BRUNDAGE FOR THE RELOCATION OF UTILITIES IN ADVANCE OF WIDENING US 41 FROM OLD 41 TO THE COUNTY LINE - PROJECT NUMBER 70045 IN THE AMOUNT OF $41,900 (WORK ORDER ABB-FT-02-01) Page 156 February 26, 2002 Item gl 6C10 -Changed and Moved to Item gl 0J Item #16C 11 WORK ORDER GH-FT-02-1 WITH GREELEY AND HANSEN, LLC, TO PERFORM FIELD EXCAVATION AND INVESTIGATION ON THE EXISTING 30-INCH SEWER FORCE MAIN- PROJECT 73943 IN THE AMOUNT OF $108,120 Item #16C12 AUTHORIZE A NEW "MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT" FOR A JOINT PROJECT (#'S 70047, 70048, 73048) AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR COUNTY UTILITY RELOCATIONS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE US 41 ROAD WIDENING FROM MYRTLE ROAD TO OLD US 41 - IN THE AMOUNT OF $275,960.62 Item # 16C 13 PARKSON CORPORATION TO ASSIST WITH THE REBUILDING OF THE NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY TO PROVIDE THE NEEDED PARTS AND ASSISTANCE IN THE REBUILD OF TWO MECHANICAL BAR SCREENS IN THE AMOUNT OF $58,052 - COMPETITIVE BID PROCESS WAIVED Item #16C14 Page 157 February 26, 2002 A ONE-TIME WAIVER OF THE S1NGLE JOB CAP OF $200,000 - CONTRACT 99-2915, FOR BEACH MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES WITH LIGHTNER CONTRACTING, INC. FOR BEACH SAND SIFTING / ROCK REMOVAL - COST ESTIMATED NOT TO EXCEED $700,000 Item # 16C 15 RESOLUTION 2002-119 REGARDING PROJECT 73077, AUTHORIZING DECLARATIONS OF OFFICIAL INTENT UNDER U.S. TREASURY REGULATIONS WITH RESPECT TO REIMBURSEMENTS FROM NOTE AND BOND PROCEEDS OF TEMPORARY ADVANCES MADE FOR PAYMENTS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE, AND OTHER RELATED MATTERS, FOR THE NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY Item # 16C 16 CONTRACT #02-RM-'2-09-21-20-017 WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF DISASTER RELIEF FUNDING EMERGENCY EXPENDITURES FROM THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY RELATING TO TROPICAL STORM GABRIELLE- FUNDS IN THE APPROXIMATE AMOUNT OF $75,000 Item # 16D 1 TRANSPORTATION AGREEMENT WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD FOR UTILIZATION OF SCHOOL BUSES FOR CAMP PARTICIPANTS Page 158 February 26, 2002 Item #16D2 BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,678 FROM INSURANCE PROCEEDS TO REPLACE TWO INDUSTRIAL MOWERS STOLEN FROM VINEYARDS COMMUNITY PARK Item #16D3 APPLICATION FOR ACCREDITATION OF PARKS AND RECREATION AGENCIES FROM NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK ASSOCIATION Item #16D4 OLDER AMERICANS ACT (OAA) CONTINUATION GRANT AND CHAIRMAN TO SIGN CONTRACT W/AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., D/B/A SENIOR SOLUTIONS OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., AND INCREASE ONE PERMANENT PART-TIME POSITION TO PERMANENT FULL TIME STATUS Item 16D5 MASTER AGREEMENT WITH THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. DBA SENIOR SOLUTIONS OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, RELATING TO SERVICES FOR SENIOR GRANT PROGRAMS Item #16D6 Page 159 February 26, 2002 BID #02-3323 - AWARDED TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES U.S.A., INC. REGARDING BOARDWALK DECK AND HANDRAIL REPLACEMENT AT BAREFOOT BEACH ACCESS, BAREFOOT BEACH PRESERVE PARK, AND SOUTH MARCO BEACH ACCESS - IN THE AMOUNT OF $194,426.98 Item # 16E 1 WO~. ORDER RFP #02-3324 AWARDING CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS TO SIX PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT FIRMS FOR "FIXED TERM SURVEYING AND PHOTOGRAMETRIC SERVICES" AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY- MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $500,000 Item #16E2 RFP #02-3326 - STAFF TO NEGOTIATE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BARANY, SCHMITT, SUMMERS, WEAVER AND PARTNERS, INC. FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE PROGRAMMING AND DESIGN OF GREY OAKS PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY Item #16E3 BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO TRANSFER RESERVES FROM THE GROUP HEALTH AND LIFE FUND (517) TO THE SHORT-' TERM & LONG-TERM DISABILITY FUND (519) TO PAY SHORT-TERM DISABILITY CLAIMS AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEES - IN THE AMOUNT OF $250,000 Page 160 February 26, 2002 Item #16E4 RESOLUTION 2002-120 ESTABLISHING AN EMPLOYEE HEALTH AND WELLNESS PREVENTION, INCENTIVE AND REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM TO REWARD EMPLOYEES WHO PARTICIPATE IN COUNTY SPONSORED OR ENDORSED HEALTH AND WELLNESS PROGRAMS, EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2002 Item #16E5 - Moved to Item #10I Item #16E6 CERTAIN COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY DECLARED AS SURPLUS AND THE SALE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY TO BE HELD ON MARCH 16, 2002 Item # 16E7 BID #02-3341 FROM KSE SCIENTIFIC - REJECTED AND STAFF TO REBID THE CONTRACT FOR "LABORATORY CHEMICALS & SUPPLIES" Item #16E8 AGREEMENT WITH BIG CORKSCREW ISLAND FIRE CONTROL & RESCUE DISTRICT FOR PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $35,850 Page 161 February 26, 2002 Item #16E9 AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE DISTRICT'S UTILIZATION OF THE TRADE-IN VALUE TO BE APPLIED TOWARDS THE PURCHASE OF A NEW PUMPER TRUCK TO BE PURCHASED FOR BIG CORKSCREW ISLAND FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT- VALUE OF OLD PUMPER TRUCK- $40,500 Item # 16E 10 MASTER PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR RFP 01-3282, WIRELESS APPLICATION SYSTEMS - AWARDED TO DUA COMPUTER RESOURCES, INC. Item # 16F 1 RESOLUTION 2002-121 REGARDING THE DISASTER RELIEF FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND OCHOPEE FIRE & RESCUE CONTROL DISTRICT FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF DISASTER RELATED EXPENSES AS A RESULT OF TROPICAL STORM GABRIELLE Item # 16G 1 BUDGET AMENDMENT #02-189 Item # 1611 Page 162 February 26, 2002 PAYMENT REIMBURSEMENT OF $25 FOR ATTENDING VALID, PUBLIC PURPOSE FUNCTION; CHAIRMAN COLETTA TO ATTEND "LAWS OF LIFE BANQUET" AT NAPLES BEACH HOTEL ON FEBRUARY 13, 2002 Item #1612 - Deleted PAYMENT REIMBURSEMENT OF $100 FOR ATTENDING VALID, PUBLIC PURPOSE FUNCTION; COMMISSIONER FIALA TO ATTEND "LINCOLN DAY DINNER" AT THREE OAKS BANQUET FACILITY IN ESTERO ON APRIL 13, 2002 Item #1613 PAYMENT REIMBURSEMENT OF $50 FOR ATTENDING VALID, PUBLIC PURPOSE FUNCTION; CHAIRMAN COLETTA AND COMMISSIONER HENNING TO ATTEND "INAUGURAL GATHERING FOR THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY" AT THE NORTH REGIONAL LIBRARY ON FEBRUARY 28, 2002 Item #16J 1 SATISFACTION OF LIEN FOR SERVICES FOR THE PUBLIC DEFENDER FOR CASE NOS. 94-161-CFA AND 90-6304-TM Item # 16J2 MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE- FILED AND/OR REFERRED Page 163 February 26, 2002 The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various departments as indicated: Page 164 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE February 26, 2002 Board Meeting FOR BOARD ACTION: 1. Satisfaction of Lien: NEED MOTION authorizing the Chairman to sign Satisfaction of Lien for Services of the Public Defender for Case Nos.: C1K020130-12 RECOMMEND APPROVAL. , Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for the period: 1. Disbursements for January 25, 2002 through February 1, 2002. 