BCC Minutes 04/23/2002 RApril 23, 2002
REGULAR MEETING
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
April 23, 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 9:05 a.m. In
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
James Coletta
Tom Henning
Donna Fiala
Fred Coyle
ABSENT: James D. Carter, Ph.D.
Tom Olliff, County Manager
David C. Weigel, County Attorney
ALSO PRESENT:
CHAIRMAN:
VICE-CHAIRMAN:
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
April 23, 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 SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY
MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE
HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS".
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
April 23, 2002
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Meredith McMillan, Golden Gate United Methodist Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A.
Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
March 26, 2002 - Regular Meeting
April 2, 2002 -Town Hall Meeting
PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation for the Great
DePasquale, President.
Dock Canoe Race. To be
accepted by Vin
B. Proclamation for Crime Victim's Rights Week. To be accepted by Al, Arlene
and Dan Klien.
C. Proclamation for National Fair Housing Month. To be accepted by Ms.
Candace M. Tapscott.
D. Proclamation for Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Month. To be accepted
by Hallie Devlin.
E. Proclamation honoring John H. Boldt, P.E., P.S.M., Collier County Stormwater
Management Director.
SERVICE AWARDS
.Five-Year Attendees:
1) Dennis Snyder, Parks and Recreation
2
April 23, 2002
2) Tabatha Butcher, Emergency Medical Services
Ten-Year Attendees:
3) Christine Crato, Emergency Medical Services
Fifteen-Year Attendees:
4) Robert Thurston, Planning Services
5) Cheryl Soter, Planning Services
Twenty-Year Attendees:
6) Marilyn Matthes, Library
Sm
PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation of the Phoenix Award to recognize EMS Department Paramedics
and EMS Paramedic/Firefighters.
PUBLIC PETITIONS AND COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
A. Public Comments on General Topics
e
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Approve a Resolution adopting the County's consolidated plan one-year
Action Plan FY 2002-2003 as required by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) for the Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Program, authorize the HUI Department to hire one additional staff
member to implement and administer the CDBG Program, and approve the FY
02-03 CDBG Program Administrative Budget.
3
April 23, 2002
To obtain Board authorization and approval of an Ordinance to increase the
Isle of Capri Municipal Rescue and Fire Services Taxing District Millage Rate
to up to two mills.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Recommendation to declare vacancies on the Black Affairs Advisory Board.
B. Appointment of members to the Environmental Advisory Council.
C. Appointment of members to the County Government Productivity Committee.
Update on Clam Farming efforts in Collier County and a request for the Board
to authorize a letter supporting the effort and requesting assistance from the
Commissioner of Agriculture. (Commissioner Coletta)
E. Appointment of member to the Health and Human Services Advisory
Committee.
F. Ethics audit for Collier County Government: Proposal for Scope of Work.
(Commissioner Coletta)
G. Request to have Board of County Commissioners reconsider the budgetary
limits for redistricting protests. (Commissioner Coyle)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
4
April 23, 2002
Ao
Board consideration of Tourist Development Council recommendation for
Board approval of additional FY01/02 funding of $250,026.00 for tourism
advertising from FY01/02 Reserves. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator,
Community Development)
Authorization for implementation of a modification to the 2001 Wastewater
Master Plan Update in the amount of $3,300,000. (Tom Wides, Interim Public
Utilities Administrator)
11. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
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.
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
Award a Professional Services Contract for consultant services under
RFP 02-3293 in the amount of $73,350.00 to the Gall Easley Company for
update of the Collier County Land Development Code.
2) This item has been deleted.
3) Code Enforcement Lien Resolution Approvals.
4)
S)
Approve a Budget Amendment recognizing additional carry forward in the
amount of $490,600 in the Affordable Housing Trust Fund.
Board approval of two permanent positions within the Community
Development and Environment Services Division to meet increased
workload demands.
5
April 23, 2002
6)
Authorize the Community Development Administrator to begin the RFP
process to select firms for "Fixed Term Professional Planning Services"
contracts for upcoming Planning Services as needed.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the acquisition by gift or purchase of
right-of-way in fee simple title, as well as perpetual, non-exclusive
drainage and utility easements and temporary driveway restoration
easements and temporary construction easements which will be required
for the construction of roadway, drainage, and utility improvements
required for the six-laning of Golden Gate Parkway between Airport Road
and Santa Barbara Boulevard, C.I.E. No. 73 (Project No. 60027). Fiscal
Impact: $3,636,000.
2)
3)
4)
5)
Approve an Easement Agreement and accept a Drainage Easement for the
Lely Stormwater Improvement Project, not to exceed $1,200.00.
Establishment of a "No Fishing" restriction on Bridge Number 030210,
Plantation Parkway over the Everglades Drainage Canal. Two signs will
be required and will cost approximately $200.
Approve a Budget Amendment for the Radio Road at Davis Boulevard
intersection improvements, Project No. 65031.
Request that the Board accept a donation of six (6) benches and memorial
plaques on behalf of the Vanderbilt Beach Municipal Services Taxing Unit
(MSTU) Beautification Advisory Committee and authorize the installation
and placement at the location determined by the MSTU Advisory
Committee.
6)
Approve a Budget Amendment for the Tropicana Boulevard Project in the
amount of $29,000 from operating in the Golden Gate Municipal Services
Taxing Unit (MSTU) Fund 136.
7)
8)
9)
Approve an amendment to a Developer Contribution Agreement with WCl
Communities to permit an extension of time for construction of golf cart
underpass and provide for liquidated damages.
Approve an Easement Agreement and acquire drainage easements at a
cost of $27,304.00 for Stormwater Facility Improvements and Maintenance
to the Lake Kelly Outfall Ditch (Project No. 31801).
Board authorization to prepare and advertise an Ordinance to permit the
expenditure of road impact fees between and among adjacent Collier
County Road Impact Fee Districts.
6
April 23, 2002
10) Award RFP 02-3346 - Standardization of decorative county street lights to
architectural area lighting where MSTU or other funding is available from
other standard street lights.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
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 $69.00 to
record the Liens.
Adopt the 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 $28.50 to record the
liens.
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 $24.00 to record the
liens.
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 $24.00 to record the
liens.
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 $30.00 to record the
liens.
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 1995 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Services Special Assessments. Fiscal Impact is $58.50 to record the
liens.
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 $76.50 to record the
,iens.
Approval of an Assignment of Lease between NTC Development, Ltd., and
Carlton Lakes, LLC, with no fiscal impact to the County.
7
April 23, 2002
9)
lO)
11)
12)
This item has been deleted.
Award Contract #02-3313 "Fixed Term Professional Geographic
Information Services (GIS)" to the following firms: 3001 Inc., Johnson
Engineering Inc., and Wilson Miller, Inc., the total FY02 Award for these
contracts total $747,267.
Ratify Deputy County Manager's approval of emergency purchase order
to Trisep Corporation and appropriate funds in the amount of $56,600 for
the purchase of reverse osmosis membranes at the North County
Regional Water Treatment Plant.
Approve remediation tasks for Naples Landfill Gun Range, restoration of
Cells I and 2, and provide Geo-Technical/Environmental Support and
execute the tasks by piggybacking Tampa Port Authority Contract #0'i-
1401-01 with Professional Service Industries Inc., in the amount of
$468,936.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Adopt a Resolution appointing officers to the Collier County Agricultural
Fair and Exposition, Inc., Board of Directors for 2002-2003.
2)
Approve Change Order #1 with Bradanna, Inc., in the amount of
$63,589.47 and approve Budget Amendment in amount of $70,000 for
Tigertail Beach Concession Project.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1)
Report to the Board of County Commissioners concerning the sale and
transfer of items associated with the County Surplus Auction of March 16,
2002, resulting in $335,419.20 in net revenues.
2)
Award Contracts #02-3324 "Fixed Term Professional Surveying and
Photogrametric Services" to the following firms: Wilson Miller, Wiikison
and Associates, Southern Mapping, Johnson Engineering, Q. Grady Minor
and Associates (estimated annual amount $225,000).
3)
Approval of a First Amendment to Lease Agreement between Sprint-
Florida, Incorporated, and Collier County to reduce the leased area and
FY01/02 rental Income by $715 annually.
4)
Authorize the Collier County Purchasing Department to Issue a Purchase
Order under State Contract #250-04 0-99-1 in the amount of $49,985.21 to
Avaya Communications for the new Immokalee Jail Center Phone System.
8
April 23, 2002
F. EMERGENCY SERVICES
1)
Approval of a Lease Agreement between North Naples Fire Control and
Rescue District and Collier County for shared use of Station #46 at an
annual rent of $15,910.00 and a $22,539.17 total budget impact during
FY01/02.
2)
Approve proposed revisions to the by-laws of the Emergency Medical
Services Advisory Council and authorize the County Attorney to prepare
the required resolution.
Ge
COUNTY MANAGER
1) Approval of Budget Amendment Report - Budget Amendment #02-279
(General Fund 001, Health Care Responsibility Act, $20,000).
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Approve acceptance of an Aviation
amount from Reserves.
Grant and
transfer of matching
I. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
J. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
K. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1)
That the Board of County Commissioners authorize the addition of a full
time pretrial officer in the Courts' Probation and Parole Department at a
cost of $32,478.
2)
3)
Request for funds in the amount of $377,600 for structures to temporarily
house the overflow of Inmate population at the Naples Jail Center.
The Finance and Accounting Department seeks authorization from the
Board of County Commissioners to file the State of Florida Annual Local
Government Financial Report for the Fiscal Year 2000-2001 as required by
Florida Statute 218.32.
9
April 23, 2002
4)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners re-appropriate
investigation funding in the amount of $63,808.36 from the Florida Violent
Crime and Drug Control Council to the Sheriff's Office.
5) Authorization to renovate the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King
JrJSupervisor of Elections Building in the amount of $103,000.
L. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve the
release of three (3) units for occupancy as a partial settlement of Shader-
Lombardo Investments, LLC v. Collier County, Case No. 01-4135-CA-HDH
(i.e. Vanderbilt Villas Lawsuit).
2)
Recommendation that the Board ratify and authorize the County
Attorney's Retention of Expert Witnesses/Consultants 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 and waive the requirements
of the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act due to an emergency if
and to the extent the purchasing policy or the Consultants' Competitive
Negotiation Act are applicable, and authorize the Chairman to sign any
necessary retention documents.
3)
4)
S)
Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Easement
Acquisition of Parcel 315 in the Lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Wilfredo
Maribona, et al, (Golden Gate Boulevard, Project No. 63041).
Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondents, Robert B.
and Ruth E. Stirling, for Parcels 179 and 179T in the amount of $11,400.00
in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Dr. Francisco O. Cortina, et al, Case
No. 00-0936-CA, Golden Gate Boulevard Project 63041.
Authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to Respondents, Douglas
Terry, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of David
Terry, and Duane Terry, for Parcel 203 in the amount of $1,000.00 in the
Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Douglas Terry, et al, Case No. 00-1297-
CA. Project No. 63041.
6)
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
Budget Amendment to pay for minor security recommended alterations of
the office space allocated to the Office of the County Attorney.
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 RECOM~IENDATION 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
10
April 23, 2002
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.
Adoption of an Ordinance establishing the Lake Trafford Restoration Task
Force; providing for creation and Intent; providing functions, powers and
duties; providing for appointment and composition, terms of office,
attendance and filling of vacancies; providing for removal from office for
failure to attend meetings; providing for officers, quorum and rules of
procedure; providing for review process; providing for conflict and
severability; providing for Inclusion in Code of Laws and Ordinances; and
providing for an effective date.
18. ADJOURN
.INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADi
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774=838,_'I.
11
April 23, 2002
April 23, 2002
on?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I think we're ready to start.
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Good morning. Would you all
rise, please. Tom Olliff will lead us in our invocation.
MR. OLLIFF: Heavenly Father, we come to you this morning
and just thank you for the opportunity that we have in this country to
be able to gather together and conduct your government and your
business in open sunshine.
Father, we thank you for the hard work of the staff, the hard
work of the commission, and for our public that involves themselves
in the -- in the process.
Father, we pray that the decisions that are made here this
morning would be in your best interest and in the best interest of this
community.
We pray all these things in the name of your son, Jesus Christ.
Amen.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And in the spirit of patriotism,
Commissioner Fiala will lead us in the pledge of allegiance.
Commissioner Fiala.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I have somebody put my hat
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, of course we
can have somebody put your hat on. And, Commissioner Fiala, when
you get a chance, can you grab a mike possibly down there. You
might be able to explain to us what this is all about.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
the commission, isn't it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
You're in this with me, Captains.
Okay.
The white hair is about being on
Let me -- don't -- don't sit down.
These are our staff captains and is a
Page 2
April 23, 2002
Relay for Life fund raiser.
And these gals decided that they would have us commissioners -
- I don't know, as targets -- as -- anyway, we had little boxes all
around the county for everybody to put some dollars in. And I'm not
quite sure if I was the winner or the loser, but I got to wear the outfit
all day today.
And I just want to thank the gals for working so hard. This
Relay for Life is going to be kicked off on Friday at -- at -- what time
was it? -- at 6 p.m. -- 6 p.m. And go right on through till Saturday at
1:30 p.m., and it's going to be at Gulf View Middle School. And
they'd love to have everybody come out. And I'm going to have
Marlene come up and give us a few words, but I just want to tell you
how honored I feel to actually be doing this today.
It's quite memorable because in my family we have somebody
who right now is in remission. My daughter-in-law, Kathy, who's 27
years old, last year February was diagonsed with Hodgkins
lymphoma, and she was pretty far along. And I want to tell you, she's
in total remission, and the doctor feels that if this continues on the
way it is in two years she'll be considered cured. So this is really a
great -- a great occasion for me.
And, secondly, I have a friend named Terry Miller who has
pancreatic cancer, given, what -- oh, three to six months ago to live a
year ago last December, and he's just coming along and he's hanging
in there and he's looking better than most people. He looks great. So
thank you again for the privilege of doing this. (Applause.)
MS. FOORD: Good morning. My name is Marlene Foord. I'm
a member of the planning services department and also a member of
the Relay for Life team for the Collier County government team.
On behalf of Kim Hadley, sitting right here in the second row,
Page 3
April 23, 2002
who -- although she can lead an 18-member team to raise over $7,000
and also serve as advocacy chair for the Naples relay itself, she's a
little nervous about coming up in front of people and speaking, so she
asked me to speak for her.
As I mentioned, we do have an 18-member team. It's all county
government employees comprised of members of all six divisions of
county government and several of the constitutional offices. We also
include, I think, just about every single department in the county,
which is really incredible.
The relay itself is this weekend as Commissioner Fiala
mentioned. It's Friday, April 26 -- Friday, April 26 and 27, and it
starts at 6 p.m. That's the first lap. It's 18 hours all together and we
will be there the whole time. We'll have a member on the track the
entire time, and we welcome you-all to come out there and join us.
The theme, as you can probably guess, is "America" for the
Naples relay this year. And our tent-site theme for our own team is
"Home of the Brave," and we welcome you to come out and see our
home. It'll be really incredible.
As -- as you know, we have a lot of employees involved, and I'd
like to thank the employees that have been taking part. Like to thank
the commissioners, particularly the commissioners that volunteered
to be possibly voted in to be Uncle Sam for the day. Commissioner
Fiala, I guess you can actually blame Kim or maybe thank Kim for
this. I'm not sure if it was her idea or not. But also like to thank Tom
Olliff for approving all these crazy fund raisers that we've been doing
and apologize to everybody and county staff that's been receiving
multitudes of Hadley Klm e-mails with updates and information.
But we are very excited. We have raised almost $7,000, and we
will have 60 luminaries on the track.
(Applause.)
Page 4
April 23, 2002
MS. FOORD: So please come out April 26, 6 p.m. For the first
lap. You can join us anytime during the 18 hours, and I'd like to
invite Kim and Rhonda to come up. We have a thank you gift for
Commissioner Fiala for volunteering and serving as Uncle Sam. This
is a basketful of cancer fighting anti-oxidant items that hopefully will
keep you cancer free for many, many, many years.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much. Thank you so
much; broccoli and oranges and apples and vitamins. Thank you.
Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, congratulations
on winning the commissioner popularity contest and for being such a
great sport.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I bet you were just pumping in
those dollars so you didn't have to wear this.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No comments.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Must have been a thousand bucks.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You wondered how it got up to
7,000 so quick; right?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, my.
Item #2A
REGULAR, SUMMARY, AND CONSENT AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: At this point, let's go on the agenda
and the minutes, the approval of today's regular and consent summary
agenda. At this point, I want to ask if there's any -- excuse me,
disclosures that the commissioners would like to make on the -- the
agenda, the summary agenda in particular.
Page 5
April 23, 2002
MR. MUDD: Changes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, I have none,
but I do think we have some changes to the agenda.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We'll come to that. We're going to
go right down the line here real quick.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have none.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I have none also.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have none.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Mr. Olliff.
MR. OLLIFF: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and just on behalf
of your staff I would like to thank the board for participating.
Everybody has -- has been touched in one way or the other by cancer,
and I think that you have some staff members who in particular have
taken this -- this particular project to heart. They have made it a
mission of theirs to get our organization involved and have really
raised the profile of it. And it takes a good sport, frankly, to -- to
participate. And on behalf of the staff we want to thank you for
participating and helping us to raise money for that worthy cause.
There are a couple of changes to your agenda, and I'll walk you
through them this morning. Item 9-D as in "David," it's under the
Board of County Commissioners, and there simply is a request to
amend the language of the actual title in the item. In addition to an
update on clam farming and a request from the board to authorize a
letter supporting the efforts and requesting the assistance from the
commissioner of agriculture, we will add to that item a request to
direct staff to set up a committee that would work with the state and
help set the criteria for what's called leased distribution.
Next change is an addition. It is Item 9-H, again, under the
Board of County Commissioners portion of the agenda. It's a
recommendation to have the Board of County Commissioners direct
Page 6
April 23, 2002
the county manager to amend the irrigation ordinance to provide
additional opportunities for people to hand water and to authorize the
chairman to write a letter requesting that all other non-participating
utilities within the Collier County boundaries consider imposing the
same restrictions within their utility districts as has Collier County
and the City of Naples.
The next item is also an addition. It is Item 9-1 under the Board
of County Commissioners, again, at Commissioner Coletta's request.
This is a request that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the chair to sign and send a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers and
to the Florida Congressional delegation regarding the funding and the
funding schedule for the Everglades Restoration Project.
Next item is 9-J, also an addition at Commissioner Coletta's
request. A request to authorize in conjunction with the Cinco de
Mayo Festival the sale of alcohol at the Immokalee Airport and to
waive what is the required 60-day waiting period for that particular
event.
Next two items are not on your change list. They are requests
from the staff to move two items off of your consent agenda to your
regular agenda. We're requesting that we move Item 16-A-1, which
is under community development environmental services on your
consent agenda. We'd ask that you move that. That would become
Item 10-C on the regular agenda. That is a professional services
contract for consultant services in the amount of $73,350 to provide
an update of the Collier County Land Development Code.
The second item that we're requesting a move from the consent
to regular is 16-A-6. You have a community development
administrator requesting to go through the RFP process to select
what's called fixed-term professional planning services contracts for
upcoming planning services on an as-needed basis. That item would
Page 7
April 23, 2002
become 10-D, as in "David," on your regular agenda under the
county manager's portion of the agenda.
Next item is a deletion off of your consent agenda, 16-B-10, at
the staff's request. It was an RFP award for standardization of
decorative streetlighting. Staff's requested that that be deleted, I
believe, because there was a bid protest or a proposal protest on that
particular item. So we'll resolve that and bring that item back.
The last item on your change list is an addition o your consent
agenda. It is Item 16-I-1, which is the Board of County
Commissioners portion of the consent agenda. And it is a
confirmation of the City of Naples appointee to your Coastal
Advisory Committee. Typically the board has appointments of
members to advisory boards on your regular agenda, but because the
way this is set up, it is strictly a confirmation of the city's appointee
for that board, and we're adding it on simply in order to be able to
make the next Coastal Advisory Committee meeting rather than
having to wait another full month before we got to the appointment
and the following CAC meeting.
Mr. Chairman, I believe I've -- I worked my way through your
full list of changes. That's all that the staff has.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, let's take a moment and start
with Commissioner Fiala and see if there's any other items from the
consent agenda for consideration.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Or the summary agenda.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: None, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And none here. What we need now
Page 8
April 23, 2002
is the-
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a motion to approve
the -- today's regular consent and summary agenda as amended as
long as the county attorney doesn't have any amendments to the
agenda.
MR. WEIGEL: None.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
aye.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
Second.
All those in favor indicate by saying
(Unanimous response.)
Page 9
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
April 23, 2002
ITEM 9D: Add the following verbiage: "Request to direct staff to set up a
committee that would work out the particulars with the State and help set the
criteria for leased distribution." (Commissioner Coletta.)
ADD: ITEM 9H: Recommendation to have the BCC direct the County Manager to
amend the irrigation ordinance to provide additional opportunities for people to
hand water and to authorize the Chairman to write a letter requesting Marco
Island, Golden Gate City, OrangeTree, Immokalee and Port of the Islands to
voluntarily impose the same restrictions on their communities. (Commissioner
Coletta.)
ADD: ITEM 91: Request that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the
Chair to sign and send a letter to the ACOE and the Collier County Congressional
delegation regarding the funding for the Everglades restoration project.
(Commissioner Coletta.)
ADD: ITEM 9J: A request to authorize the sale of alcohol at the Immokalee
Airport as requested by the Cinco de Mayo organizing committee and to waive the
sixty day waiting period. (Commissioner Coletta.)
DELETE: ITEM 16(B)10: Award RFP 02-3346 Standardization of decorative
county street lights to architectural area lighting where MSTU or other funding is
available from other standard street lights. (Staff request.)
ADD: ITEM 16(I)1: Confirmation of member to the Coastal Advisory Committee.
(Staff request.)
April 23, 2002
Item #2B&C
MINUTES OF MARCH 26, 2002 REGULAR MEETING AND
APRIL 2, 2002 TOWN HALL MEETING- APPROVED AS
PRESENTED
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a motion to approve
the March 26, 2002, Regular meeting and April 2, 2002, Town Hall
meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
All those in favor indicate by saying
The ayes have it 4-0.
Item #3A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 11TH, 2002 AS
COLLIER COUNTY GREAT DOCK CANOE RACE DAY 2002-
ADOPTED
Moving on to the proclamations.
Commissioner Coyle, you're first.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The first proclamation will be
accepted by Mr. Vin DePasquale. Vin, will you come up here and
stand while I read this -- this proclamation. Tell you something about
Page 10
April 23, 2002
Vin. He owns a wonderful restaurant at Crayton Cove in Naples, and
he started this great canoe race 26 years ago, was it. It's been a great
event, encourage you-all to come out. I'm going to read a
proclamation.
Whereas, the Great Dock Canoe Race is one of Naples' longest
standing traditions; and,
Whereas, the Great Dock Canoe Race will celebrate its 26th
running in 2002; and,
Whereas, the Great Dock Canoe Race provides fun
and camaraderie for Neapolitans and visitors of all ages; and,
Whereas, the Great Dock Canoe Race supports local charities
each year.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the 11 th day of May
be designated as Collier County Great Dock Canoe Race Day 2002,
and urge all community members to take advantage of this
opportunity to participate in this community celebration.
Done and ordered this 23rd day of April 2002, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, James M. Coletta,
Chairman.
Vin, it's a real pleasure to present this to you, and thanks for all
the good work.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor indicate by saying
(Unanimous response.)
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
I do that every time.
aye.
One of these
days I'm going to learn this has to be voted on. If you want to say
Page 11
April 23, 2002
anything, Vin, you're free to step up to the podium. Vin, they want a
picture first.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Step up a little closer here, and the
count of three.
MR. DePASQUALE: Just a couple of words. Representing the
board for the Great Dock Canoe Race I am here to accept this
wonderful honor and let you know that over the past 26 years we
have raised well over $100,000 for children's activities and programs
in the community. This recognition really means a lot to us. The
support for this event is privately done by business donations each
year entering the race, and on behalf of everyone involved we
appreciate it and thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you, Vin.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: One -- one -- one other thing, I
would encourage everyone to accept Vin's invitation. It's a great
event. Vin also runs with the bulls in Pamplona, Spain. If he -- if he
invites you to that one, I would suggest you decline.
MR. DePASQUALE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner-- Commissioner
Henning, let's see if you can top that.
Item #3B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THAT THE WEEK OF APRIL
21-27, 2002 AS COLLIER COUNTY VICTIMS RIGHTS WEEK-
ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll do my best, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, today we have A1 Klien,
Page 12
April 23, 2002
Arlene Klein, and Dan Klein, brother and parents of Jeff Klein, who
serviced the sheriff's department, and his life was taken in the -- in
the recent past. So I would ask the Kleins to please come up here
while I read this proclamation. You want to turn around and face the
audience.
Whereas, one violent crime is committed in America every five
seconds and one property crime every 1.6 seconds; and,
Whereas, 25.9 million Americans are victims of crime each
year, and those 6.3 million are victims of violent crimes; and,
Whereas, despite the great strides we have made to assisting
victims of crime, far too many persons still suffer from the impact of
crime; and,
Whereas, crime victims play an indispensable role in bringing
offenders to justice; and,
Whereas, victims of crime deserve respect, resources,
restoration, and justice; and,
Whereas, as we carry crime victim rights into 2002 and beyond
we must bring honor to the victims striving to create the world where
the legal rights of victims are honored and those responsible for their
victimization are held accountable; and,
Whereas, Collier County is devoted to liberty and justice for all,
Collier County must increase its efforts to protect, restore, and
expand crime victim rights and services; and,
Whereas, Collier County is enjoying -- joining forces with the
victim services program, criminal justice officials, and concerned
citizens throughout America to observe National Crime Victims'
Rights Week.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of April
21st through the 27th, 2002, be designated as Collier County Victim
Page 13
April 23, 2002
Rights Week.
And be it further resolved that this official proclamation be
presented to Al, Arlene, and Dan Klein. Done and ordered this 23rd
day of April 2002, and signed by the board's chairman, James
Coletta.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we move this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Henning, a second by Commissioner Coyle. All those in favor
indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 4-0.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We can have a picture.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Could we get a picture, Al? Step
back here for just one moment. Thank you.
MR. KLIEN: IfI may just say a couple words --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please do.
MR. KLIEN: -- on behalf of Jeff. This is my second time
standing in front of the Board of County Commissioners. A while
back, six or eight months ago it was brought up a wreath was
dedicated to my son's name off the Coast of Naples which is -- the
dedication is going to be May 19th. And I would like to invite
anybody -- there are going to be three sheriff patrol boats there to
supply transportation out to the reef. And if we can fit as many
people in as we can, and anybody that wants to bring their boats is
more than welcome. And I want to thank the Collier County
commissioners and I want to thank the sheriff's department for being
with us all the way. They said we were family, and they treated us
exactly like family. And also want to bring up that that young
Page 14
April 23, 2002
gentleman sitting on the end over there was my son's best friend.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Klein.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, if I -- if I may, I
think it was yesterday the governor signed a proclamation and a law,
a victim's rights law, for the State of Florida. So I think that we're
very proud of our governor for recognizing the victims of violent
crimes here in this great State of Florida.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then the next proclamation is
by Uncle Sam alias Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Auntie Sam maybe.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Auntie Sam.
Item #3C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE MONTH OF APRIL AS
NATIONAL FAIR HOUSING MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY-
ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And this is to the National Fair
Housing, and I would like Mr. Orlando Lori to come up, please. If
you'd just like to stand here. There you go. Face the audience.
Whereas, in 2001 Collier County became an entitlement
recipient of federal funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development under the Community Development Block Grant
or the CDBG program; and,
Whereas, Collier County certified that it will affirmatively
further fair housing opportunities and will work to identify and
remove impediments to fair housing choices; and,
Whereas, Collier County's Consolidated Plan One-Year Action
Page 15
April 23, 2002
Plan for the years 2002 and 2003 outlines fair housing initiatives that
will be undertaken which include education and outreach campaigns
to further fair housing choices for Collier County residents; and,
Whereas, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1986 and the Fair
Housing Act of 1998 prohibit the discrimination and the sale, rental,
and financing of dwellings based on race, color, religion, sex,
national origin, handicap, or familial status; and,
Whereas, the secretary of HUD has proclaimed April 2002 as
National Fair Housing Month and asked all CDBG entitlement
communities to join them in celebrating the freedom of housing
choices and fair housing opportunities; and,
Whereas, the Board of Collier County Commissioners of Collier
County feel that every American has a right to live where they choose
with dignity and without fear of discrimination and actively support
its fair housing, education, and outreach initiatives.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of April be
recognized as National Fair Housing Month in Collier County.
Done and ordered this 23rd day of April 2002.
Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Seconded.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Henning. All those in favor indicate by
saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
(Applause.)
MR. LORI: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And may I give you this
proclamation. There you go. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Page 16
April 23, 2002
MR. LORI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you like to say a couple
words?
MR. LORI: Yes, please.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The podium's yours.
MR. LORI: Thank you very much for -- on behalf of the
secretary -- this honor of being here today. Today's my second day on
the job, so it's interesting that I just got from Washington two days
ago, drove in this morning, got lost already. So I thank you very
much. I believe that the secretary and all of us in HUD are -- very
much our mission is to provide fair housing to the community. And
this is a very good step that you have done today.
Collier County has -- was an entitlement city in 2001 reaching
more than 200,000 individuals. Our program last year gave the
county on the CDBG funds over $1,942,000 and now an additional
150,000 for the City of Naples. So HUD has contributed over $2
million for this -- promoting our fair housing program. So I thank
you very much for your cooperation and looking forward to working
with you in the future. Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, you got a
double header today.
Item #3D
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL AS CHILD ABUSE
AND NEGLECT PREVENTION MONTH- ADOPTED
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And this is a proclamation for
Page 17
April 23, 2002
Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Month. Who is -- MS. DEVLIN: I'm taking it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Whereas, 130,209 children in the
State of Florida were identified to be abused or neglected during
fiscal year 2001 -- 2000-2001; and,
Whereas, child abuse and neglect results in significant trauma to
the child, family, and society as it causes children to suffer serious
illness and injury resulting in impairment of physical, intellectual,
and emotional functioning and well-being or even death; and,
Whereas, abused or neglected children are at much greater risk
of becoming abusive or neglectful parents; and,
Whereas, child abuse and neglect prevention services can reduce
the costs society must bear in dealing with the results of child abuse
and neglect and can help keep children and families out of already
overburdened and expensive social welfare and criminal justice
systems; and,
Whereas, 2002 marks the 19th anniversary of child abuse and
neglect prevention services in the State of Florida; and,
Whereas, children of Florida deserve the opportunity to grow
and thrive in healthy environments free from threats of violence and
harm; and,
Whereas, during the month of April public and private sector
agencies, childcare professionals, child advocates, and residents will
be increasing -- will be increasing the public's awareness of child
abuse and neglect prevention.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that April be designated
as Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Month.
Done and ordered this 23rd day of April 2002.
Motion to approve.
Page 18
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Fiala, a second by Commissioner Henning. All those in favor indicate
by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 4-0.
(Applause.)
MS. DEVLIN: I know you have a busy agenda, but I wanted to
take a minute of your time to thank you for again doing a
proclamation this year, as you have in previous years, for child abuse
and prevention month. We each year in the county investigate over
1,600 reports of child abuse and neglect. And in addition to that
there are many other families that need support, need help. The
community has been very good about giving that support, and I
appreciate this acknowledgment of their efforts and the awareness
that we hope having April as Child Abuse and Neglect Month brings
to the community. Thank you.
Item #3E
PROCLAMATION HONORING JOHN H. BOLDT, P.E.,P.S.M.,
COLLIER COUNTY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
DIRECTOR- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Now it's my turn. And
it's a real privilege. John Boldt, would you please come forward and
family members of John and the staff members that are here also
come up. We would ask all your friends to come up too, John, but
there's not enough room. This is John Boldt is the -- the number one
stormwater manager in Collier County. The best one we've ever had.
Page 19
April 23, 2002
Also the only one, but --
Whereas, John H. Boldt, P.E., P.S.M., began his career with
Collier County as stormwater management director, April 11, 1983;
and,
Whereas, John has been responsible for implementing a variety
of innovative stormwater management area-wide plans and projects
to protect the citizens and property of Collier County; and,
Whereas, one of John's passions has been service to others
through a variety of organizations including Engineering Ministries
International, Incorporated, Love-A-Child Foundation, and People
for Missions, and at his own expense has devoted many hundreds of
hours traveling to and working with local people in Haiti, Guatemala,
and Africa; and,
Whereas, after 19 years of dedicated loyal service to Collier
County, John is retiring from his post as stormwater management
director; and,
Whereas, the staff, administration, and Board of Collier County
-- of Collier -- of Collier County seeks to recognize his achievements
and to wish him well as he goes forth seeking new challenges and
endeavors; and,
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that John H. Boldt, P.E,
P.S.M., be recognized for his contributions to society wherever he
has been and may yet travel and that the people of Collier County
offer this proclamation as a token of their respect, affection, and fond
memories of him and his accomplishments.
Done and ordered this 23rd day of April 2002, James N. Coletta,
Chairman.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
Page 20
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Motion by Commissioner--
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: John, there's no option. You have a
couple words you have to say.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, are you going to be missed.
MR. BOLDT: Well, it's been an exciting 19 years. When Judy
and I moved here, the population was, like, 82,000. Now it's well
over two-sixty, so it's -- it's tripled. We've seen a lot of changes. A
number of things we're quite proud of. Particularly proud of Naples
Park Drainage Project if anybody can remember that -- how much of
an improvement that was to that community.
We leave with a little bit of sadness, some things undone. We
had a marvelous retirement party last week, and I mentioned there
and Tom agreed that they're going to invite me back for the Lely
Area Stormwater Improvement Project ground breaking that we hope
to have one of these days very soon.
Made a lot of friends, had a lot of support over the years. I
really appreciate it. You seen all my staff up there. My field crews
were -- were not in presence. They're out working today getting
ready for the rainy season. I'm going to miss that daily contact with
my staff and all of you, but I -- Judy and I are going to remain in the
community.
We propose to do quite a bit of traveling hopefully, Lord willing
and our health holds up. Plan to travel -- in fact, we're leaving
Thursday for Kenya, 12-day trip. Going to master plan a Bible
college over there, and we're not sure what else we're going to be
doing for the rest of the summer, but -- again, it's been an exciting
time. I really appreciate this proclamation, and we're looking
forward to coming back in who knows what capacity in the furore.
So thank you very much.
Page 21
April 23, 2002
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Next on the agenda is the service
awards and Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. Mr. Chairman,
before we leave I had the privilege of watching John Boldt work in
the community, and John is a servant of God and mankind, so we
should be very proud of who he is as a person. And his retirement is
really not retirement. He's going to continue to serve. Thanks, John.
(Applause.)
Item #4
EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS- PRESENTED
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, Aunt Sam, we have three
employees to recognize this morning. The first is Tabatha Butcher
with your EMS department receiving a five-year pin. (Applause.)
MR. OLLIFF: The second employee we're recognizing this
morning is with your planning services department, and Cheryl Soter
has been with us for 15 years. (Applause.)
MR. OLLIFF: The last awardee this morning, Mr. Chairman, is
Marilyn Matthes with your library department who has 20 years of
service with Collier County government. (Applause.)
MR. OLLIFF: And special recognition for having to work her
last five years with Mr. Jones, so I think she gets extra credit.
