BCC Minutes 04/22/2003 RApril 22, 2003
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, April 22, 2003
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 district as has been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
Tom Henning
Frank Halas
Donna Fiala
Fred W. Coyle
Jim Coletta
ALSO PRESENT: Jim Mudd, County Manager; David
Weigel, County Attorney; and Jim Mitchell, Clerk of Court's Finance
Director.
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
April 22, 2003
9:00 a.m.
Tom Henning, Chairman, District 3
Donna Fiala, Vice-Chair, District 1
Frank Halas, Commissioner, District 2
Fred W. Coyle, Commissioner, District 4
Jim Coletta, Commissioner, District 5
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA 1TEM
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 THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
1
April 22, 2003
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, (239) 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.
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor Andrew Delong, Tree of Life Church
e
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.)
B. March 19, 2003 - Special Meeting
C. March 19, 2003 - Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting
D. March 25, 2003 - Regular Meeting
E. April 2, 2003 - District 5 Town Hall Meeting
F. April 4, 2003 - Workforce Housing Workshop
SERVICE AWARDS
A. Twenty-Year Attendees:
1) Barbara Pedone, Communication and Customer Relations
2) Glenn Price, Parks and Recreation
B. Twenty-Five Year Attendee:
2
April 22, 2003
1) Howard McFee, Community Development Services
e
PROCLAMATIONS
Ae
Proclamation to proclaim the week of May 4 to May 10th for Be Kind to
Animals Week. To be accepted by Jodi Walters, Director, Domestic Animal
Services.
Be
Proclamation to designate April 25 and April 26, 2003 as Collier County
Government Days. To be accepted by Barbara Pedone, Communications
and Customer Relations Administrative Assistant.
Ce
Proclamation to designate the Month of May as Elder Law Month. To be
accepted by Jill Burzynski, Collier County Bar Association President and an
Elder Care Law Practitioner.
Proclamation to recognize the month of May as Civility Month. To be
accepted by Collier County Attorney, David Weigel.
Ee
Proclamation to designate May 2003 as Florida State Parks Month. To be
accepted by Joe Howard from Collier-Seminole State Park, Greg Toppin
from Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park and Robert Sieiger from
Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Park.
Fe
Proclamation to designate the week of April 20-26, 2003 as Rotary
International Group Study Exchange Week. To be accepted by Leslie
Cleaver, Rotarian Team Leader.
PRESENTATIONS
Ae
Recommendation to recognize Connie Staples, Accounting Technician,
Utilities Finance Department, as Employee of the Month for April 2003.
Be
Presentation by Fire Chief Donald R. Peterson, regarding the installation of
speed bumps, calming devices and pre-entry treatments on roads.
Ce
An oral report to the Board of County Commissioners on the results of an
employee "Ethics Audit". (Jean Merritt, Interim Director, Human
Resources)
3
April 22, 2003
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
Ae
Public petition request by Mr. Gerald Bums to discuss excluding Kensington
from the Livingston Road Beautification Phase II MSTU.
Bo
Public petition request by Mr. Bryan Banks to discuss gun range located east
of CR951 and north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road.
0
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Ao
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure by provided by Commission members. VA-2003-AR-3658,
Beau Keene, P.E., of Keene Engineering, representing Maria Martinez,
owner, requesting a 3.3 foot after-the-fact front yard setback variance from
the required 15 feet leaving a 11.7 foot front yard for residential property
located in the "E" estates zoning district, the property to be considered for
the variance is located at 811 Everglades Boulevard at the northwest
intersection of 8th Avenue NE and Everglades Boulevard north, in Section 6,
Township 49 S, Range 28 E, Collier County, Florida. This property consists
of 1.64 acres and is located in Golden Gate Estates.
Se
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Ao
This item to be heard at 1:00 p.m. An ordinance amending Section 130-3
of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, also cited as Ordinance
No. 83-35 § 1, relating to restricting trucks weighing over 5 tons from using
the left lane on multi-lane roadways, except for passing or preparing to make
a left mm; providing for conflict and severability; providing for inclusion in
Code of Laws and Ordinances; and providing for an effective date.
Bo
Board consideration of the adoption of an ordinance creating the Naples
Park Area Underground Power Line Municipal Services Taxing Unit;
providing the authority; providing for the creation of the Municipal Services
Taxing Unit; providing a purpose and governing body; providing for annual
estimates of expenses; providing for ad valorem taxes; providing for the
collection of taxes; providing for the duties of the County Manager;
providing for inclusion in the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances;
providing for an effective date.
4
April 22, 2003
e
10.
C. Adopt the Collier County Industrial Pretreatment Ordinance including
general discharge prohibitions of industrial waste; maximum concentrations
allowed; use of interceptors (grease traps); and, service charges and fees.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Educational Facilities Authority.
B. Appointment of member to the Collier County Health Facilities Authority.
C. Appointment of members to the Housing Finance Authority.
D. Appointment of members to the Industrial Development Authority.
E. Appointment of members to the Water and Wastewater Authority.
F. Appointment of member to the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee.
G. Appointment of members to the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Local
Redevelopment Advisory Board by the Board of County Commissioners and
the CRA.
II. A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners to extend the term of
the Community Character/Smart Growth Advisory Committee.
I. Discussion on employees and Commissioners Ethics Ordinance.
(Commissioner Henning)
J. This item to be heard at 1:15 p.m. Request the Board reconsider prior
Board direction to staff to fabricate and install signs requesting trucks not to
use engine brakes in and near residential areas. (Commissioner Halas)
COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
Request by Melanie and Tim Beebe for waiver of variance petition fees for
property located at 245 22nd Avenue NE, further described as Golden Gate
Estates, Unit 23 East 180', Tract 50, in Section 27, Township 48 south,
Range 27 east, Collier County, Florida. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator,
Community Development)
5
April 22, 2003
11.
Be
Approve a work plan proposed by the Black Affairs Advisory Board. (John
Dunnuck, Administrator, Public Services)
Approve a Collier County landscape beautification master plan and funding;
approve a level of landscape beautification for medians, retention ponds, and
interchanges; adopt the Collier County Landscape Beautification Master
Plan as policy for arterial and collector roadways. (Norman Feder,
Administrator, Transportation Services)
Item continued from the April 8~ 2003 BCC Meeting. Approve a
Supplemental TDC Category "A" grant application, budget amendment and
tourism agreement amendment for Lowdermilk Park Renovation, in the total
amount of $150,000. (John Dunnuck, Administrator, Public Services)
Adopt resolution opposing proposed Senate Bill No. 654 and House PCB
BR 03-06 which have the potential to allow telephone companies
unconscionable, unjustified rate increases and prohibits local governments
authority to enforce cable franchise agreements with regard to services and
quality of service related to broadband or information services. (Joseph K.
Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development)
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12.
13.
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Ao
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
settlement of all issues concerning payment that have arisen between and
among Collier County, the Clerk of Circuit Court and Kraft Construction
Co., Inc. in connection with the construction of the North Naples Library.
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14.
15.
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
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
6
April 22, 2003
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.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
Approve 2003 Tourism Agreement with the City of Naples for Tourist
Development Special Event Grant, regarding the 2003 City of Naples
Fourth of July Celebration, in the amount of $50,000.
2)
Approval of proposed payment of nuisance abatement principal only
for Resolution No's: 90-550, 91-406; 94-252; and 94-198 styled
Board of County Commissioners Collier County, Florida vs. Elizabeth
Chambers.
3)
Approval of tri-party agreements for Sawgrass Pines and Saddlebrook
Village Apartments.
4) Code Enforcement lien resolution approvals.
5)
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Pelican Marsh Unit Four,
Phase One".
6)
Request to grant final acceptance of the roadway, drainage, water and
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Pelican Marsh Unit Four,
Phase Two".
7)
8)
9)
Recommendation to approve Commercial Excavation Permit No.
59.856/AR-3916 "Creative Homes Commercial Excavation", located
in Section 21, Township 48 south, Range 28 east; bounded on the
south by 31 st Avenue NE right-of-way, on the west, north, and east by
vacant estates zoning.
Request to authorize the Chairman to execute a construction,
maintenance and escrow agreement for Summit Place, Phase I.
Approve a TDC Category "A" Grant Application and Budget
Amendment in the amount of $16,000 for installation of gates at
7
April 22, 2003
11)
12)
South Marco Beach Access Parking Area.
To approve a budget amendment of $249,000 for the expenditure of
funds from Fund 186-Immokalee Redevelopment, for projects within
the Immokalee Redevelopment Area.
Companion Item to 17F: Approve FY03-04 (July 1, 2003 to June
30, 2004) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program
and Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) budgets and
authorize FAH Department to hire one additional staff member to
implement and administer the CDBG and HOME Programs.
This item continued from the April 8~ 2003 BCC Meeting.
Recommendation that the Board approve $206,000 in additional
funding to augment current appropriations for consulting and legal
services from Carlton Fields under the existing continuing services
contract for contingent growth management services in support of the
Checkbook Concurrency LDC and GMP Amendments, Traffic Impact
Vesting Process, Defense of Challenges to the Notice of Intent by
DCA to find the Rural Fringe Amendments in compliance, and the
Work Program for development of LDC to implement the Final Order
Amendments to the GMP.
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
Approval of a resolution of the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners requesting continual regional coordination efforts
between the Collier County MPO and the Lee County MPO.
2)
Approve Change Order No. 4 in the amount of $10,152.75 to Better
Roads, Inc., for the Livingston Road Project, Phase III, from Pine
Ridge Road to Immokalee Road, Project No. 62071.
3)
Approve a budget amendment to transfer funds from the Urban
Immokalee Basin Stormwater Master Plan Project (51013) to the Fifth
Street Ditch Enclosure Project (51725) in the amount of $190,000.
4)
Approve award of a construction contract to the lowest bidder, Better
Roads, Inc. for the Transfer Road Improvements Project No. 69110
8
April 22, 2003
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
Bid No. 03-3453, in the amount of $580,945.70.
Approve a budget amendment in the amount of $50,000 to establish a
reserve fund in the MSTD Landscape Project Fund 112.
That the Board approve the Vehicle Lease Agreement between the
Collier County Board of County Commissioners and ATC Paratransit
and authorize the Chairman to enter into the agreement.
Approve Change Order No. 4 in the amount of $22,751.76 to Ajax
Paving Industries Inc. for the Goodlette Frank Road Project, from
Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road, Project No. 60134.
Approval of work order under Contract #00-3184, for the construction
engineering and inspections services by HDR Construction Control
Corporation, for Lakeland Avenue Bridge and Roadway Construction,
Project No. 66042, in the amount of $147,277.
Recommendation to approve the purchase of one (1) single engine
street sweeper track, per Bid #03-3485.
This item continued from the April 8~ 2003 BCC Meetinu.
Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
conditionally accept recorded easements and deeds for Whippoorwill
Lane; and approve an Indemnification Agreement; and accept
provision of cash escrow. All matters pertain to the land acquisition
and construction of a roadway on the property accepted by the County
for construction by private parties of Whippoorwill Lane.
Approve a change order with Better Roads Inc., for median
modifications on Davis Boulevard in the amount of $16,740 from
Project 60016.
Approve Bid #03-3490, "Vineyards/Pine Ridge Road Median
Irrigation Installation and Award to Hannula Irrigation Inc." in the
amount of $68,111.41.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
9
April 22, 2003
1)
2)
3)
4)
$)
6)
Ratify the award of a work order to Mitchell and Stark Construction
Company, Inc., for acid feed pump modifications at the North County
Regional Water Treatment Plant, Project 70057, in the amount of
$63,374.
Approve Change Order 2 to Douglas N. Higgins Inc., for Port-Au-
Prince Utility Replacement, Project 73060 and 70074, Contract 02-
3367, in the amount of $3,000.
Approve a work order, under Contract 4401-3271, fixed term
professional engineering services for Coastal Zone Management
Projects, with Coastal Planning and Engineering Inc., for the annual
monitoring of County/Naples beaches, Project 90004, in the amount
of $93,825.
Approve budget amendments for the re-appropriation of funds within
the water and wastewater impact and user fee projects.
Approve amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Water
Resource Solutions related to aquifer storage and recovery of
reclaimed water, RFP 99-2926, Project 74030, in the amount of
$550,222.
Approve a change order for an additional $9,750 in consulting fees to
Public Resources Management Group (PRMG) for a Project
Feasibility Report for refunding Utility System Revenue Refunding
Bonds, Series 1994 with Series 2003 Bonds.
PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
Authorize termination for convenience of secondary concession
location at Naples Branch Library under Contract No. 02-3334
"Library Coffee Bar Concession Agreement", with Paradise
Consultants, Inc.
2)
Adopt a resolution appointing officers to the Collier County
Agricultural Fair and Exposition, Inc. Board of Directors for 2003-
2004.
10
April 22, 2003
3)
4)
6)
Approve budget amendment of $150,000 from General Fund Reserves
to pay for expenditures incurred and anticipated as required by the
Health Care Responsibility Act (HCRA).
Approve an agreement with Turbomecca Engine Corporation for
helicopter maintenance in the estimated amount of $386,000 over a
period of three (3) years.
Address wage and retention issues within Emergency Medical
Services.
Approve a Resolution naming the Nature Trail at Barefoot Beach
Preserve the Alice and Harold Saylor Nature Trail.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1)
Approval to award Bid No. 03-3474 for the purchase of plumbing
parts and supplies used in County repairs and maintenance estimating
$57,000.
2)
Recommendation to award Bid No. 03-3468, pump and motor repair
for County-wide maintenance of equipment to Naples Armature as
primary and Horvath Electric as secondary in the estimated amount of
$300,000.
3)
Award RFP 03-3444, Janitorial Services Contract in the estimated
annual amount of $1,251,800 and approve a budget amendment in the
amount of $222,800 to the operating budget to cover the increase
costs associated with the new contract.
4)
Recommendation to award Bid No. 03-3487, Supervisor of Elections
Building (C2) renovations to Surety Construction Company in the
amount of $605,182 and approve a budget amendment in the amount
of $163,536 to finish the Supervisor of Elections move along with the
Clerk of Courts 5th and 6th floor renovations.
5)
Approval of a first amendment to lease agreement with Congressman
Porter Goss to extend his office space lease for two additional years at
total revenue of $20.00.
11
April 22, 2003
6)
7)
8)
Recommendation to approve and implement a procedure for reporting
and ratifying staff-approved change orders to Board-approved
contracts.