2. Disbursements for February 2, 2002 through February 8, 2002. B. Districts: Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Board - Meeting Minutes for October 1 st, 2001; January 7, 2002 C. Minutes: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Advisory Board - Minutes of November 8, 2001, Minutes of August 21, 2001, Agenda for February 7, 2002 Collier County Water & Wastewater Authority - Minutes of October 23, 2000. Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee - Minutes of January 11, 2002; Minutes of January 11, 2002. Community Character/Smart Growth Advisory Committee - Agenda for December 5, 2001; Minutes of December 5, 2001 Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee - Minutes of December 11, 2000; February 26, 2001; April 23, 2001; August 13, 2001 and October 22, 2001. Health and Human Services Advisory Committee - Agenda for December 20, 2001, Minutes of November 29, 2001. H:DatafFormat Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee - Minutes of January 2, 2002. ~enda for Jammr~ 2, 2002, AGENDA ,~I~EM no. Lt_ FEB 2 6 2002 o 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. a) Clam Bay Sub-Committee - Agenda for February 4, 2002 Workforce Housing Committee- Agenda for November 16, 2000; Meeting Notice for WOrkforce Housing Committee - December 14, 2000, Minutes of December 14, 2000, Notice of Meeting January 17, 2001, Minutes of Janum3r 18, 2001, Special Meeting Notice for February 6, 2001, Notice for February 15, 2001, Notice of Meeting for March 15, 2001, Minutes of March 15,2001, Notice of Meeting for April 19, 2001, Notice of Meeting for April 5,2001, Meeting Notice for May 9, 2001, Meeting Notice for June 21,2001, Meeting Notice for July 19, 2001~ Meeting Notice of October 18, 2001, Meeting Notice for November 15, 2001. Enterprise Zone Development Agency - Minutes of November 29, 2001, Minutes of January 24, 2002 Collier County Library Advisory Board - Agenda for January 23, 2002 1-75/Golden Gate Interchange - Agenda for January 30, 2002, Minutes of December 12, 2001. Workforce Housing Advisory Committee - Agenda for February 4, 2002, Minutes of January 7, 2002 Environmental Advisory Council - Agenda February 6, 2002, Minutes of December 5, 2001. Vanderbilt Beach M.S.T.U. - Agenda for February 7, 2002, Minutes of January 10, 2002. Collier County Planning Commission - Agenda for February 7, 2002. Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board - Agenda for January 31, 2002. Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee - Agenda for February 12, 2002, Minutes of January 8, 2001 Coastal Advisory Committee- Minutes of November 1,2001, December 6, 2001 and January 11, 2002 Collier County Code Enforcement Board - Agenda for December 17, 2001, Minutes of December 17, 2001, November 29, 2001, Minutes of November 29, 2001. H:Data/Format February 26, 2002 Item # 16K1 AMENDED AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES FOR ELECTION SERVICES Item # 16L 1 RATIFY AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S RETENTION OF EXPERT WITNESSES/CONSULTANTS/ OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR THE COUNTY IN AQUAPORT, LC V. COLLIER COUNTY, CASE NO. 2-01-CV-341-FTM-29DNF IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA; EXEMPT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY FROM THE PURCHASING POLICY IF AND TO THE EXTENT THE PURCHASING POLICY IS APPLICABLE Item #16L2 POTENTIAL LIEN RESOLVED BY THE SOCIAL SERVICES DEPT. OF COLLIER COUNTY AGAINST WANDA HENSLEY BY ACCEPTING $1,500 FROM WANDA HENSLEY AND IN RETURN COLLIER COUNTY WILL RELEASE ALL CLAIMS AGAINST WANDA HENSLEY FOR PAYMENT OF MEDICAL SERVICES PROVIDED ON BEHALF OF WANDA HENSLEY UP TO AND INCLUDING JULY 1997 BUT NOT SUBSEQUENT THERETO Item # 16L3 Page 165 February 26, 2002 AMENDMENT NUMBER 4 TO THE LEGAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE LAW FIRM OF CARLTON, FIELDS, WARD, EMMANUEL, SMITH AND CUTLER, P.A. Item #16L4 SUPPLEMENT AND AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE EASEMENT ACQUISITION ON PARCELS 106A, 106B, 706, AND 806 IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. NAPLES ITALIAN-AMERICAN CLUB, INC., ETAL., CASE NO. 98-1672-CA-01 (AIRPORT ROAD SIX- LANING PROJECT FROM PINE RIDGE ROAD TO VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD) - IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,000 Item #16L5 AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES RELATIVE TO THE FEE SIMPLE AND EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PARCELS 155 AND 855 IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. RONALD G. BENDER AND MICHELE d. BENDER, TRUSTEES UNDER THAT CERTAIN DECLARATION OF TRUST DATED MAY 17, 1991, ET AL, CASE NO. 99-1394-CA (LIVINGSTON ROAD, PROJECT NO 60061) - IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,944 Item #16L6 AGREED ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEY'S FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 163 IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. R USSEL BAISLEE ETAL, CASE NO. 01-0758-CA (LIVINGSTON ROAD Page 166 February 26, 2002 SIX-LANING PROJECT FROM GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY TO P1NE RIDGE ROAD, PROJECT NO. 60071) Item #16L7 TWO MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS AND TWO STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENTS INCORPORATING THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS THE MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS RELATIVE TO THE ACQUISITION OF PARCELS 2.4T AND 53T IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. dOHN B, FASSETZ TRUSTEE OF THE ANNE M. FASSETT TRUST, DATED JUNE 5, 1986, ET AL, CASE NO 99-3040-CA, PROJECT NO. 65041 Item #17A RESOLUTION 2002-122 RE PETITION VA-2001-AR-1442, KIRK SANDERS REQUESTING A 2.3-FOOT AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 1 O-FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK ESTABLISHED FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES TO 7.7 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1139 SPERLING AVENUE, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS LOT 14, BLOCK B, SPERLINGS SUBDIVISION Item #17B -Continued to March 26, 2002 BCC Meeting CU-01-AR- 1420, WILLIAM HOOVER OF HOOVER PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT, INC. REPRESENTING THE SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH, REQUESTING CONDITIONAL USE "7" AND "11" OF THE RURAL "A-MHO" RURAL AGRICULTURAL WITH A MOBILE HOME OVERLAY ZONING Page 167 February 26, 2002 DISTRICT TO ALLOW A CHURCH AND CHILD DAY CARE FACILITIES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR-846) AND LILAC LANE Item # 17C RESOLUTION 2002-123 RE VA-2001-AR-1526, KRAFT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., REPRESENTING DIOCESE OF VENICE CATHOLIC CHURCH, REQUESTING A 6.5-FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED 30-FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK TO 23.5 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5225 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY Item #17D RESOLUTION 2002-124 RE PETITION AVPLAT2001-AR1835, BARRACO & ASSOCIATES, INC., REPRESENTING LONG BAY PARTNERS, LLC, REQUESTING TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN THE 15' WIDE DRAINAGE EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG THE LOT LINE COMMON TO LOTS 7 AND 8, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF "MEDITERRA PARCEL 111" AS RECORDED 1N PLAT BOOK 37, PAGES 8 THROUGH 9, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY Page 168 February 26, 2002 There being no further business for the good of the County, meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 3:10 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL JAMES COLETTA, CHAIRMAN D,W~i'GHT~i . BROCK, CLERK s~~q~e minutes approved by the Board on ~/~.