Mr. Chairman, that's all your awardees this morning. Thank
you.
Page 22
April 23, 2002
(Applause.)
Item #5A
PHOENIX AWARD TO RECOGNIZE EMS DEPARTMENT
PARAMEDICS AND EMS PARAMEDIC/FIREFIGHTERS-
PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Mr. Pineau.
MR. PINEAU: Good morning. Good morning, Commissioners.
I'm Ken Pineau, your interim emergency services administrator.
Several years ago the Collier County and medical services
department adopted the Phoenix Award to recognize those EMS
paramedics who through their skills and knowledge have successfully
brought back to life individuals in our community who have died. As
you know, the phoenix was a bird of Egyptian mythology who rose
again from the ashes after 500 years. Now, the individuals that were
saved didn't have to go through those great lengths, but I would like
to mention that our emergency medical service colleagues using their
skills, knowledge, and expertise brought back to life three members
of our community.
We are proud to recognize the following emergency medical
professionals, and if they would come forward, please. Paramedic
Sandy Pitts.
(Applause.)
MR. PINEAU:
(Applause.)
MR. PINEAU:
(Applause.)
MR. PINEAU:
Lieutenant Doug Roberts.
Paramedic Rick Thorpe.
Our newly promoted Captain Eric Watson.
Page 23
April 23, 2002
(Applause.)
MR. PINEAU: We had one more individual today that couldn't
make it. He's out there at an accident scene, Paramedic Thomas
Michael, but we'll present that to him later.
Now, the next group -- we couldn't do this without them, but at
this time we would like to recognize and present Phoenix Awards in
appreciation for their immense help in saving the lives of our
community members to the following members of our fire service
community. We have North Naples Firefighter Rick Green.
(Applause.)
MR. PINEAU: City of Naples Firefighter Nate Williams.
(Applause.)
MR. PINEAU: And, finally, City of Naples Firefighter Jeff
Sandlin.
(Applause.)
MR. PINEAU: That concludes the presentations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sorry. I just dumped his water.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Little problem up here.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We've got just a momentary
emergency here. I hope this isn't a violation of the water ban.
MR. OLLIFF: We would consider that hand watering, Mr.
Chairman.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Touche.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sorry about that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That was not on a grass surface.
That was a non-impervious surface. That's double the violation, if
I'm not mistaken. Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: One on Aunt Sam.
Page 24
April 23, 2002
Item #6A
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAIJ TOPICS
Okay. Let's see, right now we're at our public petitions and
comments on general topics. Do we have any speakers?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. We have five speakers. The first
speaker is Edward Ostolaza, and I'm sure I got that last name wrong.
And he will be followed by Frank Leite.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And that's for five minutes
for each speaker, and Ms. Filson -- MS. FILSON: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do we have the timer working?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: For the benefit of the speakers.
Thank you.
MR. OSTOLAZA: Okay. Good morning. My name is Ed
Ostolaza, and I'm here representing Tall Pines, a development on
Airport Road, and we're right there where all the expansion is going
on and all that. In general, everything's great. We love what's going
on. I think the six-laning is going fine and all that stuff.
I'm here because I think the county is -- maybe made a mistake,
and I'm sure everything was followed by whatever rules that you go
by, but the fence, rail, whatever you want to call it that went up on
Airport Road -- I don't know if any of you have seen it or if you've all
probably seen it. This railing is 4 foot 8 tall, and it seems to be the
only place in Collier County that we have it other than over bridges
and certain sections. I've made some phone calls, and I'm trying to
find out what's going on. And at first we were dealing with a man by
the name of Corti. Apparently, I'm told don't bother trying to
Page 25
April 23, 2002
pronounce his first name. He was project manager of the project
when it started. And he is been now removed to another project, I
assume, and they've got a gentleman by the name of Lynn Thorp in
there to finish up the project.
So I called Lynn and I asked him what the deal is, what's going
on, why do we have this. He came in and basically said Big Cypress
Basin, BCB, it's their property. It's their easement. It's their thing.
He did tell me that the reason why the fence was as high as it is as
opposed to a three-foot pedestrian railing is because for some reason
that sidewalk is considered for bicycles as well as pedestrians. At
that point, I guess there's a bicycle rail height that's higher than a
pedestrian rail height. So that explains the height of the fence.
The reason why it's there at all had to do apparently with the
proximity of this sidewalk to the canal, its closeness to the canal. He
stated DOT Index 520. That means nothing to me, but I tried to get
ahold of the DOT person who's in charge by the name of Norm
Feder. He was supposed to be here today. I don't know if he's here
or not. Apparently he is not. I called him a couple of times. He
hasn't called me back. I just really wanted to find out exactly what it
is -- what was that distance. It's approximately four or five feet right
now of flat ground before it heads down into the canal.
The reason why I wanted to bring this up, why I wanted to ask
was when I talked to Lynn Thorp at the county he said that
everything that was done there is done because BCB requires it
and/or it's their thing. It's their canal. They take care of it. So with
that in mind I called BCB and I called Clarence Tiers at BCB. I don't
know if he's here. Are you, Clarence? I talked with Mr. Tiers, and
what they basically said was they really don't have requirements as
far as what they want. They pretty much have what they called or
what we referred to as criteria. So, in other words, if there was going
Page 26
April 23, 2002
to be a sidewalk there, they said, well, it has to be able to support
their machinery, not crumble underneath and all that stuff, and that's
fine. And if there was going to be a fence, that the fence would then
have to be a removal fence so they can get access to the canal. It all
makes sense, so apparently that's what this fence can be done. It can
be removed in sections as they need it whenever they need to get it
done.
They did not, however, require -- from what I understand, they
don't require a sidewalk. They didn't require something structurally
sound like a sidewalk there. All they required was 8 feet of room is
what they needed to get their -- their vehicles in there. And from what
he was telling me it's some sort of vehicles for spraying it whatever
time they need for spray for things and if they ever need to get in
there to do any kind of shaping of the canal, which they just did
because of all the work going on. They got their machinery in there,
and they shaped the canal.
In the 20-some-odd years that Tall Pines has been there, that's
never been done to that canal until now. And that's fine. They took
advantage of the time the road work was being done. It's taken care
of. As far as I can see, I don't see that happening again for a long
time. Which is fine. They maintain the canal if they need it; they'll
do it. So that's why they needed the fence to be a removal. When I
talked to him, he said as far as he's concerned, they don't really --
they wouldn't care less if the fence was there at all I'm sorry. Is that
my time? '
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we cut to the chase,
and tell us what you want.
MR. OSTOLAZA: The chase is, I don't think the fence needed
to be there. The sidewalk didn't need to be there, certainly didn't
need to be -- it's 8 foot 10 inches wide. It did not need to be there
Page 27
April 23, 2002
that wide.
It could have been a standard 5-foot sidewalk. All of a sudden now
we put an 8-foot sidewalk in there, and now it's got to have a 4-foot
8-foot rail on there, and it's just -- it's not attractive. It's not part of
Collier County's beautification thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So your objection is -- is the
asthetics?
MR. OSTOLAZA: What we would like is we would like to see,
one, was it required? Why was it required? If it could have been a 5-
foot sidewalk taken 3 feet further away from the canal, it may not
have need to be there at all. And from what Mr. Thorp was telling
me, this fence was 22, 23, $24 a foot.
It's aluminum. It's all solid aluminum, very expensive. Didn't need
to be there.
If it's there and if we have to live with it, fine. We want it to be
somehow softened up. Landscaping of some sort behind there which
we talked with Mr. Corti about two years ago about doing, and he
said -- and that was our mistake. We agreed or we assumed what he
said was the truth, and it may have been what he thought is that he
said that, no, you can't do any kind of landscaping because that would
get in the way of their maintenance of the canal.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's -~ why don't we get some
answers to your questions.
MR. OSTOLAZA: That's -- I would like to hear that, too.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Feder, if you could help.
MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, transportation
administrator. The plan as you put it or the guardrail there is because
you have an 8-foot pathway. That pathway is 8 feet. It is for
bicycles as well as for pedestrians.
MR. OSTOLAZA: He told me that because it's 8 feet it's
Page 28
April 23, 2002
considered pedestrian and bicycle traffic. MR. FEDER: That is correct.
MR. OSTOLAZA: That's -- that's fine. I -- whatever. That's --
MR. FEDER: And then the -- the actual railing there is
essentially because there's not enough clear recovery area from that
8-foot pathway to the canal.
It has nothing to do with the canal maintenance. If that was said to
you, then I apologize.
MR. OSTOLAZA: Correct. It has to do with its closeness,
proximity to the canal, for whatever reason. People can walk off, run
off, drive off, whatever; right?
MR. FEDER: And so that's why it's there, and it is standard
spec throughout. The issue of softening or one issue that was raised
to us, and I have sent some correspondence back. I don't know if it
was to you as well, but essentially trying to paint it green, the English
Ivy green like we're doing on our mast arms. The concern is the
chipping, especially along the rail and it's use there and that that
could become more of an eyesore over time as well. We have a
hesitation there.
I will explore the issue of whether or not we can do something
in a vegetative manner both with the water management district. I
don't know if they would or would not have a concern on that.
MR. OSTOLAZA: They -- from when I was talking with BCB -
- they had absolutely no problem with any kind of vegetation. Their
only concern was just like their criteria for the height, you know, as
long as it doesn't -- I guess it can't be any kind of a vine-type thing
that would crawl over that would -- you know, you wouldn't be able
to remove thatchings, so that's okay. We're talking about some sort of
hedge, and he said, "Well, as long as it doesn't go" -- as far as I'm
concerned and they're concerned, as long as it doesn't go any higher
Page 29
April 23, 2002
than the fence is now, then there wouldn't be a problem with that.
And we are well aware that if, in fact, they had to go in the future and
remove fence to do what they needed to do, it would destroy that
section of--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I see Clarence Tiers nodding his
head up and down, and I believe he's in agreement with what you're
saying.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't -- why don't we
handle it this way. You have a -- sir, you have a board of directors
for the community; correct?
MR. OSTOLAZA: Which I'm on, yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Probably the best way
to do is for transportation to get with the board of directors and see
how we can resolve this. Are you in agreement with that?
MR. OSTOLAZA: Well, the problem -- it's not so much a
problem, but the thing is that when I talk to the county, and the
county said it was BCB. When I talked to BCB, they said it was the
state or the county. You talk to the state, they said -- I'm getting
everybody kind of not really wanting to take responsibility for what
was designed. I don't know who you would go to on that --
MR. FEDER: I'm taking responsibility for that. I'm telling you
what we designed and why. As to the other issue as the
Commissioner --
MR. OSTOLAZA: Can I -- can I ask because I never did -- I'm
sorry -- I never did get to talk to you about this before, but what is the
actual dimension that at some point -- because it was stated to me at
some point that sidewalk does go further away from the canal -- at
which point it won't require a rail so it won't get one. What is that
dimension?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sir, this is a day-to-day
Page 30
April 23, 2002
operation. Your questions could be answered at the board level or
transportation. I appreciate you bringing this forward to us, and it
sounds like we're going to have resolution, but I don't think the time
to do it --
MR. OSTOLAZA: I'm not looking to say, no, do something
now. I'm not. I really -- I'm trying to bring this up. I'm trying to get
it so you're aware of what's going on.
MR. FEDER: When we head out of here, I'll be happy to meet
with you and your homeowners association to see what we mutually
can do to try to respond to possible landscaping if Mr. Tiers is
acceptable.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And if I know Mr. Feder as well as I
know him, he'll be sending a report to us indicating what was the
discussion. Thank you so much for coming today.
MR. OSTOLAZA: Appreciate it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The next speaker?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Frank Leife, L-e-i-f-e, and he
will be followed by Beverly Krouquest.
MR. LEIFE: How you doing? My name is Frank Leife. And
start off here, I purchased some properties in Naples Manor, 11 lots,
and I realized they had taxes, liens -- tax liens on them. What they --
I didn't realize they had was the mowing assessments on the
properties -- on certain properties. Time of the liens that were the tax
liens that were on the property, I was going out to different banks,
various banks to get loans to pay off the liens. And then to find out
later for buying the properties with mowing assessments, they put a --
a lien on my credit, credit line. And so I wasn't able to get loans to
pay the liens on the property, taxes. So when I presented here which
was the third, 21st of this year a check for $8,560.85 was a good-faith
payment for the mowing assessments on the properties that I didn't
Page 31
April 23, 2002
realize that had mowing assessments to be as payment as if they
would agree a payment of full payment of the properties.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So is this less than what --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, please be
recognized by the floor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, a question. I'm having a hard
time understanding where you're coming from that you -- you've been
assessed a penalty for not mowing or for charges for mowing?
MR. LEIFE: These mowing assessments were on the property
before I purchased the property. They were already on there, but I
didn't realize that they were mowing assessments on the property.
They didn't show up like mowing --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And these things have mounted up
over a period of time?
MR. LEIFE: Right. From a previous owner.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Plus interest and everything else?
MR. LEIFE: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that payment-in-full pay
your offering?
MR. LEIFE:
assessments were.
No. No, sir. It's a lot less than what the mowing
I mean, this is a -- I scraped all the money I could
get together to pay the mowing assessments to clear my credit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. These liens, were they
on the property before you purchased them? MR. LEIFE: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And your titles, did you have a
title company do a title search?
MR. LEIFE: No, sir.
Page 32
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see Michelle wants to talk to us,
but I just have a couple of fast questions. How many pieces of
property did you buy?
MR. LEIFE: No.
property.
Did they have houses on them?
They're empty lots. There are 11 pieces of
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Eleven pieces of property?
MR. LEIFE: Uh-huh. All empty lots.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And what street are they on?
MR. LEIFE: Oh, in Naples Manor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I know that, but what street?
MR. LEIFE: Two on Confederate, Katz, Texas Avenue,
Carlton, two on-- three on Carlton.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that's all right. I like to go by
and look at things. That's why I'm asking you that. And, lastly, when
did you purchase them?
MR. LEIFE: This was last year, 2002.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
MR. LEIFE: I mean, 2001.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
Okay.
Sorry.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ms. Arnold, would you, please,
enlighten us as to how this may be different from other code
violations, if there is -- if it has been different?
MS. ARNOLD: For the record, Michelle Arnold, code
enforcement director. These properties have been acquired by Mr.
Leife through tax-deed sales, and we have a total of 19 liens on the
various properties. They have collected interest in the amount of
$4,339.36, and the principal total is $8,595.59. I'd been working with
Pilar Rodriguez who is a friend to the property owner to try to get
Page 33
April 23, 2002
payment of the principal amount prior to turning these liens over to a
collection agency so we could avoid having to worry about the
percentage that we have to pay to the collection agency and
compromising that principal.
We had put together satisfactions for all of the liens back in
September of 2001 with the intention of bringing those -- this item to
you back then. Heard on and off from Mrs. Rodriguez. She had
agreed to give us payment of the principal amount in good faith --
showing good-faith efforts to pay off or satisfy these liens. And then
didn't hear anything for some time and failing to hear from them we
assumed that we weren't going to receive that payment, forwarded the
liens to the collection agencies, and there where -- that's where we are
today.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So the liens now are the property of
the collection agency to -- their responsibility to collect it.
MS. ARNOLD: Right. And the county pays a portion of what's
collected to the collection agency, so I was trying to avoid that whole
thing back in September and, you know, get a payment for the
principal. Then the interest would be something that the board would
consider forgiving, but that didn't happen.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. And the problem is if we start to
try to rewrite the codes as we're going through each individual case
we're going to be at the point where we won't have any codes or laws
to be able to fall back on.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Or any teeth to enforce them.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sir, I -- I don't think there's anything
we can do for you at this point in time. I kind of hope, if anything,
this serves as an example for other people out there to take care of
these matters in a more expedient manner rather than just letting them
sit and letting them build up and causing all sorts of problems in the
Page 34
April 23, 2002
future. But once it's turned over to collections, it's basically out of
our hands.
MS. ARNOLD: Well, the board has the ability to still consider
waiving or forgiving some of the lien, but my recommendation would
be only to figure out what portion we would have to pay the
collection agency and then reduce it by the -- reduce the interest that
we would compromise by that amount.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, can I ask one question before
we go further? Are you taking care of the property now? MR. LEIFE: Yes.
MS. ARNOLD: Yes, they are.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I personally am not willing to
lower the -- the interest or the fees acquired on these pieces of
property. It might be a different case if it was one particular property
where somebody wants to build a home on it, but I don't think that is
in this case.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So you're -- you're -- you're noticing
a difference between people speculating on property and people
being homeowners?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or potential homeowners, yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All I would suggest is that whatever
we would normally do in this circumstances without the board of
commission weighing in on it we should be doing it. Other than that,
I don't think that we should set a precedent at this time to weigh in on
a matter like this, my own personal feelings. MS. ARNOLD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: In agreement?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a question. Is there -- is there
Page 35
April 23, 2002
something that you can work out? You were saying it was a financial
hardship to you to pay this, is that it? MR. LEIFE: Yes. Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is there some way that can --
MR. LEIFE: I'm trying -- I'm trying to clear my credit off.
There's a lien of mowing assessments is the only problem right now,
and once this is cleared I can go forward in getting loans and to pay
off the taxes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can you work out a payment
schedule?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I can understand your problem,
but -- but do you have 11 parcels that you have purchased? MR. LEIFE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And because you didn't have a
title search, you've got stuck with a lot of lien costs. You can sell a
parcel of land if you've already purchased them to help pay off some
of this debt. And I don't see that that would be a big hardship for you
because that's exactly what I would have to do if I had done this. So -
- so I don't see this as your only way out here. And the problem is, as
I see it now, is that the county is going to lose money on this deal
because we have to pay the collection agency now. So I don't think --
I don't think it's the county's responsibility to bear that burden and I
don't -- I really don't want to appear too harsh because you didn't do a
proper title search on the property that you purchased. I just don't
know that we need to start revising the code or granting exceptions
because you failed to do that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ma'am, I'm going to allow you to
come up, but I'm going to have to ask you to keep it short. I realize
Page 36
April 23, 2002
you have been acting as -- between the person here and code
enforcement. Go ahead.
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Okay. Thank you for giving me the
opportunity to speak. You know, my companion Frank here -- my
name is Pilar Rodriguez. Thank you again. The properties that are
being sold, we had a big loss on the properties. All the property taxes
that they were for, like, eight, nine years, they're being paid off. Also
the sewer assessments, they're being paid off. Whatever money was
left is what Frank is trying to pay here and presenting to all the
commissioners that -- you know, hoping that you will take these
$8,560 as -- as a final payment because there is no more -- no more
money.
Also, one of the properties -- because they were single lots, one
of the lots they were lost already through the sellers, the public
auction. So there was no much profit or anything that we or that he's
keeping or taking for his self. The properties are gone. This is the
money that's left, and the situation is -- is not going to bring more
money. He's -- you know, he's a working man, and the problem was
he wouldn't be able to get loans through the bank. Everything would
have been fine to pay everything, but it was nothing. We had to go
lose the properties to somebody else just to pay all the money. They
were probably over $80,000 on taxes behind.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is there any other questions from the
commissioners?
MS. RODRIGUEZ:
to--
So this is why we're here, you know, to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I do need a clarification. Are you
saying that the gentleman does not own these properties now?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Exactly, they are no more. They are being
-- they are being sold.
Page 37
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They're all sold to someone else?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Exactly, yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, doesn't the lien follow the
property? So why should he be responsible for paying anything?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Well, the title company is waiting because
we're been talking for months with Michelle Arnold working on this.
And like she mentioned before, that they were waiting for the money,
waiting for the money. The money -- the money never was coming
because there was no money from the banks, no loans payable due to
liens showing on his credit report.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So -- so he has to satisfy the liens
before he can actually finalize the sale? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So -- so he still owns the property,
and you're waiting for a new purchaser to get clear title before they
can --
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Correct. Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- purchase it. Is that what you're
telling me?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: There going to be -- everything has been
already through the title company. We're just waiting to hear this so
they can show the title company.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm kind of lost now. The money for
the loan itself-- in other words, the amount of money that you owe
the county is 3,000 some dollars, was it? What was it again?
MS. RODRIGUEZ: No. The -- the money was probably
twelve, thirteen thousand dollars total.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. The total value of all the
parcels of property has got to exceed that by a considerable amount.
Am I wrong?
Page 38
April 23, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir. But there were a substantial amount of
back taxes owed. There were also some sewer assessments that were
outstanding on those properties as well. So when you total out
everything that was owed on those 11 lots, he has been able to recoup
all except for the interest payments about $4,000 is what it appears
through the sale of those lots, but he can't close that deal until he gets
the titles cleared.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: One final question.
MR. MUDD: And there's another piece, Commissioner, just --
we turned it over to a collection agency, okay, in order to get it, and
as soon as it goes to the collection agency they put a flag on his credit
references.
MS. RODRIGUEZ: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But did-- the $8,000 that he paid,
did that go to the collection agency? MS. RODRIGUEZ: No. No.
MR. OLLIFF: That is a check that's being held.
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Michelle Arnold is forwarding the check, I
believe. Mr. Schmitt -- which is -- I was the one that I dropped the
check. Also taking in consideration this, please, they're not 11
properties. There weren't 11 properties anymore because the county
sold one through the -- through the public auction. So now there
were, like, 10, but then there's still one up there. Apparently it's not
good. It's not buildable. So it's been, like, a mess really. So -- and
there also is hard to explain. It's a long story.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let me -- let me ask a question
because I still have strong reservations on the Board of County
Commissioners weighing in on this at this point in time. Is there
something within the scope of what you're capable of doing in your
department, Ms. Arnold, that would be able to give them something
Page 39
April 23, 2002
in the way of relief, partial relief?.
MS. ARNOLD: No. You-all are the only ones that can give
them that relief. I don't believe you can take that action today. It will
have to come back on another agenda because this wasn't an
advertised item.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So basically what we're doing if we
do do this and move forward with it, we're saying that anyone in the
future that wants to go to a tax sale and take the chance of making a
profit or losing a profit, if you come out on the wrong end of the deal
because of a lack of due diligence, that the county commission will
bail you out of it? For that reason I don't wish to proceed any further
than we are.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nor do I.
MS. ARNOLD: We -- we -- we have a policy that the board has
adopted with related to some of these issues because there are other
people that have come before -- not this particular board, but other
boards with the same dilemma. And what the county manager's
office did was create a policy that in the event we have this situation
and they want to turn the property over for a cause that -- or a need
within the community, such as affordable housing or something like
that, they could approach that -- approach the board with that as a
method for relieving or forgiving some of the interest. But that needs
to be done prior to this whole collection agency's involvement and
everything else, and we were attempting to do that but didn't get very
far with these properties.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: In order to move this, I think
the resolution should be, sir, if you could write us with all the
particulars. Put all the numbers down for the commissioners in a -- in
a letter so that we can look at it. And if one of the commissioners
Page 40
April 23, 2002
wants to put it on a future agenda we may do so. And if you could
provide us some cases where in the past the board has worked on this
type of issue.
MS. ARNOLD: Policies come up. No one's taken advantage of
it. The -- the amount -- the -- the commissioner talked about making
payments. They can set up a payment schedule with a collection
agency. That's something that they can arrange. Since it's now in
their hands, they have the ability to do that. They did pay or provide
us a check of 8,500 or $8,600 for the principal and there was some
confusion as whether or not we could accept that check because they
wrote on it "full payment of all mowing assessments." We've gotten
a response back from the county attorney's office and have been
advised now that we can accept that check or deposit that check and
write a statement on there. And we're proceeding to do that today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I -- I have another solution. Why
don't we return this check and -- and we've already turned this over to
the collection agency?
MS. ARNOLD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If we return the check, the
gentleman could take the check, give it to the collection agency,
negotiate with the collection agency, and then he'll be out of this, and
we'll be out of it. Does that make sense?
MS. ARNOLD: Well, it still -- it still would-- we would reflect
the payment of that to the collection agency.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we would have to pay the
collection agency the $8,000?
MS. ARNOLD: No. What they do -- the contract with the
collection agency, if somebody does make partial payments, they
would turn it over to the county, and then at the end is when we
would have to pay the collection agency. So we don't need to return
Page 41
April 23, 2002
the check to them for them to pay the collection agency.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So the collection agency's
receivable is going to be reduced by $8,000. They will not charge us
a fee based upon that?
MS. ARNOLD: They would -- they would still charge us a fee
based on that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
money just doing that regardless?
MS. ARNOLD: Right.
COMMISSIOENR COYLE:
this.
So we're going to lose some
Wow.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I'm for taking no action on
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Me too.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We got two --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That ends it right there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Commissioner Fiala, you got
any last comments? COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much for coming
here today.
MR. LEIFE: Okay. Well, on the check, are they going to return
the check?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That, no. No, they're not.
MR. LEIFE: Because that was supposed to be presented as a
full payment, and then what I would do is they said if you transfer the
property then the next property owner would be in debt.
MS. RODRIGUEZ: Won't be able to proceed. The county
won't sell the property.
MR. LEIFE: I'll just go ahead and get my money back and go
ahead and relinquish the property.
Page 42
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right. Why don't you talk that over
with code enforcement. Whatever their normal procedure is, that's
what you're going to have to go with. This -- this board is not going
to rule on making any decisions that's contrary to what's normal in
this case. But thank you for your -- for coming today. Who is the
next speaker?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Beverly Kronquest, and she
will be followed by Bob Krasowski.
MS. KRONQUEST: Hello. My name is Beverly Kronquest. I
have not ever been here before, and I just woke up this morning, and
I read the newspaper, and I thought, "Well, I've got to come here."
I'm talking about overdevelopment of Naples and the
infrastructure that isn't adequate for the overdevelopment. And I
would like to find out if there is a way that we -- you would consider
and you would enforce a concurrency law for the infrastructure that
would be concurrent and that is at the time -- the same time of. Not
three years hence but at the same time, which I believe concurrent
means, is that true?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
US--
We have this subject coming back to
MS. KRONQUEST: Once again.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- very, very shortly. Go ahead.
MS. KRONQUEST: And the reason I'm here also is because I
was here once before to speak, but I just got scared. And I noticed all
the suits that were here representing special interests, and I'm just
representing the average citizen of Naples and no special interest for
overdevelopment of anything. And I would just request that we don't
have -- that we consider the citizens, the overdevelopment, the
infrastructure, which isn't adequate, the water and the sewer and the
roads. We hear a lot about the roads, but it's also the water and the
Page 43
April 23, 2002
sewer.
And I would like to ask for a moratorium or concurrency which
is concurrent at the moment. Is this possible, and could I have a
response from you?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, ma'am. I'll be happy to give
you a response. We are also working for the people of the county.
And you also know that this board has inherited this huge deficit in
infrastructure. It has accumulated over 10 to 15 years. You cannot
stop a locomotive on a dime. It's going to take a little time to stop it,
and we are in the process of doing that right now. We are undergoing
-- taking the entire Land Development Code and the Growth
Management Plan under review. We have provisions which will
establish concurrency management system. You might have heard--
MS. KRONQUEST: When you say "concurrency," are you
speaking three years hence or concurrent as of the moment?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I am talking about as current as
you have in your checkbook, and that's what the checkbook
management system does. It measures the capacity of a road, and it
measures how many cars are on the road. The difference is a
checkbook balance. And as each development comes in for -- for
permitting and they have -- let's suppose the checkbook balance is
5,000. If they come in, they're going to contribute 1,000 cars to that
road, then you deduct 1,000 cars from the checkbook balance. When
the checkbook balance reaches zero, nothing else is permitted, and
there's no three-year provision whatsoever in this process.
MS. KRONQUEST: I thought there was a three-year. My error.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What you're talking about is a
current provision that is largely a state law. We're making it much
tighter. So we are in the process.
It's already in the public hearing.
Page 44
April 23, 2002
MS. KRONQUEST: State law is five years. Ours is three
years. Can we have it more concurrent?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ma'am, I just explained to you it's
going to be zero. Okay. When you get to zero balance, you're not
going to have any more permitting. So the thing is we're working on
that now. It is going through public hearings. It is in front of the
Planning Commission. It will be coming in front of this commission
in a few more weeks. So I'd urge you to get involved in that planning
process and the public review process, because if you have any
concerns or ideas about this we appreciate all the suggestions we can
get. But -- but what I want to do is dissuade you and all the other
people in the county who are concerned about this, is that we are
working toward concurrency.
MS. KRONQUEST: What -- what really prompted me -- and
it's taken me a long time to get here, is that last fall when they had the
half-cent sales tax election, and I believe it was Mr. Carter who said
that he was so totally surprised at the outcome of the election. And to
me it's, like, being in the beltway where they're totally out of contact
with the people and what the people want. And he's -- he just seemed
to be totally out of touch with what is going on by that statement.
And so that's why I wanted, again, to reiterate that there is a definite
problem out there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ma'am, you don't need to tell us
there's a problem. Everybody on this board knows there's a problem.
Everybody on this board is unanimous in dealing with the problem.
And as a matter of fact, there is tremendous progress being made.
You have seen -- I hope you've seen Livingston Road. I hope you've
seen the widening improvement of Airport Road. I hope you've seen
Immokalee Road being widened and Golden Gate --
MS. KRONQUEST: The solution is not to concrete Naples.
Page 45
April 23, 2002
The solution is to kind of limit the growth to -- to put a little harness
on it, to not give all the special interests, the PUDs, the -- that come --
I know my time is up.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's okay. This is a wonderful
subject you're bringing up, but I'd like to interrupt you just for a
minute. Commissioner Henning has been waiting to speak for a
moment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ma'am, you can sit down with
one of-- any one of us on a one-on-one basis, and I encourage you to
make an appointment with my office 'cause there is a lot of things
that are said out there that are not quite true. We are concurrent on
our -- on our solid waste. We are concurrent on our water. We are
concurrent on our sewer plants. Okay. So --
MS. KRONQUEST: Concurrent on the sewer plant?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And-- and, again, I'd like to sit
down, and I'll show you everything. We -- we approved a master
plan that will extend out for our wastewater, our sewer plants for the
next 20, 30 years. And there's a lot of misstatements out there that --
you know, there's hard facts that I'll be glad to show you. And I hear
you, and we all agree with what you're saying. And we're going to go
there. And we're going to make it happen for you and everybody else
here in Collier County.
MS. KRONQUEST: Mostly for Naples as a wonderful
community.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Ma'am, just one thing, and I'm going
to turn it over to Commissioner Fiala. Please, Collier County is a
mighty big place. Naples is a small community on our western
boundary. I live in an area that represents Immokalee, Everglades
City in the rural part of the county. And we -- we like the
terminology when you're talking about it as Collier County rather
Page 46
April 23, 2002
than Naples. No -- no offense, but I mean -- MS. KRONQUEST: You represent Immokalee. You're going
to have this problem in a couple of years.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. I represent a lot more than
Immokalee. I represent 85 percent of the county, and I just wanted to
bring it up that Naples is a wonderful place. We live in Collier
County, and we represent the whole Collier County. That was just
one little thing that's always grated against me the fact that everybody
says, "I live in Naples," and they don't. Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Just one last thing. Just as far
as limiting growth, and you were concerned about our environment.
I'm going to tell you that this is what we're heavily involved in right
now is the rural lands and the rural fringe studies and preserving the
environment, allowing certain areas to be -- to be built on and others
never to be built on. If you take a look at the map on the back wall
there, it shows you that about 76 percent of our whole county right
now is preserved forever. Nobody can build on it. 76 percent and I
believe with all of the new studies it'll be 82 percent. And we do
have to have a place for people to build as well. You know, and if we
only have 18 percent left of the entire county mass, I think that's fair.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much for coming.
(Commissioner Henning leaves meeting.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bob Krasowski to be
followed by Ty Agoston.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Here, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. One copy.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Hello, Commissioners. Is there a speaker
in the back so Mr. Henning can hear me? He always leaves when I
get up here.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, there is.
Page 47
April 23, 2002
MR. KRASOWSKI: Starting to think it's intentional. My
name's Bob Krasowski. Nice to see you today. Today I would like --
and I'm with Zero Waste Collier County. I represent myself as well
as Zero Waste Collier County, but today I would like to appeal to you
(Commissioner Henning returns to meeting.)
MR. KRASOWSKI: -- hello, Commissioner Henning -- to
endorse a program I'm interested in bringing to the county, and it's a
Zero Waste Design Trek. On June 26th of last year this county
commission with-- minus Mr. Coyle -- we had Commissioner
Mac'Kie here -- gave direction to the staff based on what was
occurring at the moment a presentation from Malcolm Pirney, your
consultant on the solid-waste issue, that evaluated five options for the
county to take in regards to proceeding -- looking at solutions to what
was a zero waste problem. Of the five options two were eliminated
by the commissioner, the incineration option and the general
composting of all the MSW.
Now, the videotape is available for review for Mr. Coyle,
because he wasn't here at the time, but it's important as a basis -- a
groundwork for what's going on today. And also there's a transcript
online if you would look at what was said there. But the commission
directed the staff to look at the options of trucking, railing out of the
county the waste along with an aggressive recycling program to
reduce the volume going out, and pyrolysis. So -- and then also the
commission directed staff to consider the options that were presented
by Mr. Gary Buriss (phonetic) and also the options that were
presented in the Zero Waste Flow Chart scenario which I have on
your telescreens now.
If we were to redo this flow chart today, there would be certain
revisions, but my point to make here is that there is a waste reduction
Page 48
April 23, 2002
program included in this chart that has never been considered or
addressed by the staff as a component to the level -- to the level of
detail that pyrolysis is now being considered. I'd like to see a greater
attention given to this.
Also included in this is -- well, there many -- there's an aggressive
recycling program. There is attention given to horticultural
processing, and there is the implication that our waste stream could
be so diminished by these techniques that pyrolysis, which is a form
of incineration, would not be necessary.
Pyrolysis as shown by the submissions in response to your RFP
has heavy emissions concerns which you will deal with at a later
time. I won't go into any of that. This is in process -- in process with
your staff. What I'm appealing today is to make sure what you
directed the staff to do a year ago gets done. And I believe I have a
suggestion on how we might do that.
The Zero Waste umbrella -- the Zero Waste program nationally
has been developing over time, and in the last year much has been
done. I'll be back to you on May 7th and prior to that, the end of this
week, I'm going to submit a packet for your review prior to my
presentation of May 7th, your next commission meeting, that will
include this packet which explains where Zero Waste techniques and
processes as far as waste reduction of all these types has been
accomplished and explains the history of it. So it's not just pie-in-
the-sky abstract thinking. There's a lot of evidence -- a lot of
programs that are in process.
And the people who have been working on this over time now
are available and have considered and decided it's a good idea, a
suggestion I made to them to perform a design shred on our solid
waste. So actually what it would be is we'd bring these people here.
We would do a workshop, and then we'd ask that the county staff be
Page 49
April 23, 2002
involved to provide these people the information before they come, to
work with them when they're here, and they would design, as Dover
Kohl did for our communities out in the rural area, as far as the
placing communities. You get -- you get the idea.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm going to have to ask you to wrap
it up, Bob.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Sure, I will. This would probably cost the
county because I'd like to see the county taxpayers, yourselves, direct
the resources the county to doing this, somewhere in the
neighborhood of maybe -- and I'll provide an outlined budget, as Mr.
Coletta has directed me to do in the packet-- of maybe twenty or
thirty thousand dollars to do this. That's a very general term. We've
already spent over $1 million in the past year and a half to our
consultant, Malcolm Pirney, for their engineering orientation to the
program which has brought us to RFPs that have us with three
pyrolysis proposals without accomplishing much along the lines --
okay. So I'd like to see this done under another heading. I appreciate
the little bit of extra time. I have a few other things I'd like to say,
but--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'm going to have to ask you to wind
it up, though, with maybe one last sentence or two last sentences.