Approve Change Order No. 5, Contract #00-3070, design of the
Development Services Building Addition and Parking Garage, to
Barany Schmitt Summers Weaver and Parmers, Inc., in the amount of
$9,000.
Approve surplus of a 1996 Freightliner Medic Master Ambulance and
donation to the City of Naples.
Fe
COUNTY MANAGER
1)
Approval of Budget Amendment Report-budget amendment #03-253
for $500 to pay for outstanding electric bills and for the remainder of
the fiscal year.
2)
Approve Hold Harmless and Indemnification Agreement from
Montelena Developers Inc., and the Montelena Condominium
Association for the benefit of Collier County and for any claims
resulting from the construction and use of an electronic gated entry by
Montelena Developers Inc.
Ge
He
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Approve a budget amendment for $50,600 to complete the Immokalee
Industrial Park Improvement Project 33327.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Jo
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) That the Board of County Commissioners make a determination of
whether the purchases of goods and services documented in the
Detailed Report of Open Purchase Orders serve a valid public purpose
April 22, 2003
2)
and authorize the expenditure of County funds to satisfy said
purchases.
Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners serve as the
Local Coordinating Unit of Government in the Florida Department of
Law Enforcement's Anti-Drug Abuse Act Formula Grant Program.
17.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Approve the mediated settlement agreement and a stipulated final
judgment to be drafted incorporating the same terms and conditions as
the mediated settlement agreement relative to the acquisition of
parcels 102A, 102B, 102C and 103 in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. 520 Fifth Avenue Company LP, et al., Case No. 02-1766-
CA (Livingston Road, Project No. 62071).
2)
Approve the Offer of Judgment relative to the Fee Simple Acquisition
of Parcel 177 in the Lawsuit styled Collier County v. Big Corkscrew
Fire District, et al, Case No. 02-2218-CA (Immokalee Road Project
#60018).
3)
Request for the Board of County Commissioners to authorize Cinco
de Mayo Annual Festival to be held at the Immokalee Airport,
including sale of alcohol and waive the sixty-day application period.
SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE
QUASIJUDICAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN
IN.
13
April 22, 2003
Co
De
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex part~
disclosure by provided by Commission members. SE-03-AR-3928, an
Ordinance amending Ordinance 02-47, thc ASGM klusincss Center of
Naples PUD to correct a Scrivcncr's Error resulting from the unintentional
omission of thc conceptual PUD Master Plan in the transmittal copy of thc
adopted PUD to thc Department of State for thc property located on thc cast
side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Section 10, Township 51 south,
Range 2(5 east, Collier County, Florida.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure by provided by Commission members. CU-2002-AR-2866
Mario Valle of Creative Homes, requesting a conditional usc in thc "E"
Estates Zoning District per LDC Section 2.2.3.3.7, to allow a lake
excavation on 5.0 acres located at 4225 31st Avenue NE and 4235 31st
Avenue NE, further described as Tract 73, Golden Gate Estates Unit 67, in
Section 21, Township 48 south, Range 28 east, Collier County, Florida.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure by provided by Commission members. VA-2002-AR-3191,
Dawn Winters, requesting a variance from the required setbacks for the front
yard and both side yards for property located at 112 Moon Bay Street,
further described as Lot 112, Port-Au-Prince subdivision, in Section 15,
Township 51 south, Range 26 east, Collier County, Florida.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure by provided by Commission members. Petition
AVPLAT2003-AR3774 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and
the Public's interest in two portions of the drainage easement located in
Tract "A", according to the plat of"Carillon" as recorded in Plat Book 21,
Pages 59 through 61, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, and to
accept two relocation drainage easements within said Tract "A", located in
Section 13, Township 49 south, Range 25 east.
This item requires that ali participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure by provided by Commission members. RZ-2002-AR-3539
Vincent A. Cautero, AICP, of Coastal Engineering Consultants Inc.,
representing Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc., requests a rezone
from "A" Rural Agricultural Zoning District to "RSF-5(3)" Residential
Single-Family Zoning District to allow a maximum of 31 lots to be
developed as a residential subdivision with some percentage to be set aside
14
April 22, 2003
Fe
for affordable housing units. This property consists of 10.3+ acres; this area
may be added to a 26.4-acre subdivision that was approved for a maximum
of 79 single-family home sites that is located immediately to the north. The
subject property is located at 10401 and 10407 Greenway Road, in Section
12, Township 51 south, Range 26 east, Collier County, Florida.
Companion Item to 16 (A) 11: A resolution by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, approving the Fiscal Year 2003-
2004 Collier County Consolidated Plan One-Year Action Plan, for
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) and Home Investment
Partnerships (HOME) Program, authorizing necessary certifications,
approving execution of CDBG Sub-Recipient Agreements by CDES
Division Administrator, authorizing submission to the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development, and providing for an
effective date.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
15
April 22, 2003
April 22, 2003
Item #2A
REGULAR, SUMMARY AND CONSENT
AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
AGENDA-APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Call the meeting of the Board of
Commissioners to order. Today being April 22, 2002 (sic). Welcome,
all.
We'll start out with invocation given by Pastor Andrew Delong
from the Tree of Life Church, and followed by that we'll have the
pledge of allegiance led by Jack Pointer. Would you all rise, please.
PASTOR DELONG: Oh, God, we put our trust in you. We
thank you for the heritage and the freedom that we have in this great
county. We thank you, Lord, for those who have defended and are
defending the freedoms of our country, even this very day.
We ask, Lord, that you would bless this day and all of the
responsibilities that lie ahead.
We ask for wisdom from above. We ask, Lord, for favor with
those that we must work with and work together with. We ask for
discernment to know which is right and which is wrong.
We ask, Lord, that you would just give us the ability to represent
your life to one another.
We must honor, we must respect one another, and we ask, Lord,
that you would help us in the decisions that we make this day. We
trust you, we believe in you, and we ask that our actions would
represent that.
We ask your blessings upon our country. We ask your blessings
upon our county, and we ask, Lord, your blessings upon the leaders
that you have placed over this county. Give them the ability to make
the decisions that will represent the people of this great community.
Page 2
April 22, 2003
And we love you and we honor you. In Christ's name, we pray.
Amen.
MR. POINTER: If you will join me, please.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Jack Pointer.
County Attorney David Weigel, do you have any additions,
corrections, deletions from our agenda today?
MR. WEIGEL: Just one comment, and that is when Mr. Mudd
gets down 16(A)3, I will physically tender into the record the exhibits
that are mentioned on the reference to 16(A)3.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager Jim Mudd, thank
you for everything that you do for us.
Do you have any corrections today?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
The changes to the agenda -- good morning.
First item is 5(B). That will be continued to May 13th, 2003, and
that's a presentation by Fire Chief Donald R. Peterson regarding the
installation of speed bumps, traffic calming, and pre-entry treatments
on roads, and that's at the petitioner's request.
Next item is item 9(H). A copy of the resolution was omitted
from the original executive summary. Resolution of the Board of
County Commissioners to extend the term of the Community
Character/Smart Growth Advisory Committee, and that -- and that
item resolution has been provided to the commissioners.
Next item is move item 16(A)7 to item 10(F), and that's a
recommendation to approve commercial excavation permit
59.856/AR-3916 -- I wonder who makes these numbers up -- Creative
Homes Commercial Excavation located in Section 21, Township 48
south, Range 28 east; bounded on the south by 31st Avenue Northeast
right-of-way on the west, north and east by vacant estates zonings, and
that's at Commissioner Fiala's request.
Page 3
April 22, 2003
Correction to item 16(A) 11. Under considerations should read,
and an increase in CDBG program funding from 2,159,000 to
$2,778,000, and that's at the staffs request.
Next item is item 16(B)1, third paragraph. First line should read
coordinate, not coordination.
Next item, withdraw item 16(D)2, which is adopt a resolution
appointing officers of the Collier County Agriculture Fair and
Exposition, Inc., Board of Directors for 2003-2004, and that's at staffs
request.
Next item is to move 16(D)5 to 10(H), which is address wage and
retention issues with Emergency Medical Services, and that's at
Commissioner Coyle's request.
Next item, continue item 16(B)10 to May 13th, 2003, BCC
meeting, and that has do with the Whippoorwill Lane indemnification
agreement for recording of easements and deeds, and we're having
problems -- and Mr. Yovanovich is having problems with one land
owner, and as long as that -- he has problems with that one and he
can't give us the full group in order for him to start building the road,
then we'll keep continuing this item, Commissioner. This is about the
third time it's been continued.
Next item, continue item 16(E)2 to May 13th, 2003, and that's a
recommendation to award bid number 03-3468, pump and motor
repair for county-wide maintenance of equipment to Naples Armature
as primary and Horvath Electric as secondary in the estimated amount
of $300,000. The item is continued at staffs request because we
received a Notice of Intent to Protest.
The next item is to move item 16(E)3 to 10(G), and that's to
award RFP 03-3444, Janitorial Services Contract in the estimated
annual amount of 1.2 -- $1.2 million and approve a budget amendment
in the amount of $228,800 (sic) to the operating budget to cover the
increased costs associated with the new contract, and that's at staffs
Page 4
April 22, 2003
request.
On the second page, correction to item 17(F), companion item to
16(A) 1 1, replacement page for Exhibit A to correct fund amounts, and
that was provided to the commissioners, and that's at staffs request.
And then the final item of-- that the county attorney had
mentioned earlier, this should be read into the record before approval
of the consent agenda. Item ! 6(A)3, the two referenced Exhibit A's
with legal descriptions were not included in the public agenda package
and are now made part of the public record. That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, do you have
any --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have none.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- additions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have none, no ex partes or any
other correspondence.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, on the summary agenda.
Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nothing, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I'd like to pull 16(A)9
from the consent agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 16(A)97 And that would become
10(I)7
MR. MUDD: I, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anything else?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have nothing to declare on the
summary agenda.
Page 5
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. With that I'll entertain a
motion to approve today's regular agenda, consent agenda and
summary agenda as --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So moved.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. David Weigel, did you want to
read something into the record? Exhibits?
MR. WEIGEL: Oh. I mentioned earlier that I would be
tendering exhibits to the court reporter-- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: -- so that's what I will do, yes. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So there's a motion by Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second by Commissioner
Coletta. Commissioner Coyle.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Coletta to accept the agenda as amended.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Page 6
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
April 22, 2003
Item 5 B - Continue to M ay 1 37 2 003 B CC M eetin.q: Presentation by F ire Chief
Donald R. Peterson, regarding the installation of speed bumps, calming devices
and pre-entry treatments on roads. (Petitioner request.)
Item 9H: (Copy of Resolution was omitted from original executive summary.)
Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners to extend the term of the
Community Character/Smart Growth Advisory Committee. (Staff request.)
Move Item 16.A.7 to 10F: Recommendation to approve Commercial Excavation
Permit No. 59.856/AR-3916 "Creative Homes Commercial Excavation", located in
Section 21, Township 48 south, Range 28 east; bounded on the south by 31st
Avenue NE right-of-way, on the west, north, and east by vacant estates zoning.
(Commissioner Fiala request.)
Correction to Item 16.A. 11 - Under "Considerations" should read, "... and an
increase in CDBG program funding from $2,159,000 to $2,778,000". (Staff
request.)
Item 16.B.1 third para.qraph~ first line should read: "coordinate" not
"coordination".
Withdraw Item 16.D.2: Adopt a resolution appointing officers to the Collier County
Agricultural Fair and Exposition, Inc. Board of Directors for 2003-2004. (Staff
request.)
Move 16.D.5 to 10H: Address wage and retention issues within Emergency
Medical Services. (Commissioner Coyle request.)
Continue Item 16. B.10 to May 13, 2003 BCC meetinq: (This item was continue
from the April 8, 2003 BCC meeting). Recommendation that the Board of County
Commissioners conditionally accept recorded easements and deeds for
Whippoorwill Lane; and approve an Indemnification Agreement; and accept
provision of cash escrow. All matters pertain to the land acquisition and
construction of a roadway on the property accepted by the County for
construction by private parties of Whippoorwill Lane. (Petitioner request.)
Continue Item 16. E.2 to May 13~ 2003 BCC meetin.q: Recommendation to award
Bid No. 03-3468, pump and motor repair for County-wide maintenance of
equipment to Naples Armature as primary and Horvath Electric as secondary in
the estimated amount of $300,000. (Item continued as staff received a notice of
intent to protest.)
Move Item 16.E.3 to 10G - Award RFP 03-3444, Janitorial Services Contract in the
estimated annual amount of $1,251,800 and approve a budget amendment in the
amount of $222,800 to the operating budget to cover the increase costs
associated with the new contract. (Staff request.)
Correction to Item 17F: (Companion item to 16.A. 11) Replacement page for
"Exhibit A" to correct fund amounts. (Staff request.)
Note:
This should be read into the record before approval of the consent agenda: Item
16.A.3 - The two referenced Exhibit "A"s with legal descriptions were not included
in the public agenda package and are now made part of the public record.
April 22, 2003
Item #2B
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES AND COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH
19, 2003, REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 25, 2003,
DISTRICT 5 TOWN HALL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 2,
2003 AND WORKFORCE HOUSING WORKSHOP MINUTES OF
APRIl. 4_ 2003-APPROVED AS PRF. SF. NTED
Entertain a motion to approve the March 19, 2002 (sic), special
meeting, March 19, 2003, Community Redevelopment Agent (sic)
Meeting, March 25th, '03, regular meeting, April 2nd, 2003, District 5
Town Hall Meeting, and April 4th, 2003, workshop housing --
Workforce Housing Workshop.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So move.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Coyle, second by Commissioner Halas to approve the previous
minutes of the meetings.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Any opposed?
Motion carries, 5-0.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Henning, I'm sorry.
On my ex partes, I did meet with some habitat people, and I can't
remember what item that is, but I think it's on the consent agenda.
Page 7
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's on the summary agenda.
you for that correction.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
Thank
Items #3A & #3B
EMPI~OYEE SERVICE AWARDS-PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Item three, now we have service
awards. So if you-all would join me down in front of the dais, we're
going to present some appreciation to some of our workforce.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, it's a pleasure today to honor three
distinguished employees for their long-time service to Collier County.
The first group of awardees are 20-year awardees.
The first is Barbara Pedone from communication and customer
relations.
(Applause.)