~, as presented ~ , or as co~ected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING, INC., BY CAROLYN J. FORD, NOTARY PUBLIC Page 169 Wajerski Litigation Page 1 of 1 Patricia L. Morgan From: Sent: To: Cc: Pettit, Michael Tuesday, January 20, 2004 12:35 PM Patricia L. Morgan Weigel, David Subject: RE: Wajerski Litigation Yes - its settled. Please place in minutes. Thanks for the reminder. Mike Pettit. ..... Original Message ..... From: Patricia L. Morgan [mailto:Patricia. Morgan@clerk.collier.fl.us] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 11:23 AM To: weigel_d Cc: PettitMichael Subject: Wajerski Litigation ~ ood S¥[ornin~t, Yfas this item (gq'ajersk~) 6een sett[edas of today, ~Tanuary 20, 2004? (We have the minutes from the C[osedSession of 2/26/02. q-hey haven't been p[acedout for the public yet. ~aureen said that we do not put these into the minutes untif we get the fina[word from you. ®tease update via emaif so to advise on the status of this particular case. qhanficyou for your immediate attention to this matter. Sincere[y, qrrish 5¥lorgan 5t4inutes ~ qLecords 1/20/2004 February 26, 2002 CLOSED SESSION MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida February 26, 2002 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 2 p.m. In CLOSED SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, Board of County Commission Conference Room, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE-CHAIRMAN: James Coletta Tom Henning Donna Fiala Fred Coyle ALSO PRESENT: Tom Olliff, County Manager David C. Weigel, County Attorney Michael W. Pettit, Assistant County Attorney David Bryant, Esquire Page 1 February 26, 2002 (Commissioner Fiala not present.) MR. WEIGEL: Well, I'll just mention just very briefly here that this closed session under the Sunshine Law is provided by statute, and the records of this proceeding are totally on the record as we conduct our business here today. And the subject matter of the meeting shall be confined to settlement negotiations or strategy sessions related to litigation expenditures. And I think you'll note from Item 12-B that was on the agenda February 12th continued over to today as the companion item following this closed session discussion is that the element included discussion of settlement -- (Commissioner Fiala enters.) MR. WEIGEL: -- and the costs related to the litigation. So with that, I'd like to turn over briefly to Mike and then to David to talk about this agenda item. MR. PETTIT: Commissioners, Mike Pettit. I need to give you the factors that are important in settlement negotiations. I want to give you a little bit of background. This litigation has been going on in one form or another for seven years. This -- the county attorney's office represented early on -- and actually, Mr. Bryant, who is here with us, represented the county, and at the time he left and went into private practice the risk manager and director felt his familiarity with the case and Mr. Wajerski's claim is such that he wanted him to retain that representation which he has, and he's been through a series of proceedings with Mr. Wajerski. The settlement agreement that was brought forth a few weeks ago was negotiated by our claims adjuster at the behest, I think, primarily of our outside counsel. It was approved by a risk department, but really Mr. Bryant -- neither Mr. Bryant nor me functioning as in-house counsel -- Mr. Bryant is the trial counsel -- had involvement in these negotiations. And as you can see, there was Page 2 February 26, 2002 a negotiation to make a recommendation to the board of $85,000. Some of the factors that I think are important to keep in mind are if the litigation continues there is a potential that we would be -- have to get new trial counsel for a variety of reasons, one of which is Mr. Wajerski has sued Mr. Bryant during this process. In addition, Mr. Wajerski has filed notices of claim or have orally threatened additional claims, which would be new events under our insurance coverage, which would mean to the extent they set a tort we would be on the hook for the first $100,000 of cost with respect to those claims. And I think it would be necessary -- even if Mr. Bryant had to leave representation, I could take over the defense of the county, but I can't take over the defense of at least eight individuals, not counting the sheriffs folks who have been sued. Some of those individuals are people like Jennifer Edwards who -- you know, supervisor of elections, Jim Mitchell, the clerk's office. We've also got Tom Whitecotton who's been sued in the clerk's office. We're also representing a former expert witness who appeared for the county in some of these cases, as well as a former county employee such as Lynn Day and current county employees like John Walker. And, generally speaking, we have not as an office -- this is a factor to take into account -- represented individuals. Now should new claims be filed, if this settlement doesn't happen, the excess carrier, I think, will be responsible for paying outside counsel fees. But that's another factor to keep in mind. We would be responsible for costs on these new claims up to 100,000. In addition, the excess carrier has agreed to contribute 67,500 to the settlement looking to us to pay the other $17,500. I've had discussions over the last couple weeks with the claims adjuster who was involved in negotiating the settlement. He indicates that the excess carrier is unwilling to go higher at this point in time and is Page 3 February 26, 2002 unwilling to contribute the full amount. This morning I had discussions with counsel for the sheriff and sheriff's deputy who are also part of these lawsuits. And the sheriff is willing to contribute $2,500 if he can be added in on our settlement which would then, obviously, assuming Mr. Wajerski would accept $85,000 and include the sheriff in that release, would reduce the amount the county would be contributing as well. One other factor that's out there I think you need to be aware of is Mr. Wajerski whether -- with validity or not has threatened to file RICO claims against the county. Those probably would not be covered by insurance and, again, we would have to -- I guess certain individuals, county individuals, there would have to be decisions how it would be handled, who was going to represent whom. Those are the factors, quite frankly, I think the excess carrier took into account when pushed with -- to get settlement here and was willing to contribute the $67,500 that's offered. And the fact that, as I said, this litigation's been going on in one form or another for seven years and doesn't look like its end is in sight at this point. It's just a reality. With that I think I've given you the background factors to keep in mind that you may want to think about as you