Commissioner Fiala has a question.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Okay. Let me end with the document I
gave you, Mr. Coletta. I'll include it in the packet for everyone next
time, but you might pass it around.
This gentleman's Gary Liss, and it shows the level of
professional competence and experience this man has and over the
last 26 years in waste and he is ' a main proponent of Zero Waste. I
saw him speak up in Sarasota a month and a half ago along with a
few other of the other people I'd like to bring here, and it's -- it's just
Page 50
April 23, 2002
very impressive. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Thank you. Bob, thank you
so much for -- for your concerns for our landfill. I, too, have a big
concern right now, and that is the commercial recycling, and I don't
know how far we've come on this, but I just had another complaint
again the other day where certain bars and restaurants have different
waste receptacles. And they have one lined with heavy plastic, and
they just put bottles in there. And another one lined with heavy
plastic, and they just put cans in there. It's great. They already divide
up their recyclables, and then there's no place to take them to pick up
these recyclables, so they all go into the dumpster which then is all
dumped into the landfill after they've conscientiously separated them.
And I'm still wondering what we're going to do about that. Every
time I see one of those things picked up, I keep thinking that's more
stuff that's not going to deteriorate in our landfill, so I'm wondering
how far along we are on that.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Commissioner Fiala, this is one of our
main areas of interest and the reason why we think the design shred
would be so helpful. At the end of May, give or take a little while,
the staff is interested in coming forward to you with the commercial,
non-residential recycling ordinance. Now, to the extent that we can
design that program properly, more businesses can participate and
save or have a flat level exchange of cost so that that material you're
speaking of can be diverted from the landfill saving that valuable
space.
Non-residential recycling ordinance, your long-term plan for the
county on solid waste, and your residential recycling and collection
which will be decided most probably by our RFP at 2006. We got to
start working on that now, are all areas that should be approached and
Page 51
April 23, 2O02
a holistic systematic analysis of what we do here. And I'll tell you,
these -- these people know what they're talking about, and they know
how to do it, and it would be a great asset. And I've shared this
document with Mr. Olliff and George.
MR. WIDES: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Tom Wides, interim public utilities administrator. I think
conceptually we all agree with what Bob's saying. I have no issue
there. Quite frankly, what we do intend to do is as Bob noted is
towards -- we're targeting the last board meeting in May to, in fact,
bring a consolidated commercial ordinance, recycling ordinance to
the board. That is likely going to have a couple alternatives in it in
terms of how to approach this.
Frankly, from my point, my point of this -- my point of view at
this point in time, probably the biggest struggle we have is -- is really
the concept of recycle it all or recycle none of it. And we have folks
on both ends, and we're trying to work that middle ground. And as
I've often described to Bob, frankly, what I would like to do
personally is I would like to take that elephant called recycling and
start nibbling away at the legs and then gradually move up rather than
trying to eat the entire elephant at one point in time. And that's,
frankly, where we're at right now. But we will be bringing something
to you, and our target is the end of May.
And, frankly, also if I may go further, recycling ordinance does
not need to be held up by any other activities in my view. We can
move ahead on that, and we can move ahead on these other RFPs.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Commissioner, we've been working with
Mr. Wides on this recycling ordinance, and I'd just like to add,
though, it's all interconnected. Really if-- to do it right, you have to
analyze it, and I'd like to see professionals that -- that have been at
this for 26 years or in the mix look at it.
Page 52
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Bob, I hear you, and I want to go to
Commissioner Henning, and then we're going to move on.
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's see, it was the mid
'90s that the Board of Commissioners been wrestling with what to do
with the solid waste and, Bob, you've been part of that. I want to
thank you, but -- and I think a lot of it was trying to delay what --
what to do with the solid waste. And we gave our staff marching
orders what to do. And I am not willing to delay it any more by any
kind of surrett (phonetic). We had a debate when you had your
professional down here, and from that we gave the marching orders.
So...
MR. KRASOWSKI: The marching orders have not been
followed. There are no RFPs for waste reduction strategies. There's
no RFPs that handle the Zero Waste flow chart components that you
directed them to do.
The RFPs have been unsuccessful other than just pyrolysis. We have
three pyrolysis plants and then the one grease trap. No respondents
to horticulture whatsoever. That's a function of the way it was
designed.
MR. WIDES: Commissioner, ifI may respond to Bob's
statement. I would like to characterize the activity as having been
successful, number one, but more so speaking to the organics RFP,
we are putting that organics RFP out which did receive no final
respondents. We are putting it back out in a more embellished form
which, in fact, is a result of a pilot we did for the recycling of the
yard waste. But we're going to be including the wastewater sludge in
that -- in that reissue of the -- of the RFP, and we expect based on
that we expect many more respondents to be very interested.
So what I really want to characterize here is we're trying to work
Page 53
April 23, 2002
very hard on that organic side, on the agricultural side to, in fact,
embellish that.
Take it out of the waste stream. There seems further to be an issue
here that we think that gasification is our answer from the staff's side.
We're evaluating that along with all the other alternatives.
If I may go one step further, Commissioner Henning, as you
said, we had, in essence, a workshop as Bob alluded to. We were
given direction. We're trying to follow that direction as closely as
possible without dropping issues on the side. And we'd like to move
forward in that fashion rather than be delayed further.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What date does this come back to us
on?
MR. WIDES: I believe we're targeting May 28th for the
commercial recycling ordinance.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And meanwhile Bob's going to be
presenting us paperwork for us to be able to come prepared to that
meeting. Did you say my options --
MR. KRASOWSKI: I will be in front of you on May 7th,
Commissioner. I will be trying to visit every single one of you next
week so that I can explain any questions -- deal with any questions
you might have in regards to the materials I give you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Bob, I thank you so much for being
an active part of what's taken place here in Collier County.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Appreciate it-- appreciate your time.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Tom, thank you. Next speaker.
MS. FILSON: Ty Agoston, and your final speaker is Phil
Mudrak.
MR. AGOSTON: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My
name is Ty Agoston. I live in Golden Gate Estates and I'm speaking
Page 54
April 23, 2002
for myself. I have three brief comments, one of them regarding last
week -- no, the last meetings you take -- took exception to my remark
as far as defending the accuracy of your transportation director. And
let me just point out that I had a public debate in which one of the
participants was your transportation director where he kind of
forecasted that unless we passed the sales tax increase there was
going to be all kinds of calamities and that it's not going to work.
Well, evidently, it is working. So being that he made a poor
judgment at that time, isn't that possible that he made a poor
judgment in regards to Immokalee Road's widening process starting
from an eastern point working towards the west where even a dumb
foreigner like me can figure out that the traffic lessens as you go out
east, because most people, because of the zoning, works within or
near the coastal area? But that's a long discussion, and I have
listened to too many long discussions already.
Another issue that I wanted to raise was just exactly who speaks
for this county? As far as I'm concerned, you -- five of you have
been elected to represent this county. Now, if-- for you to allow one
of your directors to write an opinion piece in the Naples Daily News,
and I'm going to read you what I find highly objectionable, and I
would like to know who authorized this because if you authorize it,
well, you're not speaking for me. Because you are by extension -- I
voted for one of you, but this particular statement says there is
nothing more than -- (as read): "This is nothing more than
prostituting the use of our national colors." Does any of you approve
this, that one of our tax-paying employers in the county is being
accused of prostituting national colors without asserting that that is a?
Fact. Is that okay with you?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You want me to reply, Ty? I'd love
to. No, I didn't personally approve it, but I stand by what was written
Page 55
April 23, 2002
because I do accept responsibility. I don't agree with it. The hair
went up on the back of my neck, too, when I read those words. I
understand where they're coming from that, where they were trying to
go. I would have liked to have seen it written differently to be honest
with you, but I didn't personally approve it. It would be a physical
impossibility to sit on top of every type of release.
I talked to several people about it. I personally think that Joe
Schmitt's doing an outstanding job. That little bump in the road is
just one of those things that we have with people occasionally.
Everybody gets a chance to express themselves. I'm sure if we had a
chance to do something like that over again the wording would have
been slightly different.
MR. AGOSTON: Jim, I buy your argument that everybody
should be able to talk for themselves, but by definition they should be
talking for themselves. They should not be talking for me by
extension. I would never accuse any of you or any taxpayer or voter
in this county or for anybody for that matter of prostituting our
national colors. The young lady over here came in -- and, indeed,
representing Uncle Sam, and I think she looks magnificent.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I do too.
MR. AGOSTON: And I'm going to tell you guys this, I came
from a country where you couldn't do that.
Now, I'd like to talk to you about the third subject. I was invited
two weeks in a row by a Moralis family out in Eastern Golden Gate
Estates where apparently you guys are trying to swindle -- and I am
using that word advisedly -- swindle approximately 3,500 families
out of their homestead, their property. You have established or are
proposing to establish Rome or Roma or whatever, and the young
lady came here complaining that you are trying to asphalt or concrete
the county. Take out his time.
Page 56
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: My break's going to be that much
shorter; right?
MR. AGOSTON: That's right. Coffee's not good for you
anyhow. But at any rate, these people were sitting there. There were
two television crews there. There were children. They don't have the
time like the lady coming down here complaining that there were too
many people and what have you, I don't -- I didn't notice you
suggesting you suspend the taxes that's levied against all the empty
property owners out there. You just don't want to allow them to build.
Is that consciousable?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You know, Ty, I absolutely love the
way you bring up these subjects 'cause I never get the opportunity to
tell you what's being done. Thank you so much.
I had a meeting the other day with the people from soil and
water who put together this particular Roma, the Collier County
Commission, and they asked the question five different ways to make
sure, had nothing to do with this particular Roma. They don't have
any say as for going in but not going out. That's been the
misconception was out there. However, with that said, we are going
to weigh in on it. We are holding a forum down at Golden Gate
Civic Association on the third Wednesday of May at seven o'clock in
the evening where the people from soil and water will be there to go
over with their proposed Roma is, and they'll explain to you where
the Collier County Commission comes in. And I might add that even
though we don't get to vote on it whether it happens or not, we have
weighed in many times before. When the Picayune state forest was
being formed, we came out with a number of different proclamations
opposed to the way the landowners were being treated. We tried to
intercede on behalf of the people and the property owners.
Right now we are being sued -- we are suing the State of Florida
Page 57
April 23, 2002
for the access rights to Miller Boulevard because we believe in all
these things. We are looking out for the interest of these people, and
the Collier County Commission will never do anything to sell those
people short in that part of Golden Gate Estates. I can't tell you how
much I appreciate you bringing it up. I saw you wearing your suit
today. I realized it was going to be a good sign.
MR. AGOSTON: I figured I might as well follow the dress
code.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you so much.
MR. AGOSTON: You guys take care.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Phil Mudrak.
MR. MUDRAK: Good morning, Commissioners. Phil Mudrak
for the record. My first issue with the county commission is
Livingston Road, and I'd like to see Livingston Road continue from
Radio Road over to Davis Boulevard. Reasons for is you have a
large industrial park over there off of Radio and Airport Road. It
would cut response time for services to go over to Davis Boulevard.
Also the emergency is -- vehicles are over on Davis Boulevard, and it
would cut their response time going over to the Radio Road district.
Also for roads, next time we want to implement a tax to the
taxpayers to pay for roads, let's put a time limit on it. I think it'll go
over a lot easier with the voters. I know, myself, I didn't vote for it
simply because I knew there was no time limit set for that tax, and
anybody I talked to felt the same.
Next is affordable housing. When we redistrict -- rezone
residential areas to put in multi-family for affordable housing, I think
it would go over better for the residents if they had the ability to buy
those units instead of renting those units. To me that's affordable
housing. When somebody owns their property they -- they take a
little more care of it. And there's too much going to the developers
Page 58
April 23, 2002
and the corporations who are building these complexes and not
enough going back to the residents who live in them.
Second of all, I'd like to see landowners who own rental
properties held more responsible for their units. And if it takes code
enforcement or inspectors to go by and check on these properties --
because myself I have renters that live next to me. Their roofs are in
disrepair. The apartment buildings that are in close vicinity to my
property, they're rundown. They're not taken care of, and it runs
down property values for the homeowners.
Second of all -- or thirdly, our bus systems. I don't know who
put the signs in for the bus stops, but if we could look into having
those moved before the traffic lights instead of after traffic lights. It's
causing a lot of backup in intersections. I don't know if you realize
that or not. You turn on Radio Road or turn on to Santa Barbara off
of Radio Road, and the bus turns onto Santa Barbara, stops, pick up a
passenger, people are clogged up in the intersection. Same thing with
the Gordon Bridge. There's another stop there, but I'm sure there's
more of them around the county that I haven't taken notice to.
Next, cable companies. I know this issue's been brought up with
previous county commissioners. I think we should open the market
up to other enterprises to come in and make it a little more palatable
for the residents so they have a choice on cable providers. Right now
it's a monopolized situation. And I think it's unfair for the residents
who have no choice but to go with whatever cable company provider
they have.
I think Immokalee residents should be held to about the same
standard as everybody else in Collier County. You don't better
yourself by living by a lower standard. You better yourself by
getting to a higher standard. And I think that's something we should
take into consideration and look in the future. I don't know how
Page 59
April 23, 2002
much has been done in Immokalee area for building on the
infrastructure and creating more jobs so they don't have to commute
all the way into the Naples area -- greater Naples area, but that's
something that -- you know, even if it's in recyclables, you know,
create an industrial to utilize recyclable products, and, you know,
start some kind of ordeal there.
That's pretty much it. I've been wanting to come up here for a
while, but I -- time does not provide me -- you know, my work
schedule does not provide me all the time in the world to get up here,
but I took the time today, and I thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you want to leave or call my
office where the address that -- of your neighbor with duplex or
triplex in disrepair, I'll be happy to take a look into it.
MR. KRASOWSKI: It's a house, but it's not just his house. I
just used that for an example. You know, there's several apartment
complexes that really I don't agree with being in a residential area
myself that are in disrepair. You know, they're run down. They're
not being taken care of, and I'd like to see the owners held
responsible for those units. It would -- it would do -- you know, a
great benefit to the community. And not just in Golden Gate but all
over Collier County.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Bill Mudrak, I'm telling you right
now your presentation today was beautiful, and there's one thing I'm
picking up on from your conversation about compliance for the
affordable housing, the -- the apartment complexes and whatever, I'm
going to request code enforcement let me take a ride around with
them for one day so I can see what the compliance problem is from
one end of the county all the way down from Naples to Immokalee,
Page 60
April 23, 2002
be able to visit these different units, and then I'll report back to the
rest of the commissioners, unless you'd like to also do this ride
around so we can a true picture of exactly what compliance is all
about and the problems that are out there so we have a better
perspective of what's happening.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you can do it in a day,
Commissioner, God bless you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I'll have one of staff drive --
people drive, and I'm sure that we'll need to get -- we'll need to go
real fast, and we'll skip lunch or we'll pack sandwiches to eat on the
way. We'll make it, but I do appreciate you being here today.
MR. MUDRAK: Well, thank you. Thank you for having me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that we're going to take a five-
minute break to give the stenographer a chance to rest her weary
fingers.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And allow me to get this glue off
my face.
(Short recess was taken.)
Item #8A
RESOLUTION 2002-214 REGARDING THE COUNTY'S
CONSOLIDATED PLAN ONE-YEAR ACTION PLAN FY 2002-
2003 AS REQUIRED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) FOR THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM;
AUTHORIZING THE HUI DEPARTMENT TO HIRE ONE
ADDITIONAL STAFF MEMBER TO IMPLEMENT AND
ADMINISTER THE CDBG PROGRAM AND APPROVE THE FY
02-03 CDBG PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET-
Page 61
April 23, 2002
ADOPTED W/CHANGES
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please take your seats. We're at Item
8, advertised public hearing, Item A.
MR. OLLIFF: That will be you.
MR. BAKER: Hi. Good morning, Commissioners. My name
is Denny Baker, and I am the interim HUI director. We're here this
morning to request from you approval of three specific items: The
one-year CDBG action plan for next fiscal year beginning July 1 st,
the admin budget supporting that one-year plan, and the filling of the
fourth full-time position that was approved by the board in May of
last year.
As you recall, the BCC approved the five-year plan in May of
last year, and we are required to come before you each year to seek
your approval for the following fiscal year, and that's why we're here
today.
Just to -- how did we get to this point? We got here through a
series of actions that included notices of applications availability, a
series of public hearings, public workshops, funding applications,
meetings with our citizens advisory task force or CATF, and a 30-day
public hearing period. Our CATF or Citizens Task Force has
reviewed all the requests, has ranked them, and has made
recommendations which you have copies of. We would like to go --
briefly go through those programs with you. Ms. Lee Combs will do
that.
MS. COMBS: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
my name is Lee Combs. Behind your resolution there's an Exhibit A.
There was a table breakdown of all the projects that listed. I can
briefly go over with you every year that HUD allocates CDBG
dollars based on formula population and poverty level. This year
Page 62
April 23, 2002
Collier County's expect to receive $2.159 million and we have a
carryover funding of $100,000 which came from unspent admin
dollars from last year and we have to use in the project. We have a
carryover because we were not fully staffed as we expected last year.
And we are -- can only spend any unspent admin money into the
projects. So that's why we have $2.259 million to spend this year.
As you're aware that Collier County has entered into an urban
county cooperative agreement with the City of Naples and City of
Marco Island, be able to use their population to qualify to HUD for
this entitlement program. So we have to is set aside $250,000 each
for City of Naples and Marco Island. They will continue for one
more fiscal year. So we don't have any control over that, but they are
spending their money on CDBG eligible projects to comply with
HUD regulations.
Next items we have listed projects are down payment assistance
for low-to-moderate-income people. HUD's definition of moderate
income is 80 percent of median income. So just you're aware of that,
and when we approved five-year plan last year, we have submitted to
HUD that as a county we are going to be doing down-payment
assistance as well as we have program along with the SHIP program.
This is different part of money, and also different regulations apply
beside the SHIP regulations.
The next project is infrastructure support for Habitat for
Humanity. Their project located Immokalee, Carlton Lakes. This is
second phase. They going to be building 20 homes. We're going to
be helping with road paving, water and sewer items. So 20 homes
are basically about approximately 100 people will be living in that
community as affordable housing.
Next one is Linwood Avenue which is Bayshore Gateway
Triangle, CDBG funding will be providing along with county's
Page 63
April 23, 2002
dollars and TIF money, and we are adding drainage problem they
were having Linwood Avenue.
Next project is another Immokalee affordable housing project.
This is a second phase. We have help last fiscal year with extention
of right-of-ways and road for this development. They going to be
building 30-plus affordable housing. It's going to be managed by the
-- excuse me for second -- I lost my place -- Empowerment Alliance
of Southwest Florida.
Next project is special need housing rehab for Collier Housing
Alternatives. They have duplexes.
This is second phase. This year they helped them with fixing up their
foundations. The building will not sink, but now we going back to
help them with the windows, driveways, and other items, bring it up
to the code.
Next item is Immokalee streetlights. We have provided from
this fiscal year 40 traffic lights in high crime area of Immokalee.
This is the second phase, additional 45 streetlights, and this will
really deter the crime problem in Immokalee neighborhood.
Next item is First Assembly Ministries. They have eight park
model trailers they would like to use for transitional housing. They
need funding assistance to hook up to water and sewers. So that's the
item there. And also we will be doing fair housing activities,
education and outreach as required by condition of receiving CDBG
dollars.
Next item, we mention earlier, is admin. So that bring a total to
2.1 -- $2.259 million and out of that, just for your information, we
going to be spending $740,322 in the Immokalee area this year.
HUD defines a target areas in three areas in Collier County. One is
Immokalee. Two are looking City of Naples, basically Riverpark
community. Yes, sir.
Page 64
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Questions about the
expenditures. I don't have a problem with the expenditure, just a
question. Is there anybody else that needs to approve this besides the
Board of Commissioners? Once we approve it, does it go to any
other agency?
MS. COMBS: Yes. Once you approve it, I have to submit to
HUD for their review, which is due 45 days prior to our program
year, which means we have to submit it by May 15th to HUD, and
they approve it and make sure that we follow the citizen participation
plan. Which means that we properly notify the citizens and
involvement from the citizens in developing this plan.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And the stormwater
improvements on Marco Island is not going to be a question? It fits
the criteria?
MS. COMBS: Well, they do fit the criteria. What have they
done in Marco Island is they did a survey because, as you know,
Marco Island is considered as an affluent area. So there is a section
of Marco Island off Collier Avenue up there called the Tallwood
Boulevard and their affordable housing rental units, and the director
of planning, Greg Niles, went door-to-door survey of who lives there,
whether or not their income qualify. And he has surveys to back it
up.
And last your HUD approved it because the three-year project,
so this is a continuation. It costs more than $250,000 to relieve the
stormwater problem and flooding over there. So they're doing it in
three years, and HUD has approved it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And you have noticed
the meetings by which means?
MS. COMBS: We have started process back in September 27th.
What we have done is we sent 44 different social service agencies,
Page 65
April 23, 2002
about 144 churches were notified. We also did display ad which is
half page each both English and Spanish and Naples Daily News and
Immokalee Bulletin. We advertise 15 days prior to public meeting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Today's agenda we had a --
which might be a companion item, 16-A-4, it was a carry forward
from the SHIPS program, almost a half million dollars. Do we have
any duplication between this carry forward and what you're asking
today?
MS. COMBS: No. We have to comply with the HUD
regulation which means we keep the money separate, and we do not
get two million up front from HUD. What happens is whenever the
project is finished, when the subrecipient, these people who receive
funding from us, present us with a paid invoice with all the necessary
detailed document, we go to HUD and automated software system
they draw down. And they give us money direct to our checking
account, and we have three days to move it unless we already paid it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me ask it in a different way
because that isn't quite what I need.
The SHIPS carry forward, the SHIPS money that we use, can it be
used for residential rehab -- rehabilitation affordable housing
infrastructure support, you know, these -- these things that are for
community needs?
MS. COMBS: Yes, they may.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MS. COMBS: If I may explain the philosophy behind the
Consolidated Development Block Grant program is number one
priority is housing. We are tasked to provide affordable housing,
suitable living environment, and expand economic opportunities.
The HUD looked-- yes --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what the SHIPS money
Page 66
April 23, 2002
is for.
MS. COMBS: Well, SHIP is coming from the state. This money
is coming from federal dollars.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I guess the point that I want to
get at is I think this money -- it does come from different agencies,
but it's used for same or similar purposes, and I think the money's --
what you're asking today, for future reference to this, can be used
more wisely, okay, such as social services needs within the county.
Lighting in other blighted areas of the county and sidewalks. Naples
Manor, Golden Gate is one -- one example.
MR. BAKER: That's true, Commissioner; however, one of the
major objectives of the HUD program is housing and these -- these
contributions are designed to supplement the SHIP program, not to
replace the SHIP program. So it expands the programs to more
people.
Of course -- go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And it's a different
classification of how much money people make?
MR. BAKER: No. We followed the same criteria in terms of
qualifying those individuals. Same -- the same criteria.
MS. COMBS: Some CDBG dollars can use in public facilities,
for instance, but some of the SHIP money you cannot. The SHIP has
different rules. SHIP is strictly for housing. As you notice, what we
are doing we're doing not just the housing. We're doing other support
service as well in a streetlights, and also we doing -- you know, and
what we encourage to all the social service agencies work with us
because as a staff that we go out to community, let them know about
CDBG funding available for various services. We do have a cap,
however, for public services. We are regulated by HUD guidelines
that cannot spend more than 15 percent of our grant money toward
Page 67
April 23, 2002
the public service projects.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. What is public
service? But that isn't the question I wanted to ask. What do you
consider public service?
MS. COMBS: Bus
COMMISSIONER
MS. COMBS: Bus
COMMISSIONER
MS. COMBS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
project.
FIALA: Pardon me?
or redoing indigent health care, child care.
FIALA: So it's like social service?
Okay. Fine. Commissioner
Henning just brought up -- it was a real interesting comment, and that
was about the sidewalks in Naples Manor and Golden Gate, and
there's a tremendous need we're finding in the older neighborhoods
who don't have sidewalks and the children need to get to the schools.
And -- and we've been looking for a source for these particular
projects. I'm wondering can we apply soon for those projects for next
year?
MR. OLLIFF: Let me try and help a little bit. I think
Commissioner Henning has hit a very good point, and we need to
recognize that this is our second year in this program and we are
crawling and walking a little bit before we run on this a little bit. But
I think his point is a very good one in that when we have projects that
are SHIP funding eligible type projects and we see on the same
agenda that we are doing carry-forward budget amendments for
previous year's SHIP funding, we ought to and want to try and push
as many of those projects into the SHIP program as we can in order
to free up more CDBG dollars.
The application cycle is coming up for the next year, and my
suggestion to the board and will be direction to the staff, assuming
Page 68
April 23, 2002
the board concurs, is that, one, we not only inform the churches and
social service agencies of the community, but there are a number of
civic associations, homeowners associations that are involved in
specific neighborhoods, like, Golden Gate City, Naples Manor, and
those areas that need to know what the application cycle is, as well as
our own staff. And we've got a meeting, in fact, internally to talk
about what type public works, type projects within those type
communities might be eligible for CDBG funding. And as we head
into the next cycle make sure that we, one, elevate the profile of the
program to those type agencies as well as churches and social service
agencies and that we try and push as much of the CDBG project list
into the SHIP funding as we -- as we can.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. And make sure, if you
would -- we have a brand-new association in Naples Manor, and
lighting is something that is terribly important for the safety of the
people as well as sidewalks for the safety. So thank you. If you
would notify them. I'll help them too.
MR. OLLIFF: Recognize this will be a very competitive
process at some point, and you will end up with -- under the
guidelines you are allowed only to be able to budget certain
percentages for certain types of uses, and we will probably end up
with significantly more requests than we have funding available,
which is typical of this program. We've not been in that situation yet,
but I think we've already heard that there are a number of requests
that should have been on this list and will be next year.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just to follow up on
Commissioner Henning's question, are these two programs
administered by the same person?
MS. COMBS: No, sir.
Page 69
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
department?
MS. COMBS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
MS. COMBS: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
Are they administered in the same
Are they budgeted together?
Would that not give you better
control over the projects if they were? That is, you keep -- you keep
track of both of the budgets separately, the amount of funds and
expenditures you -- you make, but when you consider them on a
project-by-project basis, is there someone who looks at those projects
and says, "Hey, we could use a little SHIP funds for this and CDBG
funds for that?" Is that --
MR. BAKER: We have not done that, Commissioner. Are you
talking about the administrative cost?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I'm talking about project cost.
MR. BAKER: The actual project? No, we have not done that,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Would that not help?
MR. BAKER: That would behoove us to do that, yes. Again, I
think Tom made a good point. This is our second -- coming up on
only our second year. We're in a learning process.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not being critical. I
understand you have to walk before you can run. I just -- just thought
if it was a good suggestion that you might want to consider it, and I
think that's exactly where Commissioner Henning was going with
this.
MR. BAKER: It is a good suggestion. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I might add a comment to that.
And we have six public speakers, and we'll be able to discuss this
further after that, but I realize the amount seems to be
Page 70
April 23, 2002
disproportionate for Immokalee, but we're coming from so far behind
there. But I do appreciate the efforts have been put there, and this
item's been before us a number of times already and moving through
the process, and we do have to weigh the total needs of Collier
County in the next year's program and, of course, we will.
With that, how many -- we got six speakers, Ms. Filson?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coletta --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- before we go to public
speakers, I'd like to make a motion to approve this item.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Fine. We'll take the motion and a
second --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- from Commissioner Fiala, and
what we'll do is go with the public speakers now. I'm sorry. Go
ahead.
MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman, before we do that, I just need to
put a few comments onto the record. Assistant county attorney,
Patrick White. The resolution that you have before you that was
provided in your package we've updated with one that was delivered
this morning. We just need to put in the record that we made some
minor changes to the first whereas -- excuse me, the last whereas
clause of the resolution that's proposed for your adoption specifically
enumerating the items therein. And we also made some minor
changes to Exhibit B which is the agreement between the county and
various subrecipients listed on your Exhibit A for the various
projects.
And, again, we made modification to what would be the fourth
whereas clause to -- at the clerk's suggestion -- to link these back to
the actual adoption resolution today. We made some other minor
Page 71
April 23, 2002
structural changes to change from HUI director to HUI department
and to correct the address where it was shown. Other than that I
think that's sufficient to move the item forward after you considered
the public hearing.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
MS. FILSON: I'm sorry.
Okay. Speakers.
The first speaker is Fred Richards,
and he will be followed by Faye Adams. If you would like to come
up and--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: By now, I'd like to remind you at this
point in time we're moving towards approval, so if you want to talk
us out of it come on up; if not, you might just want to waive.
MR. RICHARDS: I don't want to talk you out of it. I just want
to kind of enhance and try to give you some insight as to where some
of this money's going for the CDBG. My name is Fred Richards. I'm
the director of adult community services, David Lawrence Center.
We are a sponsor of Collier Housing Alternatives.
The $86,527 that we're asking for will be used to help a special
population group. We have 16 people and we have 16 units with 16
adults with very low income suffering from severe, chronic, and
persistent mental illness with other co-occurring disorders and
physical limitations. In the Collier County Consolidated Plan, the
GAP analysis, it was identified that we need to secure 148 beds to
meet the needs of a growing special population inclusive of those
diagnosed with severe chronic persistent mental illness. Also a
medium relative priority was that we provide supportive services to
help sustain independent status in the community to retain recovery
and treatment, more can stay out of the hospitals.
What we do through David Lawrence Center is we provide the
supportive services for those 16 individuals in that home. We
provide case management, employment. We provide supportive
Page 72
April 23, 2002
living which is rehabilitation. Basically, it's all designed to keep
everybody independent and keep them in the community and to be
successful. And, actually, we've been doing pretty well with that. In
this past year, we've been able to keep people out of the hospitals.
We've been able to keep them out of the jails. We've been able to
help them recover to the point where they're actually getting
employment, where they're getting jobs, where they're getting cars.
So this program has been very successful, and the CDBG grant
has helped us substantially in taking this 23-year-old five-duplex
project which has just deteriorated and the infrastructure is just
falling apart because we had a sink hole that was starting to sink. So
the foundation was splitting. It caused deterioration of the windows,
doors, the gutter replacement, so forth. All these things that we're
asking for in the $86,000 are to -- to improve driveways, windows,
flooring, walkways, exterior doors, painting, and gutters to enhance
the quality of this living situation so these people can live with
dignity and respect and so that they can move on.
So what I wanted to say is it's been very beneficial for us. And
also this project -- we had utilized some SHIP funds also for this
project to help pay for some of these expenditures. So I just wanted
to say that it's been very useful in helping us meet the goals that we
need to meet with that population. And also the biggest concern was
that we were going to displace 16 individuals with very low income
into the community. There's really no place to go. This is one of the
only projects in the community that offers this for people with mental
illness.
So I just wanted to give you some kind of insight as to what
we're doing with that project and where that money's going. I
appreciate your time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir. Next speaker.
Page 73
April 23, 2002
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Faye Adams. She will be
followed by Kathy Herrmann.
MS. ADAMS: Good afternoon. My name is Faye Adams, and I
am the project director of the Assembly Center which is under the
auspices of First Assembly Ministry where Pastor David Mallory is
the executive director.
Our need for these funds are great. As it's been stated that we do
have eight trailers on the back of our property which at this point in
time we received numerous call -- estimated calls for impact fees and
for hookups for the utilities. And we need these things -- these
trailers to be utilized by people. They're just sitting there at this
particular time.
Our intake every day in terms of telephone calls are now exceeding
over 25 and 30 of people who are both -- either needing shelter and
needing assistance and rehabilitation from drug and alcohol problems
in our community.
Our resources come from either the jails, the judges, the
courtrooms and those things, and it's getting on to the point where
we're having to tell people, "No, we cannot assist you in your
rehabilitation." We're probably one of the only facilities in Collier
County where even though the money is greatly needed we do not
turn people away because they don't have the funds for these
services. 99 percent of our people are unable to pay the cost it takes
for us to rehabilitate them in the program.
So these funds would help us tremendously. It means that
fathers will return to their families and be functional. It means that
mothers will return to their children. And I believe we need this.
And they're being successful. And our success rate has grown
immensely.
We have a tight rein on these people. Right now we do have 13
Page 74
April 23, 2002
people in our program, and the house is very temporary, and it's not
suitable for what we could do and for the need that we have at this
present time.
So we thank you for this opportunity. The CDBG funds are
greatly needed. It's been advertised. We got it through letters
through Pastor Mallory and we've also observed it through the Naples
Daily News, and it's just an enhancement for our community and for
our program. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Kathy Herrmann, and she
will be followed by Dottie Cook.
MS. HERRMANN: Thank you, Commissioners. I am here
today as a volunteer for Collier County Government. I am the chair
of the Citizens Advisory Task Force, your Citizens Advisory Task
Force for housing and urban improvement. And I'm here today on
my vacation because I wanted to talk to you to make sure that you
paid attention to this. This is very important work that you are doing
today.
I appreciate your already indications that you're going to
approve these projects, and I know the other speakers will talk about
the value of the projects. I want to tell you as a citizen who is doing
volunteer service for Collier County, the other committee members,
Bill McCarthy, Ellen Christian-Myers, and David Coburn, we work
very hard to review all of the applications. It's a competitive process.
Each grant application could be a couple inches of paper. We review
them all. There are more. There is much more requests than there
are monies to give away.
There was a very inclusive process. We invited all these people
to come and speak. This particular court reporter was in the room, so
if you have -- really any specific knowledge or information you'd like
to know, you have the access to what actually happened in that room
Page 75
April 23, 2002
where we looked at and discussed. It's all very open to the public.
There's two things I want to share with you. Oh, first, I did want
to mention that I -- as a citizen of Collier County, I live in
Commissioner Henning's district. And I wanted to make sure you
knew that, and all the other members of the committee live in
different districts. So we're geographically disbursed in representing
Collier County.
The five-year plan that you already approved I have in front of
me, and there's a one-year plan that's at least as big as this if not more
detailed. The five-year plan has just four or five pages. It really talks
about the plan. The rest of it is demographics and backup data. Out
in the five-year plan, let me share with you that strategy for
prevention, the strategy for outreach, the strategy for shelter and
transitional housing needs, and the strategy for independent living all
rely on private not-for-profit organizations to take up what needs to
be done in Collier County.
I also wanted to share with you, one of the requests that we had
asked for money to pay Collier County impact fees. And although
you have done a very good first step in providing a waiver of $7,500
for these kinds of projects, I'd encourage you to continue to look at
those funds, see if there's more funds that are being used to their
fullest and see if there's a way that we don't have to use CDBG
money to pay for Collier County impact fees. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Dottie Cook. She will be
followed by Marlene Foord.
MS. COOK: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the
commission. My name is Dottie Cook. I'm with the Empowerment
Alliance of Southwest Florida. And I'm here this morning to ask for
your support for the projects listed in the plan.
I'd like to speak about two of them specifically. One is our
Page 76
April 23, 2002
housing development in Immokalee. It's for-- the request is for
infrastructure and site development work for our site. We'll be
building 30 single-family homes. If approved, we hope to start
construction on the site development work later this summer or early
fall and then hope to start construction of the homes in January. We
will be building 30 homes, and we hope to sell them for about 65,000
or less if we can get more subsidies.