The next awardee is Glenn Price, and there's a correction to the
agenda. He's from the transportation department, not parks and rec.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Twenty years is -- boy, you don't
look like you're old enough to have worked 20 years. MR. PRICE: Just a pup.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You've got another 20 years to go.
MR. MUDD: Thanks, Glenn.
And the next employee is a 25-year employee of Collier County,
and that's Howard McFee from community development services.
(Applause).
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
MR. McFEE: My pleasure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
Thank for all your work.
Thank you for all your service.
Page 8
April 22, 2003
MR. McFEE: My pleasure.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that completes our awardees.
Could I please have a hand for these three wonderful people.
(Applause.)
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE WEEK OF MAY 4, 2003,
TO MAY 10, 2003: AS BE KIND TO ANIMAI.S WEEK-ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item on the agenda is
proclamation. The first one -- the first proclamation is to Be Kind to
Animals Week, and the one to deliver that will be Commissioner
Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Could we call up Jodi Russells (sic),
our director of animal services.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just going to call you today,
too, and ask you to be a speaker at my Kiwanis club on Friday. Do
you bring little pets with you? MS. WALTERS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, good. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Into the restaurant?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How precious.
This is a proclamation.
Whereas, we have been endowed not only with the blessings and
benefits of our animal friends who give us companionship and great
pleasure in our daily lives, but also with a firm responsibility to
protect these fellow creatures with whom we share the earth from pain
and suffering; and,
Whereas, we recognize that instilling attitudes of kindness,
Page 9
Apdl 22, 2003
consideration and respect for all living things through humane
education in schools and the community helps provide basic values on
which a humane and civilized society is built; and,
Whereas, the people in this community are deeply indebted to the
animal care and control agencies for their invaluable contribution in
caring for lost and unwanted animals and promoting a true spirit of
kindness and consideration for animals in the minds and hearts of all
people; and,
Whereas, the first full week of May has been established as the
annual celebration of the philosophy of kindness to animals for the
88th year in 2003.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, the week of May 4th
through the 10th, 2003, Be Kind to Animals Week and to heartily
recommend to all our citizens a full participation in all the events
related thereto in this community.
Done and ordered this 22nd day of April, 2003, Tom Henning,
Chairman.
Motion to approve, Mr. Chairman.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Fiala, second by Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Thank you.
Any opposed?
Motion carries, 5-0.
Page 10
April 22, 2003
(Applause.)
MS. WALTERS: IfI could say a few words.
MR. MUDD: Sure, Jodi, go ahead.
MS. WALTERS: Just a couple words. Jodi Walters, animal
services director, for the record.
I'd like to thank the Board of County Commissioners, as always,
for their support, and I'd like to invite our community to our annual
pet show, which is May the 10th. It will be at 10 o'clock at Rover
Run, which is at Veterans Park off of Immokalee Road.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: And Commissioner, I'd hate to have the
opportunity pass. I just want to remind everybody that our DAS,
Department of Animal Services, is the best in the State of Florida, so
-- we were awarded that, so I can't forget that.
Item ~4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL 25, 2003, AND APRIL
26, 2003, AS COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT DAYS-
ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll deliver the next proclamation.
This proclamation, designate April 25th and April 26th as Collier
County Government Days. To accept this is Barbara Pedone from --
the communications, customer relations administrative assistant.
Barbara, can you come up here, please. Thank you.
Whereas, Collier County activities participation (sic) in the
celebration of county government days; and,
Whereas, the event is conducted at the Coastland Mall; and,
Whereas, Collier County is one of the fastest growing counties in
the state and hopes to meet the challenges by providing exceptional
Page 11
April 22, 2003
services to its -- all its residents; and,
Whereas, the event efforts (sic) the county the opportunity -- the
-- I'm sorry.
Whereas, this event affords the opportunity to increase
community awareness about the service of (sic) Collier County
provides and allows the county to show case its employees and the
pride and professionalism they display in their work; and,
Whereas, most of the county departments are represented at this
event; staff prepares display booths and provides information during
this event and are available to answer any questions; and,
Whereas, this event will also give residents and visitors the
opportunity to meet county officials and staff members and have --
open to friendly discussion.
NOw for (sic), be it proclaimed by the Board of Commissioners
of Collier County, Florida, April 25th and April 26th, 2003, be
designated as Collier County Govemment Days.
Done in this order, the 22nd of April, 2003.
A motion to approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Henning, second by Fiala
(sic).
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Thank you.
Page 12
April 22, 2003
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just a little -- oh, yeah, thanks.
While Barbara's coming up to the podium, I'd just like to say that
I'm going to be there Tuesday.
Commissioner Coletta, does it fit your schedule to be there
Friday or Saturday? I'll be there Saturday.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You'll be there Saturday?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. You?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll sorry?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you going to be there?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Where, Tallahassee?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I lost you, Commissioner
Henning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, no. I'm going to be in
Tallahassee.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You're going to be in Tallahassee,
okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I won't get back until late
Saturday.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coyle, are you
going to be able to attend the --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll do my best to be there Saturday.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll be coming back from
Tallahassee that day. If I can get over, I will. Don't know that I'll
make it in time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think I've got plans already to go
down to Everglades City.
Page 13
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Well, I'll be there.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, a lot of the county staff will be
there. Again, it's a -- and Barbara, I'll let you do your thing, but I'd
like to send a special invitation to Mr. Brent Batten to -- to be there
with me after his comment today in the paper.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you really are working on
Saturday, aren't you?
MR. MUDD: Absolutely. And I'd like to show him the rest of
the county employees. I'll give him a -- I'll give him a guided tour if
he'd like to go with me.
MS. PEDONE: Good morning, again, Commissioners. My
name is Barbara Pedone with the Communication and Customer
Relations Department.
Thank you for recognizing the Collier County Government Days.
This event, as you know, takes place each year. At the local level it's
not in conjunction with the National Association of County
Government Days event, which is celebrated nationally.
As we mentioned, this -- this event gives us the opportunity to
show case our services and staff who provide these services to the
county. It permits us to perform -- to inform the community about
what we have done, what we are doing, and what we intend to do in
the future.
We encourage county residents to visit this event Friday, April
25th, and Saturday, April 26th. The mall hours are -- it's at the
Coastland Center. The mall hours are Friday from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m.,
and Saturday from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
Item #4C
Page 14
April 22, 2003
PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE MONTH OF MAY, 2003,
AS EI.DER I.AW MONTH-ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next proclamation will be
delivered by Commissioner Coyle. This proclamation to designate the
month of May as Elderly Law Month.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The proclamation will be accepted
by Jill Burzynski, president of the Collier County Bar Association,
and an elder care law practitioner. Now, that doesn't mean that she is
old. It just means she helps us old people. MS. BURZYNSKI: Getting there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't even know what old is.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whereas, May has traditionally
been observed as Elder Law Month nationwide; and,
Whereas, older Americans have legal needs which require special
knowledge, expertise and attention; and,
Whereas, the State of Florida consistently endeavors to be
responsive to the needs and rights of Florida's older citizens so they
are empowered to age in a place with security, dignity and purpose;
and,
Whereas, the Academy of Florida Elder Law Attorneys, the elder
law section of the Florida Bar, and the Florida Department of Elder
Affairs strive to inform older Floridians and to make them aware of
their legal rights; and,
Whereas, the population of the United States continues to age
requiring specialized professionals to meet ever changing needs; and,
Whereas, elder law attorneys deal holistically with their clients
and families in order to address a wide variety of needs and concerns
of the elder clients and their families; and,
Whereas, elder law encompasses a wide, varied range of
important matters such as estate planning, asset protection, incapacity
Page 15
April 22, 2003
planning, long-term care planning, residents rights, advocacy for
seniors, and protection from abuse and neglect.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the month of May be
designated as Elder Law Month.
Done and ordered this 22nd day of April, 2003, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning, Chairman.
Move for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Coyle, second by Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Thank You.
(Applause.)
MS. BURZYNSKI: Thank you very much for inviting me this
morning.
Collier County's demographics, which include a large senior
population, makes the practice of elder law a critical need in this
community.
I find serving this need to be very rewarding, as I enjoy working
with senior citizens. Sometimes I think I'm as much a social worker as
I am a lawyer, but that's really what elder law is all about.
The practice of elder law is really a calling, and I'm proud to be
able to help my experienced, but sometimes vulnerable, elder clients.
Page 16
April 22, 2003
I want to thank the commissioners for recognizing the service to
the community that elder law attorneys provide.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE MONTH OF MAY, 2003,
AS CIVII.ITY MONTH-ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation will be delivered
by Commissioner Halas. This proclamation is to recognize the month
of May as civility month.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And to accept this is going to be
our county attorney, David Weigel.
The proclamation reads as such:
Whereas, the open exchange of public discourse is essential to
the democratic system of government; and,
Whereas, as a comerstone of democracy, Americans have
observed the certain rules of behavior generally known as civility;
and,
Whereas, civility derived from the Latin word "civitas" means
city, and "civis" means citizen behavior worthy of citizens living in a
community or in common with others; and,
Whereas, displays of anger, rudeness, ridicule, impatience, and a
lack of respect of personnel detract from the open exchange of ideas,
prevents fair discussion of issues, and can discourage individuals from
participating in government; and,
Whereas, civility can assist in reaching consensus on diverse
issues and allow for mutually respected ongoing relationships; and,
Whereas, civility can uplift our daily life and make it more
Page 17
April 22, 2003
pleasant to live in an organized society; and,
Whereas, the city, county, and local government law sections of
Florida Bar urges the adoption of a pledge of civility by all citizens in
the State of Florida.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, the month of May is
proclaimed as Civility Month and calls upon all citizens to exercise
civility towards each other.
Done and ordered this 22nd day of April, 2003, Board of County
Commissioners. Signed by Tom Henning.
I prove -- I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Any opposed?
Motion carries, 5-0. Thank you.
I shall post it in my office.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Weigel, do you have any words
of wisdom for us this morning on this proclamation?
MR. WEIGEL: Thanks for limiting me to the proclamation.
On behalf of the Florida Bar, we do appreciate this local
recognition of civility. We hope that the county attorney office is
Page 18
April 22, 2003
emblematic of that civility, at the same time, maintaining the iron fist
and the velvet glove where appropriate.
Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well said.
Item #4E
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING MAY, 2003, AS FLORIDA
STATE PARKS MONTH-ADOPTED
Next proclamation will be read by Commissioner Coletta. This
proclamation, designate May '03 as Florida sports park month.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: State park.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Florida state park. Excuse me. You're
right. Sports parks, state park. We're all going to have sports.
And here to accept this is Joe Howard from Collier-Seminole
State Park, Greg Toppin from the Fakahatchee Stand Preserves State
Park, and Roger-- Robert Sieiger (sic) of the Delnor-Wiggins State
Park.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Whereas, Florida's massive and
diverse state park system, with over 600,000 acres and 158 parks, has
received national recognition for its state park partnership, its cutting
edge resource management, its natural (sic) and heritage tourist (sic)
program and its environmental educational value; and,
Whereas, Florida's beautiful parks are vital to the environment,
economic, and resource management goals of the state while
providing a relaxing outdoor experience for visitors; and,
Whereas, Florida state park system not only preserves these
pristine natural areas forever, it also has a growing positive impact
value in Florida's local communities, which totalled over $551 million
Page 19
April 22, 2003
last year; and,
Whereas, local state parks such as Collier-Seminole, Fakahatchee
Strand Park-- Preserve, and Delnor-Wiggins Pass all located in
Collier County, Florida, they have a total of 25 employees, 564,883
combined annual visitors, and a combined economic impact of
$15,055,688 on the local economy (sic), and all have exceptional
features.
Collier-Seminole State Park is known for the walking dredge that
helped create the Tamiami Trail -- which, by the way, we're going to
have the 75th anniversary next weekend -- and its massive mangrove
forest; Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park is known for the
cypress strand and the Florida Panther Habitat; and Delnor-Williams
(sic) is known for its pristine beaches, all resulting in substantial
enhancement on the quality of life for citizens; and,
Whereas, 98 (sic) citizens support organizations and 6,000
volunteers support Florida park system. And volunteers last year
provided 960,000 (sic) hours of service, the equivalent of 435
full-time employees; and,
Whereas, its volunteer program, along with its innovative
outsource (sic) program allow Florida State Park System to provide
more services with fewer employees; and,
Whereas, Florida State Park System had some 18 million visitors
last year from throughout Florida, the United States, and the world,
and attendance at Florida State Parks is growing with the worldwide
boom in natural (sic) and heritage tourism; and,
Whereas, Florida State Parks are engaged in hundreds of
partnerships with national and local parks in Florida to make these
invaluable resources available to Florida citizens and visitors.
And, now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier
CounW Commissioners, Collier CounW, Florida, that Collier County
recognizes the immense environmental and economic benefits of the
Page 20
April 22, 2003
Florida State Parks to the state's local communities by designing May
2003 as Florida State Park Month and to encourage all citizens to
enjoy, protect, and support Florida's beautiful and diverse state parks
in May 2003 and in the years to come so further -- so furore
generations of Floridians and visitors may also enjoy and learn about
Florida's unique natural and cultural heritage through these priceless
areas.
Done and ordered this 22nd day of April, 2003, Tom Henning,
Chairman.
I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Coletta, second by Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You guys want to turn around, we'll
get a picture.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You want to --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And last, but not least --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You want to say something?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We'd like to have -- this will be
a commercial announcement.
MR. HOWARD: Good morning. I'd like to thank the Board of
County Commissioners for making this proclamation, and on behalf of
Page 21
April 22, 2003
the Florida park service and our director, Ms. Wendy Spencer, I'd like
to also extend an invitation for all of you to come out and enjoy the --
what the Florida park services has to offer.
You have three of the best representations of what the Florida
park service has to offer right here in Collier County.
Collier-Seminole State Park, Wiggins Pass, and Fakahatchee State
Strand.
And with that being said as -- during the reading you heard a lot
about volunteers and what they have contributed to the park service.
We cannot operate and provide the level of service that everyone has
come to expect without volunteers. So I want to extend an invitation
for anyone who has a desire to be a part of a winning team to come
out and be a volunteer at one of those state parks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can we bring our swamp buggy?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, could you give us a
telephone number also?
MR. SCHMITT: Certainly. I can give you the number for
Collier-Seminole State Park, and that is 394-3397. But better than
that, I can give you a website where can you go and access all of the
state parks, and that is floridapark-- floridastateparks, with an s, dot,
org, that way you can get information on all the state parks and it will
have a contact number.