want to agree to this settlement or take some other action in the future at some point in time. I'd like you to hear what Mr. Bryant has to say about the litigation. I should say that Mr. Bryant is -- I think there are five cases at least. Mr. Bryant won one of them at trial. MR. BRYANT: Won two of them. MR. PETTIT: Won two of them at trial, okay. MR. BRYANT: Thank you, Michael, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. Pleasure to be here with you this afternoon. It's distasteful for me to represent to you that I think you ought to settle this because as David knows and Michael knows and you that have Page 4 February 26, 2002 met me before, I'm very -- and Tom, obviously, because we've done some battles together on the same side -- I've always been very tenacious in representing the county, and we've had a lot of success, not only in Wajerski but in other cases that I have been fortunate enough to represent the county in. So I haven't gone to the board -- this is the very first time I've gone to the board and said I think it is in your best interest to settle this matter. The reason I tell you this is because you've got to step back and look at the history of this case. It evolved out of a helicopter pilot that we fired back in 1995 who had a number of psychological and performance problems that we believed while performing his job. Well, his attitude hasn't changed over the last seven years, and I don't say that tongue in cheek. I mean, seriously, because he has literally sued everybody that he's come into contact with, like Michael said, myself included, and everybody that was involved in our two-week trial where he was asking for $750,000 and he got zero. I used to be an attorney -- state attorney's office in Tampa and prosecuted for a long time there, and I prosecuted for the Department of Professional Regulation for the Board of Medicine all over Florida, and I have used this analogy to this case. It's like a prisoner case -- and I don't know if any of you are familiar with this, but if you've been in government, especially in the corrections or law enforcement area, you see these cases. And what happens is you convict somebody and what happens then is they go to jail and they start suing everybody. Well, you can't do anything to them because they're in a cell. You can't put inside of a cell inside of a cell, and you can't stop them from suing people. So even though their claims are 99 percent not meritorious and just salacious, you still have to defend them because you have exceptional exposure. That's what we've got here with Mr. Wajerski. I never thought we'd get to the point where he would take this Page 5 February 26, 2002 amount to settle this case. And I commend Michael and his work with the outside carrier and everyone else that has led and gotten to this point. And the reason I think it's important that you seriously consider settling this is two reasons. One, we've got the federal lawsuit that is on the third motion to dismiss. I got his first two complaints dismissed, but there is a third one. It's almost 100 pages long. I sincerely believe eventually the federal judge and the -- basically the federal judge's law clerk who is going to be tasked with responding to that motion is going to find something there that is going to stick where that lawsuit will go forward. Federal litigation is very expensive and very time consuming. As an example, last year in the State of Florida EEOC litigation in Florida, the average claim that was recovered was $250,000. The average attorneys' fees to get to that point was $350,000. Civil rights litigation is very, very expensive, and it takes a special type of litigator to do that because you have to deal in the federal sector, and a lot of attorneys don't. So that case, if it goes forward, either with my representation or without my representation of the county, is going to cost the county a serious amount of money. The whistle-blower case that we won is pending a motion for new trial. I sincerely believe that we will win that; however, that means that Mr. Wajerski then will appeal that case because as long as he has a computer and as long as he can use it and as long as there's a courthouse where he can go to seek what he thinks is his just rewards, he is going to be at the courthouse door, and it's going to take your time and it's going to take your money. And even though it is most distasteful to tell you that this is something you ought to seriously consider settling -- and I recommend that you settle it, mainly because of the future exposure. And Michael hit on a very important point. This new case that he says he's going to file, even though I don't Page 6 February 26, 2002 believe it's meritorious -- I know it's not meritorious, but I don't believe it has any standing -- it's going to mean you're going to have to respond to it because he always seeks damages, the last one at 1.5 million in the federal case. And so you've got-- you just can't forget about it. So you've got to task attorneys and staff to handle that. Well, that RICO case or whatever this new litigation he's going to craft in his own mind -- and you've got to realize he represents himself. He doesn't have an attorney anymore. So it's his mission, his crusade against Collier County that new -- new recording number is going to require that the county spend up to $100,000 under their self-insured retention program. So if you can get out of this for less than $20,000 and the people that are in it individually like Jeff Walker, like Jennifer Edwards who did nothing, but she's a defendant that I've defending. And all of you know Jennifer. She's the nicest person in the world. Ross Sasser who was our outstanding expert from Washington and Atlanta who used to be with the FAA and with the Go Team for the Federal Aviation Administration, he's got sued. I got sued. Everybody that basically participated in that case and testified for the county and testified truthfully and testified correctly and the county won has been sued. Which is only the tip of the iceberg. And I don't mean to belabor this, and if you've got any questions I'll be more than glad to answer them. COMMISSIONER COYLE: COMMISSIONER FIALA: COMMISSIONER COYLE: How -- I'm sorry. Go ahead. You started. How can we be sure that settling this particular lawsuit with him will stop? MR. BRYANT: That's an excellent-- COMMISSIONER COYLE: He can keep doing this for the next 20 years even though he settled. MR. BRYANT: That's an excellent question, Commissioner Page 7 February 26, 2002 Coyle, and Michael has crafted an excellent release and settlement document. In fact, we've had a lot of discussion about that and what it does -- it's a global settlement because we always told Wajerski that if we settle anything, it settles everything from the day we ever heard of you to today when you sign it. And that's what that release and settlement says. It says that it's over with against the county, its employees, its former employees, its expert witnesses. It's as ironclad as you can get. That doesn't mean he might try something, but then if Michael handles it or I handle it or whoever, the enforcement of that settlement agreement is totally different than litigating the factual issues that we're litigating now, because now we're litigating all of his claims