We won't be competing with Habitat for Humanity, which has
been a long-time provider of affordable housing in Immokalee,
because our prices will be a little bit higher. We'll be serving a little
bit higher market that hasn't been filled in Immokalee, and we'll be
able to give families there an opportunity to get safe affordable
housing.
And I'd like to just speak to a minute -- for a minute about the
going back and forth between the SHIP and the CDBG funds. We
will also be using some SHIP funds as we get home buyers into our
homes. They'll be using it for down payment and closing cost
assistance. And both your staff members, Ms. Lee Combs and Mr.
Cormac Giblin, work very closely with those two programs. And
there are certain projects that fit well under one and they direct us to
that one and ones that fit better under the CDBG. And, for instance,
the money that we're getting for CDBG couldn't currently come from
the SHIP program the way thc Collier County housing assistance plan
for that program is written right now. So your staff did a good job of
directing us to one source for one PUD of money and to the other for
the other source.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala and then
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a fast comment. I'm just so
delighted and pleased to hear of the programs like yours and like
Page 77
April 23, 2002
Habitat who are allowing people to buy affordable -- and I underline
that -- affordable homes to be owner occupied. It makes -- as
Commissioner Henning stated earlier, it makes all the difference in
the world as to how they care for their property and how they feel
about themselves. So I'm delighted that you have applied and that
you're receiving this money.
MS. COOK: Thank you. And that's really important because
Immokalee has about a 60 or 70 percent renter-occupied housing
market. So home ownership is really critical.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Amen. And it is single-family
homes. Is that one family per household? MS. COOK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I just wanted to make
sure. Somebody -- some people think it's different.
MS. COOK: No. It'll be one family per housing unit.
The second project that I wanted to talk about was the
Immokalee streetlighting project. This is the second phase. The first
phase was started last year with CDBG money from last year, and
that project should be wrapped up in the next few months.
The second phase would put an additional 45 streetlights in
another part of Immokalee, and it's not only -- as Ms. Combs
mentioned -- to reduce crime and make the area safer. It's also to
help -- because Immokalee is so pedestrian and bicycle oriented, it's
also to help people who ride their bicycles or walk especially before
light comes up -- or the sun comes up and before it gets light, help it
make it safer for them to get to work and to school.
So I thank you for your support, and I hope you'll pass the plan.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you for all your help in
Immokalee.
MS. COOK: Thank you.
Page 78
April 23, 2002
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Marlene Foord, and your
final speaker will be Dr. Sam Durso.
MS. FOORD: Good morning, again. Marlene Foord with the
planning services department. But I'm actually here this morning to
represent the Community Redevelopment Agency, which you-all are
members of as well as the Immokalee Local Redevelopment
Advisory Board and the Bayshore Gateway Local Redevelopment
Advisory Board.
I'm here for two projects. One Dottie kind of stole my thunder
on a little bit, the Immokalee streetlighting project. That is for
$60,000 to put an additional 45 lights in. I'm sure if you are out there
in Immokalee in the evening you will see the benefit we can already
see from the first phase of streetlighting. It's really a big difference.
And the additional streetlights will go throughout the weed-and-seed
area of Immokalee which is important because the basic tenets of the
weed-and-seed program include crime prevention and neighborhood
restoration. So the streetlights in Inunokalee will help with the weed-
and-seed program in those two main areas.
The other project that I'm here before you for is the Linwood
Avenue Stormwater Improvement Project. And, again, that is a CRA
project as well. We have $50,000 contributing from the CRA as tax
increment funds towards this grant as a match, but it's a much bigger
project. It's over a million dollars of improvements that are being
provided there. This grant is just one small part of it. A lot of the
improvements are already in your budget for this year and our --
some of them underway. So you'll be seeing some great
improvements in the Gateway Triangle as far as flooding and
stormwater management very soon.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'd just like to add, first of all,
Page 79
April 23, 2002
Marlene just guides us through that so beautifully. I just want to sing
your praises. Talking about great staff, you're there.
Secondly, I want to say that one of the things she's helped us to
do through the CDBG funds is provide a sidewalk for the children to
walk on on Linwood Avenue to get to Shadowlawn school. And
before these funds were available -- as it is right now, there's only a
small two-lane street going down, and people use it as a
thoroughfare, by the way. They really speed down there. It floods
terribly. The children have to try to walk to school down this flooded
street where speeders are and -- and splashing water all over.
We were going to try and have a Band-aid approach, and they
were going to just put a strip of asphalt around this street. And that's
when Marlene rode in on her white horse and said, "I think we can
solve this problem to the benefit of everybody." And so I just --
again, I want to sing your praises for helping us through this.
MS. FOORD: Thank you. And just one clarification on that.
The CDBG grant, the funds are not actually going to be paying for
the sidewalk. The sidewalk part of the project is part of the match.
The Pathways Advisory Committee and the MPO are the ones to give
the credit for that sidewalk.
And the other thing I wanted to do is sing the praises of the
Housing and Urban Improvement Department. They have really
done a great job, and speaking as a fellow staff person, I know the
time and effort that they've put into reviewing these projects and
taking them to the Citizens Advisory Task Force and then bringing
them to you today. Well, I thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Dr. Sam Durso.
DR. DURSO: Good morning. For the record, I'm Dr. Sam
Durso. I'm here as a citizen of Collier County but also as president of
Page 80
April 23, 2002
Habitat for Humanity of Collier County.
My wife and I have been doing Habitat for Humanity now full
time for over nine years as volunteers. Until three and a half years
ago we did not receive any help from the county, and at that time we
were building about 30 houses a year, and that was great. And we
started in Immokalee in 1978 with the oldest Habitat chapter outside
of Georgia. But since we hooked up with the county we -- through
both CDBG and SHIP money, we now build 70 houses this year.
And the main reason we did that was because of the help we received
from the county. So I think your staff has to be applauded. They've
done a great job. I've seen tremendous progress with your staff.
They're really fantastic to us, and without the help we couldn't do
what we do.
Now, obviously, it means we have to work even harder because
when you do 70 they want you to do 80. And we project to do 80
houses next year. We cannot do it without the CDBG money or
without the SHIP money. Leverage and bang for your buck is what
I'm here to talk about because that's what you people get from us. We
received $600,000 last year in CDBG money. We leveraged that for
our Victoria Falls project. We're building 110 houses, and we will
spend $6 million there by the end of next year. So for the $600,000
in CDBG money we will end up spending $6 million. We also
received about $500,000 grant from Habitat International which was
actually HUD money. So, in essence, the CDBG money is HUD
money also. We received almost a million dollars in HUD money,
but we spent $6 million. So $5 million was raised from private
donations for those -- for those 110 houses we built.
We're building them as fast -- you can't believe how fast we're
building. You folks were out there in December. We broke ground
February 1st on the first house. We have 19 houses completed. We
Page 81
April 23, 2002
have another 10 going up. While this is going on, we're building in
Immokalee as well, in Carson Lake in Immokalee which is where the
money we're applying for today is going to be going. We have 30
houses completed. We'll finish about 15 more houses in the next six
months in Phase 1.
The money we're applying for today is for Phase 2. It's actually
for 38 houses. There's leverage and bang for your buck there, but --
it's for $460,000 we will spend almost $3 million for 38 houses. It's
about $2.7 million we're going to spend for the 38 houses we're
building.
So Habitat is still your best bang for your buck for affordable
housing. We'll be here for a long time. We now have 400 houses
completed. We will finish our 500th house next March. Millard
Fuller, who's the founder of Habitat, will be down to help us
celebrate our 500th house. We have enough land under contract for
another 600 houses, which means we will do 1,000 houses by seven
years from now Habitat will have done 1,000 houses. For 5,000
people in Collier County.
We cannot do it without your help. We need your help with
funding as we're here now, but we need your help even more with
zoning changes. And, you know, the "not in my backyard" issue is a
major issue. We see it all the time. We keep going after land, and
we keep getting trashed by the neighbors. We're going to be before
you again in about a month on another piece of land that's far, far out,
and I didn't think we'd have any trouble at all, and we had a public
meeting, and already we're getting -- we get a lot of grief from the
neighbors.
And we will try to answer all those problems before we come
before you. As a matter of fact, we've already agreed to have another
public meeting that we're not required to do before -- before we go to
Page 82
April 23, 2002
the planning board, we're going to meet with those neighbors again
and see if we can answer all their problems before we get to the
planning board and before we get to you folks.
But we'll be back here again in June for the zoning change.
Again, when we go into the rural fringe, we need your help out there.
We need to try and figure out a way to get a big piece of land,
because we keep going after 25-acre parcels of land where we can
build 100 houses. We'd like to go after a 100-acre piece of land
someplace. The engineering costs are outrageous. It costs about
$ ! 50,000 for every parcel we go to engineer. So for 25 acres it costs
us 150 grand. If we can get a 100-acre parcel, it still just costs us 150
grand for the engineers. So that's the long-range solution.
But we're here. We're here to keep doing our job as volunteers.
It's a pleasure to do it. We get tremendous satisfaction out of this.
There's an awful lot of people who are in houses now because of
Habitat for Humanity. We represent 3,000 volunteers that are still
out there working every day. I wish I was out there working today.
I'd much rather be swinging a hammer than doing what you folks are
doing.
But thank you very much for your help. The staff has done a
great job, and I just hope the process continues.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You, sir, are the one to be thanked
and congratulated for all you have accomplished. And I'll tell you
something, I was involved in Habitat back in '84 to about '94, helping
them from putting up signs, making signs, securing materials, and
when I finish this part of my life I plan to get involved big time with
it again. I commend you for what you're doing, and any way I can
help you I will. I'm sure the other commissioners here are very big
supporters of Habitat also.
DR. DURSO: Thank you very much for your help. Thank you.
Page 83
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, you
know, this is about the only time I welcome to see a developer come
up to the podium.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well put, Commissioner Henning.
That was it for the speakers. And so is there any other questions of
staff?. If not, I'm going to call the question. We have a motion by
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Fiala. All those
in favor indicate by saying aye. (Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 4-0. Thank you
very much.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, just in closing that item out, I
wanted to take the opportunity to introduce you to Ms. Combs. Lee
Combs is on your HUI staff, and if you didn't notice by her
presentation, she knows a heck of a lot about CDBG and SHIP
programs. We're glad to have her. This is her first presentation in
front of you, even though she's been with us for sometime.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Congratulations. Good job.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What we're going to do is we're
going to move on through the appointments, and then when we get to
Item D we're going to break for a short lunch.
Item #8B
ORDIANCE 2002-19 TO INCREASE THE ISLE OF CAPRI
MUNICIPAL RESCUE AND FIRE SERVICES TAXING
DISTRICT MILLAGE RATE TO UP TO TWO MILLS.-
Page 84
April 23, 2002
ADOPTED W/CHANGES
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We've got 8-B.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. We've got 8-B first.
Then we're going to go through the recommendations. You're
correct, Commissioner Henning. Thanks for pointing that out. To
obtain board authorization. You go ahead, Mr. Pineau.
MR. PINEAU: Good morning, Commissioners. Ken Pineau
again, your interim emergency services administrator. We have
before you today a request to authorize and approve an ordinance that
would increase the millage rate for the Isles of Capri Municipal
Rescue and Fire Services taxing district up to a maximum of 2 mills
from the current 1 mill. At the present time for the next fiscal year
we're looking to increase it only to a half a mill which would generate
an additional $130,000 bringing the total for the operating and
personnel budget for the Isles of Capri Fire District up to
approximately $390,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Slow down. Okay. We've got a
motion to approve and a second from Commissioner Coyle.
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you're just looking now for a
half mill rather than 2 mills; is that what you're saying?
MR. PINEAU: Yes. We're looking to increase it a half mill
over this next fiscal year, but rather than having to go out and amend
the ordinance again at some future point you would have an
additional half-mill cushion somewhere down the line.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that's what I wanted to talk to
you about. I feel that it's nice to have the cushion, but there's a lot of
development going on right now in the Isles of Capri as well as WCI
Page 85
April 23, 2002
that's going coming in. It's going to give the Isles of Capri Fire
Department a lot more dollars, I think, with the tax base just growing.
And so I would like to see it stay at 1 1/2 mills now, and I'd love to
have them come back again. I'm sure that we'll look favorably if they
need it. It might just be that their pockets are bulging with all the
new development, and they might not need it.
I bounced this off of a few people and spoke a little bit to Chief
Rodriguez, and I feel that this is -- this is the way to go. And I would
ask that the other commissioners work with me on that, and then
come back for the other half a mill at another time.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's my understanding that this
was a citizen initiative to increase the millage for the fire rescue on
Isle of Capri. If you can help me with that, Commissioner, I'd
appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure. And I've been sitting in on
all the meetings, and initially -- this is all at the civic association
meetings -- the citizens wanted to do this. They felt that they needed
the extra equipment. Chief Rodriguez told them of the 2 -- 2 in 2 out
-- whatever it's called -- and that he would need to hire some extra
people. He explained this to everybody.
There were some -- there was a lot of communication amongst
the residents and the fire department, and what they came out with
was some felt that while they could put up with the two, but they
would prefer to have the one and a half-- you know, the extra half a
mill rather than extra mill, especially if they didn't need that extra
half a mill now. They didn't seem to feel any problem with it at some
future time accepting the other half a mill. They just wanted to see
where this first half mill will go.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may comment. I get the point
Page 86
April 23, 2002
where they don't want to bother the commission again. I feel it's our
responsibility to offer due diligence of the taxpayers' money no
matter where it's coming and going. In this case here, meet the need
that's out there with the half mill, and if this doesn't meet it and they
come back and substantiate it, then we can go back and put up the
other half a mill at that point in time. But we have a motion on the
floor for the item to be just the way staff recommended.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, Commissioner Fiala, it's
your feelings that the citizens would like to wait and see what
develops later on instead of putting on a half mill.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, thank you for clarifying
that.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, do keep in mind that the
ordinance provides a cap. It doesn't mean that the budget
automatically goes up to 2 mill cap. It means it can anywhere
between the current millage rate and the 2 mill cap, and the Board of
County Commissioners has to review and approve through a special
public hearing process what the millage is going to be for that special
taxing district each and every year. So if the board wanted to even go
with the staff recommendation and then only approve a mill and a
half this year or even less than a mill and a half as part of the budget
process, you have that ability as well. So that's just another option for
you to consider.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like them to come back before
us and talk with them again if they do need the other half.
MR. OLLIFF: That's what I'm saying. They would come back
every year and have a public hearing process to establish what the
millage rate will be each and every year-- each and every budget
year.
Page 87
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
there anyone to speak on this?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
Let me go to Commissioner-- is
Commissioner Henning, do
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll remove my motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. And then would you like to
make a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, yes. I would like to
make a motion that at this time we implement a 1.5 mill cap for the
Isles of Capri, and at some future time if the fire department feels that
it's necessary to increase that, come back to us.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll second that. So we have a
motion by Commissioner Fiala, a second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any other discussion? (No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor of the motion
indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 4-0. Thank you
very much. What we're going to do now --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks, Chief Rodriguez.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Was there something you wanted to
address?
CHIEF RODRIGUEZ: No, sir.
Item #9F
ETHICS AUDIT FOR COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT:
PROPOSAL FOR SCOPE OF WORK- APPROVED W/COSTS
Page 88
April 23, 2002
NOT TO EXCEED $500
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What we're going to do is -- I found
out that Professor Ferenz is going to have to go back to class, so
we're going to move his item up now on the ethics issue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What item is he; do you know?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That would be Item 9-F.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nine. That's right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And then we'll take a lunch break
after that.
DR. FERENZ: Thank you very much, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
MR. FERENZ: Apologize for that conflict in schedule.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's quite all right, sir.
DR. FERENZ: The students await. I came to the board
sometime ago, and I return. My name is Leonard Ferenz, F-e-r-e-n-z.
Nice to be back. And I'm here with the scope of the proposal for an
external ethics audit to be conducted by the International College
Center for Ethics Moorings Park.
They -- if you have the item before you -- and I can tell you that
basically in a summary form this audit would probably take three to
four months which I would hope to commence at some time upon
your approval and will involve probably in the order of 1,000, 1,200
hours of your staff time in the way of participation in a survey
instrument and some number of personal interviews between an
auditing team that I assembled and some representatives from the
various departments of your organization. I expect to be -- hope to
meet with one director and staff person from each of the departments
within Collier County Government, personal interviews, and a survey
instrument to be distributed among all the employees of Collier
Page 89
April 23, 2002
County Government.
That instrument is to be designed once there is a go ahead with
this project. I would like for participation from the commissioners, in
fact, in the design of that instrument. The reason for that I think is
very clearly because this external ethics audit would, in fact, be a
wonderful and rare opportunity for government to bring transparency
to the organizational values that are being disemanated through
various echelons of government. And I think this is a great
opportunity for an academic resource like our own at International
College to be represent the community and participate with
government to bring that type of visibility to the government. So if
you have any specific questions, I'd be more than happy to address
them.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I'm personally delighted in the
direction this has taken, and I know this is a step from the norm for
government to want to have an ethics audit done on themselves,
although big business has been doing this on a regular process for
many, many years. And I think this is a chance for us to show good
faith with the public, with our county employees, and with ourselves
by having an outside source do an in-depth analysis as to how we're
doing business and the very reason why we're doing business.
Any other comments from the commissioners? Commissioner
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Question. You know, I know
that -- excuse me, that one of our priorities is overhaul the Growth
Management Plan and Land Development Code which will not only
include community development directors, administrators but also
parks and rec and all the other facilities that are in -- identified within
the Growth Management Plan for us to take a look at. And my only
concern is at this time can we -- are we going to put this amendment
Page 90
April 23, 2002
process off, or can we have them parallel, or do we have to consider
when we should do this ethic audit involving the employees'
participation? Mr. Olliff.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I guess that's addressed to you, Mr.
Olliff.
MR. OLLIFF: What's being proposed from a staff timing
perspective, if I read it right, Dr. Ferenz is only a half hour estimated
time per employee roughly somewhere between 1,000 and 1,200
hours total on the survey instrument itself, and then I think there may
be some additional interviews required for an administrator or
perhaps one or two other individuals within each division and/or or
department. In honesty, I don't see the staffing time requirement
being significant there if we're really only talking about, for the most
part, a half hour per employee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, Mr. Olliff, when I talked
to Dr. Ferenz, he's saying 45 minutes to an hour; correct?
MR. FERENZ: What you have before you is 35 minutes to 45
minutes, 30 to 45 minutes, yeah. I'm anticipating that would be the
limit of the amount of work with regard to your staff. There would
be the additional time for those individuals that serve as our liaison
between the auditing team and your staff, and I believe that would be
the attorney's office and the county manager's office in providing
some -- some contact with us so we have a liason to work through.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And these -- these questions will be
offered to people so they can remain anonymous. They won't have to
MR. FERENZ: That's correct. Absolutely. Now, our-- our
meetings as an auditing team, from what I understand from your
office as well, are governed by the state Sunshine laws, and actually I
welcome that process. I think that will be quite exciting actually.
Page 91
April 23, 2002
Whatever meetings that we have as auditing team to construct,
devise, and create these benchmarks and survey instruments will, in
fact, be open to the public. And I think that, again, in itself that also
brings transparency and visibility to our project.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All right. I'd like to take the time
now to make the motion that we recommend that the Board of
County Commissioners authorize the external ethics audit as
described in the agenda item that we have in front of us.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The attorney wants to say
something.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Mr. Weigel.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One clarification as
we discuss the item is that under fiscal impact you will note that there
is relatively little fiscal impact to the county. And, in fact, I'd like to
be as clear as we can that in the first group of items where it talks
about some reproduction costs and things of that nature, that if there
are, in fact, to be costs incurred by the county that you're aware of
that in your motion to approve, and we will need to identify a cost
center to pay for those if that is to be a county cost. And maybe Dr.
Ferenz can help me with that a little bit.
DR. FERENZ: Well, that was my anticipation, that to reproduce
this survey instrument, which I expect will be roughly three pages
long, and circulate it among your 1,600 employees, there will be
some cost -- paper cost there. And I will collect those surveys. You
won't have to have post it's to get it back to me, but there will be
production costs for the written report that we will offer you. And I
have no way of knowing how long a document that would be and
how many copies you're going to need. But certainly those would be
costs you would have to be aware of. If there were any -- I don't
Page 92
April 23, 2002
anticipate any types of incidental costs. I don't believe you're going
to be asking me to incur any traveling expenses or anything of that
nature. We're local, and so this can all really be done in-house.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So what we're looking at is a cost
factor for the reports yet to be generated? DR. FERENZ: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: In that case, I would add to my
motion that we allow up to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ten dollars.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning will take
care of making them for you at no cost to anyone. No. I would
recommend, what, up to -- what, $500?
MR. FERENZ: I can't imagine it would cost more than that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That would be added to my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And to my second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We do have one speaker that
I would like to go to.
MS. FILSON: Robert Robinson.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
clam farming.
MS. FILSON: That's 9-D.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
No. I think he is here to speak on
I'm sorry.
We got you mixed up with clam
farming. Sorry about that. So we have no speakers.
Is there any other questions? (No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that I'll call for the motion.
those in favor indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed.
(No response.)
All
Page 93
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Kind of like a report.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it 4-0.
DR. FERENZ: This is the first time I've been graded in so long.
I feel really good. I can go home now and tell my parents.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We can't thank you enough for what
you're doing. We appreciate International College allowing you to do
it.
DR. FERENZ:
acknowledgment.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
lunch break.
Thank you very much. I appreciate that
And with that we're going to take a
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How long?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What do you think you need?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: An hour.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: An hour lunch break.
(Lunch recess taken at 12:05 p.m.)
(The proceedings recommenced with Commissioner Fiala not
present.)
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2002-215 DECLARING VACANCIES ON THE
BLACK AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Item 9-A, recommendation to
declare vacancies on the Black Affairs Advisory Board.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We've got a motion for approval
from Commissioner Coyle and a second from Commissioner
Page 94
April 23, 2002
Henning.
MR. MUDD: It's three vacant seats, Commissioner. Just so you
know, there's three vacant seats.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep. Because of nonattendance.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we have three -- three
applicants; right?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
MR. MUDD: This is just declaring the vacancies.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, just declaring them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're removing people from the
board.
MS. FILSON:
attended meetings.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
We have -- we have three members who haven't
One moved out of town.
Okay. All those in favor indicate by
The ayes have it, 3 to 0.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2002-216 APPOINTING KENNETH HUMISTON
& ERICA LYNNE TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY
COUNCIL - ADOPTED
Next one is appointment of members to the Environmental
Advisory Council, 9-B.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve the
recommendations.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We got a motion by
Commissioner Henning to approve.
Page 95
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we have a second by
Commissioner Coyle. Is there any questions? Okay. All those in
favor indicate by saying aye. (Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The next item, I've been requested
by Commissioner Fiala I skip over it and come back. She'll be here
in just a minute. And I'm going to do so to honor her wishes, as I
would yours also.
Item D, update on clam farming efforts in Collier County and a
request for the board to authorize a letter supporting efforts and
requesting assistance from the Commissioner of Agriculture; plus the
other item, to form a task force to be able to get this done to act as the
-- to run interference for us as far as forming it up. There is -- there's
a little bit involved with the fact that you're dealing with state -- I'm
sorry. You got something, Mr. Olliff?.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I don't see the two gentlemen,
one from the state and the other who is the commercial fishing
interest, here.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, you're right. Let's come back to
that item. Sorry I led you down that path, gentlemen.
Item #9E
RESOLUTION 2002-217 APPOINTING DR. CARL J. SHEUSI TO
THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
We'll go on to the next item, appointment of members to the
Health and Human Service Advisory Committee.
Page 96
April 23, 2002
(Commissioner Fiala entered the boardroom.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I make a motion for approval of No.
1 there, following the recommendations of the Health Advisory
Committee itself. Let me get right to that there, and sorry I'm not
flipping these pages as fast as you are. There's two people
recommended, and I recommend Carl Shenoski (phonetic).
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sheusi.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we have a second from
Commissioner Fiala. Is there any discussion? All those in favor
indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2002-218 APPOINTING JOSEPH SWAJA,
P.K.MIRSA & JOSEPH MUMAW TO THE COUNTY
GOVERNMENT PRODUCTIVITY COMMITTEE- ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Now we're going to go back
to the -- to 9-C, the appointment of members to the Collier County
Government Productivity Committee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And I'd like to make a motion
that we -- that we -- not nominate -- that we approve the
recommendations for Joseph Swaja, P.K. Misra, and Joseph Mumaw.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And how close does that follow the
recommendations of the committee?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll second that. Is there any
discussion at this time?
Page 97
April 23, 2002
yOU.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see a pen waving.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead. I'm sorry.
I didn't see
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't know if this is absolutely
necessary, but I took a look at the distribution of the membership on
this committee. And there are four from District 2, three from
District 3, one from District 5, one from District 1, and zero from
District 4. Now, I don't know that that is relevant, but it would be --
certainly it would be helpful, I think, if all districts were -- were
represented. And Mark Stout seems to have good qualifications, but
since we don't get to interview these people here -- which I would
like to recommend one day. But I have no way of assessing his -- his
qualifications against the other people. But I -- I think it would be
good if we would try to balance these somewhat.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may offer a suggestion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The Productivity Committee, their
agenda is quite a bit different than the Planning Commission, where
there you're going beyond -- you're very boundary-specific as far as
district goes. The Productivity Committee is working with
generalities of budget and items such as that. And even though I only
have one, if I had zero, it wouldn't offend me unless there was a very
qualified candidate that might be passed over. I don't -- I don't really
think these things have so much things to do with districts.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just think it would be good --
well, let me be more specific.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. When you get a group of
people on the committee and they're selecting individuals for
Page 98
April 23, 2002
membership on that committee, they're generally selecting
individuals they know, that they have confidence in and that they
know. And that sort of means that people who are outside that -- that
sphere of influence are not given consideration for membership on
these committees. And I am merely raising that issue because if-- I
think it is important for us to begin to try to balance things like this. I
-- I really don't think we should have a committee that consists of
people with essentially the same interests in the same districts. There
are differences. And they look at projects. They look at
management. They look at money for us. And I -- I really do believe
that districts have slightly different priorities. But I just want to raise
that for your consideration, and then we can proceed.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, did you
want to weigh in on this?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No thanks. I'm ready to vote.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I know I didn't see your hand, but I
thought I'd give you the opportunity. Commissioner Fiala, you got
any other comments?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Speaking of politically correct,
Tom, that was a good one. No. No. I'll say no thanks.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. I still feel the same, that this is
something that's -- that really doesn't need to be influenced by
districts. I wouldn't feel the slightest bit offended if everyone from
that committee came from one district and not my own. You know,
as long as -- the reason being is I've been close to the Productivity
Committee for a full year, and I've seen how they come up with their
decisions and their logic. And believe me, if we totally failed as a
government body someday, we were wiped out by terrorism, God
forbid, and you ever needed somebody that could make this county
government work, you could take the Productivity Committee and set
Page 99
April 23, 2002
them down, and this thing would be -- would just keep right on
moving.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Take public comment?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I know I'll get comment on that;
that's for sure. But I said enough. Did you have something else you
wanted to say?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. That's all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I do have something.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Go ahead, Commissioner Fiala. You
still look lovely.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, gosh, you should have seen me
in the restaurant. Anyway --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I knew I shouldn't have stayed here
for lunch.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I couldn't go in because I have a
hair net underneath this, so I couldn't take my hair off. But you
couldn't walk in with just the hair without the hat because you'd look
pretty foolish.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, you look pretty foolish
anyway.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So I went with the full -- oh, God.
Anyway, what I wanted to say was I really understand your concerns.
I would feel the same way if-- if my district wasn't represented, and
so I would -- but I really feel strongly about the committee's
recommendations. I'm sure that they've researched that. They didn't
just willy-nilly give them to us. So I would suggest that next time we
weigh heavily on your district first when there's another opening on
the Productivity Committee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that, let's call the motion there.
Page 100
April 23, 2002
All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
Opposed?
And the ayes have it, 4 to 0.
Item #9D
LETTER AUTHORIZING SUPPORT REGARDING THE
EFFORTS OF CLAM FARMING IN COLLIER COUNTY AND
REQUESTING ASSISTANCE FROM THE COMMISSIONER OF
AGRICULTURE (COMMISSIONER COLETTA) - APPROVED
Okay. Where are we now? Oh, clam farming. We're back in
the room. Yeah. I see Mr. Robert Roberts (sic). We're going to
move on to that one now. That's Item 9-C -- no, excuse me -- 9-D.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: D.
(A discussion was held off the record.)
MR. GUNTER: My name is John Gunter. I'm a -- I work for
the Department of Agriculture within Division of Aquaculture. I'm
the field biologist and coordinator for most marine and estuary
aquaculture lease activities. What I'm going to try and do is give you
a couple of different presentations. The first is just an overview of
what the Department of Agriculture's responsibility is within the
aquaculture leasing program and what the submerged-lands leasing
program is. The next is going to be a status report on what we've
been doing here in Collier County.
Okay. Back in 1990 when we first started, we had a value of
about $1 million. Today the aquaculture -- the clam leasing program
produces about $20 million of-- of clams. Most of the activities on
Page 101
April 23, 2002
submerged -- sovereign submerged lands has -- has been increasing at
an exponential rate. For instance, in 1999 we went to $15.9 million.
It's the largest marine aquaculture activity in the state. Now, in terms
of what we look at from an economic standpoint of what it means to
different communities, you have a lot of different cottage industries
that are associated with this business. In those kinds of terms, we're
looking at close to $34 million statewide.
Now, the aquaculture leasing program was put into place under
Chapter 353 or-- 253, rather, Florida Statutes, and this provides the
authority for the Board of Trustees and-- as well as the Department
of Agriculture under the Division of Aquaculture to administer these
leases. Again, just a -- another reference to 253 and what it allows
for.
And part of it is, of course, to produce marine aquaculture
products and to protect and conserve natural resources as well as
supplementing depleted stocks. We have various -- for instance, in
the Indian River where we have -- we do have wild harvesting of-- of
clams, but we also have a depleted natural stock area. So most of the
activity that is concerned in that area does apply to aquaculture. So
there's several things that -- that this is providing for. Of course,
again, citing 253 Florida Statute, the -- it states that the Governor and
Cabinet have decided that this is -- aquaculture is in the public
interest. So this is part of what the mandate is for us, as a division or
a department of agriculture, to -- to go out and work with commercial
fishermen to try and designate these areas that are of an aquaculture
use, to work with other agencies that -- that are involved, and try and
come up with these areas that are appropriate, depending on what the
area is and depending of what type of aquaculture is involved. And
that's primarily what our division does. Right now we administer
more than 600 aquaculture leases totaling about 1700 acres
Page 102
April 23, 2002
throughout the state. Now, these are -- most of these -- most of this
acreage is tied up in clam aquaculture. We do have some oyster and
live rock leases that we take care of. There's some tropical fish farms
as well as some catfish farms and various other things that are inland.
But most of the marine aquaculture is going to be on public bottom,
which the -- which the Board of Trustees administers. So those --
those are the areas that we have to deal with.
And the next aspect of this, of course, is that we have to deal
with also the other user groups that are using these areas, so that's --
part of what the process is when we're trying to implement these
leases is combining all the user groups, making sure that everybody's
accommodated, making sure that everybody's concerns and interests
are taken care of before we implement any sort of aquaculture leasing
program in a particular area. Again, just different -- different aspects
of-- of things that are used around the area, whether it's recreational
fishing, whether it's marinas, developments, all those kinds of things.
The resource management aspects of-- of this run the whole
spectrum of public health and site location. In -- in our case,
especially with clam aquaculture leasing, we deal with things like
manatees, sea grasses. Those are -- those are very important to us
because we don't want to encroach or impact on any of those kind of
-- of communities. So we typically work with aquatic preserve staffs
as well as natural wildlife refuge staffs in order to establish the best
sites for these types of leases, because our goal in the end is -- is to
do really, really good resource management. And so that's just a -- a
real quick and dirty overview of what -- what we do as a division. In
this case of Collier County, back in 2000 we began getting requests
from different commercial fishermen as well as certain local -- local
officials within Goodland and -- and Everglades City to take a look at
this -- the ! 0,000 Islands area. I -- I put out my first two plots of test
Page 103
April 23, 2002
clams -- three plots of test claims in June of 2001, and I've been back
periodically to monitor those to see what kind of growth we've had,
to -- as well as to check on the sizes and suitability of those areas that
-- where I've got them at.
And what we've looked at in the last 10 months is we've seen an
average growth on these clams of about 2 1/2 to 3 millimeters a
month, and that's very competitive, and it's -- it's certainly as
competitive, if not more, than some of the other areas we have in the
state. I've seen a minimum of predation and also not -- not
particularly significant mortalities.
The leases that -- or the -- the potential areas that -- that I've got
in mind are -- they're -- they're deep-water leases, so this more or less
alleviates some of the problems with sea grasses. Typically within
the state we find sea grasses only from the shallow water area to
about 4 1/2 to 5 feet of depth, and that's because of light penetration.
So you normally don't find sea grasses in areas where it's, you know,
6 to 7 feet deep, and that's basically where these potential sites are
located.
So -- and Commissioner Coletta was nice enough to come to our
meeting in March down in Goodland where we had some interested
commercial fishermen as well as different agency staff. We had
people from aquatic preserve staff as well as a couple of other people
from our division. My boss, my bureau chief, Mark Berrigan, was
there. And we discussed where we were at in the process and what
was needed to go on from there in order to continue to move forward.
And one of the things that we've traditionally done within the
state is that when we get to this point we really like to have what's
called an aquaculture task force that's associated with a county;
obviously in this case Collier County. And the task force is normally
comprised of state people; myself would be one of them. We would
Page 104
April 23, 2002
have several commercial fishermen from -- from different areas --
you know, whether that would be Isles of Capri or whether it would
be Goodland, Everglades City, we would have those -- those interests
involved-- as well as we always like to have at least one or two staff
from the Collier County Commissioners' office just so that they
would be -- act as liaison between decisions and issues that are taken
up by the task force, because as you go along through this process,
there are a number of issues that come up because there are a number
of user groups out there on the water. And those are the types of
things that can be taken care of by this task force so that we can
address them and see if we want to go forward or how we want to --
to handle them. And it's -- it's been a very, very positive tool for us
in the past in other counties, and it alleviates a lot of the confusion
sometimes associated with this aquaculture leasing program. I can
tell you right now that the -- the data that we've gotten over the past
ten months for this -- for the 10,000 Islands area has been very
positive. We still have a lot of other data collection and monitoring
to go and, of course, obviously, involving aquatic preserve staffs of
the different areas here. That's another part of the process in
determining whether or not these sites are -- are going to be suitable.
So I've been requested to ask if-- if the Collier County Commission's
agreeable to possibly formally request a letter or -- to my boss, Mark
Berrigan, the establishment of this Collier County Aquaculture Task
Force and to proceed from there.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Questions on the part of the
commission? Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Farming, great idea. How does
that affect the boating traffic out there, 10,000 Islands?
MR. GUNTER: That's a good question. One of the things we
did early on-- and I've done --just so you understand where I come
Page 105
April 23, 2002
from, all of those 1700 acres, I've participated in putting those out,
whether it's the Indian River or Lee and Charlotte Counties or, you
know, Levy and Dixie or the next one that goes on-line up in Franklin
County so -- and those are always big concerns. So the first thing
that I do is really try and take a close look at where that boating
activity is and how big of a problem that's going to be for having a,
you know, 40- or 50-acre lease plot out there.