And I'll leave you with the information that during the month of
May -- May ! 7th is going to be armed services day, armed forces day,
and that would be a free day to any state park. So whatever your --
park you choose to visit that day, it will be a free admission. And also
during the month of May, we'll have activities and events throughout
those three parks that you heard about. We'll be in the mall and other
places, so be on the lookout for us. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
Page 22
April 22, 2003
Item #4F
PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE WEEK OF APRIL 20-26,
2003, AS ROTARY INTERNATIONAL GROUP STUDY
EXCHANGE WF.F.K- ADOPTF. D
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Last proclamation will also be read
by Commissioner Coletta. This proclamation to designate the week of
April 20th through the 26th, '03, as Rotary International Group Study
Exchange Week, and to accept this is Lisa (sic) Cleaver from --
Rotarian team leader.
Lisa, thank you for being here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to have the whole team
come up, if we could, please. Come on up. These people came all the
way from Australia to be here today with us.
Thank you. Please, line right up in front here. Line right up.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, wow. How nice.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Whereas, we welcome the
Rotary International Group Study Exchange Team from Rotary
International District 9650, Australia, to Collier County, Florida; and,
Whereas, the Rotary Foundation of Rotary International Group
Study Exchange Program has sent to us a team of six team members,
including Lisa (sic) Cleaver, the rotary team leader, who are visiting
Collier County to study our institutions and way of life; and,
Whereas, the team members will also observe the practice of
their own profession and exchange ideas; and,
Whereas, the team is able to personally experience family
lifestyle as they are hosted by rotary clubs of Collier County and
given accommodations in local homes; and,
Whereas, the Rotary Foundation is a non-profit corporation
Page 23
April 22, 2003
supported by Rotarians and others worldwide. Its objective it to
achieve -- the achievement of world understanding and peace through
international humanitarian educational programs.
And, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the week of April 20th
to 26th, 2003, be designated as Rotary International Group Exchange
-- Study Exchange Week.
Done and ordered this 22nd day of April, 2003, Tom Henning,
Chairman.
And it's my pleasure, as a commissioner and a fellow Rotarian, to
make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Coletta, second by Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, thank you for being here.
Welcome to the USA.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thanks for being here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Welcome to the USA.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hope you enjoy your stay. Thank
you very much for coming.
Page 24
April 22, 2003
I hope you enjoy your stay here in the United States.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're going to take a photo
here, so if we can have you line up and face towards the young lady
with the camera.
We'd love to hear a couple words from you, please.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I was just mentioning that the
Australian wines are pretty good this time of the year. Better than
some other European countries.
MS. CLEAVER: Australian wine's good any time of the year.
Mr. Chairman and Commissioners of Collier County, we are very
overwhelmed and very appreciative of this proclamation for this week.
We are here for nearly a six-week period in the Southwest
Florida area. We've exchanged with a group of Americans who have
been down to our area and have enjoyed six weeks hospitality in
Australia, and we are absolutely overwhelmed by the welcome, the
hospitality, and it's great. The differences are not huge enough to
make it very, very interesting. But we're so alike, and it's been
wonderful to be here, and we appreciate it very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. CLEAVER: Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry I have to --
I forgot to mention that on 17(A) in the summary agenda I received a
fax just explaining a scrivener's error. It's nothing major, but I just
wanted that to be on the record.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just an extra ex parte communication
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- on behalf of Commissioner Fiala.
Page 25
April 22, 2003
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you so much.
Item #5A
ACKNOWLEDGING CONNIE STAPLES, ACCOUNTING
TECHNICIAN, UTILITIES FINANCE DEPARTMENT, AS
F, MPI,OYF, E OF THE MONTH FOR APRII,; 2003-RF, COGNIZF, D
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And, Commissioners, we have the
honor to recognize one of our employees who's Employee of the
Month, so if I can call up Connie Staples in front of the dais. Connie, thank you for being here this moming.
And if the commissioners would all rise in recognition, I have
something to read.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very impressive the things you've
been doing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Connie has -- has helped keep our
financial department going through several personnel changes and
SAP introductions. The finance department has lost two full-time
employees during the last nine-month period.
During this time, Connie has spent many extra long hours paying
the division's bills, supplying the water and sewer plants with
chemical needs and ensuring the division's accounts payable process
are (sic) on track.
She has trained three temporary employees in aspects of the
vacant positions until the permanent replacements are in place.
She also has instructed, trained, and mentored many new hires.
All this has been going on through the end of the year closing, gearing
up for the new financial systems introduced and bulldozing through
four weeks of unpaid bills after the new system came on line.
Page 26
April 22, 2003
During this period of time, Connie has unfailingly kept her cool,
answered dozens of questions, sometimes repeating (sic), also making
numerous suggestions of improving our workflow.
Connie has also been-- took up (sic) herself to mentor the water
and sewer plant personnel during the new financial system process
and ensuring continuity, continuing for the billing division.
Public utilities financial department runs exceptionally due to
Connie's unfailing attention to the details and devoting (sic) her job
right the first time. Connie has always come up with resolutions to
problems.
So, Commissioners, I have a plaque here on behalf of the board
recognizing April 2001 (sic) as -- Connie Staples as our Employee of
the Month.
Connie, thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Connie, the commissioners also want
to award you for the extra duties that you have been doing through
these difficult times of transformation in the billing department, so
here's a little check on behalf of the Board of Commissioners. Thank
yOU.
MS. STAPLES: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Look at -- her department is
standing in salute. That's pretty neat. MR. MUDD: Congratulations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. DeLony, you have a real winner.
MR. DeLONY: Thanks, sir. We really believe it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next one, item six, is public petitions.
MR. MUDD: It's --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm sorry.
Page 27
April 22, 2003
Item #5C
ORAL REPORT RE: RESULTS OF AN EMPLOYEE "ETHICS
AUDIT", CONTINUED UNTIL DR. LEONARD FIRENZ OF
1NTF, RNATIONAI, COI,IJF, GF, CAN PIE PRESENT-APPROVED
MR. MUDD: The next item is 5(C). Commissioners, I'd like --
Dr. Firenz can't be with us this morning. If I could get the board to
vote to continue this particular item indefinitely until he can be
amongst us and provide us the report.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So move.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Coletta, second by Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION BY MR. GERALD BURNS RE: THE
EXCLUSION OF KENSINGTON FROM THE LIVINGSTON
ROAD BEAUTIFICATION PHASE II MSTU, STAFF DIRECTED
TO BRING BACK ON A FIITIIRF, AGF, NDA-APPROVF, D
The next item is public petitions, and under public petitions our
Page 28
April 22, 2003
residents and visitors have the opportunity to petition the Board of
Commissioners to seek guidance, relief, or whatever action it is.
And under public petition, the board cannot take -- the only
action they can take is to hear this item on a future agenda. And under
public petition, we try to hear the petitioner, and if anybody would
like to speak on this item, we -- we encourage you-- if you the Board
of Commissioners decide to bring it back at a future agenda,
encourage your input at that time.
So if we could call up -- the first public petitioner would be a
request by Gerald Bums to discuss the -- excluding Kensington from
the Livingston Road MSTU beautification. Mr. Bums.'?
MR. BURNS: Good morning. Mr. Chairman, fellow
commissioners. I'm Dr. Charles Zinn. I'm a homeowner of
Kensington Golf and Country Club, and I represent the Kensington
Park Master Association. I come before you today requesting a public
petition to remove Kensington from the Livingston Road MSTU.
I present you with signed petitions from a majority of the
Kensington homeowners. Over 400 of the 550 homeowners all
requesting removal from the Livingston Road MSTU.
As you know, we became a member of the Livingston Road
MSTU because of developer initiatives without proper Kensington
homeowner representation. This was all developer driven.
Kensington homeowners, however, realize -- excuse me. We
have a financial obligation to Collier County of approximately 65- to
$70,000 pursuant to the actions of the MSTU for upgrading lighting
on Livingston Road.
At the present time, we are attempting to obtain these moneys
from the developer to cover this obligation; however, should this fail,
we, the homeowners of Kensington, agree to fulfill our obligations by
way of our property tax assessment for 2003.
Page 29
April 22, 2003
At the time, when this obligation is paid through this tax
assessment, we are asking removal from (sic) Kensington from the
Livingston Road MSTU.
We also request at this time that no more moneys be spent by the
MSTU on Livingston Road.
I appreciate the opportunity of talking before you. I'll -- these are
the petitions, over 400.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Commissioners? Any comments? Direction?
MR. BURNS: I'm Jerry Bums.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Bums?
MR. BURNS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, okay. I thought that was Mr.
Bums that spoke. Did he speak on your behalf?.
MR. BURNS: That's Dr. Charlie Zinn, and Charlie did all the
legwork, so I said, why don't you speak on behalf of Kensington, and
I'll reconfirm. We both signed up to speak.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We only -- the presenter of the
petition is what we're asking for today. And, again, if the Board of
Commissioners decide to bring it back on a future agenda, that would
be the time that we can do that, just so -- MR. BURNS: Fine. No problem.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please -- while you're there, please --
since you're the petitioner.
MR. BURNS: I've got two sentences, that's all. I'm the vice
chairman of the Kensington Park Master Association Transition
Committee.
I want to reconfirm Dr. Zinn's position. I also speak on behalf of
the residents. We would have all of the -- we would have a lot of
residents here. We could get bus loads, but out of respect for your
parking lot, we felt that we have over 400 petitions signed, which is
Page 30
April 22, 2003
more than 40 -- 50 percent plus one because there's 560 residents, so --
but if necessary in the future, we'll be happy to have the people here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a
motion that we bring this back and place it on the agenda.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that, but -- for the sake of
discussion as well.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He said at the end of his
conversation that he requests no more MSTU money be spent on
Livingston Road.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what I heard.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, there might be another
development that would prefer to spend the money, and I would hate
to -- I think we need to consider that, but I would hate to tell
everybody, you know, even if you vote to -- to landscape it yourself,
too bad. So I do think that's up for discussion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think we can discuss that
when it comes back.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. BURNS: Just to let the commissioners know, there has
been a petition -- or at least a motion to disband the MSTU too. So
that's -- Grey Oaks and ourselves both worked in conjunction to
request that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But there's another development
that's involved.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Bums.
MR. BURNS: But we -- okay. I hope you're not going to
commit our money for the other development. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, clarification.
In your motion, is it to bring it back when the moneys are due to the
county, then we can consider it, or you just want to just bring it back
Page 31
April 22, 2003
in two weeks?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I'd like to bring it back and put
it on the agenda so we can get all the facts and decide what action to
be taken.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think there's some discussion
about the amount of money that is to be paid to the county, and we can
discuss how it is to be collected and what the obligations are of the
homeowners. They've indicated an interest in paying that, so I think
we can discuss that at the next -- next meeting, but I think we should
get it on the agenda so they have an opportunity to make their
presentation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I hope that the board or the --
can direct the county manager to send out a letter to the advisory
board on the action and what will be taken and encourage them to --
for their input.
All right. I see some nods.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I do have a question though, if I
may.
Will our action today, in any way, undermine the efforts of
burying this line or -- is this going to --
MR. MUDD: No, sir. This has to do -- let me -- let me try to
blow this up just a little bit.
Commissioner, this is -- this is a -- it was a landscaping type
MSTU for Livingston Road phase --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right, the ones we already
excluded.
MR. MUDD: -- II. Grey Oaks has been excluded because they
came up and paid their bill. You notice it was $134,000 on here.
Kensington's bill, as we know it right now, is around $64,000.
Page 32
April 22, 2003
They have written their developer in a series of correspondence to try
to get the developer to do -- to do what he's supposed to do in that
process. And again, from Dr. Zinn's comments that the -- absent any
action from the developer, they're prepared to pay their taxes and be
done.
Now, previous guidance by the board was to -- and this was in
September at our second hearing, if you remember correctly, budget
hearing, the board basically said, collect the commitments for the
decorative streetlighting and things like that to the tune of $153,000
and change, and when thafs done to disband, if that's what has to
happen.
But Kensington is basically saying, absent disbanding by the
MSTU board that gets basically appointed by this Board of County
Commissioners, if they don't want to do that, Kensington wants to be
out of that MSTU, and then it would be Wyndemere and whomever
else is left.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: As long as wherever we draw
the line in the sand--
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- we're not -- the county's not
picking up --
MR. MUDD: We drew it in September and basically said, you're
going to pay this bill before you incur --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't want to see that money
come from the general fund. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have a motion by Commissioner
Coyle, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
Page 33
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION BY MR. BRYAN BANKS TO DISCUSS GUN
RANGE LOCATED EAST OF CR951 AND NORTH OF
RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD. MEETING TO BE HELD
WITH SPORTS PARK PF, OPI,FJ AND NFJIGHI:IORS-CONSFNSI IS
Next public petition is requesting by --
MR. MUDD: Mr. Bryan Banks to discuss the gun range located
east of County Road 951 and north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road,
sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. BANKS: May I? I would like to thank the Board of
Commissioners for taking time to hear our petition. I am Bryan
Banks, a resident of Naples Lakes Country Club acting as a
spokesman for a concerned residents group at our development and as
a concemed citizen for the safety of residents at First Assembly
Ministries.
First, I would like to read from county ordinance 2000-68.
Whereas, it is hereby declared to be the public policy of Collier
County that every person is entitled to sound levels that are not
detrimental to life, health, and enjoyment of his or her property.
Page 34
April 22, 2003
We have previously submitted a petition signed by
approximately 100 residents of Naples Lakes Country Club stating
that the gun range is affecting the enjoyment of their property and
requesting that the range be moved to a more suitable location where
the sound from the gun range is not a detriment to people who are
simply trying to enjoy the use of their homes.
The signatures represent only a fraction of the hundreds of
homeowners that are being affected.
We are not against gun owners, and we support their right to have
a firing range; however, we strongly believe this recreational use
should not be allowed to negatively impact hundreds of residents.
In doing research for this presentation, the swamp buggy days
PUD, 83-24, established in 1983, in reading from the statement of
compliance, the project development is located in an area that is
within a reasonable distance of residential development without
conflicting with those residential uses.
Reading on, operation of the target ranges shall be limited to
daylight hours, provided that night trap and skeet shooting may be
conducted no more than two nights per week. In addition, the
shooting and archery ranges shall meet accepted designed standards
regarding safety and shall be operated and maintained in accordance
with accepted and safe practices.