of graft, corruption, and everything else. He truly believes that he has -- is the only person that shined light on the county and he's exposed everything, and he truly believes that. If you've dealt with him as long as I have, you would see that I'm not being facetious about that. I mean, in his mind he truly believes that he's right. But that's an excellent question, and Michael's done an excellent job at crafting a document to do that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand that you can draft a settlement for those lawsuits that are outstanding and to protect anyone who is previously involved in those. Is there any possibility of protecting us against future claims from this guy that are frequented? MR. BRYANT: Well, that's a good corollary, Commissioner Coyle, and Michael has addressed that, because it says if you ever thought about suing us for something, you are releasing us for that, and you will not sue us for that. If you even thought you might have some idea to sue us, you're releasing us from that. MR. PETTIT: Let me say, though, up to and through the date that the parties sign the agreement, so when Commissioner Coletta Page 8 February 26, 2002 signs the agreement, assuming that's how we go, three days later he can say, "Tom Olliff defamed me" or "Mike Pettit defrauded me when he entered that settlement." I'm not sure how we could handle that. I've never seen it done, but I suppose it's possible to craft a settlement saying we have to have a covenant to never sue us again for anything. MR. BRYANT: And I think that you're -- we could do that. MR. PETTIT: That settlement or draft right now doesn't go quite that far. COMMISSIONER COYLE: If he understands he can get, what, $117,000 right now from us, he can start suing us again for all sorts of things. MR. BRYANT: No, sir. It's not 117,000. It's eighty-five total. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. He can start suing us again about a whole list of things. I mean, there are people right now who maintain that there's corruption in county government. Can he come and start seeking out things that he can charge us with doing and sue us? MR. BRYANT: Commissioner Coyle, the way I'd answer that is this: Anybody that's got $87.50 can sue you. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. MR. BRYANT: And you can't prevent them unless you stick a gun in their mouth, and we haven't been able to do that with Mr. Wajerski yet. And I'm not suggesting we ever consider that, except at times I did get that frustrated. There's no way -- and Michael's correct; there's no way you can absolutely positively say he will never sue you again. I do believe, though, we have reached the point in the litigation that he has lost enough and his health has deteriorated enough -- because he has cancer -- that he -- and I think Michael will agree with this with his discussion with him -- he really wants to come to closure. Page 9 February 26, 2002 CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Now, that-- that is really interesting because I didn't see these facts in there. The man is on his last legs. MR. BRYANT: Not his last leg, Commissioner Coletta. He has been in cancer remission for the last couple of years, but he has been treated for cancer in Chicago two years ago, because we had to continue the trial because he was there. I don't know how long he's going to live. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I know and the point is that it really bothers me. Here's a man who has represented himself who is so effective that he's tied us completely up, got us over the barrel and holding us for ransom for $85,000, and there still seems to be some uncertainty whether he can come back for second helpings later. You know, I -- I don't know if we're starting a precedent by paying this man even when he's wrong, and then the next person that comes along says, "Well, Mr. Wajerski pulled it off. Here is what you have to do to make it work. Here's the whole plan, and this is where the county's going to cave in." I know where you're coming from dollar for dollar. If we put this behind us, it's behind us, but I don't -- I don't really know if it's behind us, and I don't know who comes after this gentleman. MR. BRYANT: And that's a great point, Commissioner Coletta, and that's the problem you have in litigation. It's because that when somebody sues you even though it's wrongful you have to expend resources to defend that. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right, and I understand that. MR. BRYANT: And the county has expended a significant amount of resources and been very successful. And you're right; it's like chumming the water when you settle these cases, but sometimes you've got to weigh the risk of all this future litigation that he's going to be thinking about 24 hours a day in his house with his computer, Page 10 February 26, 2002 and somebody is going to have to be paid to respond to it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I hear you loud and clear. I -- I - - if the man really believes that he has a mission in life and that his mission deserves his full attention, I can't see how he's selling out -- selling out for $85,000. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I agree. That's just -- that's just what I was going to say is -- excuse me -- why would we be paying him for his bad behavior when, as you said yourself, it doesn't look like there's any end in sight. MR. PETTIT: Let me -- let me just respond to that Commissioner. Two points: One is keep in mind that assuming you would wrap the sheriff into this. I've got to say Mr. Wajerski doesn't know anything about that part of the proposal, because I learned about that for the first time this morning as a possibility. The cost to the county would be around $15,000, not eighty-five because CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's still money. MR. PETTIT: Yeah. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And then tomorrow he could -- MR. PETTIT: But then the other thing I would say is that -- and one of the reasons for this meeting -- as drafted right now, David's commcnts aside, I think I drafted a settlement proposal in the direction of the claims adjuster and some input from David that cuts Mr. Wajerski off from any claims that relate in any way to Collier County, his employment or termination of employment with Collier County or any other litigation he's ever had with Collier County, et cetera. Can he sue us in the future for something else? Yes. Would it be possible to go back and revisit that -- that document and attempt to make it something in the nature of a covenant never to sue us again for anything, possible. He might consider that. I just throw that out. That's out there. ~[R. OLLIFF: What it does is it covers at least the full period of Page 11 February 26, 2002 time when Wajerski had any personal relationship with this organization. MR. PETTIT: Exactly. At this time up to now. MR. OLLIFF: Right. And so the only way he woUld be able to sue us from that point forward is he's got to be able to show that somehow as just a regular Joe citizen he's been aggrieved by the county somehow personally, and then I think you've really done a nice job of limiting his ability. MR. BRYANT: And that's the key point what Tom points out. That's the really key point because we have the starting point when he went to work here and we've got today when he signs the agreement. And he is giving up all claims against anyone during that time period. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can you broaden that a bit by not only excluding all of the people that were involved with him during that period of time, but also exclude all events or activities which occurred during that time? In other words, he cannot a year from now sue us for some other event that occurred during that period. So we're talking about protecting all of the persons involved during that specific time period but also any events that occurred during that time. MR. BRYANT: That's an excellent point, Commissioner Coyle, and I think that the way the document is drafted now I think it totally does that. Because it doesn't just talk about people. It talks about anything that basically -- of any association with Wajerski and anybody associated with Collier County -- Collier County or any activities performed by Collier County. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. MR. PETTIT: Quite frankly, depending on what the board would decide if it takes action on this at some point, Mr. Wajerski has not approved the settlement documents. He's just looked at it. Page 12 February 26, 2002 And I don't have any reason not to go back and tighten it up even more at this point. And I will say that if we are going to -- one of the things we have to keep in mind, if we are going to try to wrap the sheriff and the sheriff's deputy who he's also sued here into this package in exchange for them contributing some money to the settlement, he may balk at that, because that certainly is not what we negotiated with our excess carrier, but I'm certainly going to have to disclose it. I will just put the names in there. MR. OLLIFF: Why would they have not been included? MR. PETTIT: I do not understand how that occurred. MR. BRYANT: I can address that. The sheriff's self-insurance fund took the position early on, just as we did, they did nothing wrong. They weren't going to pay him anything, and we'll just litigate it forever. Well, after they saw how extensive the litigation is getting in Tallahassee, they talked to their counsel in Fort Lauderdale and said, "You know, bravado is good, but sometimes it's too expensive, so if you can get us out of this, get us out of it." And the person who sued for the sheriff's office, Mark Churney, he's the sheriff's chief pilot. One of our witnesses at the trial, he's a lieutenant, up for captain now, outstanding person. I mean, those are the kind of people that have been involved in this, and those are the kind of people that if you settle this you're going to be getting them out of it, which I think is something to definitely be considered. Especially when you think about the time and attention all the myriad of pec;ple who are going to have to apply to this. Not only your attorneys, but I'm talking about your employees, your former employees, Jennifer, Jim Mitchell in the clerk's office, all those people that helped us in this trial are now being penalized because they were our witnesses. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, what is he suing everybody for? What did he start the suit for? Page 13 February 26, 2002 MR. BRYANT: He started the suit initially-- had five suits. I got three. I got two dismissed. Those were against individuals. The third suit was against Peter Bolton who I saw on the agenda got an award today. Peter is one of our outstanding people too. Peter was our chief pilot. He was Wajerski's superior. He sued Peter and he sued Walter Copka who's a commander at EMS who was a flight medic. He sued them initially individually under slander and liable saying that they said bad things and wrote bad things about him. I got that case -- we won that on judgment on the pleadings. But he can still appeal that or try to or try to file a motion for -- or file an amended complaint because Judge Hayes let him because he's pro se. That means he represents himself and pro se people get more leave than lawyers do. The third or the fourth lawsuit was the whistle-blower suit where he said that we terminated him because he exposed graft and corruption in the county. Well, we said, "Go have a psychological examination. Go get a flight physical." In fact, it was signed off by the county manager. "You do that, we'll bring you back to work. We suspend you for 30 days." He said, "No, I'm not going to do that. I'm going to leave and sue you." Which he did. We went to trial for two weeks. We won that case. That's the case that I'm sure he will appeal because I feel comfortable that he will lose the motion for a new trial. The fifth lawsuit was a federal lawsuit that he has filed himself in federal court in Fort Myers suing all of these people. In the lavzuit and the whistle blower he only sued the county and Diane Flagg, Peter Bolton, Walter Cochran, Norris Himes. Norris used to be our head of EMS services here. I got the individuals out so that the county was the only defendant in that case, but in the federal litigation he's claiming that we all conspired to deny him his civil rigLts. We lied, cheated, subverted the Court, did everything you can think of to win the lawsuit. Whereupon at the end of the lawsuit the Page 14 February 26, 2002 judge wrote a ten-page order saying that we won on every point. The only person he didn't sue in the lawsuit was the court reporter and the judge. COMMISSIONER FIALA: So then by -- by this explanation, obviously, he's got -- he's got some problems that he's dealing with emotionally, and -- and it sounds like he's devoting his life to -- to lawsuits which don't cost him very much of any dollars at all, but cos:s us a lot. Thirdly, it seems like whatever he can get from these diff:rent lawsuits would be his earnings for that year, I mean, depending on how much he gets back. I'm inclined to -- you know, I can understand where you're coming from but how much more -- can you really tie him up from not continuing this on as a life's vocation? MR. PETTIT: I think -- I think with some additional slight tinl:ering with what's already in place I could-- I think we would have a document that would shut him off from further lawsuits against the county or individuals that have been associated with the county up to the time we sign the documents. Could we -- can we -- wh:.t can we do for the future, that's MR. BRYANT: One point you make, Commissioner Fiala, that's excellent, is that it is a crusade and it is a mission. And plus, let's say we won every lawsuit. Let's say we spend a million dollars and we win every lawsuit. We taught him a lesson, but who won the lessa::? And the reason I say that is because he has nothing to lose. He has no job. He has no money. He has no assets. So he -- he is one of those kind of people that -- like the prisOner cases that you can't do anything to them, and that's why as distasteful as it is a business decision is why. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning. COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're getting recommendations from our counsel and our outside counsel to settle this for the Page 15 February 26, 2002 betterment of-- for the taxpayer. I don't like it just as much as you or Commissioner Coyle, but we're the stewards here of the taxpayers' money; therefore, if it's proper now to make a motion, I'll -- MR. WEIGEL: It's not. We just want to discuss the negotiation here. We're looking for some general advice. We understand the tenor of your discussion. When we go back then to the -- and open the session, Mr. Coletta will indicate that the closed session is finished. When we go back out there and open up the session for the 12-B item, then you can have discussion and give direction. Obviously, the purpose of this closed session is so that detail doesn't necessarily have to be restated publicly at this point in time since it's the fruit of negotiation discussion that we're having here. But at that open session we will answer any question that's given to us 5~ere, and any discussion or statements you make on the record in regard to prudence looking after taxpayers' funds and things of that nature is part of the record at that point and public even at that early point right there. And, again, you've heard from David Bryant. Yo~'ve heard front Mike Pettit, but you also heard a bit from Tom in reg:,zd to the fact that it has affected -- it is effective -- affecting the cou.~ty staff and has in the past primarily. So I don't want to overstate that, Tom, but I thought Tom was on the record here, too, indicating that there have been certainly effects that have been felt tha~ have called it a practical or impractical effect on his staff, not just thc a'~torney staff that handles the litigation. MR. OLLIFF: However-- however distasteful this one is, havlng been involved peripherally for seven straight years in this case, if there is a potential for getting out of it for $15,500, that's a goccl -- that's a good thing. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would agree with that. MR. OLLIFF: My hope is, though, that somehow that we are not b,rred from, if asked, the commissioners can at least publicly Page 16 February 26, 2002 indicate that the county's total exposure in the settlement case after somebody was working the court system against us for seven straight year; was now -- whatever that number ends up. MR. PETTIT: Depending on how everything goes those nmnbers are out there -- will be out, public numbers. I think, again, to t:nderstand one of the factors in this negotiation with Mr. Wajerski wi~ '3 -- e, if we're going to include and we're going to include the she;'! .T in the negotiation -- we've been asked to do that, and there is a slit! benefit to us because there will be some contribution -- he may say, "You know, I settled for $85,000 against Collier County and thc~;e people associated with the county. I didn't settle with the shc:'i~T, so that's not part of the deal." But that's certainly something to 2c,;p in mind. It's a factor, but I think it's important for us to bring it COMMISSIONER FIALA: What makes you think he's going to accept these dollars? MR. PETTIT' Well, Commissioner, at this point in time, he -- he ', ~' '-~'~'~ -- ,,=~,,,~,~ that if he agreed with our claims adjuster when we negotiated with him that if the board approved a settlement in the am ;.~nt of $85,000 he would accept it. I see still two potential stun~!:ling blocks. One's the one I mentioned, the sheriffs deputy lss~.~, which we'll see how he responds to that if there were to be a set~'~cmcnt. And, two, to the extent that we tighten up even more the agreement. And I can think of maybe one more thing I could say in thc ~'c to tighten it up. I don't know whether that would be a stumbling blt :~. :. I think that's of less concern with how he'll respond when we add i ~ the idea of the sheriff. So I still think that's a good idea for the CO ~ ~ '.y. 3OMMISSIONER HENNING: I say just bring the check to the tal~'~. MR. PETTIT: I think there was one other factor that you could Page 17 February 26, 2002 keep in mind. I was told by the claims adjuster -- and I don't know if this was in the mediation. Was there a mediation in the case? There wer,~: some series of settlement discussions that occurred some months back within the last six months where his absolute bottom line was $250,000. MR. BRYANT: That was after our court-imposed arbitration that was continued because my motion for summary judgment was pen(~ing. MR. PETTIT: Okay. So in the meantime there's been a subs:antial drop. MR. BRYANT: And I might add one point: When we were getting ready to go to trial on the whistle-blower case in 1999, his bo:'~ ~m-line figure with a lawyer at that time was $450,000 to settle. An:! the board said not "No," but "Hell, no." Which was the right dec/>;ion. So it's -- the numbers have moved considerably. That's why I ~vas surprised that this number is on the table today. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: There's never been a case like this before? MR. BRYANT: That's gone on this long? CItAIRMAN COLETTA: That has the same parameters, where we c::d up selling out. MR. BRYANT: I know of one in the City of Pompano Beach becaL;sc I represented them, but I'm not involved on -- that's gone on for over ten years. It's gone to the Supreme Court twice. They have spent just a tremendous amount of money. The numbers are millions of do'~lars over an inverse condemnation matter, but Collier has never had ~ne like that. g,IR. WEIGEL' Mr. Chairman, we've had a couple cases a few yearz ago where we -- the question came from the board, the app:',:priate question was' What are the risks of winning and losing? And . ion Cuyler was asked these many times, and he chaffed under Page 18 February 26, 2002 ther:, and I continue to also because when we estimate and tell you any',l-ing -- the figure of 50/50, 60/40, 70/30 and knowing what juries can .'o if it ever gets to the jury, we know that there's always risk wit?..'urther court proceedings. And so from that standpoint the board or predecessor board members have, in fact, made the business decision to settle personal injury claims, other kinds of court cases clai: :lng damages when it's 10,000 or $30,000 or things of that nat's: '~'. And those boards at that time have considered what was the cos: 'aat got us where we were and what did the potential furore in thc ~' urtroom appear to potentially be? And the crystal ball gazing is prc~/-- pretty difficult. The object has always been not to appear or in actuality be pro'," o',lng rewards for unfortunate tenaciousness that's ill founded, but ic board has made these decisions in the past on some of these pe:. ,.