Now, having said that, the state is only going to be leasing just
the bottom as well as 6 inches above the bottom. So access and, you
know, egress over these large lease -- high-density lease areas is
allowed by boating, any -- any kind of boating that goes on. The
other thing that's provided for in most of these high-density lease
areas are alleyways and easements so that they can go across them at
any time.
The only -- the only restrictions that we normally do is, you know,
low-speed-type zones going through these areas because there's a lot
of-- generally if you have boats out there that are working on the
leases, there's -- there's no need for, you know, high-speed traffic to
be going through it. But as far as, you know, being allowed to fish or
being allowed to, you know, drive through the alleyways and those
kinds of things, there's no restrictions on that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I -- I presume if-- if you move
forward with this, that you're going to have public hearings on these
things.
MR. GUNTER: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you're asking us to participate
in establishing a committee, an advisory committee of some kind,
that would work as a liaison between the Department of Agriculture
and your agency and local interests, I presume.
Page 106
April 23, 2002
MR. GUNTER: Absolutely. Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And -- and no action would be
taken with respect to creating these until we had adequate public
hearings.
MR. GUNTER: Right. We have a series -- let's assume -- you
know, assuming that things go forward as they have in other areas,
there's a series of public workshops to determine any sort of other
concerns that may come up that are not addressed by the task force,
which sometimes they do. Sometimes you -- you know, as you might
know, you think you have everything covered, and you don't. So,
yeah, the series of public workshops will come later on, and it would
-- it will address any concerns that come up.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And who has the final authority
with respect to approving or disapproving these projects?
MR. GUNTER: The Governor and Cabinet, Board of Trustees.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So the Board of County
Commissioners would not be involved in -- MR. GUNTER: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- the approval process at all.
MR. GUNTER: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We would be just the coordination
agency.
MR. GUNTER: Just a coordination agency. It is -- it is our
wish, from a -- from a department standpoint, that we have your
cooperation and that we have your approval. We want to -- we want
to make sure that all the agencies as well as administrative staffs are -
- are okay with whatever we're doing. It's not in our best interest to
be in conflict with any of you on these. So while we don't necessarily
need your approval or your -- your input, we -- we want it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What depth of water? Now, you
Page 107
April 23, 2002
said you're only going to be leasing the -- 6 inches from the bottom or
something like that?
MR. GUNTER: Right. Right. These are not water-column
leases. They're -- the submerged-leasing program does provide for
water-column leases. These would not be those types of leases.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Would there be an option to do
water-column leases?
MR. GUNTER: Those would have to be reviewed under the
specific type of activity that you might want to do. These would all
be clam leases. If you said, "Well, I'd like to grow" --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oysters.
MR. GUNTER: Well, oysters would probably be okay, too,
because that's -- that's a bottom-type of animal, so we wouldn't be
worried about having a water-column lease. Water-column leases
come in play when you're looking at, say, things like finfish. Say, if
you wanted to have a redfish pen or something like that out there,
then obviously that's a water-column lease. So that would be
addressed under a different type of application.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have seen -- I think I have seen
clam and oyster cultivation in a vertical, rather than horizontal,
manner.
MR. GUNTER: Correct. Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, if someone were to wish to
do that, would that require a special permit?
MR. GUNTER: Yes. You would have to -- if you-- if you
wish to grow oysters or clams in a vertical setting either on strings or
latern-type cages, then we would have to explore that method. That's
-- one of the things that -- that we do on most aquaculture lease
applications is, how are you going to do what you say you're going to
do, and is that going to be in conflict with the other user groups or the
Page 108
April 23, 2002
other situations out there?
It is -- it's not likely that we would approve anything of that
method mainly because in Florida we don't have the depths for the
string-type culture that you -- that you're familiar with. That's
typically something that you might see in Latin America or, you
know, Chile or Australia, those kinds of areas, where they have
embayments (phonetic) that are 50, 60 and a hundred feet deep. We
don't have that kind of bottom. And, of course, the other aspect of
our -- our particular method of clam aquaculture, or at least the state's
particular method, is that they're -- you can still put down anywhere
from a million and a half to two and a half million clams on a 2-acre
lease, so that's a lot of animals to take care of. And --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And will private individuals have
the opportunity to do this, entrepreneurs, fishermen who want to --
want to do this?
MR. GUNTER: Yes. That's what -- part of what the task force
does is to -- there are -- and I'm going to give some examples. For
instance -- just recently, for instance, in Franklin County, their county
decided that they wished to limit the first priority on applications to
people within Franklin County. So that's -- part of what the task
force does is get that input from -- from the Collier County
Commissioners as well as from other commercial fishermen.
And if we can lay down some limitations -- they can't be all-
inclusive, and they can't be restrictive to the exclusion of anyone.
But we can do certain things like that, where we say, "Okay. We're
only going to have Collier County residents with restricted species
license" or something like that "to begin with. Then after that
everybody on the outside." But those are things that are worked out.
I don't want to get too far ahead because I'm -- that's a little premature
for me to be talking about that.
Page 109
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just one other item, and then I'll
be finished. One of my concerns is that the commercial fishing
industry in this area has been -- been hurt over the past several years.
This could be an opportunity to -- to rejuvenate that industry or
provide alternative sources of income for people who used to earn
their income from the water. And so you're telling me that if-- if we
were to recommend that first priority be to the residents here in this
county, that that would receive high consideration? MR. GUNTER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And before we go to you,
Commissioner Fiala, if I may, this is something that I got involved in
early on and found great interest in the whole thing. We're trying to -
- one of the reasons why we came forward with it is to try to make
the fishermen whole out there that have suffered greatly from the net
ban that you mentioned, Commissioner Coyle. And I kind of hope
that when we put this task force together, that we'll meet their
immediate needs first and then be able to branch out. But the task
force will be able to work through this and the legalities of what they
can do and can't do.
And from there, once we get this under -- under way and this is
working out, I'd like to see if we can maybe grow this into something
as far as shrimp and prawn agriculture, also, to be able to keep this
movement going forward and offer a sustainable income for us for
the people of Everglades, Goodland, Marco Island so that they have
this ongoing resource all the time developing, coming forward, and
putting economy back where it's been lost over the years.
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'm glad you said that because
that was one of my points, and you said it far better than I could have.
Page 110
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I read your notes. That's why I --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I -- I had the good fortune also of
going out and seeing aquaculture first hand or clam farming
firsthand, and I -- I truly enjoyed it. And I just wanted to tell you that
I didn't see it inhibiting, in any way, the free flow of boating or
fishing at all. I loved the idea that it was creating a new business, one
to fill the gap that the net banning has -- has presented to us as an --
as an obstacle. And I wonder, though, has there been much theft,
theft of the bags?
MR. GUNTER: Well, typically on these -- these test plots,
which I do everywhere at one time or another, we always have a little
bit of either theft or inadvertent, you know, dragging up with an
anchor or those kinds of things. I don't really -- I don't really worry
about that too much. I mean, you know, I lose bags occasionally, you
know, because of one reason or the other. And I have lost two bags
out of my six or whatever from one of the sites.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They were good, too. Thank
yOU.
MR. GUNTER: But it -- now, as far as -- as far as the actual
leases go, yes, any time you have a high-density lease area with clam
product on the bottom, it is a security problem, and unfortunately
that's part of the business. We do have theft problems in other areas
of the state, all areas of the state as a matter of fact. Like you would
with anything else that -- that is worth that much that's sitting on the
bottom out there, you're going to have somebody that's going to go
get it. Those are things that are worked out generally among the
communities and whether through law enforcement or--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Don't go there.
MR. GUNTER: We won't go anywhere else on that. But, yes, it
-- theft is sometimes a problem, and it will be a problem regardless of
Page 111
April 23, 2002
where you're at.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'd like to make a motion at this time
that we go forward with this with the recommendations that are
outlined there on the letter dated April 2nd regarding -- to myself
there regarding the agriculture and the letter that we want to send on
to the Department of Agriculture; the -- also the -- that we put
together the task force; that we follow all the recommendations
within this letter so that we can get this thing moving sooner or later.
And we also have a couple of speakers, but first I'd like to see about
getting a second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to second that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you could find someone who
could start raising snook so I could catch one sometime --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. But we got a store in Everglades
City that sells plastic ones.
With that, we'll go to the speakers.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, you have two speakers. The first
one is Robert Robinson, and he will be followed by Matt Finn.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I want to recognize right off the
bat, Robert Robertson (sic) has been the driving force that got
everybody off their butt to make this thing come together. Thank you
for that. We ought to name the first site after you.
MR. ROBINSON: Well, Matt has been into it, too, so --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We'll name the second one after
Matt.
MR. ROBINSON: Okay. But, anyway, I did call up there and
find out that we had to come to the county commission and get it
started. So with all that John has said, the only thing I would say is I
would like for the county to research whether or not there was grant
Page 112
April 23, 2002
money somewhere to send these guys to school like the first
fisherman got sent from the state. There may be some state money
yet up there. Because as I understand, talking to other clammers, it
benefits going to this six- or seven-day school and finding out what
you're really supposed to be doing rather than jumping into it not
knowing anything unless you have been up to one of these clam
farms and went out with the guys. Other than that, that would be --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We'll work with you on that through
the EDC and whatever it takes to either get you guys to the school or
bring the school to you.
MR. ROBINSON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But I tell you, we got the right
direction going. And I hope that when it comes time to form this task
force, that you will submit your application.
MR. ROBINSON: Yeah. Absolutely. And I want to tell you I
think enough of this that I'm headed to Cedar Key this afternoon to
see what they are doing up there. I've been there one time, and I'm
headed back now because my son and I are putting in a nursery,
different from a hatchery. The hatchery comes first, then the nursery,
and then the guys behind them to put them in the ground. In fact,
that's the reason -- main reason I'm going up there. And any
questions?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Matt Finn.
MR. FINN: Well, it's great to hear all these positive comments
about this. When I began working with John Gunter on this about a
year ago, I was extremely skeptical. It seemed to me like a good way
to waste a lot of time and throw away some money. But now that
I've done a lot of hands-on work with these clams, I think this is a
very viable approach, and it could help out a lot to our community,
Page 113
April 23, 2002
the commercial fishermen. And then maybe we can get some spin-
offs, like he's saying, the different types of aquaculture, as things
move along.
Now, historically Collier County used to be clam capital, and I
think with this program we're going to bring that back again. And we
had the opportunity to try some of our clams now that they've grown
up to legal size, and I'll tell you they're the best clams you're going to
get anywhere. Isn't that right, Tom? And the growth we've had -- I
mean, when you see John -- he's kind of low-key about this whole
thing, you know. You should see his eyeballs when he comes out of
that water. "You should see how they're growing." And he can't be
that way right now. You know, he's got to be a little low-key. But I
think we're going to do something really good here, and we do need
your support, and I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's only a matter of time before we
can honestly say that not only do the best people come from Collier
County, but the best clams do too. And with that, I'll clam up. MR. FINN: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Any other -- Commissioner Henning,
I seen you raise your hand for a moment there. Was that to gain your
breath, or did you have something to say?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I don't breath out of my
fingers. Question for Mr. Olliff. Do we -- have we identified a staff
member that could be a liaison?
MR. OLLIFF: No, we haven't. I'll -- I was waiting on some --
there may be a volunteer. There is -- we were going to wait on -- to
see whether the board authorized it or not. And actually it's just a
letter to create -- to request that the state create the task force. I'm
assuming we'll probably have at least 30 days in order to be able to --
to appoint someone. But I'm assuming it's going to have to have
Page 114
April 23, 2002
some environmental background, and so somebody from our natural
resources department is probably going to be who we tap.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I would encourage all commissioners
that could take time to attend the task force meeting to be fully
informed and to maybe offer some guidance along the way.
With that, we'll call the question, unless there's any other
comments. All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
Opposed?
The ayes have it, 4 to 0. Thank you.
Item #9G
BUDGETARY LIMITS NOT TO EXCEED $15,000 FOR
REDISTRICTING PROTESTS AND COUNTY ATTORNEY TO
RETURN TO BCC IF ADDITIONAL FUNDING NEEDED
Commissioner Coyle, I believe we're down here to your item,
20-G (sic), request for the Board of Collier County Commissioners to
reconsider the item for redistrict proposal.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. And by way of some
background, you might recall at the last meeting we were debating
whether we should file suit over the redistricting effort or whether we
should write a letter to the Department of Justice expressing our
concern. The board rejected an opportunity to join the suit with a cap
of $35,000 (sic), and I understand the reason for that, because suits
tend to get much more expensive once you get into them.
I believe the -- the board made the right decision with respect to
pursuing the Department of Justice letter, primarily because there are
Page 115
April 23, 2002
two ways of pursuing this: One is to go through the courts, and there
are lots of people going through the courts challenging this now. We
have a unique circumstance. We are a voting rights state, which
means that the Department of Justice must approve any changes in
our state, unlike Lee County or, as far as I know, any other adjoining
county. So -- so we have a unique opportunity to pursue this issue in
a parallel course to the Department of Justice.
My only concern here is that -- in discussions with -- with the
county attorney, it's my understanding that -- that he doesn't really
intend to spend $30,000 doing this, and that was the cap that we
placed on this -- this effort. And with our current budgetary
constraints, I
-- I would like to make sure that -- that we do this for -- as
inexpensively as we can. And so what I would ask is perhaps if the
county attorney could give us an assessment of what it would take to
get this initial letter of concern to the Justice Department.
And I've been told that it -- it's entirely possible that the Justice
Department might come back and ask for additional substantiation
for our concerns, and at that point we can decide whether or not we
want to spend the money on outside consultants or proceed with it
ourselves. So -- so that's basically where I am. Mr. Weigel, is that a
fair assessment?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, that's just fine. It's fair.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So -- so if we-- if we
agreed that we wouldn't spend the $30,000 unless we actually needed
it for the continuation of this thing, would that be an acceptable
procedure for you?
MR. WEIGEL: Absolutely. The -- when I was asked and gave
a figure of 30,000, it wasn't that I estimated that it would cost us
30,000. But once we file the letter of concern -- which we're going to
Page 116
April 23, 2002
provide relative formality to this letter. It's not just easy
correspondence. We are not submitting a preclearance application as
we typically do for special elections in the county or things of that
nature. But we're probably going to parallel that format to a
significant degree so that the Justice Department, in reviewing the
issues of concern concerning the redistricting that we bring to their
attention, will have a listing and hopefully some background
information of why we have these concerns and providing several
exhibits of why these concerns are one that have come to the
attention of the board and been formalized by the board to -- to
address to the Justice Department.
That will include some thi.ngs which are very easy to
accumulate, such as copies of the newspaper articles, headlines,
editorials, as well as probably some exemplars of lawsuits that have
been filed in the court system. But those lawsuits, just as we
discussed two weeks ago, make allegations which will have to be
supported in court. And for us to merely parrot those allegations of
such things as -- and this is just an easy example -- the digital divide
or some of the other, in some context, relatively new or novel
arguments, will have little merit in the letter and probably stand to
lose, call it, quality review if we cannot provide some significant data
or reasons why we make these assertions.
We want to bring a powerful letter for the Justice Department to
review, and so the figure of 30,000 was just to -- for you, the board,
to adopt, and you did -- was that if it should be required, and only if it
should be required, that we stand behind the very significant and
substantive effort with the Justice Department. I expect that the costs
will be far below that.
But as the reporter asked and I mentioned -- responded to her,
there is the possibility in the process that the Justice Department
Page 117
April 23, 2002
would say after a submittal, "Well, we need to know why you say
this. Is there, in fact, statistical or other demographic information that
supports the claim or issue that you bring?" And that may require --
just may, but I can't say absolutely would require -- some assistance
from some experts or even outside counsel in that respect, or it may
not require that. And as a -- as a trustee of public funds, as all of
your officers are, county manager, county attorney, we take the
obligations of fiscal responsibility very seriously, and we would
obviously do that in this case all the way through.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Is there -- is there any
reason we should have an authorization of $30,000?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I -- I don't have -- if it takes significant
funding, I don't have the money in my budget to do so. And so the
authorization that you gave is, in essence, an authorization to amend
the county attorney office budget to -- to undertake and pay off the
costs that may -- that might be required for this new and unbudgeted
effort. If you wish to reduce it, it's fine. I would expect that if needs
be, based on our two-week meeting schedule, board meeting
schedule, we could come back to you and tell you where we are at
any point in time if we had an additional need, if you were to reduce
it, even significantly, at this point in time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. That's what I would prefer
because I think we need to assess that case as it goes forward and --
and not, again, get drawn into an expensive legal battle which we
might decide at that time we cannot win. But, in any event, that's the
reason I brought it up, just to clarify that we weren't really going to
spend $30,000 on this thing. And if-- if the board would be
interested in -- in reducing that amount, I would suggest $15,000 with
the county attorney coming back to us for any expenditure exceeding
that. Would that seem reasonable?
Page 118
April 23, 2002
MR. WEIGEL: I think that's perfectly fine, and I appreciate the
clarity.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion from
Commissioner Coyle. Do we have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a second from
Commissioner Fiala. Any other discussion?
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, we have three speakers.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We do. Okay. Fine.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Chuck Mohlke. He will be
followed by Laurel Paster.
MR. MOHLKE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Chuck Mohlke. I appear here at the direction of a
group that I chair, the Democratic Executive Committee. The
purpose of my being here is not to argue or reargue the merits, that I
think the discussion that you are having now and the contemplated
motion is entirely suited to the occasion. But I do have a concern,
and the concern is derived from e-mail correspondence that I've
become aware of that has been plentiful in recent days, I understand
from talking to commissioners. And I think there are some
assumptions built into the very professional responses by
commissioners and staff that may require some clarification.
Mr. Chairman, if I may, toward the conclusion of my remarks,
make an inquiry of the county attorney, I would appreciate that
opportunity.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You may. Thank you for asking.
MR. MOHLKE: Thank you. Without identifying the source,
because I think that's entirely irrelevant to this discussion, I would
like to quote from a recent e-mail that expresses my concern nicely.
And the quote is as follows: On Tuesday April 9th, 2002, the Board
Page 119
April 23, 2002
of County Commissioners voted unanimously to direct our county
attorney, Mr. David Weigel, to represent the board through the
Department of Justice with a budget of $30,000 to address the
redistricting issue. This department-- I place emphasis on that-- this
department has the final say on redistricting, and we felt it best to go
directly to the decision-makers.
That depends, members of the board. That depends. And the
reason I make that point is that 10 years ago, 1992, when a citizen of
Collier County joined others under what is normally known as the
DeGrande (phonetic) suit and retired Federal Judge Clyde Atkins
decided that there was sufficient merit to the suit to direct a special
master to make recommendations regarding the remapping of
congressional districts, the special master did that. The judge
accepted that. That does not require Justice Department review.
And my concern is that if the board pursues only the avenue of
the Justice Department, that it may not have available to a three-judge
Federal Court panel the information that you desire be reviewed and
understood as the Court makes decisions regarding the pursuit of new
district mapping. Does that suggest that you alter the approach that
you're discussing now? Probably not. Now, there will be others here
this afternoon who have contacted me who may express somewhat
different views on this, and I think you ought to hear those.
But I would hope that-- to use language familiar to attorneys
present -- that perhaps, perhaps, an amicus brief, as a friend of the
court, could be filed in a manner thought suitable by your county
attorney and by members the board to be sure that those issues that
are of primary concern to local citizens and to this board and your
colleagues in our municipalities and other jurisdictions that will be
potentially affected by this redistricting decision, then have the
benefit of knowing that what I know will be a very professional, very
Page 120
April 23, 2002
thorough, far-reaching analysis of this issue by the county attorney
staff that will be submitted, as appropriate, to the Justice Department,
that that also have the potential for being included in the docket
available to a three-judge federal panel as they give consideration to
this issue.
Now, if I may, do I, Mr. Weigel, understand properly the
circumstances that prevailed back in 1992, and do you feel that there
is an absolute assurance that whatever you submit to the Justice
Department for consideration will be provided in the venue that the
three-judge panel will create to discuss the merits of the litigation that
will likely be before them? Incidentally, the, quote, drop-dead date
for that is this Friday, I believe.
MR. WEIGEL: No. I can't -- can't state with assurance that
what we submit to the Department of Justice would absolutely be
before a three-judge panel. But I would like to comment a little
further at the appropriate moment in regard to the concept of an
amicus brief to the -- to the Court.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Fine.
Now must be appropriate.
I didn't want to get in the way of
any further discussion at this moment from Mr. Mohlke. But, once
again, an amicus brief is a brief to the Court on the action that is
before the Court. It's not -- it's not that we create -- we, Collier
County, would be creating our own issues for the Court, but we are
taking the lawsuit or the matter that's under review and responding to
it -- to those issues that are formally before the Court.
Now, I don't know exactly what issues will be before that court
or the three-judge panel; no difference at this point in time. But,
again, if we go that route, either as an alternative -- which I don't
think I would recommend -- or as an additional route, that's going to
take additional resources. And I mentioned to you two weeks ago
Page 121
April 23, 2002
that our county attorney litigation staff are up to their head and
shoulders right now in our own county litigation. And we treat all
court matters, particularly these type things -- particularly these type
things that affect not just dollars and cents of a individual lawsuit, but
the whole county, in a, you know, highly respected way. And I'd
probably have to tell you that we would want some outside
assistance.
And, again, we knew two weeks ago the deadlines were short in
regard to Federal Court action. To contemplate -- if this is required
to file something by this Friday, it's not going to be that much of a --
the brief we file isn't going to be that much of a friend to the Court, I
don't think, at this point in time, but there may be some additional
discussion on that here.
MR. MOHLKE: Mr. Chairman, if I could just for a moment
respond to that, that was an expected and professional response. The
only concern that remains with me is that your very professional
county attorney staff have the board's understanding that at some
point in time they may wish to consult with you, once we know what
the environment is after Friday when final litigation is filed, so that
the board would be open to any recommendation that the county
attorney may make and that those who may, for whatever reason, be
involved as a party to any of the litigation that may be filed or the
interventions that may be filed or any other amicus brief, be available
to you for discussion and consultation with county attorney staff.
That's -- really, the substance of the request is -- is to feel that
the board is open to these considerations and that if a three-judge
panel is, indeed, involved, the very fine professional work that I
know the county attorney's office will do would be sought by the
three-judge panel as a resource or made available to them under
whatever circumstances. Because I don't have the legal skills to
Page 122
April 23, 2002
know the protocols involved here, I'll leave that entirely in the hands
of the competent professionals that you employ.
That concludes my remarks. I just wanted to be on the record to
be sure that there was a discussion of this item and that the board will
deal with that and decide as it sees fit. Thank you for your
consideration.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, your next speaker is Laurel
Paster, and she will be followed by Kathryn Shug.
MS. PASTER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm really
glad that you decided to revisit this issue because I am a taxpayer and
a resident of Collier County who is very upset by the legislative
redistricting that has taken place, very upset. I think we were shafted.
Let's put it that way. And I'm not alone. I think there are all these
people who have attended the bipartisan meetings that Chuck Mohlke
and that Mike Carr and their task force held all throughout the
county. I'm sure they have done as many as 50 meetings. I may be
wrong on that, but anyway, it's close to that. There were also
legislative hearings that many of us attended and spoke at, and we
were really ignored, totally ignored. The wishes of Collier County
just went down the tube because everybody was unanimous, as was
your commission, in supporting this by resolutions.
And then two weeks ago I came, and I thought, my God, they're
not looking after Collier County either. Certainly the legislators
didn't. I know Mike and Chuck did. I know the League of Women
Voters did. I know Common Cause did. And then you guys sat there
-- you voted a hundred thousand dollars for a concert for one night,
but this thing that's going to last ten years you couldn't put up
$75,000 that the county attorney said would be needed to institute the
lawsuit.
Page 123
April 23, 2002
And I thought to myself, hey, you have talked about being
fiscally responsible and taking care of the taxpayers' money. I'm
right with you. I like frugality, and I like saving money so we can
spend it where it needs to be spent. And I believe that we need to
spend that money right here in a lawsuit because, for one thing, if the
Justice Department says, "Hey, you know, it's fine the way it is" -- or
no. Suppose they say, "It's not fine the way it is." They're going to
send it back to that legislature, which has openly disregarded any
kinds of wishes that we ever had; whereas if it goes to the Federal
Court, they can make a decision and redraw the lines as they did, I
believe, ten years ago, which is a vast difference.
And I think that we need to stand up and say, "Hey, we are not
going to take this kind of stuff," and that's what I want you guys to
do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may --
MS. PASTER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- you got to remember when we
were voting on this, at that point in time the lines were quite a bit
different than were settled on. What exactly do you have a problem
with, the representative seat, the senate seat, or the congressional
seat?
MS. PASTER: The representative seat, the U.S. Representative
seat.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The state representative seat.
MS. PASTER: No. U.S.--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You have the one -- trouble with the
one on the coast that ties us in with Lee County?
MS. PASTER: That ties us -- ties Collier County in with
Miami.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. That's the one that's on the --
Page 124
April 23, 2002
that's the eastern part there.
MS. PASTER: The eastern part of Collier County being tied --
actually, I have trouble with the whole bit.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I'll tell you what I had trouble
with is I can identify -- I represent District 5, and I personally like the
way we got it set up now, and I'll tell you why. I can identify better
with other rural districts than I can with the coastal Lee and Collier
County and -- Lee and Collier County. I feel that our representation
needs to be more of a rural-type of district. And that's what we're
picking up is the rural part, not the coastal part of the west coast.
We're picking up the rural part of the -- of Dade County, which fits in
exactly to the rural part of Collier County and Hendry County.
MS. PASTER: But it seems to me that the people who are in the
rural part of Collier County that testified at the hearings, at the
legislative hearings, said they wanted to be with Collier.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: They are.
MS. PASTER: No, they're not.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: In any case, I'm not going to argue
with you.
MS. PASTER: Okay. I don't want to argue with you either.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But, I mean, everybody has a
difference of opinion. When I went up to Tallahassee, two different
occasions, I seen the hundreds and hundreds of maps that were out
there. Everybody had at least one map and in some cases five or six
of the same thing. To try to reach a middle ground for everything, I
think they did a remarkable job, our representatives, and I commend
them for what they did. And I think we got tremendous
representation not only at the state level, but at the federal level too. I
don't see where we're going to go wrong.
You can only divide this pie up so many ways before you can't
Page 125
April 23, 2002
do it anymore. You can forget the numbers and try to dump
everybody together and say, "Okay. Collier County is by itself," but
we're not getting fair representation by the numbers that live within
the county. They exceed the minimum -- the maximum amount for
the number of people. So there's got to be some bleed over one way
or the other.
MS. PASTER: Okay. They had-- both the nonpartisan task
force and the League of Women Voters and Common Cause
submitted maps to the legislature that kept Collier intact and had
almost all of Lee County, which is contiguous, with it. The only part
that was left out was Lehigh Acres, but the other two counties were
together. So I don't see, you know, how dividing it up -- and Lee
County --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But, I mean, to say that they don't
care is totally wrong. I feel very comfortable with the maps. My
biggest concern at this point in time is that they're going to do
something to lessen our representative and senate position to the
point where when we go back and this thing is brought up, that we're
going to lose the ground that we gained on the state part of the
representation. And that could very possibly be, because I assure you
just as soon as we gain something on our end, somebody else at the
other end loses it, and they're going to be fighting for the same thing.
Right at this point in time, I -- as a representative for District 5,
which is the rural part of Collier County, I am very happy with what
they got for a map and the representative that I see -- the possible
person to be able to run for this position I think would be able to
represent Collier County very well. He's done a good job with
Immokalee when he's been -- when he was in the state legislative
body. So, I -- I mean, don't think that we're totally ignoring you.
We're not. We're trying to weigh everything as it comes down.
Page 126
April 23, 2002
And now I got a chance to get my opinion, just like you did, and
I do appreciate your time. So, I mean, I did take your time. So if you
want to take another minute or so, please do.
MS. PASTER: Well, I just -- I just feel that -- well, if I'm not
going to bar any holds, it seems to me that the people who are pulling
the strings here are the state Republican party. Yeah, because look at
-- they all along were saying that they wanted seats -- they wanted
people from -- from Collier to be drawn over to the east coast
because they needed -- they wanted more Republicans other there.
That's one thing.
The next thing was a letter that came to you guys from Cardenas
(phonetic) and saying that it would be, what was it, an embarrassment
to the Republican Party? Something like that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: But I think at that point in time we
made it perfectly clear that that did not weigh on our decision. But if
you think otherwise, that's your opinion. But it did not weigh on
mine.
MS. PASTER: Well, anyway, it seems to me that the state
Republican Party's been calling more of the shots. And I want to
know -- you guys are representing Collier County, and I want to see
you doing it. I want to see you stand up for this county.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have. I've made two trips to
Tallahassee to make sure that some of these maps were amended to
be able to fit some of our needs.
MS. PASTER: I'm talking about a lawsuit, and I'm talking --
you don't want the lawsuit. Okay. I'm talking about the Justice
Department and the lawsuit, and you guys need to be funding that
stuff. That's where I want my taxpayer money to go, and I know
that's where loads of people want it to go, because a lot of people are
hopping mad about this. Just what do you think that Mr. Diaz-
Page 127
April 23, 2002
Ballard (phonetic) is going to be thinking about? Is he going to be
thinking about us over here on this little hunk, or is he going to be
thinking mostly about Miami-Dade?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, you're getting into an area that
I will not enter discussion with. MS. PASTER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I don't represent him. I
represent myself. I gave you the logic behind my own thinking.
MS. PASTER: All right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I know you don't agree with it,
and that's fine, but I figured I owe that to you. MS. PASTER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And is there any other questions on
this matter? Mr. Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I agree. I don't like the maps
either. I think it's a lot better than what was first proposed, but I do
want to comment on the state party representative A1 Camas's
(phonetic) note to the board of commissioners. The board of
commissioners are -- get a recommendation or a nomination from the
local Republican party, not the state party. So Mike Carr has -- if
anybody, has more say so. We would take his comments in --
favorable over the state party. But my vote is looking at, can we
win? Are we spending the taxpayers' money properly? And what
our senator has said, and many others looking at Collier and Lee and
how many people live in it, we can't have a continuous representation
from one congressional member.
I would hope that we would not lose any ground. And if we can
spend the least amount of money and accomplish -- and keeping
Collier and Lee together as much as possible, I'm in favor of that.
But, you know, we have to look under the -- for the taxpayers'
Page 128
April 23, 2002
money.
MS. PASTER: Well, let me put it just this way: I think that we
have to try every avenue possible. And to me it-- and we have to
stand up for this county because nobody else is. And, you know, you
guys are elected here. And you didn't even -- I mean, it didn't seem
to me as though you paid much attention to Mike Carr when he said
putting the money into the lawsuit would be a better use of that
money than putting it into the Justice Department fund. So all I'm
saying is, A, stand up for us; and, B, take -- we need to take every
avenue that we can because this is going to be for ten years. And -- I
lost my thought. Well, anyway, I want us to take every avenue we
can. Okay?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We do appreciate your comments
very much. Thank you for coming today. The next speaker.
MS. FILSON: The final speaker is Kathryn Shug.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Good afternoon.
MS. SHUG: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I want to thank
you for putting this on your docket today. I did write a letter about a
-- faxed a letter to my representative, Donna Fiala, asking you to,
along with probably many other people. As I see it - I've only lived
in Collier County for about seven years, and so I'm kind of new at all
of the rules and regulations here. But, as you know, Collier County is
the fastest growing county in probably the world and, what they're
saying, in the United States one of the fastest. So our population is
just -- just exploding.
I live on Marco Island. In just the last four years, each year
they've built at least four or five hundred new homes and -- plus
several more very, very high-rise condominiums. It is -- and they're
not stopping. It's still going on. And it's the same thing in Naples.
So what I feel is that through this redistricting for the next ten years
Page 129
April 23, 2002
I'm probably going to lose my representation as a resident of Collier
County, whereas before I did have representation. And certainly
Collier County is big enough and will be big enough in the near
future to have its own representation.
This is -- I agree with your former speakers, and I do believe
that you should try every avenue and you should try and find money
to stand up for Collier County because this is a long-term, major
change. And I just hope that you will do that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much. Let's see.
Where were--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, I thought that
the coast is going to be represented by Porter Goss, that district.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Marco Island included, and
there's only going to be Golden Gate, District 5, and Lely, parts of
Lely that are going to be represented by this new congressional seat.
Is that how everybody else remembers the map, the last map?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I wish we had an example of it to put
on the viewer, but we don't. Or do we?
MR. WEIGEL: We may. We may. One moment.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Be careful, now, because there's
been a lot of counterfeits out there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, if I may, I -- I
would hope that we wouldn't lose opportunities through this avenue
through the Justice Department. And I feel a little bit uncomfortable
reducing the amount knowing that our legal staff is not going to
spend it unless it is necessary, and that's my concern about the action
that we're going to take today. If Mr. Weigel can help me out with
feeling comfortable with the motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry. Go ahead.
Page 130
April 23, 2002
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. Well, whether it's 30,000 or
15,000, those kinds of funds won't be spent exceedingly quickly, and
so if-- if I felt and could foresee that the expenditures were going to
run beyond that, then I'd come back to the board at the very next
meeting, even as an add-on agenda item-- although I'd obviously
always like to give as much forewarning and notice as possible
through a regular agenda item. But I'd make a point to come to the
board to indicate where we are and what I forecast that we would
additionally need for the professional expenses that we night need to
provide demographics, statistical information to back up issues and
claims that we have -- would have taken to the Justice Department.
So I don't -- I don't feel unhappy or any other negative word
about reducing it to 15,000 today as far as that goes. It seems to me
that when we talked about it two weeks ago, the idea of 30,000 was
hazarding a figure to indicate the good-faith effort that this board was
endorsing the county attorney to do. And by changing the figure, call
it a review figure, to 15,000 doesn't change the good-faith,
professional effort that we're going to provide.
And, as I mentioned earlier, even before Mr. Mohlke discussed
the three-judge panel, we will have and, in fact, will almost assuredly
be adding to our submittal in the dialogue we expect to have with the
Justice Department. And if there is significant information or briefs
that go before the three-judge panel or before the Florida Supreme
Court, which is occurring right now, we will include those as
additional material to the Justice Department so that they'll -- they
may well ask questions of us, which is fine.
But we're monitoring on the -- on the Web right now what's
going on with the Supreme Court and bringing back the -- the briefs
that have been filed, both by protesters against the redistricting that
has been approved by -- by the legislature, but we also now have the
Page 131
April 23, 2002
legislature's response as to the efficacy, the appropriateness of what
they believe they have done. So we think we -- we're right in the
thick of it as far as staying on top of it. And whether it's 15,000 or
30,000, we'll be keeping you apprised both from a fiscal-need
standpoint and where we are at any point in time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle first, then
Commissioner -- COMMISSIONER COYLE:
why I brought this issue back up.
I would just like to -- to clarify
I think we've talked about a lot of
things that don't particularly pertain to that, but that -- that's important
also. At -- at our meeting two weeks ago, I had suggested that we
establish a budget of $35,000 to file a lawsuit, and -- and the board
did not feel that -- that that was appropriate. And instead we said
we'd spend $30,000 to find a -- send a letter to the Justice
Department.
Now, in many people's mind, it is confusing why we would not
spend the extra $5,000 to get in on the lawsuit, and that's exactly
what I'm trying to -- to clarify here, is that it's not going to take
$30,000 to do the -- the letter of concern to the Justice Department.