It obviously intended that the safety standards should be properly
established and maintained in the future, and likewise, we believe that
the sports was intended to not conflict with residential users in its
future use as well.
Also, unless later amended, the firing range has been operating
out of compliance by the use of handgun and rifle fire after dark,
which was very prevalent around the holidays and was notified to the
sheriffs department.
I would like to read two paragraphs from the letter that I
Page 3 5
April 22, 2003
previously sent to the commission. The gun range is used for very
high powered handguns and rifles, including fully automatic rifles or
machine guns that are fired sometimes starting as early as 6:30 a.m.,
and at times going past 9:00 p.m., and alcohol is being consumed at
firing range.
To those who would say that the people who purchased property
should have checked out the gun range prior to buying the property,
that sounds good, but this is not the reality of the situation. After
living here for several months, it is easy to see how a person could
have visited Naples Lakes Development and even gone by the gun
ranges numerous times and never encountered the problem.
This is due to the sporadic hours. Some days gunfire may go
from 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m., and then cease and not happen again until
7:00 p.m., or there will be no gunfire at all for two days, then it could
be followed by gunfire throughout the day for the next three days.
Concerning safety, the range is in close proximity to residential
areas which was not intended in its original approval. In fact, some of
the gunfire is directed in a westerly direction which is pointed right at
the church development and Naples Lakes Country Club.
As I indicated in my letter, Pastor Mallory related to me that
residents have heard ricocheting bullets whiz buy.
The firing range is out of compliance as firing in the direction of
people in close proximity, and the consumption of alcohol at a firing
range are definitely safety violations.
I have personally observed each of these violations, and I will
present some evidence to that.
In researching the approval of the church properties, I have
discovered conflicting issues which, due to the time constraints, I have
documented in writing and will provide to each of you. I would,
however, like to read briefly from the approval of ordinance 96-68.
The First Assembly of God education rehabilitation campus for a
Page 36
April 22, 2003
church facility includes approval for a school, a child care, a care unit
facility, adult living facility, a children's summer camp and
multi-family complex.
I would like to give an example of what area residents can
experience, which I recorded from my lanai starting at 9:15 a.m. on
Easter Sunday morning. I would also mention that on that Sunday,
there was an inflatable play area set up for the church for use after the
children's service, which starts at 9:30. The children's area -- the
church is in between my home and the firing range.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right on the mike.
(A tape was played.)
MR. BANKS: I can tell you that at times it pretty much sounds
like a fire fight in Baghdad. And this is not only a problem of
enjoyment of the homes but is actually causing emotional distress
among some of the residents. (A tape was played.)
MR. BANKS: Concerning code enforcement and sound
monitoring, I would just say that it was -- it has been tested some. It
was administered by a person who is a firing range gun user and was
simply not indicative of the sound levels we often experience.
On the days we observed the testing, for example, on April 10th,
which was one of the windiest days we've experienced since being in
Florida, the wind was blowing 29 miles per hour towards the gun
range. And even though there was supposedly gun firing going on,
you could not hear any gunfire. On April 14th, again, no gunfire
could be sounded at time of the testing.
In summary, as far as the gun range being established first at its
current location, this is, of course, the situation. However, if the intent
was to keep the gun range at this location, the property in the
surrounding areas, such as Naples Lake Country Club and the church
property, should have remained zoned Zone A property.
Page 37
April 22, 2003
Unfortunately, with the approval of rezoning, the surrounding
property has put the gun range in conflict with the residents and the
gun range is no longer in compliance with the stated compliance
objectives from its original approved PUD.
We are asking that the firing range be relocated to a more
appropriate area with a firm date of August 1 st, 2003. And I will
present some documentation on the approval process on the church
property as well as some other documentation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Comments? Questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I have a question.
The -- what I'm concerned about is maybe this might be in
regards to how we go about zoning areas, that we should have a large
enough buffer. We had something that came up in front of the board
here, I think, the last meeting, and I was concerned about the buffering
and how far away that we should be. And I realize that gunshots
travel quite a large distance as far as sound-- related sound goes to
them.
As a group of citizens, and you're very concemed about this,
have you worked with the gun range to see if maybe all of you citizens
can work together and find a location that would be comparable for
these people at -- at the same -- and it would cost them the same
amount for rental and everything else?
MR. BANKS: Well, I would just like to, ifI could, mention and
thank Commissioner Fiala for her help and Officer Ray Erickson. Ray
has definitely pursued some efforts. I think he's contacted the
Everglades superintendent about, possibly, is there some property that
could be used for a firing range that would not be in any close
proximity.
I can tell you when I've made some phone calls to the people that
are associated with the firing range, it's been basically a brush off and
Page 38
April 22, 2003
told the rules don't apply to us, you know, that we -- you know, we're
able to do, you know, what we want to do over there.
And so -- but I do -- I do, again, appreciate what Ms. Fiala and
Ray Erickson are--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But what I'm saying is, if you work
and find out if you can fi -- get them some land and get it zoned for a
firing range -- the problem is, this sports park was moved out there in
1983.
MR. BANKS: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The next thing that I foresee
happening down the road here is that people are going to start
complaining about swamp buggy races because of the loudness of
those vehicles on weekends that they mn the races there.
MR. BANKS: IfI could comment on that. You know, the
swamp buggy, certainly to me, and from comments that I've observed
from other people, is not really a problem, number one, because it's
infrequent. It happens on three weekends a year. The sound is not
very noticeable.
Yeah, the band plays late one night, but, you know, we can live
with that. It's every day, 12-hour a day gunfire. Gunfire is a special
type of sound too. I mean, it is very -- it's sharp, you're unexpecting
(sic) it and it hits you, and so -- but as far as the swamp buggy,
personally, I have not heard hardly any, any comments on that. Just
lots on the gun range. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I wait to be recognized by
the chair.
MR. BANKS: Oh, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala was first, then
Commissioner Coyle -- Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
Page 39
April 22, 2003
Thank you, Mr. Banks.
We had discussed and to our county manager and to my fellow
commissioners, Mr. Banks and I had discussed this a little bit. A
couple of my concerns, of course, were alcohol being consumed on
the property. Somebody with a gun then leaving, and maybe if
they've had enough alcohol, that isn't a safe situation, aside from the
fact that we have the first assembly over there with the children's
programs, and their hoping to build an unwed mother's place, aside
from the fact that there's a new hospital going in down the street as
well.
So I spoke with somebody from the sheriffs office about this as
well, and he said that he realizes that they're in a location that couldn't
stay there much longer anyway. He figures a couple years at the most
because of the development that's taking place.
And so I suggest that possibly they look at some of these
recreational areas in the state parks or national parks. They're trying
to put together recreational areas where they've set aside. You can't
build there anywhere -- anyway, but maybe it could be used for such a
purpose.
And I'm hoping that maybe we can assist Mr. Banks in his -- and
the residents of his community in finding an area that's more
appropriate in the state park or national park system that will have no
homes built around it because of its location.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, then
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can offer you some assistance
on this. I was president of Florida Sports Park in '97, and so I -- and I
was -- previous to that we sold the property where the gun range is on
to Mike Taylor and Company.
The id -- my understanding back then was, is that the gun range
had a limited life because of development that Mr. Taylor was going
Page 40
April 22, 2003
to be doing down there. I haven't had any contact with swamp buggy,
per se, since I became a commissioner so there wouldn't be any
conflict of interest if items like this ever came up. I carry no voting
position on their board.
But I can -- I can tell you for a fact that this is a real problem
that's been ongoing for a long time as far as location, because they
were very concerned where people could go to recreate with their
weapons in a meaningful way when the gun range was going to close.
At that point in time they had something like a year or two left,
and I don't know where the situation is now. I think there's some
talking that has to be done with everyone concerned.
But as far as another location, let me update you on some things.
One, back in the '80s, the entire trust in Golden Gate came up with a
large donation of land for the sheriffs department for a gun range, and
that was supposed to also be a public range; however, I don't think
many people even know the range exists, and it's limited to one day a
month. So in all effect, that does not exist as an option. It was
supposed to be a public range for the public also.
We talked to -- I have talked to the Picayune State Forest early
on about possibly someplace there might be a suitable location for it
because it's far removed from everything, and I'm sure the noise
wouldn't be a problem.
But in all honesty, I have found forestry to be less than
cooperative in talking to me. I'm kind of hoping that when it comes
down to push and shove on the road issue that we have in the
Picayune State Forest, that this might be something we can negotiate
with them. Meanwhile, we have to preserve the integrity of the
neighborhood and the safety of the residents that live out there.
And if you would like, I'd be more than happy to arrange a
meeting where everybody can sit down. And I think if we're looking
over their shoulder, along with code enforcement, something might be
Page 41
April 22, 2003
able to be done to mitigate some of the present dangers that they see
with the gun range, maybe in the way of buffers for sound. And I
know there's berms in place now. There shouldn't be anything in the
way of any bullets traveling past the range.
As far as drinking on the range, it's been a long time since I've
been there. I've never seen alcohol there, but I'm not saying that it's
not happening now. And if it is, it should cease immediately,
whatever is required for law enforcement to do so.
But if you would like, I'd be more than happy to arrange a
meeting between the residents and the owner of the property, along
with the people that are leasing the gun range.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think that's great. If you know the
proper people, go for it, if I may comment on that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Because we're dealing with
items we don't know. We don't know how long they're supposed to be
there as it is, and we don't know whether their -- whether our -- what
other options are out there for them to go to. I'm sure that they would
prefer an area where they would be less intrusive, but I don't know if
that exists at this point in time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, as we try to reach a
solution to this problem, I think we have to understand the limits of
our authority. There is a state law which protects shooting ranges, and
the state law essentially makes them immune from any complaints of
noise or noise pollution.
And no court in the state can enforce any action relating to noise
or noise pollution for a shooting range. So we have to understand the
limits of our authority here. And if a solution is going to be devised, it
has to be one that is -- is cooperative in nature. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We do not have the authority to
Page 42
April 22, 2003
impose a solution on this issue, except that we should insist that it be
operated in accordance with approved safety standards.
Now, the other thing is that finding an alternate shooting range
site is not a simple task. Not only do you have environmental issues
of the existing facility -- and that has to be addressed if it is changed
from a shooting range -- but you have the problem of creating an
environmental problem somewhere else, because there's a lot of lead
out there.
So this is not a simple issue, and we, quite frankly, don't have the
authority to solve it. But we certainly, as Commissioner Coletta has
suggested, can try to get people to talk about it and make sure that the
range is operating in a safe manner and to resolve any safety
discrepancies that might exist there.
But -- so I would encourage that you continue to talk with people
and try to get these things resolved. But please recognize, we don't
have the authority to make this thing go away.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, what I hear --
MR. BANKS: Could I comment one --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure, in just a minute.
MR. BANKS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What I hear is -- consensus of the
board is to have -- or allow Commissioner Coletta, on behalf of the
board, to work with the sports park and the residents in there to come
to resolution or see if there is any resolution. And I'm -- I think that's
the direction that we're going to go. Sir?
MR. BANKS: I would just like to say that it's more than a noise
issue. The noise issue is the biggest problem for us, but it has gone
beyond that, and the reason why is because the zoning of the property
has put people in an unacceptable close proximity to a gun range that
is not within reasonable safety standards.
Page 43
April 22, 2003
It's just -- it's just too close, and that issue you will -- in the letter
that I addressed the zoning of the property, you will see some of that
background.
It was not a -- it was not appropriate for that to ever be housing
property, and it got to be.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Bums (sic), I can tell you at the
time that it was zoned, the conditional use, it was proper, because
there wasn't anything around there at the time. You --
MR. BANKS: No, no. I'm talking about the church property.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. BANKS: Not the swamp. I'm talking about the church
property. The church property --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. BANKS: -- is the issue, not the swamp buggy. I understand
initially.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Now, there was -- the swamp buggy
grounds were located on Radio Road, what is now Cooperate Square.
At that time they didn't have a gun range there, but they did have the
swamp buggy races, besides car races. Same issue was raised at that
time, and that's what drove the location off of Collier Boulevard.
MR. BANKS: Well, they -- I think the question came up by
Commissioner Halas about another issue on -- that would have
potential noise concerns or whatever.
I can just say this, that the only way to avoid this issue is to
protect the zoning around the property. As I mentioned, if the intent
was for that gun range to always there be, then the property that's
within surrounding area should need to remain undeveloped.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, there is property fights.
Recognize that the owners around there do have property rights, and
I'm not sure where the firing range, in the location where they're
firing, whether it is west, as you're indicating or if it's east or north or
Page 44
April 22, 2003
south. You might want to comment on that.
MR. BANKS: It's set up -- it's set up on the north, but they also
fire to the west, which I physically observe, and I'm sure there would
be indications to that, and west is right at the church and Naples Lakes
Country Club.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So it would probably --
Commissioner Coletta, working for resolution might be the answer.
Commissioner Coyle, then Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Just so there's no
misunderstanding, I think-- I'd like to read from the state statute,
chapter 99-134, and I'll read the last two-thirds of this paragraph.
A sports shooting range shall be permitted to continue in
operation even if the operation of the sports shooting range does not
conform to the new ordinance or an amendment to an existing
ordinance provided the range was not in violation of any law when the
range was constructed.
Now, it goes on to say that the range must conform to the
National Rifle Association gun safety and shooting range standards.
And I think that's an issue that can be addressed. But any changes in
ordinance or any changes in zoning are not a reason for moving a gun
range, according to state law. And so I think our solution is one that's
reasonable, okay?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I was just going to -- what I was
going to sum up with is that Commissioner Coletta, as the mediator,
and the citizens and -- to work together with the people that run the
gun range there, and I think maybe some of the concerns that you're
very concerned that we can -- that you, the citizens, and the people
that run the gun range, along with Commissioner Coletta, can
probably come up and figure out the best way to address all these
concerns and issues that you have as far as safety. If the range is not
Page 45
April 22, 2003
up to standards, then it needs to be up to standards.
And as far as noise, that's one of my concerns because I feel that
in the very near future, we're probably going to have noise issues with
the swamp buggy as we get more growth out in that neck of the
woods. There's going to be people that are going to live a mile away
from that track, and they're going to say on a certain Sunday when
swamp buggies are run, that noise is interfering with our lifestyle, but
that -- we have to look and we have -- all of us have to live together in
this society, so we basically have to give and take a little bit on each
side.
But the safety issues, definitely, I think, need to be addressed.