-,al injury claims. f?HAIRMAN COLETTA: We've seen some come before us be~'~ ',: with the fire department not too long ago. I still have a very uncc nfortable feeling given this man -- I know the money isn't all co:x.! -~g from us, coming from our insurance pool, but I also realize th:', :e pay for the insurance and that we use it. We have to pay m~ !n the long run. So it's real money and $85,000 if the gen man will cease and desist outright. It scares the daylights out of ~ I'm just afraid of setting a precedent. Here's a man that de~., '.'t have a background in law; correct? ./IR. OLLIFF: Does not. THAIRMAN COLETTA: I would say he's pretty good at what hc'~· ,'~:ng. iOMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, one other way to look at this is :1. : we are -- we're paying -- it will be 12,000 or so -- or 15,000, so if tit ~ sheriffs office joins in this. We are paying $15,000 for a cha:'~ : to get this thing off our back. If we're right it's a good Page 19 February 26, 2002 inv¢~'~ment. If we're wrong and he won't accept it or he brings up mot,: lawsuits, we are in no worse condition than we are now because So we're really paying $15,000 for a he v'ould continue this process. goo([ -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA: isn't. No, we're paying $85,000. .2OMMISSIONER COYLE: No, not us. Not us, the county CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Regardless, whether it's insurance mo~-~ :y or other money, whoever, it's still money. COMMISSIONER COYLE: But the money that comes from us, t'.'e taxpayers, is really $15,000. ;HAIRMAN COLETTA: No, not correct, Fred. You've got the taxi?' yers are paying for the insurance premium, and the insurance prep, !'ams is what is actually covering the cost of this. They don't give' ~7~c money away free for this. MR. PETTIT: Let me make a couple of points on that. And, unfc "unately, because of the way the Sunshine Law operates, we can't .:ave Mr. Walker here, so I hope I'm correct, but this was -- I was . )Id this by the claims adjuster who has been involved with the exc,~ is n{ cart7 plug cozt' som~J clai: ha'~'. ':; carrier. The excess carrier questioned as to whether this claim 'onger an excess caTTier. ¢?hy, I don't know the answer to that, but that particular excess ::- is unhappy. Frankly, one of the factors here they pulled the ".t sixty-seven five. They want to get this over with because it's g them money. What's now being spent on that lawsuit to pay ryant. Mr. Bryant wants to take a deposition, got to pay a court :r, the excess carrier is paying for that. We don't. There was unhappiness expressed by this former excess carrier about '; experience because that excess carrier is also involved with in Cove, and the board may in the heat of the many things we ) do forgotten, but ! haven't. It's still there and, quite frankly, Page 20 February 26, 2002 I'm ~'till negotiating with that excess carrier about getting some co~'.,-ibution for Dolphin Cove. They don't like that fact, but that's still going on, and they are unh~:ppy with their claims experience, and I think that's -- there are two lhings driving it. One is they know they're in their money, but two is they took a hard stand about we're not going to contribute m(-:' '. We had claims experience with the county and where we feel lil.: '-~:ey have to contribute something. That's -- that's why -- that's wl~~ the numbers are as they are. So you're correct that in the future th,, :: might be a higher premium with a different excess carrier or the samc' excess carrier. My suspicion is the premiums probably go up to sore,: degree based on experience, but they also probably go up based on j 't time passing and premiums go up. And that's why we got to 67 ?. That's why they've taken such a hard stand because I tried to go .... ~ck and I understood what the settlement is, "Why are we p~yi:~g anything? It's not your money." ?OMMISSIONER COYLE: It's not a direct relationship bc'~,~" ~n the payment of the $67,000 and the taxpayers. iR. PETTIT: That's true. 'OMMISSIONER COYLE' So if you really want to look at ~..' · ~: s costing the taxpayers, you have to look at the premium for or:" ~',.:cess insurance carrier which we're going to pay anyway and wi ~1 '()ntinue to pay that and the $15,000 that would be out of pocket. Se ~ i,ink it's safe to say that from the taxpayer impact, the most log! ~,~ xvay to look at it, is a standpoint of $15,000; is that right? X'lR. BRYANT: That's an excellent way of putting it, C~:·. ~fissioner Coyle. And also one thing you need to remember is tl:~:t ::cess coverage is your cheapest coverage because you're not pa~.'i g for dollar one coverage. That's why we have that 100,000 b~z' ~lly deductible. That's why we increased if from fifty to one hr:r: ~ zd several years ago because you're paying it with cheaper Page 21 February 26, 2002 do!l::'s for that excess coverage. But if he files-- if we don't settle an t, .,~ files a lawsuit that's not covered, then you're going to be payi,; dollar one up to $100,000 to defend that on top of everything else ~,nd all the other lawsuits. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And then once we get past the $100,000 they pick it up again. '.iR. BRYANT: Exactly. 'HAIRMAN COLETTA: Yeah. Not that I want to go that dj": 'on, but I know you're talking -- you're talking some business log!.~ but I mean I equate this to the same thing as protection money. In oti',er words, we're paying him not to destroy the store, and we're givir~g him the money. I see this as a violation of everything we sterne' for, xvhat this man is doing to us. I wish we could stop him. I wish '.,~ere was a lawsuit xve could counter with, but we can't. I know it','! zn explained to me. ,iR. PETTIT: Let me say this, David -- David and I have prck,.51y been the lead counsels in 95 percent of the litigation the cc ul;. 7's been in since 1994, '95. This is the only one like this I know ha bc w7 si. Ul' I'l 1 I We have not had -- I know there have been some where the board ',Id of said, "Gee, I don't lmow that I want to pay this person J0, but it's the economically wise thing to do." But we have not ,is kind of a situation that -- David's analogy is absolutely right :e I have been involved when I was in federal court as a clerk , judge reviewing prisoner suits for the judge, and this is very hi'.:.:-. '©MMISSIONER HENNING: You know, we are beating this y too much. ZIAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I think we've reached a point 'we've probably reached our opinions. ;,3MMISSIONER HENNING: So if I could finish. You know, 'ady to go back in there and err on the side of the taxpayers for Page 22 February 26, 2002 ~nefit of the -- '5IAIRMAN COLETTA: And I'm ready to do the same thing. I ~:. '~3 the definition of taxpayers is different. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Looks like it's going to be dc". "~cked. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Not necessarily. I don't know how D. 'q comes in on this. R. OLLIFF' Keep in mind the amount of money the county w' ". 'lc out of pocket here we will spend in probably two full weeks w, :-:: of attorneys cost alone, let alone court reporters, expert w' "ses, or anything else on top of that, but let alone your staff tir~ .~. So I think the potential and, in my mind, of us not spending tw 'lore weeks worth of attorneys' time on ongoing cases is so re:.xe~ ~ can't begin to tell you from a cash dollar business standpoint th" 's probably a pretty fair settlement agreement, but the principle is: ' i:; one you have to decide. ~-OMMISSIONER COYLE: The only thing I would change al: t it is I would hit the sheriff up for a little more money because he' ;or big exposure over there if we settle and he doesn't. ~,,R. OLLIFF: It's your pot too. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just moving it from one pocket to th t~ er. (,;pecial closed session concluded at 2:40 p.m. Whereupon the regular session continued in the regular meeting rc ~ immediately following.) \? ,~SCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN iET REPORTING, INC., BY CAROLYN J. FORD, NOTARY ~,~C Page 23