And by suggesting a reduction in that amount of money, I am not
suggesting that we make a halfhearted effort. I think we should -- we
should proceed. Two weeks ago I would have been in favor of
spending $35,000 to get into the lawsuit. It, in my mind, is probably
too late to do that now. We have two more days, and I'm not sure
you can put together a credible lawsuit at that -- in that time.
But that's the reason I brought it back, because there were two
avenues to go: One was expensive, fairly expensive, and one is really
simple, comparatively simple. But yet we allocated almost the same
amount of money for both, and I think it leads people to believe that
Page 132
April 23, 2002
we'll spend money -- the same amount of money for the letter of
concern to the Justice Department as we would spend on the lawsuit,
and they wonder why we didn't just proceed with the lawsuit. And
that's the reason I'm bringing this up.
MR. WEIGEL: That's fine. And, Mr. Chairman, and, Mr.
Coyle, if I might add another thought on this, and that is I think that's
a fine clarification, not that you're asking for anything like that from
me. But additionally, two weeks ago at that meeting I talked in terms
of asking you for 75,000 for a lawsuit, and that was based on
discussion with expert outside counsel. State Senator Saunders had
indicated that he thought it would be 250,000 or more. So there are
different thoughts as to the kind of needs that would be in a credible
lawsuit. And so the 30,000 that I hazarded as just an approval to go
up to if absolutely necessary was only to show that in taking the route
of working with the Justice Department, that it was to be a fully
credible attempt with them and nothing less.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Thank you. The figures there
that -- up to the 250,000 were some of those that really concerned me
as well, especially when I figured that was going to be done in the
courts, whereas we could tackle this thing right in the Justice
Department and then to the three-judge panel. I figured hit it where it
hits the hardest, fight all the way to the winning circle, and that's
where we should go. But we have to make sure that we give him
enough money. Now, he says 15,000 is enough to start him off, but if
he needs more, I'm willing to step up to the plate and do that.
Especially if we're on our way to the winning circle, we have to make
sure to give him enough -- enough -- enough credit -- enough money
to get to the -- the final winning spot.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, thank you, Commissioner. Fifteen
Page 133
April 23, 2002
thousand will work out just fine. You may recall about a year and a
half ago, Ms. Student was to be involved in a mission with the state,
and you gave us $10,000, which we didn't have in our budget because
this was in -- she was afforded an honor to participate on behalf of
the county as an expert with the state. And I told you then that if in
any -- through any circumstance we did not participate, did not go
forward, then we wouldn't spend a penny of that. And, as it turned
out, the program changed, and we didn't spend a penny, and it didn't
become part of my general budget or go for any other types of things.
We -- you know, we look at these things in a very segregated
way, and I would promise you that whether it's 15,000 or 30,000, we
have the same kind of segregated review process on this type of
specialized funding. And the 15,000 is -- that's fine. That's a
wonderful assurance, and we may not even spend that. But at the
same time, I think with the periodic board meetings that you have,
my gosh, just two weeks apart, sometimes less, I can always get back
to you and inform you at a public board meeting of any problems that
I may see fiscal-wise down the road, as well as the fact that I can
send you a memo telling you that too. And I would certainly do that
in as prompt a way as I could.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one last thing I wanted to
mention to you. Thank you. Although I -- I understand where you're
coming as far as your support for District 5, I must tell you that the
people in Old Lely, Lely Resort, Marco Island, they really don't feel
that they're rural. I don't feel that they're rural. And so I can
understand them wanting to be included in the coastal area because
they're part of that area. So I just wanted to make -- state that on the
record.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. We have on the visualizer the districts
that were approved as well as an enlarged copy of what
Page 134
April 23, 2002
commissioners have before them, which is, I believe, identical.
Would you go back and get the very southern part of the state on
down to the Keys? You can see the bottom area hopefully. No.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: This map may help you for more
detail. Oh, I see. You do have it blown up quite a bit.
MR. DURHAM: I have a more detailed one, sir, if you'd like to
look at it.
MR. WEIGEL: And, by the way, this is my assistant, Tim
Durham, who's been working with us on this project and with Mr.
Carr and Mr. Mohlke. And I want to make clear for the record, for
the viewing public as well as the audience, Tim and Commissioners,
our county district as it shows here, the colors are a little indistinct on
my visualizer here. But I think you can tell that the coastal Miami
area -- the coastal Miami area down the Keys to the bottom to Key
West is, in fact, a different district than the gray or grayish-blue color
of Collier and part of Miami-Dade; is that correct? MR. DURHAM: Yes, sir.
MR. WEIGEL: It's too bad they didn't make it red or a more
striking color distinction or contrast but-- there we go. I think it's
pretty clear. Yeah. With your pen you can show -- those are district
lines. And where he's showing there, the bottom part is a separate
district from the Collier County/Miami-Dade congressional district to
answer any question of the board or the public that, in fact, the Key
West area and a majority of Monroe County has been made a part of
this congressional district, and that is not the case.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No, not at all. There's a lot of
confusion because of all the prior existing maps. As it is now, Porter
Goss's district still remains the coastal area of Collier County,
including Marco Island.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It looks like--
Page 135
April 23, 2002
MR. WEIGEL: Thanks, Tom.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And that's the part that -- the rural
part -- the only part that may be a problem, I know for Commissioner
Fiala, would be Lely Resort. There is a dip in there, and they pick up
part of Lely Resort. But for the most, part it's rural versus rural.
We're not talking about the west coast of Florida being part of that
district. It's a rural district total.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, could I make a
motion, please? I -- I would like to move that we continue with our
letter of concern to the Justice Department with the understanding
that the attorney -- county attorney will come back to the commission
if he expects that the cost will exceed $15,000 and that we keep our
options open, as Mr. Mohlke has requested, with respect -- with
respect to pursuing any other opportunities as they appear during this
process.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The only problem I got is exactly
what are we trying to define as an acceptable district? That I want to
know now before I commit any money to what we're talking about.
I'm concerned about losing ground for what's already been put
together. I'm very concerned about it. If we're going to reconfigure
the district to try to include the rural Collier County with coastal
Collier County, I'm not that excited to support it. Forgive me, but I'm
not.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I can understand because--
but you -- you have to recognize that right now we're involved in that
process. We have already gotten a board motion to proceed with the
letter of concern to the Justice Department. And we either have to
withdraw that, or we have to proceed with it. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that's -- that's the issue I'm
Page 136
April 23, 2002
addressing right now. So if-- if you don't wish to proceed with it,
then somebody has to make a motion to terminate the -- the letter of
concern to the Justice Department.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I just interrupt everything? I
think we already had a motion on the floor and a second, so you
might want to withdraw that motion and second before we move on
to the new motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. What was the --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, you might want to wait on that
a second because I've got something else I wanted to say about what
we're looking at. Once more, what I was trying to protect is the
integrity of the maps that exist at this point in time. I'd hate to wake
up some morning and find out that this has changed and now Collier
County -- the rural section of Collier County is part of Miami itself,
right to the west coast. Totally unacceptable; can't live with that.
That -- that would be something I'd be very upset with.
I'm not too sure where we're going with it, but we do agree on
one thing. Do we agree on the representative seat being intact the
way it is, the new one, 101 ? Do we believe that the senate seat, the
new state senate seat, meets our needs?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So those aren't issues that we -- the
only thing we'd want to do there is protect the integrity of them.
Then it boils down to, do we feel that Porter Goss's district meets the
needs of Collier County?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So that's not an issue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Other than Lely Resort. Excuse
me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. That's fine. So we're down to
Page 137
April 23, 2002
the one issue, which is eastern Collier County merged with western
Miami-Dade, two rural districts that don't have their coastlines
included in it. That's the one issue I guess we got left to work
through. Commissioner Henning, what do you see?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we got Golden Gate City
into the new district too.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We do. And we got part of Lely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So that's not rural.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I mean, we would welcome
you with--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We got just as many residents
in Golden Gate City as we do in Immokalee.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, like I say, there's going to be
disagreement no matter what the final product is that comes out. If
you'd like to see that part be included in with Porter Goss's district,
I'd have no problem with it, you know, Golden Gate City and Lely,
because I agree with you; they're not rural. And I would -- I can
support that. But let's get down to what we actually want to try to
accomplish here before we spend any money.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's a good question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And -- and I think the only
thing that has changed from last -- from the previous meeting to this
meeting is how much we're going to spend initially.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we never did--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's going from 30,000 to
15,000.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We were kind of neglectful in never
defining exactly what we -- our mission was. We were sending Mr.
Weigel on a mission that was kind of blinded, in other words, to meet
the people out there that were having a problem with what it was. He
Page 138
April 23, 2002
was going to go there and defend what? Now we got to clarify that.
What do you -- what were you going to defend, sir?
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. What we would be talking with the
Justice Department about is the fact that we think that there are
minority voting rights that have been improperly diluted, have been
lost, in this redistricting process. And, as I mentioned two weeks
ago, wants and needs are not the same as findings of illegality in the
redistricting process. And so that's just something to keep in mind,
because we will probably clearly be talking about wants and needs.
But we'll also -- it will be incumbent upon us to point out what we
think is illegal in what has been done with a review of the statistical
and other bases that the legislature took its action.
Now, preclearance with the Justice Department does not mean
that if the Justice Department says, "No, we don't preclear the new
congressional districts" -- and they draw a new one. All they do is
say, "It doesn't meet the federal Voting Rights Act requirements
imposed upon Collier County," and it sends the matter back to the
legislature to redraw the lines. That's the logical conclusion of a
finding of nonpreclearance by the -- by the Justice Department.
To try to answer the questions that are sort of bubbling up here
in regard to Lely -- or Lely Resort and Golden Gate City, if there is to
be an argument that they should be included in a redistricting attempt,
what our argument really is to the Justice Department is that they are
improperly included in the districts created now. And we would have
to show, based on racial, ethnic, other minority voting rights reasons,
why they are illegally included as they are right now.
And some of those buzz words that we talked about, again, two
weeks ago and before were contiguity, compactness, communities of
interest, where we can look and, in part, where neighborhoods or
communities have been divided by this new district creation. Those
Page 139
April 23, 2002
are the elements that we would -- will be discussing and arguing and
hopefully having some backup information to the Justice Department
to review. If they say, "Yes, you're right. The standard for-- for the
redistricting does not meet the minority voting standards of the
federal Voting Rights Act," it puts a halt to the redistricting, and it
gets sent back to the legislature.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What he just said was what?
MR. WEIGEL: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. I understood what you said, but
now what exactly are we going to try to accomplish?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, as you've noted, the laws of physics apply
to redistricting. For every action there will be an equal and opposite
reaction based upon these communities of interest and the population
maximums that can be in any particular district, and I think 639,000,
approximately, is the figure we talk about. So if we add people to our
district right now, they'll have to be removed from the district
somewhere else. So other counties will be affected.
A question that I cafft answer for you now, but it's a question
that I will need to attempt to learn more about, is if we file something
with the Justice Department on behalf of Collier County, will other
interests that are adverse to a change in these newly formed districts
file something with the Justice Department saying, "No. Collier
County's attorney is wrong, and they should be left just the way they
are"? And I don't know if that kind of dialogue will exist or not. It
certainly hasn't existed in the preclearance issues we've had up until
now, but they've been purely internal county election issues. We've
never had election issues, voting issues, involving cross counties,
which -- which this does for the first time, obviously.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But what I understood we were
Page 140
April 23, 2002
doing, and this is what I voted for, was we were asking you,
representing our best interests, to say to the Justice Department,
"Take hold of this thing. You don't have any political -- political
reason for looking at this in any way but what is fair, what is best
communities of interest, what is the right thing to do." They have no
political gain in this whatsoever. And we're asking them to take hold
of this situation and -- and decide for us what the correct thing is to
do. Isn't that where we're going?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, pretty much so. They've got it, whether
we come to them or not. It's -- because Collier County is one of the
five covered jurisdictions, this county will be reviewed by the Justice
Department whether we file something or whether we file nothing.
But we will help alert them of the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Our concerns.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, concerns and the areas of review where
we hope that they will pay particular attention, and that will include a
discussion of where communities may have been divided and if we
find what we think is an improper, perhaps illegal, dilution of
minority voting rights. And, again, the issues are perhaps a little bit
novel here in 2002 where it has been raised in other suits filed in
court already that the Hispanic ethnic population of Collier County is
-- is significantly different, possibly legally recognizably different,
than the Hispanic population of the Miami-Dade area. And there
may be, certainly, credence to that.
And that's something that we're going to be looking at very
closely, looking at the briefs that are filed and seeing if it's something
that, on behalf of the county and the citizens of the county, we would
want to bring into our discussion with the Justice Department. If we
think that there's a bogus issue that some other lawsuit has already
raised, I would exercise my, call it, prosecutorial discretion not to
Page 141
April 23, 2002
raise it to the Justice Department. I want a fully credible dialogue
initiated with the Justice Department and not fire the blender bus and
shoot every issue whatsoever with very little backing just to try to get
them to say no. And they might ultimately say yes regardless of what
we file, and that's, of course -- but we'll have been in the process and
fought the good fight.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The good fight to win --
MR. WEIGEL: What?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- what? Yes. That's exactly it.
We're fondering (sic) here, fellows, ladies and gentlemen. We're
talking about -- okay. Let's -- let's give directions that we can agree
on. The state seats, we got no problem with that. We want to try to
maintain the structure; correct?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That would be marching orders for
Mr. Weigel, to protect the integrity of that; correct?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: As far as I'm concerned.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Then let's go to the
congressional district, Porter Goss's district.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's okay.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Maybe not.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, not for me. I think the reason
they -- they dipped in-- they didn't only dip into Lely Resort, what
they were actually doing was going for the minority vote in Naples
Manor, so they were going back to Naples Manor to get the Hispanic
vote from that area. But I -- I don't think that that should be
considered rural at all.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No.
something that they're --
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
Other factors. Hispanic vote is
Yeah. But you have to go through
Page 142
April 23, 2002
Lely Resort, which isn't Hispanic and which relates more to the coast.
I realize that we can't help them to redraw the lines, but I do -- you
know, maybe the Justice Department would come in and say, "Now,
this doesn't fit into this scheme of things because this is not rural at
all," and they would want to rethink that. And that's -- I just want
them to have the ability to -- to look at it fairly and -- and draw those
lines without being in any way commandeered because of some
political gain.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And how do you feel about Golden
Gate City, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, all of Collier County I
represent, and I would hope that we could keep it -- congressional
seat as much Collier County as possible.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, in other words, you -- in this
case you'd have to cut off the part that you got from Porter Goss to be
able to make a new district.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Pardon me?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You would have to remove the
congressional district for Porter Goss from Collier County if you
wanted to merge it together now to one, plus you'd have to pick up
parts of-- probably parts of Lehigh Acres and parts of Hendry
County. You're talking a whole new map. Now, if that's the way you
want to go, that's no problem. We got -- all we want to do is come up
with some clear-- clear and concise directions for Mr. Weigel so he
knows what he's defending. I myself am totally happy with the way
it is. I can understand -- I wouldn't mind adding, you know, Golden
Gate City and Lely Resort. You'd like to see the map amended if at
all possible so that it's one continuous line from top to bottom. I have
no problem with that. If I could draw the map myself, it would be
Collier the way you see it tied in with Lehigh Acres and Hendry
Page 143
April 23, 2002
County for the western half there. We'd do much better with our own
representative that would be able to relate to the rural area. But I
can't have what I want, obviously.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just have one request. Mr. Olliff,
would you please remind me of this next time I want something
reconsidered?
MR. OLLIFF: Absolutely. I will make it a personal mission.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Coyle, I can't thank you enough,
because I didn't -- until we started this discussion, I realized that we
never gave directions to our county attorney on what he was
supposed to do. We just sent him out there blind to shoot every --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what lawyers are for.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, I think your attorney at least has a
-- a good option for the board to consider, now that we've sort of
talked this one to death.
MR. WEIGEL: If I may make one last comment here, and that
is Mr. Mohlke talked about the three-judge panel, which we're going
to keep you apprised upon. And-- and I understand that it may be
something that we will want to get involved with, and we'll learn
more about -- about the lawsuit aspects and three-judge panel
following Friday.
But, additionally, what you need to know is, of course -- and I
think we've pretty well stated -- is that if the Justice Department says
that it's -- that the districting as enacted is inappropriate, the persons
you'll be talking to about the redrawing of the lines will be the
legislature. And these very discussion items of Lely Resort and
Golden Gate City and whether that little 4 percent of Hendry County
should -- Charlotte County should be included in Mr. Goss's district,
all those things will be fair game at that point.
Page 144
April 23, 2002
And another thing which may be kind of a ray of hope is there
are, I believe, other counties other than ours that have concerns in
court. And so, again, the laws of demo -- if something changes in one
spot, it's probably going to change significantly in many other spots,
too, or potentially significantly. So whether we win or lose alone
may not determine whether we're going to be changed because of a
failure somewhere else in the state.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And if I may, John Norman from
Ralph Arza's office is here, and he would like to address us on this
very same subject. I think we need a third, fourth, or fifth opinion
about now.
MR. NORMAN: My name is John Norman. I've been in
Collier County for a long time. A point that -- that keeps skipping by
us here, we said -- Commissioner Coyle said, How about the house
district? Is that okay with us? House District 101, the new district,
that's okay with you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. NORMAN: Goes into Broward County; right? What
happens when the Broward County people say, "A representative
from Collier County, the west coast, cannot possibly understand
what's going on on the east coast"? And then they file suit to do
away with that phase of it, and the first thing you know, you got
everybody in the state filing a suit. And what's going to happen is
you're going back to the legislature at the next special session which
is set up, I think, two weeks right now, and you're going to go
through the whole thing all over again.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: With the same people, with the
same people making the decisions.
MR. NORMAN: The same people at $40,000 a day, I believe,
to run the special session. So I think you have to look and say, "Is it
Page 145
April 23, 2002
possible that the east coast people could look and say, 'I don't want a
representative from 101 representing me over here. How could that
possibly be?'" And they've got the same complaint that we -- alleged
complaint that we would have.
And one other little thing which almost sounds political, I think
we've got to get over this idea of electing a guy from the west coast
or a guy from the east coast. We better elect a good representative
from wherever he comes and get the best one you can get.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Norman. Well, with
that, I -- I don't want to lose sight of the original motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There were two original motions.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, we have to go with the first
one if we never-- did you drop it or--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I didn't make one.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I thought we did.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
seconded yours.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
You made the first one, and I
The 15,000.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That was the motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right. Do you want to call the
motion?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I hate to ask this, but any other
discussion?
All those in favor indicate by saying --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just want to hear what it is again.
I've forgotten already. There's been so much discussion since then.
Do you mind?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're concerned about the first
motion, which was only the -- only a dollar amount, which is really
Page 146
April 23, 2002
what I started out talking about, was the dollar amount. And that's all
that I -- I moved in the first motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And that's what I seconded. And
so the second motion is not on the floor now. That's the motion we're
voting on.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And I -- I think Mr. Weigel's got
about as clear as -- an idea of what we're looking for as the rest of the
citizens have of what the state legislation body is doing right now.
MR. WEIGEL: I'm pretty clear, I think, because we'll bring the
issues of concern to the Justice Department. They will get in a
dialogue with us about those issues of concern, and they will do what
they will do. And they're going to do what they're going to do even if
we're not involved, but they will have the assistance of us. I think
that it's important that we do be involved with them.
And ultimately if they reject the districts based upon an illeg -- a
finding of illegality under the Voting -- federal Voting Rights Acts,
then the districts will have to be redone by the legislature, and that
will occur whether we have convinced them on our part that the
district lines are inappropriate or if someone else does in some other
forum. But the Justice Department forum is one, to some degree,
unique to Collier County as a player.
And, again, I -- I cannot tell you that as a public agency the
Justice Department will not accept information from other
jurisdictions or citizen groups or political groups. It's part of their
review process. But we know that we can have a very formal
dialogue with them, and I look forward to that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. With that, I call the motion.
All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
Page 147
April 23, 2002
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 4 to 0.
And we're going to take a ten-minute break and give the
receptionist (sic) time to cool her fingers.
COMMISSIONER HENN1NG: Well, how much -- how much
time --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We haven't got much longer, but it's
every hour and a half you need to take a break for the receptionist.
It's agreed upon.
(A break was held.)
Item #9H
COUNTY MANAGER TO AMEND THE IRRIGATION
ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
FOR PEOPLE TO HAND WATER AND TO AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIRMAN TO WRITE A LETTER REQUESTING MARCO
ISLAND, GOLDEN GATE CITY, ORANGE TREE, IMMOKALEE
AND PORT OF THE ISLANDS TO VOLUNTARILY IMPOSE
THE SAME RESTRICTIONS ON THEIR COMMUNITIES-
APPROVED W/CHANGES
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We're moving right along.
The next item would be 9-H, amendment to the irrigation ordinance.
And the reason I brought this back is twofold: One, I had a number
of people express concern over the limited hours for hand-watering,
which I may point out to you is something that uses a low volume of
water. And the hours are so restrictive that somebody that was
employed and might not be able to get home between five and seven
in the evening could lose out on it. And we do allow for people to
Page 148
April 23, 2002
use hoses to wash cars without restrictions, and we do allow them to
use hoses to use pressure washers without restrictions -- well, limited
restrictions.
What I'm proposing is that we open that up so that we also have
it available in the morning for the people to be able to water between
specific hours that will be of the best benefit to the plant and still
keep it from evaporating and being wasted.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, that's only part of it. And I
thank you very much for that, Commissioner Coyle. And the other
part of it is that I'd like authorization from this board to be able to
write a letter asking the other municipalities and utilities that aren't
currently joining us in the water restrictions to do so because we all
share a common aquifer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I would second the motion
with that amendment.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Does staff have any
comments before we go on, and is there anyone to speak on this?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
MR. MATTAUSCH: If I may, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please.
MR. MATTAUSCH: The reason -- I'm sorry. For the record,
Paul Mattausch, director of water department. The reason why we --
we did the hours the way that they are in the ordinance, from five to
seven p.m., was to be consistent with the South Florida Water
Management District's different phases of regulations. All of those
phases include the hours of five to seven p.m. And without that
consistency there, I'm afraid that -- that we're going to cause a lot of
confusion with the -- with the ordinance from what our ordinance
says and then when we move into different phases of emergency
Page 149
April 23, 2002
water orders under the South Florida Water Management District.
There is a -- a means in the ordinance for a person -- if they have
a hardship, if they do have to work and they can't get home until
seven o'clock in the evening, there is a means in the ordinance for
that person to obtain a variance from those hours on an individual
basis. And, in fact, right now I am working with the Collier County
Public School System to obtain a variance, and I'm working with two
private individuals to obtain a variance because they cannot meet
those hours. So there is already an avenue written in the irrigation
ordinance for a person to -- to obtain a variance if it is a hardship
under those -- under the conditions of the ordinance.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, and then I'll go
ahead and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Go ahead. You can go first. I'll
wait.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: If I may. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The -- the problem being is that
we're not talking about one or two individuals, and what we're doing
is we're telling the public out there if you don't have the money or--
to build and get a sprinkler system in with a timer and if you have to
water with a hand-held hose, that you have to be treated differently.
You'll have to come in down to developmental (sic) services -- is that
correct? You can do it over the phone?
MR. MATTAUSCH: We -- I'm working right now -- and, by
the way, the -- the variance is at no cost, and all it takes is a letter to
me directly -- and I'm working -- I'm working with a number of
citizens right now on that -- a letter just stating what the conditions
are, why they need the variance. And -- and we have a very similar
procedure to -- the same variance procedure with South Florida
Page 150
April 23, 2002
Water Management District where the variance can be obtained just
with my authorization.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're not -- we're not talking about a
handgun; we're talking about a hose that a person has to hold in their
hand to be able to water down vegetation on one side of their house
or the other. I tell you, we're not talking about people stretching
hoses and running many lines off them and running them like a
regular irrigation system. I -- I would assume that's what the
definition of hand-watering is.
MR. MATTAUSCH: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And hand-watering by itself uses
very little water to begin with. Am I correct there or am I wrong?
MR. MATTAUSCH: No. That-- that is correct. It doesn't.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And we do allow for the same
watering to take place with a hose without time restrictions for the
cleaning of cars and for pressure washing; is that correct? MR. MATTAUSCH: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Why do we want to make our
citizens out there have to jump through all these hoops to be able to --
just be able to water their vegetation? I don't see what the impact's
going to be as far as being so detrimental it's going to upset the whole
balance of nature. We need to make provisions. If it means we have
to rewrite the ordinance in such a way that it's going to capture this
and if we have to get the Big Cypress Basin to be able to go along
with it and the Southwest (sic) Florida Management -- Water
Management to go along with it, then so be it. We're here to serve
the needs of the public, not to have them serve our needs. That's my
own personal feelings, and I'll defer to the board on -- for the rest of
that.
Commissioner Fiala.
Page 151
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks. I just had a question about
us as a county. I've had a few e-mails from people who mentioned
the water sensors in the medians and that they have found even right
after a rain they go on, or during a rain they're on. And I wanted to
know how we, as a county, were complying with our own restrictions
and making sure that those water sensors are there on all the medians.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know if this has
anything pertaining to the item we're discussing now, Commissioner.
With all due respect, I think that could be handled on a one on one.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: It's a good question. Could you
possibly go ahead and answer it anyways, even though it doesn't --
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Mattausch can't answer that. He's your
water director, and he doesn't deal with your medians. But I can tell
you that we have sensors on all of the medians. And if we ever are
notified by anybody that we've got a sensor problem, just let us
know, and we'll go out, and we'll get it taken care of.
Mr. Chairman, the staff recommendation is the staff
recommendation. We're recommending, for consistency sake, that
the variance process is the way we would prefer to handle additional
hand-watering opportunities for people. But you've got a motion on
the floor, and whatever it is the board wants to do we'll do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to remove my second
now that I have more knowledge of the process of what can be done
for citizens for hand-watering.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. But the first was by
Commissioner Fiala, was it? I'm trying to remember who made the --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Me.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I'll make the second because I still
Page 152
April 23, 2002
think that we're here to serve the needs of the public, not the other
way around.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And can you state the motion once
again?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I -- I'm not sure. I need to
understand.
Can -- can they actually call in and get a variance?
MR. OLLIFF: It -- it requires a written letter. There is no fee.
And -- and we think that the -- the actual individuals who need to
have an opportunity to water outside of 5 to 7 p.m. Are, frankly,
going to be those people who are working during that period of time,
and that's probably a very limited number of individuals. We are
trying to make this process as simple as we can. But we think in
order to be consistent with every other utility that's got these
restrictions in place, that consistency is more important than trying to
provide additional windows for people outside of a variance process.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, this doesn't mean they have
to write a letter every time they want to do this; they can write a
single letter and get a variance for doing this for an entire year?
MR. MATTAUSCH: Actually, for the duration of the
ordinance, until conditions would otherwise change.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then I don't consider that to be
too onerous.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, let me throw another one at -- let's
say I don't have a sprinkler system. I think Commissioner Coletta
brought this up. I don't have a sprinkler system, and I remember one
house I didn't when I was in Florida. And I did that for about a year,
moving hoses around, and I said, "I had enough." But let's say we
have some folks that have a yard, and they have to move hoses
around in order to do the sprinkler issues. They would go to Paul
Page 153
April 23, 2002
Mattausch and ask for a variance so that they could do that during
their wake evening hours instead of after midnight in order to get that
done.
And Paul would know that, and they would have a variance.
And so if somebody called up to complain that -- that Mr. Smith was
watering outside of the irrigation ordinance, Mr. Mattausch could
say, "Roger out. I have a variance for that particular thing, and it's
logged" and let the constituent know that, indeed, it was a variance so
you could solve that problem.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I was just going to make one point,
though. We just got through discussing a few minutes ago that this
covers hand-watering with a hose in your hand and a nozzle on it, not
on running sprinklers throughout the yard. I assume that that would
come under the regular sprinkler ordinance.
MR. MUDD: It comes in -- Commissioner, it comes into that
variance issue that-- that Paul talked about. It could be hand-
watering, or it could be hoses on a sprinkler system where they want
to come outside of the hours that -- that have been designated by the
ordinance so that they could come and get that variance. I'm just
trying to do it for the record for the audience out there so that they'll
know. The ordinance wasn't to mandate somebody to get an in-
ground sprinkler system on a timer. It does have -- it does have the
flexibility to go to the water director to try to get a variance in order
to -- in order to continue their life as they know it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't believe the ordinance says
that. It also allows for low-volume hand-watering from 5 p.m. to 7
p.m. On the same days that irrigation is allowed. It doesn't say
anything about being able to run sprinkler-- it says hand-watering.
Hand-watering is where you hold the instrument in your hand to be
able to put the water on the plants. Now, maybe I'm
Page 154
April 23, 2002
misunderstanding something here. I'm sure there's ways we can work
around this, but let's know what we're talking about first. It's not
clear here.
MR. MATTAUSCH: Section 7.2 of the ordinance says -- and
I'll leave out some of the legalese, but anyone who is affected by this
ordinance, whose irrigation patterns are affected by this ordinance,
may request a variance, which means that -- exactly as Mr. Mudd was
saying -- if someone has to irrigate by use of hoses and sprinklers,
they can get a variance. There is a method of getting -- obtaining a
variance not only for hand-watering between five and seven, but if
this causes an undue hardship for them to be able to irrigate, they can
obtain the variance if it's requested and if it's appropriate.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I hear the direction we're going with
this. Obviously I have two commissioners that would like to keep it
in place the way it is. I still think that it's making it one more step
difficult for the consumer out there to meet government needs instead
of government meeting their needs. However, with that said, I do
realize that if I brought this up to a vote now, that it would probably
fail 2 to -- 3 to 1, whatever.
I would suggest one thing: At least let's make it user-friendly to
the point where people have nothing to do but call. We'll send them a
form that they have to sign their name to with an address and maybe
a simple little statement when they want to water, and try to make it
as user-friendly as possible, maybe even provide the postage. We're
getting to the point where you're -- you're telling people out there, "If
you want to do it, you have to apply for this. You have to be able to
send in a letter." You're making it so difficult that some people are
never going to get around to it. They're going to probably try to save
their trees, their vegetation. They're eventually going to get caught,
fined, and then we're going to have to deal with the public relations
Page 155
April 23, 2002
of the whole issue. So I -- I hope that at the very least we might be
able to consider that part.
MR. MATTAUSCH: Actually, Commissioner, the several
people that I have worked with did not think that this procedure was
very onerous and were very willing to work within the -- the
framework of the ordinance and obtain the ordinance -- or the
variance the way that the ordinance establishes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Do you think that for those people
that may not wish to write a letter, you might be able to supply them
with a simple form they can fill out and return to you?
MR. MATTAUSCH: We can do that, but-- but we're still going
to need a statement as to why it is a hardship from -- you know, for
them. And certainly we can provide a form. We can do that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just one other comment
concerning trying to make this thing more convenient. I would hope
we wouldn't immediately assess a fine if we detect this occurring.
And if we could make sure that the people understood at the time we
gave them a courtesy ticket that they could get a variance, it would be
helpful, I think. I think the really bad things occurs when we just go
by and fine somebody for doing something, and they don't know that
they -- they have an option of getting a variance.
MR. OLLIFF: No, sir. In every case we provide a warning
first, and the idea of making sure that they are aware of a variance
process is one that we will incorporate into --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Maybe we could even include this -
- this form that Mr. -- that Commissioner Coletta was talking about,
something that would be simple for them to fill out and return to us,
at the time of a -- of a friendly citation or whatever you call it.
Page 156
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: How about if I make that part of a
motion, what Commissioner Fiala said, that we do supply this
particular form where they can put their own paragraph in it,
whatever they need, as simplified as possible. We can either mail it
to them or hand it to them with a first warning so that they can apply
for this variance. Would that be something that this commission
would be agreeable to?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think you just seen the heads
shaking of staff, and they're going to incorporate that in there. I'm
not sure if it takes a motion.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I would feel more comfortable if it
was a motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we want you-- to make
you feel comfortable, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you very much,
Commissioner Henning. I -- I appreciate it. And I'm starting to feel
a higher level of comfort at this point in time. And also to include the
direction for the chair to write a letter to the municipalities and
utilities out there that currently don't come under our regulations and
ask them if they would please give serious consideration to
complying to these regulations as we all share the same aquifer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I got a motion from myself
and a second from Commissioner Henning. Is there any other
discussion?
All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 4 to 0. Thank you
very much.
Page 157
April 23, 2002
Item #9I
CHAIR TO SIGN AND SEND A LETTER TO THE ACOE AND
THE COLLIER COUNTY CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION
REGARDING THE FUNDING FOR THE EVERGLADES
RESTORATION PROJECT- APPROVED
The next one is a letter to the ACOE and the delegation on the
Everglades restoration project. As you may be well aware of, after
all the hoopla to move the thing forward, purchase people's lands,
grandiose plans of-- of our elected federal and state officials, there's
been a snag. The money is not forthcoming as planned. The whole
program is being set back to the point we don't know when it's going
to get kick-started. And what I'm looking for is the authorization
from this commission to be able to write a letter on our behalf
expressing our dismay with the fact that this has not moved forward.
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you explain why it's being
delayed?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Funding, money, priorities.
Obviously this hasn't gotten the priority it did in the beginning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There was a great piece in the
local paper this weekend done by Cathy Zolo (phonetic). The
Everglades restoration is -- and dealing with the estuaries is
questionable by science. There's conflicting information whether, you
know, the restoration is going to help out or not. So I just want to
throw that out before we even -- CHAIRMAN COLETTA:
speakers on this subject?
MS. FILSON:
I understand. Do we have any
Yes, sir. We have one speaker. Nancy Payton.
Page 158
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I was kind of hoping that was the
reason why you were here.
MS. PAYTON: Nancy Payton, Florida Wildlife Federation. I
was just seeking clarification. I only became aware that this was on
the agenda this morning when I watched the approval of the agenda
items, and I got a copy of the draft letter when I arrived today. And I
was just seeking clarification.
One of the first major restoration efforts under Everglades cert
program, the major Everglades restoration, is Southern Golden Gate
Estates. Does this letter address and ensure funding and asking for
funding for Southern Golden Gate Estates?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: This is the Everglades project in
general. I -- I wished I could answer that about Southern Golden
Gate Estates. I was in communication for a short time with Pam
Mac'Kie through e-mail, and she suggested that I do this, approach
the commission on this. Can you shed any more light on it than that?
MR. OLLIFF: The only thing I --
MS. PAYTON: No.
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, the only thing I can help with is I
think there's two parts to this program: One part is the actual
property acquisition program, and the other part is the actual
construction and restoration part of the program. What I'm being told
from Mike Bauer (phonetic) through an e-mail that he had provided
was that the construction phase funding was what was being talked
about here and that that construction funding needed congressional
approval, that there was an original design issue with the design that
the Army Corps of Engineers had put together for the actual
construction portion. Because it needed to be reengineered and
redesigned, they were not going to make the request for funding in
the 2002 cycle, which meant that they couldn't request again, from
Page 159
April 23, 2002
what I'm told, until 2004. So this is primarily more a construction-
funding-related issue than it is the actual property acquisition of the -- MS. PAYTON: I'm talking -- I'm talking about the restoration
of Southern Golden Gate Estates.
MR. OLLIFF: So the answer is yes, then, it does affect the
project that is associated with --
MS. PAYTON: So can we say Southern Golden Gate Estates in
here?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Nancy, why don't we do this: Since
there seems to be a little lack of background in this and obviously my
e-mails have not become part of this package like I hoped they would
be, can we continue this to the next meeting? Would that be
acceptable to this commission?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that sort of like a
reconsideration?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, not quite a reconsideration
because we don't have to reconsider anything. We haven't considered
it yet. But in that case, if it's no problem, we'll continue it. MS. PAYTON: Very good. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Nancy. Get you
updated, and you can come back and tell us what you think.