But as far as the gun range itself, unless you and the citizens can find
some area whereby you can put a gun range up -- that's the next thing.
And it's -- as Commissioner Coletta -- or Coyle said, that it's very
difficult to find areas whereby you can put a gun range on.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Bums (sic), thank you for
bringing this to our attention. I think you got -- you've truly got our
attention, and I hope Cormnissioner Coletta can get some relief for
yOU.
Commissioner Fiala, I'm sorry. I didn't --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. That's all right.
Because I can't talk to Commissioner Coletta when we get off the
dais, I wanted to suggest that we've already been working with Ray
Erickson from the sheriff's office, and he's been assisting Mr. Banks,
and also I understand there are two gun ranges there, one I guess is
private and one is public, and so -- and also I think Reverend Mallory
would like to be a part of those -- those talks, so I just wanted to add
that. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. We'll bring all the players
to the table, sit down, and actually find out exactly what it is and what
the life expectancy of it is, where it is, what can be done to mitigate it,
Page 46
April 22, 2003
and also the hours of operation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's a lot of room for
discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, again, for bringing this to
our attention.
Item #7A
RESOLUTION 2003-157 RE: VA-2003-AR-3658, BEAU KEENE,
P.E., OF KEENE ENGINEERING, REPRESENTING MARIA
MARTINEZ, OWNER, REQUESTING A 3.3 FOOT AFTER-THE-
FACT FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FROM THE
REQUIRED 15 FEET LEAVING AN 11.7 FOOT FRONT YARD
SETBACK FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 811
F, VF, RGI,ADF, S FIOl H,EVARD-ADOPTED
Next item is board of zoning appeals, and this item requires all
participants to be sworn in and ex parte disclosure provided by the
Board of Commissioners, and this is a variance, VA-2003-AR-3658,
Keene of Keene Engineering representing Maria Martinez, owner of--
requesting a 3.3 foot after-a-fact (sic) front yard setback variance,
required 15 feet, leaving a 11.7 foot front yard for residential property
in Golden Gate Estates.
All wishing to participate, would you please raise your right hand
while the court reporter swears you in. (All witnesses were sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, have you any
ex parte communication?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, I don't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
Page 47
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: None.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: None from myself.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: None from Commissioner Coyle.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I do. I met with the
petitioner the other day and talked to him about this subject, and also I
talked to his son probably some month and a half ago about the very
same subject matter.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And the staff that's presenting
this today is?
MR. MUDD: No. This is the petitioner's representative, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. N1NO: For the record, my name is Ron Nino, and I'm
representing Beau Keene in the matter that's before you.
Your staff has identified, I think, the factual situation extremely
well; however, let me reiterate, what we have here this morning is a
situation that results from improper application of the setback rule as it
applies to comer lots.
I think the error is understandable, nevertheless, there was an
error initially dealing with the building permit application that --
whereby the county approved the location of this residence 12.8 feet
from the long side of a comer lot fronting on Everglades Boulevard
and 8th -- 8th Avenue Northeast.
I believe that that situation results from staff concluding that, in
fact, the setback ought to have been 10 and a half feet from 8th
Avenue, and evidence of that is illustrated by a copy of the inspection
card where you will note a front yard setback of 75 feet, a rear yard
setback of 70 feet, left side, 10 and a half feet, right side, 10 and a half
feet.
So it is apparent that county personnel, in fact, when they
Page 48
April 22, 2003
approved the residence at 12.8 feet, concluded that that was consistent
with the requirement of the ordinance.
As your staff has so well elucidated, the setback really ought to
have been 15 feet because the provision of the code is that for
nonconforming lots in the estates -- in the estates subdivision, the
setback on the -- for the long side is based on one half of the normal
setback application of 20 feet, however, in no instance less than 15
feet.
So you have a number of errors that have occurred here, and you
have to conclude that the county staff either felt that the setback was
12 and a half feet, i.e., one half of the required setback, or they
neglected or erred in assuming that the lot didn't really have two front
yards but, indeed, had two side yards, and that the side yard
requirement is based on 10 percent of the width of the lot. The lot's
105 feet, therefore, the side yard requirements are 10 and a half feet.
Be that as it may, the contractor compounded the error at that
point, so -- resulting from a surveyor placing the stakes, indeed, 1.2
feet closer to the street than the 12.8, consequently we end up with a
building that is now 11.7 feet from 8th Avenue Northeast instead of 15
feet or 12.8 feet as approved by the county. And we suggest to you
that the fact that the developer proceeded after he submitted the spot
survey probably results from an assumption that the setback could
have been 10.5 feet.
The situation that we have today is that we basically have a
house constructed. We suggest to you that there is no corrective
action for all practical -- not for all practical purposes. Corrective
action means demolishing the entire building.
Now, how it got to this point, you know, the county, in dealing
with this place, it's a course -- it's a matter of habit that builders, once
they submit a spot survey, continue to vertically construct the
building, particularly if the spot survey -- if in their opinion the spot
Page 49
April 22, 2003
survey is consistent with the regulation.
We suggest to you that our builder continued the vertical
improvements because they honestly felt that the setback should have
been 10 and a half feet as evidenced by the documentation that we
showed you earlier.
This correct -- this error cannot be corrected. The floor plan of
this house does not provide for chopping off two and a half feet of the
house. And it would be, I suggest to you, an inordinate and unjust
burden, because in reality, it's the owner of the house that's going to
suffer the most. Even if the expenses are met through some legal
action, the fact remains, they've got to go out and find a new house
plan, you have to start all over again. Their dream of occupying a
house is now postponed by another year.
But we ought to look at the magnitude of the deviation. You
know, how big an error is this and how does this affect the public
health, safety, and welfare? We suggest to you that this error does not
take on significant proportions in terms of impacts to the public health,
safety, and welfare.
This lot is 660 feet deep. I suggest to you that the setback on
comer lots is driven by a desire to not impede the line of sight of
people approaching the intersection.
In this -- in the context of the estates, the setback is normally 75
feet, versus in an urban development, a normal subdivision type of
development close in to where we are, the setback would normally be
25 feet. However, in this case, this building is setback 145 feet from
Everglades Boulevard, so there's no question of a diminution of the
sight angle as you approach the intersection.
Furthermore, the rear yard is 450 feet. So if the offending wall
pushing on 8th Avenue has any genesis in not blocking the sight from
a person who is on the next buildable lot, we suggest to you that that
issue is not there. So we don't have a really severe problem as a result
Page 50
April 22, 2003
of this diminution in value, this diminution in the -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta has a question
for you, Mr. Nino.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't mean to interrupt you.
Just some simple facts I want to bring forward.
Do you have any complaints from any of the other neighbors?
MR. NINO: No, we have no objections --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Do you have any --
MR. NINO: -- from the neighbors. The Planning Commissioner
has recommended approval 7-1.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think you've answered his questions.
MR. NINO: Your staff has endorsed it very strongly.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Do we have any
speakers on this?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. A couple things I want to
understand though, and I'd be ready to make a motion, if you wouldn't
mind.
As far as the survey stake in itself, would that have been -- would
that error have happened if the original error wasn't made by staff on
the setback? In other words, did one contribute to the other -- MR. NINO: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- or is it meaningless?
In very simple terms, would the contractor's error that he made in
addition to the staff error, would the contractor's error in itself been
enough to bring you in for a variance? MR. NINO: Yes, it would have.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So the variance that
you're asking for is because of a combination of both--
MR. NINO: Combination.
Page 51
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- both items?
But if-- if the county never made a mistake -- and being human
beings, we are going to make mistakes. MR. NINO: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we've got to recognize that
at all times. There's going to be a human element involved.
If the county never made the error, there still would have been an
error on the part of the petitioner as far as where the stake -- the line
would have been. In other words, if they had set it back to where it
should have been in the beginning, caught the error on the application,
would there have been an error from the contractor? Do I get into
another --
MR. NINO: It's possible, but we can't be absolutely sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. NINO: It's possible there would have been --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, in--
MR. NINO: One point two feet.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand.
Well, I was looking at the possibility, if it was just the county's
error alone, that possibly we should bear the cost of the variance, but
I'm not going to make that recommendation based upon what Mr.
Nino just said, but I am going to make a motion at this point in time --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before you do, I need to close the
public hearing, and I think you have some fellow commissioners that
have some questions.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Mr. Nino, granted that the county
made an error here, and also the surveyor made an error, but the
builder also made an error whereby when he put the spot survey in, he
just went on his merry way putting the rest of the building up instead
of waiting to make sure that the everything was according to plan
Page 52
April 22, 2003
before he continued to build.
So yes, the end result is, the homeowner is the one that's
suffering, but we also have to take into consideration, why would the
builder continue on building it if he didn't get the spot survey
approved before he starts going up in the vertical direction? MR. NINO: I suggest--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I think we have too much of
this going on.
MR. NINO: I suggest to you, Commissioner, that the builder
was of the opinion that the setback was 10 and a half feet.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Mr. Nino, the --
You have to sign up if you want to speak to that, sir.
The -- you said -- you stated in a normal neighborhood, the
setbacks are usually what?
MR. NINO: Twenty-five feet on a comer lot.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And this is not a normal
neighborhood?
MR. NINO: This is not -- well, not normal in the sense that in
the estates area you have estates lots. And in this particular case, this
comer lot is 660 feet deep, whereas in a normal urban context, you
would have a lot maybe 120 feet deep.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So it's just a different type of
neighborhood?
MR. NINO: Yes, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We do, Commissioner--
MR. NINO: For the record, I might add that this builder has built
a number of houses in this community. I think he built 60 of them in
Naples Manor and has never -- has never been before you requesting a
variance.
Page 53
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We -- I think we have the builder
representative who would like to address the board. He's about to sign
up. And you can give that sign-up sheet to the county attorney after
you speak.
So why don't you come up, sir, and address the Board of
Commissioners, and please state your name for the record.
MR. NUNEZ: Good morning, Commissioners. My name's Jose
Nunez, and I'm the vice-president of Ramsey Building.
I just want to clarify with what Mr. Halas says. I did not
continue to build vertical after they told me that the spot survey was
wrong. What happened here was when we pour -- the following day
we did cinder block, the following day we did tie beam. By the sixth
day, we already have the house framed.
When I went to the county, they said we have the wrong setback,
and that's when I stopped immediately, the house. In fact, I was not
able to continue because the county automatic (sic) goes and put a red
tag, so I did not continue to build after I knew there was a mistake.
Unfortunately this happened. And like he says, I've been
building houses for about three years, Naples Manor, Golden Gate
City, and this never have happened to me.
I build houses, and you can check that in the county, in 120 days.
And I guess everybody's happy about that. Unfortunately, the most
person that is suffering this for the past five months is the homeowner,
so, therefore, I ask you to grant this variance.
That was part of the mistake on the county, myself. When the
surveyor called me and asked me, how should I stake this house, I
usually said, go center the house in the middle of the property. That
way we be safe on each side. Unfortunately, she looked at the permit
board as I told her, and it was three (sic) and a half feet, and that's
where I think the problem started.
Thank you very much.
Page 54
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to make a motion. Oh,
I'm sorry. You haven't closed the thing. There is a discussion. I'd like
to go back to.
The county contributed to this. This is a builder that has had an
impeccable record in the county building affordable houses. And if
he's forced to be the first one to take a hit on something like this
because of a contribution from our own staff's errors, then I think it
would be grossly unfair.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Seeing none, I -- no further
discussion, I close the public hearing. What's the wishes of the board?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I make a motion for approval of
the variance.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: In your motion, is that under staff's
recommendation?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Under staff recommendations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Include staff recommendations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that, under staff
recommendations.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I would just like to say that
I'm making this -- going along with this because of the fact that it's the
inconvenience of the homeowner that is looking forward to moving
into this house.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Seeing no further discussion,
all in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 55
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Are we going to work on the ethics ordinance later on today?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, we are.
It's about 10:30 though, and your agreement with the court
reporter is to take a break, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I don't to -- I want to honor my
agreement. So how long do you suggest that we take?
MR. MUDD: Ten minutes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ten minute break.
(A recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Everybody take your seats,
please.
The next item is 8(A), which -- well, 8(A)'s going to be heard at
one o'clock.
So the next item after that -- we're okay, county manager.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2003-17 RE: ESTABLISHING THE NAPLES PARK
AREA UNDERGROUND POWER LINE MUNICIPAL SERVICES
TAXING 1JNIT-ADOPTF, D
And the next item is 8(B), the board consideration to adopt an
ordinance to create a Naples Park area underground power line
municipal service taxing unit.
And here to present that is Diane Flagg from our transportation
Page 56
April 22, 2003
administration.
MS. FLAGG: Good morning, Commissioners, Mr. Chairman.
For the record, Diane Flagg, director of Alternative
Transportation Modes. This item is for the board to consider the
adoption of a municipal services taxing unit ordinance to provide
funding source to pay for the underground placement of FP&L
transmission lines along 91st Avenue North.
The boundaries of the proposed MSTU are shown on the map, as
you can see here on your screens.
The millage would be levied for one year solely for the purpose
of placing the lines underground. The MSTU would then be
collapsed. We would come back to you and collapse the MSTU after
the payment is made.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions? We have some
public speakers, Ms. Filson?
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman. We have eight.
The first one is Dick Quinsey. He will be followed by John
Hickey.
MR. QUINSEY: My name Dick Quinsey. I am a resident at 551
91 st Avenue, Naples Park, so the burial of this underground -- or
burial of these lines, of course, would affect my property and my
property values.
And I appreciate the county commission passing the ordinance a
few meetings back realizing that this would be a negative impact if
these lines were above ground, and passing the ordinance to place
them below ground, and I'd especially like to thank Commissioner
Frank Halas for spearheading that.
The placement of these lines below ground will keep Naples Park
the way it is now. It will not negatively impact it if it's placed
underground. And I hear from some of my neighbors saying that they
want to keep Naples Park the way it is. Well, to do that, we need to
Page 57
April 22, 2003
place the lines underground.
And it would be nice if Florida Power and Light would come
forth and pay for these, but we know it won't -- that won't happen.
They have an above ground easement, and if they choose to, they can
place the lines above ground.
So it's time for the Naples Park owners and the residents around
Naples Park that will be visibly affected by these lines to come forth
and chip in and pay for these. And I think that's the way it should be
done.
This is the month of civility, and let's -- let's all be civil and try to
keep Naples Park as beautiful and -- as we can without having above
ground lines. And if we have to pay 10 or 12 dollars per property
owner, I think that's money well spent.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, sir.
MR. QUINSEY: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hold on just a minute.
What -- what was your residence again on 91st?
MR. QUINSEY: 551; 551 91st.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. QUINSEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Hickey?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is John Hickey. He will be
followed by Doris Rand.
MR. HICKEY: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, I am the
chairman of the Public Relations Committee for Beachwalk Residents
Association.
I have spoken to you before on this subject, and -- of the FPL
burying the power lines along 91st Avenue, and I have read the
executive summary that has been presented to you today, and I just -- I
am here today with the approval of the board of directors of
Page 58
April 22, 2003
Beachwalk Residents Association to say that our 356 owner members
are fully in favor of the provisions in that executive summary, the
proposal for the MSTU that you have in front of you.
The -- the proposal made by County Manager Mudd originally to
go with a visibility of what would be a 50-foot pole erected along the
north wall of our property three feet from that wall is a good proposal,
and we believe that the folks can or could see that -- that line of poles
should be included in the MSTU.
I would like to thank all of you, with special mention to Frank
Halas, our commissioner in District 2, to County Manager Mudd, and
to both Bleu Wallace and Ed Kant, who have contributed
tremendously in doing the work that was needed to put together this
MSTU. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Doris Rand. She will be
followed by Marie Sourbeir.
MS. RAND: My name is Doris Jean Rand. I am president of the
Pavilion Club.
I would like to read a letter from our attorney, Robert Murrell
from Samouce, Murrell and Francoeur.
Our firm has the pleasure of representing Pavilion Club
Condominium Association. The board of directors of Pavilion Club
has requested our firm contact the commissioners regarding the Board
of County Commissioner's consideration of an ordinance to adopt a
municipal service -- services taxing unit, MSTU ordinance, to provide
a funding source to pay for the underground placement of certain
Florida Power and Light power transmission lines along 91st Avenue
North from about 8th Street North to Vanderbilt Drive.
The board of directors has previously corresponded with the
commissioners requesting the Pavilion Club Condominium not be
included within the MSTU.
Page 59
April 22, 2003
The association's board has supported and continues to support
the efforts of Beachwalk to have the power transmission lines that go
through their property placed underground; however, the association's
board has requested previously, and this letter is for the purpose of
emphasizing the association's request, that the Pavilion Club not be
included in the MSTU.
At the current time, the Pavilion Club already has power
transmission lines on its property. The placement of the proposed line
underground would not eliminate the line that is currently there.
This line, as well as the new transmission line, would be at the
outer edge of the condominium property. Neither the association nor
its 156 members has any problem with the new power transmission
line being above ground at the Pavilion Club property.
Since there would still be a power line above ground on their
property, the Pavilion Club does not desire to have the -- excuse me --
have the transmission line below ground at their property line and
would not receive the benefit that the other property owners would be
receiving from the placement of this FPL power transmission line
underground.
For that reason again, the board of directors of the Pavilion Club
Condominium Association would, on behalf of itself and its members,
request that the condominium property not be included in the MSTU.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Marie Sourbeir. She will be
followed by Mildred Lucanegro.
MS. SOURBEIR: Good morning. My name is Marie Sourbeir.
I live in Naples Park on 100th Avenue, right in the middle of-- heart
of the park.
And if you look at that map over there, you'll see we have some
3,000 houses in Naples Park, and I don't think any of them are going
to get a bit of benefit from these proposed electric lines that are going
Page 60
April 22, 2003
down 91st Avenue.
We have less people here because, like most of your public
advertisement of hearings that are coming up, they're kind of not too
clear to the general public. I'm a little confused.
I want to know how the Board of Collier Commissioners can
create an MSTU for a group of people without their having some input
into it, and I don't think there's too many people who really realize
what we're here about today.
I see -- I thought from reading this, I thought this was going to be
-- this says something about providing the collection of annual du -- or
annual expenses, estimated annual expenses to be placed on ad
valorem taxes. I thought this was a one-time shot.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MS. SOURBEIR: If you pay for them one time, and that's -- the
gentleman before me maybe clarified that a little from me. But you
wouldn't know that from 8(B) on your agenda. Anything that's to be
paid annually is usually every year, in my -- the way I understand it.
Anyway, I think they need to bury those transmission lines.
First of all, the people in the park have a right-of-way behind
their properties -- every one of them has a pole behind their properties.
You've also made that same mistake or permitted Florida Power and
Light to make that same mistake, on one block, 99th Avenue, from 41
to 8th Street. Those people have a stinking old Florida Power and
Light pole right in the front of their front yard, and they don't get a bit
of power from that. Their power poles are behind their homes, just like
everybody else's. So I think there ought to be something done about
that.
Florida Power and Light has the monopoly here. They're
licensed to serve us -- to give us the service, electric service, and I
cannot see why they can't afford to put those poles -- provide that
service, because it's not going to do anything for Naples Park. You're
Page 61
April 22, 2003
really taking care of the Regatta and the new high rises that are going
along Vanderbilt Beach. So they're the people that need to pay for
that service. Go after them, not those poor little homeowners.
I do appreciate the fact that you are concerned. I'm not worried
about property values going up any more. They've gone up so much, I
don't think they can go any higher. I don't think -- and if you notice,
most of the people are now thinking they can make a killing on those
properties because the properties have been appraised so high, they're
moving out, and that's pitiful, because we do have a nice community.
Thank you for listening to me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Marie?
MS. SOURBEIR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Before you go, yes, this is a -- just
for your clarification, this is a one-time MSTU charge. And basically
if your property has a valuation of about $113,000, what this one-time
assessment would amount to is about $14.59.
MS. SOURBEIR: Which is not too, not too se -- that's not too
severe --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: One time.
MS. SOURBEIR: -- that's for sure. But you know, it really gets
to me, that Florida Power and Light, who have the monopoly here,
have the say on where they can put their lines and so forth and so on.
They ought to be made to bury them when they know that that service
is not going to do anything for the community they want to transgress
over.
COMMISSIONER HALAS' And I just want to also make sure
that the public realizes that not only myself, but I can assure you that
County Manager Jim Mudd and Bleu Wallace, and there was a whole
host of people that got behind this, and we had numerous meetings
with FPL just on the very same issues that you're bringing up, that we
Page 62
April 22, 2003
wanted that power line underground. MS. SOURBEIR: That's true.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And we did everything in our
power to convince those people that this was the fair way of doing it,
because basically the people in Naples Park were not getting the full
benefit of that power --
MS. SOURBEIR: They're getting none that I can see.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And so we did -- we did -- we
spent countless hours and countless amount of staff time, your
taxpayers' money, trying to convince those people of what was -- we
thought was the right thing to do.
And because of the outpour of all of the email that myself and the
county manager and a few other people got, I bet you we had close to
five to six hundred emails in regards to, we wanted this thing
underground. And if people want to get copies of that email, that's a
public thing and they can find out just how many copies were coming
into the county manager and to my office at the time that this was
transpiring.
MS. SOURBEIR: I have no argument about they should be
buried.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MS. SOURBEIR: My argument comes from the fact that Florida
Power and Light claims they have to be paid to do it. They have to be
paid -- they're going -- it costs them money to put them up, so why is
it going to cost them so much more to put them in the ground? I don't
-- it don't jive with me, sorry.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Mildred Lucanegro.
MS. LUCANEGRO: Yes, ma'am.
MS. FILSON: She will be followed by Rose Palumbo.
MS. LUCANEGRO: Good morning, Commissioners. I was
going to say gentlemen, but ladies and gentlemen. My name is
Page 63
April 22, 2003
Mildred Lucanegro, and I am vice-president of the Naples Park Area
Association.
And I wanted you to know that when we presented this particular
subject to our members, there was no -- everyone was mostly in
agreement that they would want the lines underground. But at that
time there was no mention of anybody paying for anything. There
was no mention of having to pay for that service.
So for that reason, I thought that was kind of not such a good idea
to ask people to sign something or to agree with something without
telling them that, okay, now you're going to have to pay for it, and that
should be up front.
We all assumed that Florida Power and Light was going to pay
for it, or maybe the county would pay for it with all the taxes that they
have collected from us in the past.
So this is something I wanted to bring to your attention, that
Naples Park Area Association, we were not fully aware of how this
was going to be paid for, and actually we weren't aware of it being
paid for by us.
And as far as the five or six hundred emails, I'm sure that
everyone would say, yes, put all the power lines underground, but did
they know that they had to pay for it? So that's one thing I wanted to
tell you.
And I was hoping that there would be some way that we would
find that Florida Power and Light would contribute to putting it
underground. But I noticed that Mr. Halas did do some work on that,
and I appreciate it. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
Did -- we know that it's just a one-time cost and it will be about
$15. Do you feel that that's a hardship on residents there?
Page 64
April 22, 2003
MS. LUCANEGRO: Well, I think at this time with all that's
happening in Naples Park, I think that any little bit is a hardship,
because you worry about it being $15 this year and, perhaps, another
little thing is going to be another $25 next year. And as senior citizens
with fixed incomes -- and at our last meeting, we had a multitude of
family members that have little children, and they're also very
concerned about the costs of the things that are happening in Naples
Park.
So far anything that has happened in Naples Park has made it
better, but it didn't cost us any money. So we're hoping that that's the
kind of thing that we can follow up on, things that will not cost us
money each year, even if it is only $15. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Rose Palumbo. She will be
followed by Barbara Bateman.
MS. PALUMBO: My name is Rose Palumbo. I'm president of
Naples Park Area Association. There's not much I can add to what's
happening here. We would like the lines buried, but we certainly don't
want to pay the MSTU.
In these modem times, you would -- you would think that Florida
Power and Light wanted to bury the wires, considering the zone that
we're in with hurricanes.
But they put a hefty price on burying these wires, not only that,
but the county also jumped in with another $10,000 for this MSTU to
expedite this. I -- I don't see -- we're still paying for the drainage on
91 st Avenue, and we don't really want any more taxes.
Between this and the Dover-Cole thing coming up, we're in a
pickle. And I think that maybe the county can -- can take this -- this
money for this burial of this wire out of the general fund. I feel that
that-- for one -- one mile of transmission line, that's an awful big
Page 65
April 22, 2003
price.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Barbara Bateman. She will be followed by A.J.
Lugara. He's your final speaker.
MS. BATEMAN: Good moming, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good moming.
MS. BATEMAN: My name is Barbara Bateman, and I've been a
homeowner in Naples Park for 28 years, and I'm also on the civic
committee of the Naples Park Area Association.
I'm here today for the purpose of presenting my concerns, the
concerns of the Naples Park Area Association members, and other
Naples Park homeowners about the fast tracking in setting up the
MSTU for Naples Park to pay for placing FPL's transmission lines
underground at 91st Avenue.
The Naples Park homeowners were not formally notified of the
cost for burying these transmission lines. Initially at a February 6
Naples Park community character plan meeting, a petition was
circulating requesting signatures for FPL to bury these power lines,
and approximately 450 signatures were obtained.
Nowhere on the petition did it state that Naples Park owners or
other surrounding communities would be responsible for the cost of
placing these transmission lines underground. In my opinion these
signatures were acquired under false pretenses.
On February the 1 lth, commissioner's board meeting, this issue
was presented, and a 15 -- February 15th Naples Daily News article
stated the cost for burying these lines would be about $60,000. Only
the homeowners on 91st through 93rd Avenue would be responsible
for the cost, along with Beachwalk, the Pavilion Club, and portions of
Vanderbilt Beach Road.
It wasn't until February 16th when the Naples Daily News
published a formal notice advertising a Collier County
Page 66
April 22, 2003
Commissioner's Board workshop meeting to discuss the 2002/2003
update to the county water/sewer district master plan's impact fees and
user rate studies.
There was no official advertising of an MSTU for Naples Park to
pay for placing FPL's transmission lines underground. The only
advertising for the workshop meeting was a typed notice posted on the
wall between the elevators on the third floor of this government
building. Possibly they could have been somewhere else. I didn't
happen to see them.
This was the legal process placing Naples Park property owners
on notice. It was legally, but not morally, correct. How was it
possible for the majority of Naples Park taxpayers and voters to have
input when they were not put on notice and did not know that there
was a meeting?
During the February 18th commissioner's workshop meeting,
pomp (phonetic) president Vera Fitzgerald stated numerous emails
were sent over the weekend to people all across Naples Park who
supported the 91st Avenue beautification.
When I spoke with Commissioner Halas's administrative assistant
at the time, she verified then there was 21 emails supporting the FPL
lines being placed underground. Mr. John Hickey, who always spoke
at that workshop meeting representing Beachwalk, was in favor of the
MSTU creation, and at that time he had 72 recorded telephone
messages in favor.
The Pavilion Club, approximately 156 condo owners, were not in
favor of this MSTU creation. And out of the 3,200 property owners of
Naples Park, a large majority of them did not have the opportunity for
their count to be considered.
The commission moved forward with the MSTU formation to
include now all of Naples Park, Beachwalk, Pavilion Club, and the
Regatta based on the input at that time, I understood, was 93 people.
Page 67
April 22, 2003
While attending the February 19th Naples Park Area Association
meeting, it was the general consent of the association's members not to
pay for placing of FPL transmission lines underground. I do have
some signatures I would like to make part of public record. They have
signed.
And we have lost faith in the political process and the decisions
made by a few people which affect hundreds of taxpayers and voters.
Perhaps, had the Naples Park owners -- owners been formally
notified, they could have had their voices heard, but by fast tracking
this project, they were not afforded their rights as taxpayers and
voters. It's just not fair.
For a project that FPL claims will cost $58,000, Naples Daily
News quoted $60,000. The final cost has risen to $70,000. What
seems to be the driving force that keeps the figure accelerating?
Here's a suggestion. A one-time cost for FPL to place this cost
on our electric statement, and it would have saved the taxpayers a lot
of unnecessary expenses, rather than paying the county an additional
10- to $12,000 for administrative and advertising costs.
And as a concerned citizen, a taxpayer, a voter, and a Naples
Park Area Association member, I presented the viewpoints of many
people who were unable to be here today to express the same
sentiments in this matter.
Thank you.
(Applause).
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is A.J. Lugara, and he will be
followed by Jane Bowie.
MR. LUGARA: Yes, Commissioners. My name A.J. Lugara. I
live at 645 91 st Avenue North. I completely disagree with the last
speaker. I really feel that if everyone contributes and if the
commission can guarantee that, for instance, that no one pays more
than $15, one time $15, I don't see why there's a big problem with this.