MS. PAYTON: Very good. Thank you.
Item #9J
SALE OF ALCOHOL AT THE IMMOKALEE AIRPORT AS
REQUESTED BY THE C1NCO DE MAYO ORGANIZING
COMMITTEE AND WAIVER OF THE SIXTY DAY WAITING
PERIOD. - APPROVED
Page 160
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Now, where are we? Down to
county manager's report, or am I missing one?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You're missing J, Cinco de Mayo.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Oh, Cinco de Mayo, right. Which is
which one?
(A discussion was held off the record.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Where we are at this point in
time on Cinco de Mayo, like many organizations putting on festivals,
it's happening more or less at the last minute. Originally they didn't
plan to use the park and the part of the airport property. This is a
recent event. They were going to use the Indian rodeo grounds, and
that changed at the last minute, and they were forced into coming
back to the county for some help. And John Norman, who is a
representative of Cinco de Mayo, will make a presentation for us at
this time.
MR. NORMAN: Thank you, Commissioner.
presentation. In reality we had everything set up. It went away.
then began negotiating with the airport folks in Immokalee, who have
no problem with it. But it had to come back before you upstanding
individuals so that we can waive that 60-day period that comes in
there. And on the advice of learned counsel, we stand before you and
ask your -- your help in getting this Cinco de Mayo pageant under
way.
It's a festival. And in case you're not familiar with it, the
purpose of it is all the funds -- all the net funds that come in are for
scholarships, strictly for college scholarships. No one gets paid in
this. It's strictly a -- it's to educate some more kids. And we need
your help, and if we could receive that, we would be deeply
appreciative.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, Mr. Weigel.
You just made the
We
Page 161
April 23, 2002
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. To add to the discussion, the Cinco
de Mayo festival needs a place. And Mr. Norman, on behalf of the
festival, therefore has approached the board for the authorizations
that -- that this event may occur, in fact, on county facilities and
specifically the Immokalee Airport. He -- as he mentioned, he's
already been in contact working with the executive airport director,
John Drury, pertaining to the logistics of setting it up at the airport.
John Cushner (phonetic)? Okay. With the airport officials about
setting it up.
And in coming to our office, we reviewed the fact that with the
sale of alcoholic beverages on county property, we came into contact
with a couple county ordinances. The airport does not purport to
officially be a park, but I'd be asking the board today if they endorse
the Cinco de Mayo project on county property, to accept on the
record the following statement, words to this effect: That the county
approve the Cinco de Mayo festival request to be held at the
Immokalee Airport finding a public benefit and public purpose in the
event; and that the county waive the advance application time
requirement of Ordinance 70-11.
Now, the number 70 indicates the year that it was adopted, and
this is an ordinance concerning outdoor festivals a scant one year
after Woodstock, and it has some pretty hefty requirements. But
most of them are in regard to health, safety, and welfare of events
that would be held. Therefore, that the Board of County
Commissioners waive the advance 60-day application time
requirement under the ordinance and recognize no conflict with
Ordinance No. 76-48 as amended, which refers to park use. Now, I
don't believe we're actually dealing formally with a park here, but the
term has come up from time to time, so I wanted the board to include
that in its endorsement.
Page 162
April 23, 2002
And, additionally, that Cinco de Mayo, as applicant, shall meet
all health, safety, welfare requirements of Ordinance 70-11, the
outdoor festival ordinance, with the assistance of community
development services staff and approval through the county manager,
his staff, including risk management, in regard to insurance and
indemnification, and the county attorney. Therefore, in the short time
frame between now and the event, being endorsed as an event of
public benefit and purpose, the county staff would assist in the
application, reviewing the application, and assuring that the event
would meet the health, safety requirements of the ordinance.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion and a second. Is
there questions? Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Are we setting a precedence
here about serving alcohol on county or government property? Have
we ever done this before?
MR. WEIGEL: It has been done, Tom, I believe, certainly at the
Golden Gate Community Center.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's --
MR. WEIGEL: Specifically provided for in the county
ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there any other places that
we've done it?
MR. OLLIFF: Not that I can recall.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So we're setting precedence
here, would you say?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, it may be -- it may be considered
precedent that it hasn't been done before. Other events that come
forward -- this outdoor festival ordinance doesn't specifically apply
Page 163
April 23, 2002
only to public property, county public property; it's anywhere. But
this would be a first. I consider these things particular to the specific
events and circumstances that come before you, and I would make
that statement again if someone came before you and said, "Well, you
did it before. Why won't you do it again?" And I would state that
there's no legal precedent. There may be some similarity on some of
the facts, but I expect that you almost always have significant
differences of facts also.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Norman, could you possibly
give us a little bit of a description of Cinco de Mayo and how it's
worked in the past and how alcoholic beverages and beer, in this
case, would fit in?
MR. NORMAN: Okay. Prior to last year, the Cinco de Mayo
was held at the airport park on Main Street in Immokalee. And
inasmuch as it was in a park at that time, we believed that alcohol --
actually, the place was too small to start getting a real festival going,
so we never endeavored to do alcoholic sales. When I say
"alcoholic," I mean beer only. Last year, to have a larger area, we
made a deal with the Seminole people. It went to the rodeo grounds,
and it was far larger. But for reasons known only to the tribal leaders,
when it came time to nail everything down this year, they said, "Oh,
yeah, we've changed our minds, and we don't want to do that."
We had no problems with alcohol last year. The crowd is not
that huge. I think we had a total of about 2500 people that came
between eleven o'clock in the morning and about six o'clock in the
evening. The whole mob scene was not there at any one time. And
we understand, after talking to Attorney Weigel, that obviously we
would have to have security people there, and the recommended way
is to hire off-duty deputies from the Collier Sheriff's office. This is
just not a rowdy -- it's not like a rock-and-roll crowd. I mean, this is -
Page 164
April 23, 2002
- we'll have several very good Hispanic bands there and a lot of
Hispanic food. But it's not a real wild -- I think they'd like it to be
sometimes, but it's never turned into one.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Then as long as that's the type
of a crowd, do you feel it's even necessary to have the alcoholic
beverages? I mean, being that it went so many years without ...
MR. NORMAN: Well, it went in the hole every year without it
or very, very limited success. Last year with the sale of beer -- as we
all know, it's a very profitable item, and we did very well, and we
came out several thousand dollars farther ahead than usual which
allowed us to get into, I believe it was, three additional scholarships.
People do drink alcoholic beverages.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle.
MR. NORMAN: Some do.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just a question to the county
attorney. I'm unclear as to what the -- the ordinance requires. Does
the ordinance permit the sale of alcohol -- alcoholic beverages on
county property?
MR. WEIGEL: No, it doesn't address anything about county
property. It's an ordinance that applies to all property in county -- in
the county. And they would have to get applicable permits, both state
-- it's not -- there is no particular county permit for this. They would
have to have applicable permits from the state to sell alcohol.
Now, my own experience with this in private practice, coming --
working with the county many years ago, was, in fact, that the
establishments that were looking to do an outdoor festival already
had liquor licenses, things of that nature, to sell. So the county itself
is not giving a license to sell, but would ostensibly be indicating that
the sale could occur on the county property. The county's interest, of
Page 165
April 23, 2002
course, is health, safety, welfare; make sure that they have
appropriate security, both on and around the premises; and that no
illegal sales and things occur. And that's typically done through the
sheriff's office.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How can we give them an
exemption to the requirements to get a state permit?
MR. WEIGEL: We would not. They have to meet their own
state permitting requirements.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And will those permitting
requirements be met, John?
MR. NORMAN: Yes, sir. They have to be. Otherwise the
purveyors of the beer that we sell can't -- cannot deliver.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we--
MR. NORMAN: And all our people have to go through the
state-mandated alcohol sales training courses to make sure you don't
sell it to the wrong people, whether they're too young or too drunk or
what have you, not that any of our people would do that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So one more time because I want
to make sure. The county ordinances do not restrict the sale of
alcoholic beverages on -- anywhere in the county.
MR. WEIGEL: The only restrictions that we have under county
ordinance is the open-container law for vehicles, and we have a parks
ordinance that I referenced, 76-48 as amended, which indicates no
use or sales of alcohol in county parks. And we do have an exception
built in for the Golden Gate Community Center, which has been in
place for many years, ostensibly because that's a controlled
environment. And there is, in fact, an application process to use the
facility, whether it's for wedding receptions, things of that nature.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How about the Farm City
Barbecue? How do they deal with that?
Page 166
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That's at the fairgrounds.
MR. WEIGEL: I quit going years ago to that, but I don't recall
alcoholic beverages being sold.
MR. NORMAN: Yes, they do. They have beer and wine, and it
is -- it's on the fairgrounds, which is county property. I don't know
that it's designated for park. It may not be.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nor is the airport designated as
park, is it?
MR. NORMAN: The park is across the street from the airport.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But you're asking for the use of
the airport -- airport property, not the park itself, not a county park.
MR. NORMAN: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, the county park is going to be
used for part of the festivities, but the alcohol will be sold -- am I
correct? Aren't you going to be using the park also?
MR. NORMAN: Our lease is strictly with the airport.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: So the whole festival is going to be
contained on the airport property?
MR. NORMAN: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. I stand corrected.
MR. NORMAN: Southwest comer of the airport.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: All those in favor indicate by saying
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 4 to 0.
very much, Mr. Norman. You were a tremendous help.
MR. NORMAN: Thank you.
Thank you
Page 167
April 23, 2002
Item # 10A
ADDITIONAL FY01/02 FUNDING OF $250.026.00 FOR
TOURISM ADVERTISING FROM FY01/02 RESERVES.-
APPROVED
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Going back to this, I think I
skipped over a couple to get to that, didn't I?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I don't think so.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 10-A and 10-B, did we do that? I
don't --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner, we do have -- I
have an item here that is marked 9-J, confirmation --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- of-- may I finish? -- of a
member to the Coastal Advisory Committee.
MS. FILSON: Yeah. Commissioner Henning, that was moved
to the consent agenda this morning, and that has been approved.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I was wondering why it was
scratched off.
MR. OLLIFF: I believe we're at 10-A, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 10-A. Mr. Wallace.
MR. WALLACE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record,
Bleu Wallace. I'm the director of community development
operations, and right now I'm in charge of the tourism efforts. I bring
to you today the -- a recommendation from the Tourist Development
Council concerning a -- requesting board approval of an additional
$250,026 for tourism advertising in the current fiscal year reserves.
On April the 5th, the TDC had a special meeting, and they -- the TDC
considered the regular marketing plan for this fiscal year, which was
Page 168
April 23, 2002
some $552,000. That's already been approved by the board. This
was the second item, and this is the additional $250,000.
Staff recommended denial of the item in line with the board's
action it took earlier in the fiscal year when the board identified or
staff identified a shortfall in projected TDC revenue. We expect the
tourist development tax to have a shortfall of $1.5 million by the end
of the year. The action the board took at that time in November
reduced some operating funds from the museum, also reduced beach
renourishment funding, and also the botanical garden funding. And
the reason staff recommended denial of this additional funding was to
keep in line with the board action that was taken in November. Staff
makes no recommendation on -- on this issue except, should it be
approved by the board, that it come from the TDC advertising
promotion reserves. And there's a million dollars in that account now.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And if I may, because I sit on the
TDC board, the reason for the request is simple. The shortfalls were
the reason for it. The shortfalls is because the tourists aren't coming
since 9/11. And in order for us to be out there and to be able to draw
in the limited number of tourists that are available, we need to expend
some of our emergency resources to be able to bring them in. Mind
you, these resources have been set aside to cover such things as
hurricanes or other natural disasters. And this in itself is a disaster
that's befallen the industry, and they need your help at this time.
I'd like to make a recommendation for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. Discussion?
All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 4 to 0. Thank you,
Mr. Wallace.
Page 169
April 23, 2002
Item # 1 OB
IMPLEMENTATION OF A MODIFICATION TO THE 2001
WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN UPDATE IN THE AMOUNT
OF $3,300,000 - APPROVED
10-B.
MR. WIDES: Commissioners, for the record, Tom Wides,
interim public utilities administrator. The item in front of you today
is the authorization for an implementation of a modification to the
2001 wastewater master plan update, and the amount noted is $3.3
million.
What I'd like to note to you this afternoon is when we completed
the master plan update in approximately October of 2001, we had
shown a wastewater corridor roughly in a -- I'll put this on the
monitor for us
-- showing an east -- a west to easterly out on Immokalee Road that
runs from a little bit east ofi-75 to 951. There was -- there was an
additional main being installed there. And that was in the 2001 and
the 2006 time frame. In addition to that, we had a run, at the bottom
of the map you'll see, from-- from Vanderbilt Beach Road, which I
believe was at Logan Boulevard to 951.
The total cost of those two segments -- and maybe I'll break
them down for you. The top portion, the run from Immokalee Road,
was approximately $2.9 million estimated in the master plan. The
Vanderbilt Beach segment was estimated at $1.4 million. We have --
since that time we've come up with what we believe to be a better
alternative, and that's partly in -- in reference to the fact that we know
now the plans for the transportation department.
Page 170
April 23, 2002
And instead of that run, what we're proposing instead is we
would not do the Immokalee Road segment. In fact, that's a very--
area that's just recently been widened, repaired. We'd rather stay out
of that area and, in fact, coincident with the work being done on
Vanderbilt Beach Road by the transportation department, make our
run and make our expenditures along Vanderbilt Beach Road up
through -- up to 951 and then north on 951 to meet at Immokalee
Road and go east.
The idea here is basically in this case we'd be spending $3.3
million instead of, in fact, what we had in the master plan of almost
$4.3 million, and that's what we're proposing to you today.
Now, the way the executive summary reads, it speaks to an
Alternative 1 and an Alternative 2. This is, in fact, our Alternative 2,
which we believe to be the preferred method to -- to, in fact, make
this run. The other alternative is approximately -- almost $2 million
more expensive than this run.
So just to recap, what we had anticipated in the master plan was
over $4 million. Now that we've had a chance to get a little bit closer
to it, look at the plans for the transportation department, we can --
feel we can do this for a million dollars less than that alternative, and
that's basically what we're proposing to you today, that we accept that
alternative.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion from
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Fiala. Any
discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You have these funds available
now?
MR. WIDES: Yes, Commissioner, we do. They would be
Page 171
April 23, 2002
coming out of impact fee funds, as you-- as you approve this today.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that, call for the question. All
those in favor indicate by saying aye. (Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 4 to 0.
MR. WIDES: Commissioners, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you.
Item #10C
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR CONSULTANT
SERVICES UNDER RFP02-3293 FOR AMOUNT OF $73,350.00
TO GAIL EASLEY COMPANY FOR UPDATE OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.- APPROVED
SUBJECT TO RECEIVING DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
I believe the next item was originally 16(A)1.
MR. OLLIFF: Yes, sir.
MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, administrator,
community development and environmental services.
Commissioners, what you have before you is a request for
professional services to assist in updating the Land Development
Code. Just for background, last July staff recommended and you
approved staff's proposal to hire the services of a law firm from
outside the county to review the code, simplify the format, and
identify potential areas of conflict throughout the code. And that's
really all this process is -- is meant to do.
It's been ten years since our last comprehensive review of the
Land Development Code. Though you all know and you understand
we do -- twice annually we go through an LDC amendment process,
Page 172
April 23, 2002
it's been over ten years since we've really gone through a
comprehensive review, and this is part of that process. What we
expect is that we would get a report back to our planning services and
engineering, transportation, code enforcement, and the county's
attorney's office, at least on recommendations for those three areas.
And what this executive summary, in essence, does is give us the
authority to transfer munds -- transfer funds so that we can execute
this contract.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Yes, please.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Tell us a little bit about the Gail
Easley Company. Where are they and--
MR. SCHMITT: Well, I'm going to have to defer to Patrick
because Patrick is my project manager working this piece, and he -- I
know they're a law firm. And, Patrick, if you could.
MR. WHITE: Assistant County Attorney Patrick White. The
Gail Easley Company is located is Crystal River, Florida. They have
a consistent record of working with these types of projects, most
recently in Sarasota County. They do have, as part of their team, a
law -- excuse me -- a land-use attorney as part of their matrix
approach that they utilize for reviewing LDCs. And if you have any
other more detailed questions, I've got, actually, their submittal as
part of the contract negotiations that we entered into.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do we know if they have any
other contracts in Collier County or any other clients here?
MR. WHITE: Not in Collier County at this time that I'm aware
of. They may or may not, but if you need the specific answer to that,
that's fine. One of the things we did, however, consider as part of the
ranking of consultants was the degree of commitment, if you will, for
the staff, their team, at the point in time that we were going to bring
Page 173
April 23, 2002
them on board in order to ensure that they had the opportunity to be
able to successfully complete what we'd ask them to do as part of
their scope of services.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I -- I understand why we're --
you're making this request. The board has -- has required you to go
through and review the entire Land Development Code and the
Growth Management Plan with a view toward developing ways to
manage growth more effectively, and I understand how that can
overburden your existing staff. I just want to make sure that we have
the appropriate safeguards to assure that there are no conflicts of
interest with respect to that, because the -- the Land Development
Code and Growth Management Plan are very, very important to the
future of Collier County, and -- and I'd like to make sure there are no
land mines there that will explode sometime in the future.
MR. WHITE: As far as any potentials for conflict of interest,
these are folks who, as I mentioned, perform this type of task for
other local governments and have done so with an exemplary record.
I'm not aware of anything that would lead to a conflict of interest
under any of our regulations or any of the professional regulations of
any of the individuals themselves and the rules that apply to them, for
example the attorneys and planners that are part of their team.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can you get an appropriate
disclosure from this company if-- before we sign a contract with
them?
MR. WHITE: We've gotten disclosures with respect to
statements about litigation that are required as a part of the process.
And certainly if you're looking for a disclosure before we enter into a
final contract with respect to any other work that they may have in
this county and the absence thereof, certainly that's something we
will do at your direction.
Page 174
April 23, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: Mr. Chairman, one of the other things that I
wanted to point out on this particular item was that this is one part of
a follow-up to the board's strategic planning item to go back through
an entire process with the Land Development Code and the Growth
Management Plan. This is a consultant being brought on to clean up
a lot of what are internal inconsistencies within your Land
Development Code and to fix some of the more simple things, which
are the ridiculous numbering system that we all laugh at each other
over every time we go through a Land Development Code hearing
and go through the 2.2.6.7.8 kind of process. So that is a component
of this contract.
But what Jim just handed out to you -- and I know you already
have this, so don't get confused thinking this is something new, but
this is the agenda for tomorrow's workshop. And if you'll flip over to
what is the stamped page 14 of that package, you will see the staffs
proposal for a series of upcoming LDC amendments and workshop
items. And if you will look in addition to this contract, the internal
staff work that we are proposing to you in a list of issues within the
LDC that we want to have some discussion and get some direction on
include the big issues that we have had over the last year and a half to
two years: The PUD process, in and of itself; the variance processes;
conditional uses in this county; the affordable housing program,
which I have heard from at least three of you about the specific
incentives that we have in regards to affordable housing, that's on the
list; the different zoning districts, what's allowed, what's not allowed,
whether they should or should not be inclusive of districts below
them; supplemental zoning and district regulations; the site
development plan process; the subdivision plan process; the review
of nonconformities; the interpretation process; and then there's some
decision-making and administrative bodies and applicability.
Page 175
April 23, 2002
But, in essence, what is being on your-- proposed to you on
your agenda in conjunction with this list we think is the first major
blow at the entire LDC review. And what you've directed us to do as
part of the strategic plan for fiscal year '03, we're frankly accelerating
it and not waiting until October of'03 to start that process.
MR. WHITE: Just as a factual matter, Commissioner, to
directly answer your question, one of the things that the consultants
are required to provide as part of their package is a statement about
how much work they've done within our jurisdiction in Collier
County. And in Easley's case over the last five years, that dollar
amount is zero, so I'm assuming that they have no potential or
existing conflicts of interest with regards to other projects that are
ongoing in Collier County.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But you could get a disclosure
before we sign a contract; right?
MR. WHITE: I believe that would be reasonable and something
they would be willing to do.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Good point, Commissioner Coyle.
Do we have a motion and a second on this?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't think so.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I don't think so either.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, we don't.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would somebody like to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to make a motion that the
Board of County Commissioners award a professional services
agreement to the Gail Easley Company and authorize the chairman of
the board to sign the standard county-attorney-approved agreement
and approve the necessary budget amendment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Page 176
April 23, 2002
Fiala, a second by Commissioner Henning. Any discussion?
MR. OLLIFF: Only one. Do you want to make that subject to
the disclosure statement that Commissioner Coyle raised?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, please.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: And your second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: With that, was there any other
discussion?
All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 4 to 0.
Item # 1 OD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATOR TO BEGIN
THE RFP PROCESS TO SELECT FIRMS FOR "FIXED TERM
PROFESSIONAL PLANNING SERVICES" CONTRACTS FOR
UPCOMING PLANNING SERVICES AS NEEDED - APPROVED
WITH CHANGES
And if I'm not mistaken, that takes care of the agenda items.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. One more.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. We got one more.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: !6(A)6.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: 16(A)6. Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He's trying to get us home. He's
working on it.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioners, before you is another agenda
item, and this really has to do with the establishment of two ongoing
- for two annual ongoing contractual relationships with professional
Page 177
April 23, 2002
firms to do -- really to do -- augment my planning staff on an as-
needed basis. And these, frankly, we're looking at to establish -- to
enter into a -- at least the preliminary process to begin to go out and
ask for proposals to establish -- or to do work for the staff as far as
the Land Development Code, the Growth Management Plan, and
many of the other activities in the planning and review process.
This -- the item itself is pretty self-explanatory, but this issue
certainly brought -- was a sensitive issue in both the report in the
Naples Daily News this morning and in my discussions, at least
yesterday afternoon, with the reporter who reported this. It certainly
sensitized me to the fact that what we're talking about here is this area
of conflicting interest or -- or conflicts of interest between a local
firm or firm and then work for the county. So this, in fact, we will
specify.
And I want to make sure as a matter of record that we will
specify in the -- in this process that we will require from any firms
that are submitting to compete for selection, that they present to us a
plan on how they would prevent any type of conflict of interest. For
example, that could be a clear separation between those working on
county business and those working for the private sector. A fire wall,
I guess, is a good example of how they would separate.
And, second, we could even specify -- and, again, I will need
some guidance from both our contracting staff and our legal staff--
the planning professional who represents the county or -- in any
capacity would be prohibited from representing a -- the private sector
before the board or the Planning Commission.
So that's, in essence, what we're looking at here, to -- to go out --
at least for the first phase, to go out and begin the process of looking
for what I would say a fixed-term professional planning services
contract. And just to clarify, those, by law, allows us to go $90,000
Page 178
April 23, 2002
per task order and $500,000 for the contract. But in reality, those
task orders would probably more -- be more in the area of five to ten
thousand dollars on a task-order basis.
And I would be looking at this contract probably being
somewhere between a three- and five-year range, and what that
precludes is every time -- if I needed to have professional services
handle the surge and workload, what I really would -- I wouldn't have
to come before the board every time and ask for a separate contract
and, quite honestly, saving our taxpayers a lot of money in the
procurement process. And this is -- would be an another type of
professional service that we're pretty accustomed to throughout the
county.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just a couple questions. It's hard
for me to separate, looking at the executive summary, what services
are being sought for the purpose of assisting you in plan site surveys
and planning review and what services are being sought for the
purpose of Land Development Code revisions and Growth
Management Plan revisions.
MR. SCHMITT: That's a good question, Commissioner. The
first -- the previous item was specifically looking at the structure of
the LDC, quite honestly to make it more user-friendly. This is
getting into the nuts and bolts when we're talking about setbacks and
we're talking about architectural themes and other type of activities.
But it also would be -- provide me a source to task out work for many
of the community and growth management plans that we're looking
at: The Vanderbilt Beach study, the Golden Gate Master Plan study,
Naples Park character study, East Naples U.S. 41, where I'm looking
at specific community character plans. And you could grab this
resource to help in doing that.
Page 179
April 23, 2002
A good example is the Vanderbilt Beach study. I was directed
to do -- to go out and actually do that in January, but it's -- we
couldn't -- I don't have the staff, and we couldn't really begin to tackle
that until about April because of the workload and the planning
review process; not the permitting process, but the planning and site
development and plan review -- or the site development review
process, not the building permit process.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I -- I can see a very distinct
difference between those, and let me -- let me try this on for size and
see what you think of it. I understand that you're overburdened from
the standpoint of plan reviews and permitting and that sort of thing
because we've thrown a lot of stuff at you. And there was a peak of-
- of permits because people wanted to get their permit requests in
before the new building construction laws were put in, and so it
would be unreasonable for you to staff up to the level to meet those
peak demands. So I understand the need to -- to have outside help
from time to time when these things outstrip the capability of-- of the
organization.
But involving an outside consultant in the process of approving
someone's plan or approving someone's plan site gives me a little
concern. And I'm wondering if it is possible that -- that we could
have these people involved mostly in Land Development Code
changes and Growth Management Plan changes because those are the
things that will come back for a complete public review. And they'll
be reviewed by our committees and our Planning Commission, and
everybody will get a chance to take a look at them and feel
comfortable with those recommendations of the consultant; whereas
the building plans for a development generally will not or sometimes
will not. And I -- I think there is -- is some concern that if an outside
consultant who is also working for builders in the county is also
Page 180
April 23, 2002
responsible for reviewing the plans of those builders, I think it creates
the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Now, on the other side, having consultants do -- or help us with
Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan plan
provisions, I -- I will support that because I -- I know that -- that a
complete review of the Growth Management Plan and the Land
Development Code is beyond the capability of this staff. This is the
first time it's being done in, what, 15 years or so?
MR. SCHMITT: Actually, it's almost 12.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Twelve years. So it's a huge
undertaking, and -- and it's being done specifically for the purpose of
helping us manage growth more effectively. I mean, that's the
driving force between these Land Development Code changes and
the Growth Management Plan changes.
Now, I think that -- that we can take advantage of those
consulting services without undermining the -- the credibility of the
documents they produce. And I'll -- I'll use as an example, the -- the
Rural Fringe Committee consisted of both environmentalists and--
and developers, developer representatives. The rural area assessment
study has been done largely by the kinds of people we would
probably be seeking consulting help from, and that plan is being
highly praised in Tallahassee and, I think, by lots of other people. So
I believe it is -- it is possible and reasonable that people with great
skills in Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan
could provide us with -- with assistance, and we would develop the
comfort level through our -- our public review process and public
input process.
So I hope I haven't gone on too long, but really what I'm saying
is that -- that if we're going to hire a consultant, I would prefer that
the consultant be involved in helping us with Land Development
Page 181
April 23, 2002
Code and Growth Management Plan issues and not being involved in
the actual approval of someone's building plans.
MR. SCHMITT: I understand. Now, understand that the
building plan piece is a separate piece. That's done in my building
and plan review. They -- that would not -- they would not be
involved in that at all. That's the -- the vertical construction piece.
What we're talking about here is the horizontal construction piece, the
-- the site development plans and the platted surveys and those type
of things, where we're looking at subdivision plats, the approval
process of the overall planning pieces where they would be involved.
But I -- I agree, and I -- I accept that. Frankly, that is a -- that's a
government function. That really is something that the county staff
should be doing.
If I could add -- if we put those provisions, we'd also include the
Growth Management Plan, the Land Development Code-type issues,
and maybe some of the community character plans that we're looking
at, the smart growth community character plan, the -- those type of
activities that may only be a year or anywhere -- six to nine months
where you certainly -- it isn't cost-effective to hire additional staff.
This -- this would be something special. But I'll -- I'll be coming to
you probably during the next board (sic) to talk about additional staff.
But I -- my -- I know my boss wants to make a comment, or he
appears like he wants to make a comment, so I'll let him--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I could just--just comment on
one thing you said there, and I think it's a natural fit. The East Naples
41 corridor study, it's logical that we should get someone really
experienced in that kind of redevelopment to help them. Now, if that
person also happens to advise someone else, a development company
as an example, that seems to be okay to me because they're going to
be talking with the residents of that area about the community
Page 182
April 23, 2002
development plan. And if the residents don't like it, they're going to
be able to tell them that. And so I think we're protected from any
potential danger in doing that if we use -- use consultants in those
kinds of activities. So I feel more comfortable doing that than I do
having people come in from the outside and get involved in our
internal decision-making and approval process.
MR. SCHMITT: Well, and -- and naturally the trade-out period
-- if I were to use a consultant, naturally I think it's more conducive to
use the staff to do that review process.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I agree.
MR. SCHMITT: And there is a considerable backlog on that
piece of our process, the plans -- the planning review process.
MR. OLLIFF: The one thing I would ask for your consideration
of is allow us to go with the RFP as it's proposed. Let us see who
bids, and let us see what protections there are in terms of arm's-length
distance in the firms that actually get proposed and recommended.
Joe -- Joe needs tools, and what we've just recently gone through is a
period of time where Joe was down to three principal planners in the
entire division. And I think you all got plenty of an earful from, you
know, people who had plain old, you know, small, little, single-
family-home-type projects. And the turnaround time was -- was
horrendous on that, and whether I like that community or don't like
that community, I think I've got an obligation to at least try and
provide a -- a reasonable level of service.
If firms bid and we can develop contracts where there is no
question that there is an arm's length and Joe will then at least have
that as a tool in the toolbox to be able to vent if and only if we finds
ourselves in that kind of a situation again, that's all we're looking for.
Primarily, what we are looking to this firm to do is a whole lot more
of the planning and the special-type plans, the neighborhood-type
Page 183
April 23, 2002
plans, that this board has asked us to do, and that's where we see the
vast majority of the work. But we would like to at least be able to go
out in the RFP process the way it's been structured. And then when
we get to the point of contract, that'll be in front of you again, and we
can talk about whether or not you're comfortable with it or not.
MR. SCHMITT: I do need to come back with -- with the
particulars to the board if, in fact, we want to go this route.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And-- and I would -- would
encourage you to staff up to try to take care of that backlog because it
is causing problems. And -- and after all, the salaries of the -- of the
employees are being paid by the permitting fees, and so people have
every expectation that they should get reasonable service. So I'd
encourage you to staff up in that area as quickly as you can.
MR. SCHMITT: I'm delighted to report I just got an e-mail
before coming up that we finally got another applicant who accepted
an offer, and we're negotiating a starting date. So we're starting to get
-- get back to where we need to be. So with that ...
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I make a motion, then, that we
approve this subject to the provisions that the county manager has
suggested, that before the contract is signed -- I think we have a --
public speaker.
MS. FILSON: We certainly do. Nancy Payton.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Let me get the second first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion and a
second. Now for the speaker.
MS. PAYTON: Nancy Payton representing the Florida Wildlife
Federation. I just wanted to make a few comments about this
particular agenda item. We certainly understand that the county is in
a planning crunch. And there is a very impressive and very important
Page 184
April 23, 2002
to-do list that accompanied this particular agenda item, and we don't
doubt that any of these don't (sic) need to be done in order of a high
priority. But we did have some questions, and I wanted to get them
on the record.
One is, how will conflicts be defined? What is a conflict? Is it -
- shouldn't there be a uniform policy within the county as to what a
conflict is when these particular proposals are being evaluated? And
how will be -- how will the planning -- how will the conflicts be
identified within a firm? When you have to -- what is a conflict, and
then how are you going to identify it?
And it didn't give me a very high comfort level to say we're
going to ask them, because I don't think we're going to get the type of
answer that we, the public, want. We ought to be determining what
the standards are, and they have to meet those standards, not just ask
the planning consultants or whatever consultant it might be, and they
say, "Oh, don't worry about it. We'll take care of it. We'll have the
folks at one end of the building and the other folks at the other."
Well, that doesn't cut it for us, doesn't -- doesn't do it.
What is -- what are the standards that are going to be used to
determine what is going to be farmed out and what's not going to be
done in house, and who is it going to be farmed to? Again, I think
there need to be uniform standards. And one aspect is not only do
there not have to be conflicts in terms of private clients they have, we
have to make sure that these consultants are going to work well with
county staff.
Also, we have concerns about the number of contracts per firm.
Who is watching the big picture? Who is looking out for how many
contracts particularly -- a particular firm might have? For instance,
today you approved two contracts with WilsonMiller and Johnson
Engineering, and what were the conflict criteria that were used to
Page 185
April 23, 2002
determine those awarding of contracts? And so we have under public
utilities and I think it was administration that these -- these contracts
were let, these -- but yet we don't know what the -- the criteria we
used to determine conflicts, if there were any-- there was any effort
to determine conflicts for those particular contracts.
There are no-string contracts -- contractors out there we know,
because we had Dover Kohl, and we had Spikowski (phonetic)
Planning, so there are folks out there that do not have the particular
conflicts of interest and can produce products there are very
important and very useful to this county.
The one question today remains, how does the county ensure the
outside planners, the outside consultants will be without conflict of
interest, and how do you determine those conflicts? Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can I answer?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You sure can.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can -- can you give us some
suggestions how we could -- how we could identify conflicts?
MS. PAYTON: I don't immediately have an answer, but I'd like
to work on that, and we can consult with other locales and see how
they do it. But certainly we ought to know whether they have other
clients in the county, what those clients are, when they had them; if
they don't have clients now, how recently they had clients; if they're
an outside consulting firm, do they have people that own that
particular firm that live here, but the firm is not located in this area?
Those are just ones that I can immediately think of, but if I thought
about it, I probably could think of more.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I-- I know that you-- I suspect
your concern is prompted by a recent example of that where there
was a potential conflict with respect to a consultant working on some
things that you brought to --
Page 186
April 23, 2002
MS. PAYTON: Right. And we raised similar issues when
WilsonMiller was approved by county commissioners to do the rural
land effort.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I -- I will tell you that I've also had
some experience with out-of-town consultants who do not produce
the desired result because they don't understand the history and the
background and the interest of our community. And I believe
personally that we are better served by someone who understands our
community, where we want to go, rather than -- than some outside
consultants who -- who frequently market canned products. And--
and they go from community to community proposing essentially the
same kinds of-- of strategies, and I -- I think that can be equally
damaging to us.
But I -- I like the idea of trying to find a way of defining what a
conflict is because I believe we have some very fine consultants and
engineers in Collier County, but we all must be very careful that -
that there are no conflicts when we ask them to work for us. And I
would be most interested in -- in trying to find a better way of
defining how we do that. And -- and perhaps we should task the staff
to do that, to make sure that we -- we define what represents a
conflict and include that in the contract.
MS. PAYTON: Right. The issue isn't where they come from;
it's --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. And that was exactly
the point I was trying to make. And -- and if you have any comments
or recommendations to that, could you please give them to Mr.
Olliff?.
MS. PAYTON: Be glad to. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And copies to us, if you'd like.
Thank you.
Page 187
April 23, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: And, in fact, beyond that, I think a lot of that
needs to be flushed out in the RFP process well in advance of the
contract process so that those people who are submitting proposals
are submitting proposals that are going to respond to the conflict-type
definitions and issues that we will raise in the RFP itself.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Good.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. If there's no other
discussion, I'll call for the question on that.
All in favor indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: The ayes have it, 4 to 0.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATION
And now I do believe that concludes the agenda, and we're
going to go to the county attorney, who's getting up to leave for a
moment.
MR. WEIGEL: I have nothing to say. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: That was great timing. Mr. Olliff.
MR. OLLIFF: Two things, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to ask Mr.
Mudd to give the board a little brief on when we expect to come back
to you with a water report, sort of the follow-up. You had asked
some additional questions the last time we made a presentation.
The first thing, though, is, in essence, the continuation of some
horizon committees. The board created three separate horizon
committees that were specifically created by the Board of County
Commissioners. One was the Community Character/Smart Growth
Committee. The other one was the Health and Human Services
Page 188
April 23, 2002
Board, and the other one was the Work Force and Affordable
Housing Committee.
The Work Force and Affordable Housing Committee and the
Health and Human Services Board were ad hoc, one-year committees
whose expiration is in July of this year. I believe you've gone back to
both your boards, and they have requested extensions. I just need a
board motion in order to allow us to prepare the resolution and bring
it back to you in May that would provide the extension for those two
committees. The third committee, the Community Character/Smart
Growth Committee, was actually a two-year term committee, so their
committee does not expire until the year 2003.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to so move.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We have a motion by Commissioner
Fiala and a second by Commissioner Coyle. Is there any discussion?
All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
(Unanimous response.)
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN CARTER: The ayes have it, 4 to 0.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, the water plan that we presented at
the last board meeting and -- and you directed us to come back-- we
planned to come back with a time line, cost structure on the 14th of
May. We're still working on some of the details and trying to get the
facts and figures on that. So we've got a meeting with -- with the
staff here in the next week, and they'll be thoroughly prepared to brief
you on the 14th on the -- on the regular agenda.
As a point of clarification, when we had their discussion, Mr.
Chair, about the -- the irrigation ordinance, the irrigation ordinance --
somehow when we had the discussion, it -- it seemed like we lost the
Page 189
April 23, 2002
-- the fact that the irrigation ordinance was -- was directed by the
board at the water workshop last March 2001 in an effort to push the
conservation effort of water within the county, because it is a
valuable resource, one that's -- one the shouldn't be wasted.
One of the facts that I don't -- I think was kind of lost today in
the discussion is the fact that right now within our water/sewer
district, we're using -- the last two years using about 205 gallons per
person a day, which is about 134 percent over the national average,
which is 145 gallons per person. The City of Naples is trying to take
measures -- because they're over double what the national average is
in their consumption, and they've been directed by the South Florida
Water Management District to get more in line with the national
average. And so they've -- they've put the squeeze on them as far as
their consumptive-use permits for additional wells. We don't want to
get ourselves in that mode. Again, we're trying to conserve water,
and I just wanted to make sure that the -- that on the record that that
gets out to the public.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Right. And I think I want to make
sure that we got on the record that I was looking to increase the -- the
direction that we were going as far as reaching out to the
municipalities. In no way was this an effort to try to use more water
by the people that were trying to water by hoses, and we so directed
them how to apply for their variance. At no point in time was I ever
intending to try to lessen the impact of the water restrictions, and I'm
sorry if anyone misconstrued what I was trying to do.
MR. MUDD: I just wanted to make sure -- I think that was your
intent, and I just wanted to make sure it was clear to the -- the
audience that that was the case. Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Mudd. Anything
else, Mr. Olliff?.
Page 190
April 23, 2002
MR. OLLIFF: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Okay. We'll start with
Commissioner Henning. Any closing comments?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Earlier there was -- I
made a comment about Dr. Sam Dursoy being the favored developer.
I don't want to take anything away from anybody else, any
developers. We do have very good developers who donate thousands
of dollars to Habitat for Humanity and very-- very responsible. It's
just I know where Dr. Dursoy's heart is, and it is all about
community. I just want to recognize that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Three things. First, yest-- last
evening I had the opportunity to attend the lighting ceremony for
Bayshore Beautification Area, and I -- I think that they have done a
magnificent job. And although they are in my district, Donna Fiala
has a lot more to do with that than anybody else that I know of and
Bill Neal (phonetic), and I think they should got some kind of special
recognition for -- for what they've done, because they've done a
wonderful job, and I really congratulate them.
Number two, the supervisor of elections, Jennifer Edwards, has
written us a letter asking us if we would make a -- an LDC change
with reference to polling places in gated communities. In some cases
the gated communities are not large enough to make up an entire
precinct. And -- and so rather than inconveniencing the people in the
gated communities and requiring them to go someplace else,
sometimes a polling place can be placed there, but they don't want
individuals, sometimes, coming into their communities, into the gated
communities.
So Jennifer Edwards has asked us if we would consider a Land
Development Code change that will -- will require that, if necessary,
Page 191
April 23, 2002
a polling place be placed in a gated community, that it will be
available to people in that precinct to come and vote. So I'm just
seeing if-- if there's support on the board to at least have that-- that
change considered or prepared or brought through the public review
process.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would like to see that change
brought up, yes, brought through the review process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I haven't seen the memo, so I --
I would like -- like to get into that discussion at -- during the LDC.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You want to put it on the agenda?
Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Actually, if I could just get the
memo. We have the LDC changes, and we always have discussion
on that.
MR. OLLIFF: We can -- I'll make sure that we get copies of the
memo distributed. We can even talk about it at tomorrow's LDC
workshop because we're talking about what is the schedule of
amendments that are coming, and we could talk about it in concept
after you've had a chance to look at the memo. Then you can decide
if you want to give us that direction or not. You can do it tomorrow.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I believe that -- oh, I'm so
sorry. I'll be through with this in a minute. When I read some of
these -- these PUD requests, I notice in there they usually say polling
place to be located within that PUD. So I think Jennifer is just really
trying to confirm --
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
Standardize it.
Yeah. Right. To enforce it.
MR. OLLIFF: She may be doing it by hook and crook now as
opposed to actually having a code behind it where --
Page 192
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. That-- that could be. I
think that's probably it.
One final -- final thing. We went through an issue with respect
to legal expenses earlier today, and I -- I am concerned with the
lawsuit of the clerk of court against the Board of County
Commissioners. It -- it leaves the impression that we are not working
together in the best interest of-- of the people.
Now, as you might recall, Mr. Brock believes that the law
permits him to take interest from certain funds that he earns and
transfer it back to us in the form of a general fund revenue. Our
outside counsel tells us otherwise. I am not confident that any of us
is dealing with -- with all of the elements of information necessary to
resolve it. I would like to find a way to resolve it because if Mr.
Brock is correct, that gives us more flexibility with the -- with the use
of the funds.
And what -- I have not been able to find anything that tells us
what funds we're talking about. There are dozens and dozens of these
funds, and if we could find out what funds Mr. Brock is talking
about, it might be a relatively easy decision for us to make about
saying, "Yeah, we agree. I think that's great." I -- I know that there
are some funds where all of us agree you can't do that, and -- and
that's the problem. I'm not sure that we're all working with the same
set of information.
And I -- I don't recall any kind of request or presentation being
made by the board to -- you know, that -- that explains what this is all
about and -- certainly not while I'm here, and I don't know if the rest
of you have had such a thing. But it seems to me that before
something like this gets elevated to a lawsuit where we're using
taxpayers' money to deal with it, we should have had an opportunity
to deal with it.
Page 193
April 23, 2002
And so what I would like to suggest, and also to -- to make sure
we're working more closely together, is to ask that the -- the clerk
provide us with a specific request for guidance with respect to what
funds that he thinks he can transfer money from and how much that
represents, and then I think we can make an informed decision as to
whether or not we want to spend taxpayers' money defending that or
whether we just want to give the -- the clerk our guidance to do it
anyway.
So -- and in order to preclude this from -- from happening again,
I would like to -- to -- you know, we have in our packet a place for all
constitutional officers to -- to be here and tell us about any problems
that they have. And -- and I would like to suggest that at least once a
month we invite the clerk or his representative here to -- to discuss
any potential problems of this -- this nature because it -- this is just
not the right way to deal with these kinds of things. I think it's a
waste of taxpayer money, and I think it -- it gives the taxpayers the
wrong impression, that we are not working together in their best
interests. So--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- how do you feel about that?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: -- would you like to talk to the
clerk's office about that and maybe arrange for --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think this is something that the
Board of County Commissioners have to decide upon. I think it's
something that the board should -- should make a decision about
whether the board wants to do this or the board doesn't want to do it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: What exactly are we going to do?
He's a constitutional officer, and he has a free will to come before us
or not.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. And that's why I said
Page 194
April 23, 2002
"invite."
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Well, I'm sure the invitation always
stands from us to -- to Dwight Brock, as it is to all the constitutional
officers, to come in any time they'd like to. But I -- I do agree with
you that if there's any way we can save taxpayers money and avoid
going through a lawsuit if the end result is going to be the money is
going to be spent in the county coffer one way or the other. I think
he was just trying to give us a little more latitude with it. Possibly we
might be able to come to an agreement and not have to go through the
whole motions.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let me ask a different
question. Is there anybody on the board who has ever gotten a
request, officially received a request, that says specifically what the
clerk wants to do?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I've received an oral request of
interpretation by the clerk of courts on using interest money for -- on
certain funds, such as impact fees, to transfer it into -- or it's under
control of the clerk, and the clerk is willing to transfer that money
back into the general fund for the needs of the county.
Now, I can tell you that that interpretation is different than what
our counsel believes, and it probably could be or would be challenged
by possibly some special interests out there that we're not expending
the monies properly. But what I see the avenue that it's going now is
a friendly lawsuit of an interpretation of what the -- the board and the
clerk can spend that interest money for. Am I correct or--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I think that -- that we have
the ability to say that we agree or disagree with the clerk and, thus,
avoid a lawsuit. And I -- I don't know how we can agree or disagree
without knowing specifically which funds they're talking about.
Page 195
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle, tell me this:
The way -- we have two choices from what I see. One, we can
maintain the status quo and not change anything; or, number two, we
can follow the advice of our counsel, who would be the one that I
would follow at all times when it comes down to the Nth degree, and
not do what's being suggested. Meanwhile, we got nothing to stop
the clerk from taking us to court on this in a friendly lawsuit or
however you want to call it. I -- I don't -- I don't know how our
alternatives play out on this to be different. I talked to Mr. Brock at
great lengths about it, and he led me to the opinion that this was
probably the only way it could be resolved, because when it comes
down to it, I always trust my counsel's opinion first.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So what -- what you're saying is
you -- you do not want to have a discussion --
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. I have no --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Wait a minute. Wait a minute.
You do not want to have a discussion in the sunshine about a lawsuit
that has been filed against this commission to determine what the
facts are, what funds are involved, and let the public hear what this is
all about?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: No. I have no problems at all with
having an open discussion on any subject. I'm just telling you what I
see the alternatives coming down to be. You tell me what our final
choice is going to be other than what I just outlined for you. You
know, I -- it doesn't mean it precludes a discussion. We can have an
informational discussion where we let out all the facts to the public.
That is fine. If you think we're lacking that at this point in time, we
should do it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you see, what I'm suspecting
is that what Mr. Brock is proposing is quite possible for certain funds
Page 196
April 23, 2002
and what our outside counsel is looking at are some different funds
where it clearly is not possible.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Is that true?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't know. But until somebody
defines what funds we're talking about--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: I would assume that Mr. Weigel
would be informed on that part of it. Mr. Weigel.
MR. WEIGEL: I believe I am. The preliminary opinion from
outside counsel attempted to address certain specific funds that we
asked about. And the response in this preliminary opinion, never
finalized, was that there were limitations with certain funds.
Now, I want to add that if you wish to speak with the clerk,
since we are in a lawsuit filed last week of which I must respond in
court within 20 days of yesterday, that I will respectfully ask
permission from their counsel, Mr. Pires, clerk's counsel, that you
may speak with the clerk. Because not notwithstanding that you-all
are government officials, there is a certain protocol by virtue of the
fact that we're in court. I expect that they'll easily say yes, that you
can talk -- or any one of you can talk with the clerk about the matter,
but they do have their ability, by virtue of the fact that it's in a
lawsuit, to stay more formalized if they choose to and may not wish
to come and discuss it at a board meeting. Again, that's his
prerogative, as far as that goes.
But in -- in calling it a friendly lawsuit, it's friendly in the sense
that the clerk is asking the Court to tell him what he can do. But, for
the record, in no way has this board either endorsed the preliminary
draft opinion of outside counsel to whom we asked, we thought,
significant, relevant questions of fiscal importance to the county --
and so he's looking to the Court, and the county stands as an
Page 197
April 23, 2002
ostensible defendant because it takes two to go into court. We have
not, you know, opposed him.
The board will do what it wishes to do with the funds it receives,
and he's looking for interpretation of a statute that tells the clerk what
the clerk can do with money that it invests, that is county -- Board of
County Commissioners' funds that it's the statutory duty of the clerk
to take care of and invest. So he's looking to the Court to provide
him an answer to a question that he has. It's not because he's at -- that
the board has taken any particular formal stand, which it has not, that
puts him at odds with us at this point.
And we will ask the questions not only of our outside counsel,
as well as working with our own internal staff to provide you what
we think our thoughts are of funds that may be available for the
clerk's interpretation of where the interest goes. And we'll also,
through counsel, attempt to ask that question of them as to what their
thoughts are. And if it will short -- shorten or short-circuit the
lawsuit, that's fine. He may feel that he needs another form of
government, meaning the courts, to give him the definitive answer he
wants. And that answer will not only affect him, but it'll affect other
clerks, too, I expect.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Do you know what funds we're
talking about specifically?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, in -- in conversation with the clerk and
his counsel, with the county manager and other staff, I thought we
knew some of those funds, but the complaint doesn't specify any
particular funds. It appears to address the fact of general statutory
application to all funds, is my best take on it right now.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But -- but there are different kinds
of funds and, quite likely, different kinds of applications of statutory
requirements to them.
Page 198
April 23, 2002
MR. WEIGEL: That's absolutely correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's -- that's the problem. We're
going to spend money on an outside counsel who is saying this fund,
this fund, this fund, and this fund cannot be -- be used in this way;
whereas Mr. Brock might be saying these other funds certainly can.
And he might be absolutely right, and yet we're fighting about
something where we haven't really defined which funds we disagree
on. We might dis -- we might agree on a number of funds that are --
are perfectly appropriate to transfer, and we could solve that by
giving Mr. Brock what he asked for, which is guidance from the
board about the use of those funds. And I wouldn't have the slightest
problem doing that if I knew which funds we were talking about, and
I don't believe anybody on this board knows that.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you like us to ask Mr. Weigel
to invite Mr. Brock to join us? Would that be -- it would appropriate
because we're in the middle of a lawsuit.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, that would be fine. I'll -- I'll
communicate with Mr. Pires, his counsel on this lawsuit, to see if, in
fact, he would like to join us in either a board forum or to talk to
commissioners individually. This is not something outside of
sunshine in regard to one on one with the commissioners. He may
choose not to do that, but I'll certainly afford every option.
And I would like to mention that the county manager was, in
fact, looking to determine with some specificity which of the various
funds might be applicable to not have the interest connected with the
principal and those funds which would continue to have interest
connected with principal. And we didn't get that fleshed out before
the lawsuit was filed last week. The timing of the lawsuit is the
clerk's. I don't know of any particular timing reason why the lawsuit
was filed as -- from any desire on our standpoint to be in a lawsuit.
Page 199
April 23, 2002
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Mr. Weigel, in light of
Commissioner Coyle's reference to sunshine, I think that's the way
we should be going.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. I appreciate--
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Would you agree?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I definitely would agree,
because there is nothing that should escalate to a lawsuit level
between the elements of county government unless we have had a
chance to discuss it in this room.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I appreciate that, and that's why I
mentioned that this board has not taken a position opposite to what
would appear to be the interpretation of the clerk. Staff, I think in a
very appropriate question, had said if, in fact, the interpretation is
correct, the interest does not follow principal -- and there are very
many funds that comprise the total county budget -- is there, in fact,
an issue in regard to the -- what appears to be the clerk's
interpretation of a particular statute? And that's what we were
working on. It was a work still in progress.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Again, I can see how outside
counsel can say, "No. These particular funds you can't transfer," and
they take that position. And then Mr. Brock says, "These other
particular funds you can transfer." Yet we're fighting about things
that we both believe are right when, in fact, if we decide -- if we're
talking about the same funds, we might agree.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: We're going to have to bring it back.
Anything that takes this much discussion during comments is better
left for another meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Was there any other comments you
had?
Page 200
April 23, 2002
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nope. That's it.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, it's your mm.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have four.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Please go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: First of all, I want to thank all the
staff from Collier County government for the many fund-raisers
they've been holding here and there, car washes and bake sales and
even the one that I'm dressed for, to raise money for the American
Cancer Society and the Relay of (sic) Life. And I just want to put in
a little plug for Relay of Life. It starts on Friday, Gulfview Middle
School at 6 p.m. And goes clear on through Saturday -- all night long
until Saturday at 1:30 p.m. And, again, thank you, staff, for all the
work that you do and the good that you do in the community. Just a
little special thank you.
Second of all, just a fast note on No. 8-B. The way we have the
summary agenda written, it says "Isle of Capri," and I just wanted to
correct that if we could to be "Isles of Capri." That's very important
to the Caprians because there are four islands, and they'd like to each
be recognized, Isles of Capri.
Number three -- see how fast this is going?
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: You're doing wonderful.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Three, this basket from our staff
was given to -- to -- well, given to us, actually, on behalf of the
county as a visual display of healthy things that you can do and eat to
help fight cancer. And so I'm just going to keep it on display in the
county commission office just so that everybody can see it and
maybe come by, take a look, and see what you can do to keep
yourself healthy.
And, lastly, I have a letter. I've been pounding away at my
computer at night, and I just wanted to read this. And I'll send you all
Page 201
April 23, 2002
a copy of it as well. But anyway, this has been something that -- that
I've felt that I needed to say in the sunshine.
The board's recent vote on the Henderson Creek affordable
housing issue brought to light some major issues and adjustments --
and/or adjustments we need to consider as we get into the LDC cycle.
Excuse me. First, a traffic congested area that is already operating at
such a high volume that density needs to be restricted should really
not qualify for affordable density bonuses when there are no plans for
additional capacity to that roadway in the 25-year projection. In fact,
we must look very conservatively at any commercial development
that might be impacting that same already overburdened roadway.
Second, I really find it reprehensible to throw millions of
taxpayer dollars at developers who qualify for affordable housing
credits and then build what I believe in practicality-- speaking is
unaffordable rental units. And I'll go on to -- to mention what I feel
about that. This points out two additional specific changes that must
be considered: Rents are based on median income rather than
average wage, and the inventory of affordable housing is skewed
when it is based on credits alone, as the current plan dictates.
With regard to the development that was just approved, the table
presented to us in our agenda information packet showed a three-
bedroom apartment for a low-income family placed at $1,049 month.
That's not even affordable to an average family and with average
income. This encourages families to double and triple up in one
apartment to pay the rent. Isn't this what we're trying to discourage?
My Work Force Housing Advisory Committee is working on
correcting this pricing index, but we're not there yet, and we've got to
move forward quickly to stop any further intrusion into this area.
Also, No. 2, staff presented to the PAB, to the Planning
Advisory Board, and to the Board of County Commissioners an
Page 202
April 23, 2002
affordable housing inventory for this particular corridor that only
included these unaffordable housing projects but didn't truly reflect
the affordable housing areas such as Naples Manor, Trail Acres,
Treetops, West Winds Mobile Home Park, Gray Stone Mobile Home
Park, and Holiday Manor, just to name a few. There are over a
couple thousand of these living units combined in these areas, and
I'm only speaking of 5 linear miles on U.S. 41 East.
The concentration of affordable units in one small area creates a
multitude of problems for the roads, the schools, and the other
infrastructure. As stated at the board meeting, we need to spread
these homes over a greater area before this particular area breaks
down completely. Again, our task force is working feverishly to
solve this problem and implement a solution.
And we're -- inclusionary zoning may be one solution. I have
learned that this inclusionary zoning concept is being used around the
country. That's where you're including a work force housing element
in each PUD, by the way. That's what inclusionary zoning is. And
they are using it around the country, and really it's quite -- it's worked
quite effectively. This is a part of smart growth and community
character that should be considered soon in our Land Development
Code changes.
As desperate as Collier County is for affordable housing, your
approval of the Henderson Creek Development was, in my opinion, a
poor decision, particularly in light of the infrastructure issues in that
specific area. While that decision has been made, I would ask the
Board of County Commissioners to schedule a workshop to discuss
affordable and work force housing in June to make these obvious and
important changes. And I thank you.
CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you, Commissioner Fiala.
And with that, I have nothing further to add. Thank you all for a
Page 203
April 23, 2002
wonderful, enjoyable meeting. We got quite a bit accomplished.
*****Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala and carried 4/0 (Commissioner Carter out), that the following
items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or
adopted: *****
Item #16Al - Moved to Item #10C
Item #16A2 - Deleted
Item #16A3
PROVIDING FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF LIENS FOR THE
RESOLUTIONS 2002-188 THROUGH 2002-202, COST OF THE
ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCES
Item #16A4
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING ADDITIONAL
CARRY FORWARD IN THE AMOUNT OF $490,600 IN THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND
Item # 16A5
TWO PERMANENT POSITIONS (PLANNING TECHNICIAN)
WITHIN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENT SERVICES DIVISION TO MEET INCREASED
WORKLOAD DEMANDS-ESTIMATED COST OF $41,000 FOR
BALANCE OF FY
Item # 16A6- Moved to Item # 1 OD
Item # 16B 1
Page 204
April 23, 2002
RESOLUTION 2002-203 AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION
BY GIFT OR PURCHASE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY IN FEE SIMPLE
TITLE, AS WELL AS PERPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS AND TEMPORARY
DRIVEWAY RESTORATION EASEMENTS AND TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS WHICH WILL BE REQUIRED
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, AND
UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE SIX-LANING
OF GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY BETWEEN AIRPORT ROAD
AND SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD, C.I.E. NO. 73
(PROJECT NO. 60027)- FISCAL IMPACT: $3,636,000
Item # 16B2
EASEMENT AGREEMENT AND ACCEPT A DRAINAGE
EASEMENT FOR THE LELY STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT, NOT TO EXCEED $1,200.00
Item #16B3
RESOLUTION 2002-204 ESTABLISHING A "NO FISHING"
RESTRICTION ON BRIDGE NUMBER 030210, PLANTATION
PARKWAY OVER THE EVERGLADES DRAINAGE CANAL,
REQUIRING TWO SIGNS AT AN APPROX. COST OF $200
Item # 16B4
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE RADIO ROAD AT DAVIS
BOULEVARD INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT
NO. 65031
Item # 16B5
Page 205
April 23, 2002
ACCEPT A DONATION OF SIX (6) BENCHES AND
MEMORIAL PLAQUES ON BEHALF OF THE VANDERBILT
BEACH MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNIT (MSTU)
BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND
AUTHORIZE THE INSTALLATION AND PLACEMENT AT THE
LOCATION DETERMINED BY THE MSTU ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
Item #16B6
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE TROPICANA BOULEVARD
PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $29,000 FROM OPERATING IN
THE GOLDEN GATE MUNICIPAL SERVICES TAXING UNIT
(MSTU) FUND 136
Item # 16B7
AMENDMENT TO A DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION
AGREEMENT WITH WCI COMMUNITIES TO PERMIT AN
EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONSTRUCTION OF GOLF CART
UNDERPASS AND PROVIDE FOR LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
Item # 16B8
EASEMENT AGREEMENT AND ACQUIRE DRAINAGE
EASEMENTS AT A COST OF $27,304.00 FOR STORMWATER
FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE TO THE
LAKE KELLY OUTFALL DITCH (PROJECT NO. 31801)
Item #16B9
PREPARE AND ADVERTISE AN ORDINANCE TO PERMIT
THE EXPENDITURE OF ROAD IMPACT FEES BETWEEN AND
Page 206
April 23, 2002
AMONG ADJACENT COLLIER COUNTY ROAD IMPACT FEE
DISTRICTS
Item # 16B 10 - Deleted
AWARD RFP 02-3346- STANDARDIZATION OF
DECORATIVE COUNTY STREET LIGHTS TO
ARCHITECTURAL AREA LIGHTING WHERE MSTU OR
OTHER FUNDING IS AVAILABLE FROM OTHER STANDARD
STREET LIGHTS
Item # 16C 1
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 $69.00 TO RECORD THE LIENS
Item # 16C2
RESOLUTION 2002-205 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 $28.50 TO RECORD THE
LIENS
Item # 16C3
RESOLUTION 2002-206 APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIENS FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS
Page 207
April 23, 2002
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 $24.00 TO RECORD THE
LIENS
Item # 16C4
RESOLUTION 2002-207 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 $24.00 TO RECORD THE
LIENS
Item #16C5
RESOLUTION 2002-208 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 $30.00 TO RECORD THE
LIENS
Item #16C6
RESOLUTION 2002-209 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 1995 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
Page 208
April 23, 2002
ASSESSMENTS;FISCAL IMPACT IS $58.50 TO RECORD THE
LIENS
Item # 16C7
RESOLUTION 2002-210 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 $76.50 TO RECORD THE
LIENS
Item # 16C8
ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE BETWEEN NTC DEVELOPMENT,
LTD., AND CARLTON LAKES, LLC, WITH NO FISCAL
IMPACT TO THE COUNTY
Item #16C9 - Deleted
Item # 16C 10
AWARD CONTRACT #02-3313 "FIXED TERM PROFESSIONAL
GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SERVICES (GIS)" TO THE
FOLLOWING FIRMS: 3001 INC., JOHNSON ENGINEERING
INC., AND WILSON MILLER, INC.; TOTAL FY02 AWARD FOR
THESE CONTRACTS $747,267
Item #16C 11
RATIFY DEPUTY COUNTY MANAGER'S APPROVAL OF
EMERGENCY PURCHASE ORDER Z02-006 TO TRISEP
CORPORATION AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS IN THE
Page 209
April 23, 2002
AMOUNT OF $56,600 FOR THE PURCHASE OF REVERSE
OSMOSIS MEMBRANES AT THE NORTH COUNTY
REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Item #16C12
REMEDIATION TASKS FOR NAPLES LANDFILL GUN
RANGE, RESTORATION OF CELLS 1 AND 2, AND PROVIDE
GEO TECHNICAL/ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT AND
EXECUTE THE TASKS BY PIGGYBACKING TAMPA PORT
AUTHORITY CONTRACT #01-1401-01 WITH PROFESSIONAL
SERVICE INDUSTRIES 1NC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $468,936
(PLUS A 25% CONTINGENCY OF $117,234 FOR A TOTAL OF
$586,170)
Item # 16D 1
RESOLUTION 2002-211 APPOINTING OFFICERS TO THE
COLLIER COUNTY AGRICULTURAL FAIR AND EXPOSITION,
INC., BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR 2002-2003
Item # 16D2
CHANGE ORDER #1 WITH BRADANNA, INC., IN THE
AMOUNT OF $63,589.47 AND APPROVE BUDGET
AMENDMENT IN AMOUNT OF $70,000 FOR TIGERTAIL
BEACH CONCESSION PROJECT
Item # 16E 1
REPORT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
CONCERNING THE SALE AND TRANSFER OF ITEMS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE COUNTY SURPLUS AUCTION OF
Page 210
April 23, 2002
MARCH 16, 2002, RESULTING IN $335,419.20 IN NET
REVENUES
Item #16E2
AWARD CONTRACTS #02-3324 "FIXED TERM
PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING AND PHOTOGRAMETRIC
SERVICES" TO THE FOLLOWING FIRMS: WILSON MILLER,
WILKISON AND ASSOCIATES, SOUTHERN MAPPING,
JOHNSON ENGINEERING, Q. GRADY MINOR AND
ASSOCIATES (ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT $225,000)
Item #16E3
FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
SPRINT-FLORIDA, INCORPORATED, AND COLLIER COUNTY
TO REDUCE THE LEASED AREA AND FY01/02 RENTAL
INCOME BY $715 ANNUALLY
Item # 16E4
COLLIER COUNTY PURCHASING DEPARTMENT TO ISSUE A
PURCHASE ORDER UNDER STATE CONTRACT #250-04 0-99-
1 IN THE AMOUNT OF $49,985.21 TO AVAYA
COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE NEW IMMOKALEE JAIL
CENTER PHONE SYSTEM
Item # 16F 1
LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN NORTH NAPLES FIRE
CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT AND COLLIER COUNTY
FOR SHARED USE OF STATION #46 AT AN ANNUAL RENT
Page 211
April 23, 2002
OF $15,910.00 AND A $22,539.17 TOTAL BUDGET IMPACT
DURING FY01/02
Item # 16F2
RESOLUTION 2002-212 REVISING THE BY-LAWS OF THE
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES ADVISORY COUNCIL
Item # 16G 1
BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT- BUDGET AMENDMENT
#02-279 (GENERAL FUND 001, HEALTH CARE
RESPONSIBILITY ACT, $20,000)
Item # 16H 1
ACCEPTANCE OF AN AVIATION GRANT AND TRANSFER OF
MATCHING AMOUNT FROM RESERVES
Item #16I 1 - Added
RESOLUTION 2002-213 APPOINTING RON PENNINGTON TO
THE COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Item # 16J1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE- FILED AND/OR
REFERRED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented
by the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the
various departments as indicated:
Page 212
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
FOR BOARD ACTION:
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
AG
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 March 23, 2002 through March 29, 2002
2. Disbursements for March 30, 2002 through April 5, 2002
3. Disbursements for April 6, 2002 through April 12, 2002
B. Districts:
Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Board - Minutes of February 4,
2002.
C. Minutes:
1. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board_- Agenda for March 27, 2002
Livingston Road Phase II Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee -
Agenda for March 6, 27, 2002, Minutes of March 6, 2002
o
Collier County Planning Commission - Agenda for April 12, 2002,
Minutes of March 12, 2002
Environmental Advisory Council - Agenda for April 3, 2002, Minutes of
March 6, 2002
5. Workforce Housing Advisory Committee - Agenda for April 1, 2002
o
Rural Land Area Assessment Oversight Committee - Meeting Notice for
April 1, 2002
o
Immokalee Local Redevelopment Advisory Board - Minutes of March
28, 2002
o
H:Data/Format
Collier County Hispanic Advisory Board
Agenda for March 28, 2002
Rural Lands Assessment Area Oversight Committee - Agenda for April
1, 2002, Minutes of February 4, 2002, Minutes of February 25, Minutes
of March 18, 2002 AGENDA ITEM IIt~
~tic~llf Mcct~n~ and
APR 2 3 ZOOt
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee - Agenda for March 27, 2001,
Agenda for April 3, 2002, Minutes of March 6, 2002.
a) Clam Bay Sub-Committee - April 4, 2002
Bayshore/Gateway Local Redevelopment Advisory Board - Minutes for
December 13,. 2001, January 3, 2002, February 7, 2002 and April 3, 2002.
Collier County Library Advisory Board - Agenda for March 27, 2002
Collier County Health and Human Services Advisory Committee -
Agenda for April 10, 2002, Minutes for March 21, 2002.
Enterprise Zone Development Agency - Minutes of November 29, 2001,
Minutes of Jammry 24, 2002.
Vanderbilt Beach M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee - Agenda for April 4,
2002, Minutes for March 7, 2002
Code Enforcement Board Advisory Committee - Agenda for March 238,
2002.
Bayshore Beautification Advisory Committee M.S.T.U. - Agenda for
April 10, 2002, Minutes of March 13, 2002.
H:Data/Format
A, PR 2 3 2.00l
April 23, 2002
Item # 16K1
ADDITION OF A FULL TIME PRETRIAL OFFICER IN THE
COURTS' PROBATION AND PAROLE DEPARTMENT AT A
COST OF $32,478
Item # 16K2
FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $377,600 FOR STRUCTURES TO
TEMPORARILY HOUSE THE OVERFLOW OF INMATE
POPULATION AT THE NAPLES JAIL CENTER
Item # 16K3
FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT TO FILE THE
STATE OF FLORIDA ANNUAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001 AS
REQUIRED BY FLORIDA STATUTE 218.32
Item # 16K4
RE-APPROPRIATE INVESTIGATION FUNDING IN THE
AMOUNT OF $63,808.36 FROM THE FLORIDA VIOLENT
CRIME AND DRUG CONTROL COUNCIL TO THE SHERIFF'S
OFFICE
Item #16K5
RENOVATE THE REVEREND DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING
JR./SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS BUILDING IN THE
AMOUNT OF $103,000
Item # 16L 1
Page 213
April 23, 2002
APPROVE THE RELEASE OF THREE (3) UNITS FOR
OCCUPANCY AS A PARTIAL SETTLEMENT OF SHADER-
LOMBARDO INVESTMENTS, LLC V. COLLIER COUNTY, CASE
NO. 01-4135-CA-HDH (I.E. VANDERBILT VILLAS LAWSUIT)
Item # 16L2
RATIFY AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S
RETENTION OF EXPERT WITNESSES/CONSULTANTS 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 AND WAIVE THE REQUIREMENTS OF
THE CONSULTANTS' COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATION ACT
DUE TO AN EMERGENCY IF AND TO THE EXTENT THE
PURCHASING POLICY OR THE CONSULTANTS'
COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATION ACT ARE APPLICABLE, AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN ANY NECESSARY
RETENTION DOCUMENTS
Item # 16L3
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
EASEMENT ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 315 IN THE LAWSUIT
ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V. WILFREDO MARIBONA, ET
AL, (GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD, PROJECT NO. 63041)-
STAFF TO DEPOSIT $180 INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE
COURT
Item # 16L4
Page 214
April 23, 2002
OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENTS, ROBERT B. AND
RUTH E. STIRLING, FOR PARCELS 179 AND 179T IN THE
AMOUNT OF $11,400.00 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER
COUNTY V. DR. FRANCISCO O. CORTINA, ETAL, CASE NO. 00-
0936-CA, GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD PROJECT 63041 -
STAFF TO DEPOSIT $4,900 INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE
COURT
Item # 16L5
OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENTS, DOUGLAS
TERRY, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF DAVID TERRY, AND
DUANE TERRY, FOR PARCEL 203 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$1,000.00 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
DOUGLAS TERRY, ETAL, CASE NO. 00-1297-CA. PROJECT
NO. 63041 - STAFF TO DEPOSIT $400 INTO THE REGISTRY
OF THE COURT
Item #16L6
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO PAY FOR MINOR SECURITY
RECOMMENDED ALTERATIONS OF THE OFFICE SPACE
ALLOCATED TO THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY
Item # 17A
ORDINANCE 2002-18 ESTABLISHING THE LAKE TRAFFORD
RESTORATION TASK FORCE; PROVIDING FOR CREATION
AND INTENT; PROVIDING FUNCTIONS, POWERS AND
DUTIES; PROVIDING FOR APPOINTMENT AND
COMPOSITION, TERMS OF OFFICE, ATTENDANCE AND
FILLING OF VACANCIES; PROVIDING FOR REMOVAL FROM
Page 215
April 23, 2002
OFFICE FOR FAILURE TO ATTEND MEETINGS; PROVIDING
FOR OFFICERS, QUORUM AND RULES OF PROCEDURE;
PROVIDING FOR REVIEW PROCESS; PROVIDING FOR
CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:35 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
g COLETTA, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:..
D~?t .G' ~..[:BROCK, CLERK
..;..~ese m~nut~s approved by the Board
as k or as co ected
Page 216
April 23, 2002
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT
REPORTING, 1NC., BY CAROLYN FORD AND BARBARA
DRESCHER, NOTARIES PUBLIC
Page 217