Page 68
April 22, 2003
Everyone chips in for $15, we get all the -- all the power lines
buried. If ifs -- if that's the case, I'm in favor of it.
I know I live at 91 st Avenue and I'll be benefiting from it, but
I've talked to many of my neighbors, people who live on 92nd and
93rd and 94th, and we are in favor of it.
I think what some people have a problem with is that they're
worried that costs will go up or something will happen where they're
going to be paying more. But if the board can guarantee that $15, $16,
somewhere in that ballpark, a one-time payment is all we're going to
have to pay, I don't see why there's a -- there's a big disagreement.
Now, maybe people have philosophical disagreements. I agree
with the philosophy that FPL should pay for it themselves, and then if
they want to, tack it on to the electrical bill. But I heard from Mr.
Halas that that's not the case. We could dream and wonder and hope
for the best, that they would be very gratuitous in that way. But from
what I hear-- and I haven't been participating with the meetings in the
past -- that they're not going to do it. I mean, they -- from what I hear,
they own the easement.
So I think almost everyone here says, yes, bury the power lines.
We want the power lines, buried. The question is, how do we pay for
it?
So I think if the board says -- you know, puts a cap, if it's
possible, of 15, $16, I think that would be the way to do it. And I'm in
favor of the district as put up here because everyone contributes, the
people in Beachwalk, the Pavilion, all of Naples Park. By doing it
that way, everyone pays a little for a -- for a community benefit, and I
think that's the way to go. And I wish the board approves it as is.
Thank you si -- thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sir, I just wanted to clarify
something.
Page 69
April 22, 2003
MR. LUGARA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This is not to bury all the power
lines. I think you stated that. It's just to bury one large voltage line
that--
MR. LUGARA: Yes, yes, correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- is going through the area.
MR. LUGARA: Yes. No, I misspoke. I'm sorry. Just the one
line, yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Great. And it basically goes in
regards to the assessment of your property. So if your property's
assessed at $100,000, you're looking at 12.84. If you're assessed at
$200,000, you're looking at $25.68. And the average property in
Naples Park is valued at about the 113,000. That's where the $14.59
comes from--
MR. LUGARA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- relates from.
MR. LUGARA: So this is a one -- so everyone understands, it's
just a one shot deal, right?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: One-time charge.
MR. LUGARA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I believe it will show up on
your tax - correct me if I'm wrong -- 2005, isn't it?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 2004.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 2004?
MR. MUDD: Four.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 2004, excuse me.
MR. LUGARA: So the people who have a small house that -
they're senior citizens or have a modest house will only pay what, 12
or $13, something like that?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It could be in that area, yes.
MR. LUGARA: And that's only one time?
Page 70
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right.
MR. LUGARA: Okay. I think that's fair, but that's my opinion.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The final speaker is Jane Bowie.
MS. BOWIE: Good morning, Commissioners. I live at 551 91st
Avenue, and I definitely will be affected by this. But we realized after
that meeting that there was a misunderstanding about having to pay
for the buried lines, so our neighbors went around, and we telephoned
and we went door to door, so I have about 350 to 400 yeses that we
are willing to pay the fee to have the lines buried. And I'll submit
these.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
If I might take my turn right now. I haven't heard anybody here
that doesn't want these buried. The only comments that I heard is, you
know, what's other alternatives. Well, the other alternative is --
ma'am, I'm sorry, you had a chance. The other alternatives -- this is
the best alternative by creating a taxing unit, and it's only going to be
one year.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: One time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And one time and fitting of the
character of the community. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I would like to
elaborate on that just a little bit.
People have proposed different ways of doing this as if you're
going to escape having to pay for it if you do it in a different way, and
that isn't going to happen.
One person recommended that we have this come out of the
general fund. Well, the general fund is made up of your property
taxes. Now, if we pay for this one out of the general fund, are we also
going to pay for the burying the one on Livingston Road and all those
Page 71
April 22, 2003
in the City of Naples out of the general fund and those in Immokalee
and Marco Island? And if we do that, then what's going to happen?
We're going to increase your taxes. So the point is that you're going to
pay for it no matter which way we do it.
Now, let's take the FP&L. Let's suppose we made them do this.
If we could make them do this, you're still going to pay for it, because
they're entitled to increase your utility rates to pay for their -- to
recover their expenses, and that is a -- is an increase that's going to
occur forever and probably get higher as time goes on. In this
particular case, you're paying one time, and then that's the end of it.
So please don't think that if we could find a different way of
financing this it means that you're getting it free. You're not. You're
going to be paying more for it under any other alternative that you
would be under this alternative.
So I think that the action that the board has taken so far is in your
best interest, and we're trying to do something that the community
says it wants done, and we're getting it done in the least expensive
way for you to do it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Entertain -- Commissioner
Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Maybe we -- maybe we could have
staff step up and give us basically some background of why there's a
$10,000 charge from the original 60,000.
MS. FLAGG: Yes, sir. That was the original estimate. There's
been a transition in responsibility for the MSTUs. And the county
manager and I were discussing -- we will make every effort to
reevaluate that cost, and certainly it could be lowered, and we will
accommodate that request.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I want to make a motion --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, part -- part -- Jim Mudd, for the
Page 72
April 22, 2003
record.
Part of the -- part of the process was we had an estimate of what
it was going to cost from FP&L. They haven't sent us the bill yet, and
when they do, hopefully their estimate is dead on. But you don't want
to say it's going to be $58,000, and then all of a sudden they give you
have a bill for 62, and you said, well, now I've got to -- now I've got to
figure out where I'm going to do four.
So I basically told the staff, give yourself a little leeway,
depending on what their bill is. And I'm going to try to hold FP&L to
that original estimate 58 and hold the staff amount of time down to a
minimum. That estimate was -- was based on, there could be meetings
about the MSTU and whatnot, and the board didn't take that particular
course of action, so I think that those staff costs are going to come
way down.
And so whatever that appropriate piece is, we give that
information back out to these particular associations' representatives
so they can know what that is, and then they'll know what dollar
amount is going to go to that bill on their tax bill.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But it shouldn't -- it won't any
higher. If anything, it's going to be lower. Very good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I'm going to make a motion to
approve at this time.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a second by Commissioner
Halas.
Before I ask for the vote, I just want to say to the people in
District 2 and Naples Park that Commissioner Halas works very hard
as a commissioner to represent you. There are many a times that I
come in early to be prepared for the day, and I can tell you
Commissioner Halas has always beat me here and he's always been
here well after I leave, I'm sure, and I hope that somebody in District 2
Page 73
April 22, 2003
would point out to him that he has a lovely wife at home, and then
hopefully he'll take some opportunity to spend some time with his
wife.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
sure
here
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, are you
that the reason he's here is the work, or does he just want to get
early to get a good parking place?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I'm sure it's the parking places.
I never thought of that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
Thank you very much.
Item #8C
ORDINANCE 2003-18 RE: COLLIER COUNTY INDUSTRIAL
PRETREATMENT ORDINANCE-ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item is 8(G) (sic), and that's
grease trap ordinance.
Do we have any speakers on this item?
MS. FILSON: One.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Page 74
April 22, 2003
MR. CHEATHAM: For the record, I'm Joe Cheatham, public
utilities wastewater director.
I'm here today to make a short presentation on the industrial
pretreatment ordinance, to answer any questions you may have, and to
make a recommendation from your wastewater delivery team to
approve this ordinance.
I would first like to acknowledge the project team responsible for
the production of this ordinance. They are Millie Kelley, to my right
here, who is the author of this ordinance. She's our wastewater
laboratory pretreatment supervisor; Ann Marie Saylor, public utilities
operations analyst; Margie Hapke, public utilities information
coordinator, and myself.
Proposed ordinance was reviewed and approved by the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection. Calls for comments were
requested from the Naples Chamber of Commerce, City of Naples
Public Works Department and state and local restaurant associations.
The Public Utilities Solid Waste Department, Pollution Control
and Prevention Department, county attorney's office and the Collier
County Development Services have conducted internal reviews.
Additionally, a presentation was given to the Collier County's utilities
subcommittee.
An outside engineering consulting firm prepared this ordinance
with others across the State of Florida and reviewed other county
ordinances to ensure compatibility. A lot of hard work and research
have gone into this very important ordinance that meets all federal,
state, and local requirements.
Commissioners, wastewater treatment plants are designed to treat
pollutants that are biodegradable, are not designed to treat pollutants
that are toxic. Some industrial and/or commercial establishments
discharge pollutants that could be toxic to a biological system causing
serious problems.
Page 75
April 22, 2003
We're here today to propose an industrial pretreatment ordinance
that will act to protect our health and safety by preventing introduction
of pollutants that could cause a potential endangerment to the staff, the
public, or the environment; ensure compliance with federal, state, and
local laws and permit regulations; protect our wastewater
infrastructure by preventing discharges that would interfere with the
operation of a wastewater facility, including interference though use
or disposal of domestic wastewater residuals; prevent discharges that
will pass through or otherwise be incompatible with wastewater
facilities.
The pretreatment program requirements include a comprehensive
user data base of industrial contributors to our system including data
derived from each business, proper legal authority to place limitations
on the amount of pollutants that can be discharged into the system,
require compliance with pretreatment standards and technology,
develop a compliance schedule for industrial users to -- who fail to
comply with pretreatment standards, develop an administrative
procedures for monitoring compliance and for dealing with violations,
carry on inspection surveillance and monitoring procedures, and enact
penalties for noncompliance.
Also we enforce conditional industrial limit requirements to
provide relief from industrial use that endanger the public health or
operation of facility. Also technical and industrial effluent limits.
The pretreatment programs exists to regulate introduction of
pollutants from non-domestic sources thereby incurring opportunities
to reclaim municipal industrial wastewaters and sludges and reducing
effluent toxicity.
A compliance monitored program, which is the primary tool of
the pretreatment program, has determined compliance for industrial
users wastewater applicable regulations, administrative procedures to
address all elements of the pretreatment program, and sufficient
Page 76
April 22, 2003
resources and qualified personnel to carry out authorities and
procedures.
What is an industrial user? An industrial user is identified as
any commercial or industrial customer who either discharges more
than 250 -- excuse me -- 25,000 gallons of wastewater per average
workday or contributes more than five percent of the average daily
hydraulic organic capacity of the sewer system, or discharges any of
the compounds regulated under CFR-40, part 403, believed to be in
high enough concentrations to cause harm to the county's wastewater
system or the capacity of the treatment plant and cause a compliance
problem in the plant sludge or effluent.
A sediment of industrial pretreatment ordinance establishes a
fats, oil, and grease inspection compliance program called FOG, the
purpose of which is to prevent fats, oil, and grease from entering the
sewer system; discharges that fats, oil, and grease cause; blockage of
gravity mains that can lead to sanitary sewer overflows; loss of
capacity in gravity and force mains; increased operation and
maintenance cost associated with frequent cleaning of sewer lines;
increased odors in neighborhoods around lift stations.
We hate to show you this slide before lunch, but this is a clogged
manhole as a result of an out-of-compliant grease trap.
Collier County water/sewer district tends to provide a fat-free
diet for our sanitary sewer system through the fats, oil and grease
program.
The fats, oil, and grease program will apply to every hospital,
nursing home, jail, cafeteria, restaurant, or any other establishment
where food is handled or prepared for consumption or distribution.
These establishments must maintain grease traps and oil
separator interceptors located on their premises on a regular basis.
Included in the fats, oil, and grease program are vehicle
maintenance centers, body shops, machine shops, any other
Page 77
April 22, 2003
commercial or industrial establishment storing or using
petroleum-based products.
The industrial pretreatment ordinance gives the county the
authority and guidance to ensure all industrial users are in compliance
with all required technical standards. This can be accomplished by
issuance of permits that list in detail specific pretreatment
requirements, all interceptor designs must be to State of Florida
building and plumbing codes, all industrial users and FOG customers
follow operation and maintenance requirements. It also outlines
enforcement action needed for noncompliance of the ordinance.
The wastewater department has the funds budgeted in this year's
operations and maintenance budget to pay the $65,000 cost to
administer this ordinance. It is anticipated the FOG program will
produce $42,000 a year revenues.
The department establishes that the forecasted four permits,
which we have identified that will be issued, will produce over
$50,000 revenue in excess strength charges. Twelve dollar per month
per user fees left from the FOG program will pay for the cost of
county staff time for inspections, sampling, and administration of this
program.
The fees collected will reduce the impact from the wastewater
department's operational maintenance budget. These revenues will
pay the additional treatment costs associated with wastewater that has
excess strength over domestic wastewater.
It is not anticipated that any additional staff or vehicles will be
required this time in a proposed fiscal year '04 budget.
As the system grows, revenues associated with this program will
bear the cost of expanded services required.
Commissioners, that's the end of my presentation. We're
prepared to answer any questions you might have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Call up the public speakers, please.
Page 78
April 22, 2003
MS. FILSON: You have one public speaker, Mr. Chairman.
Bob Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Hello, Commissioners. Good morning.
Good morning, staff, Mr. Cheatham and public utility director. My
name is Bob Krasowski. I'm-- for the record. I'm with the Zero
Waste Collier County Group. Grease trap waste is waste, so we're
very interested.
I would like to say that this is a wonderful ordinance. This is
great work here. What's being done is parallel to the -- the priority of
value structure that zero waste applies to issues. Here we have a
specific identification of a source of a pollutant, problematic material,
and we are looking toward the generator of that material to deal with
the solution for that problem.
It's a great strategy to identify the source and put the expense to
hand -- to taking care of that problem at source so that those people
causing the problem are motivated to come up with solutions.
And when we put that -- that requirement on the source, the
American industrial business community is very -- very -- adequately
addresses those things.
I'd like to wish you all a happy Earth Day. Today is Earth Day. I
don't know if that had anything to do with Mr. Cheatham's selection of
timing here. But this is a wonderful gift to the earth that you're
working on here.
I also, essentially, am here to mention to you that this grease trap
waste, when it is collected, has a number of processes that it can go to
for disposal or treatment.
As -- what occurs now, people take it to -- they put additives in it,
lime or -- like lime, and then -- to neutralize the odor, and they take it
and land apply it. That's one option. It's not the best, but it happens
now.
Also there's research being done to take this grease trap waste,
Page 79
April 22, 2003
put sodium hydroxide, I believe, it is, in combination with it, and then
have it anaerobically digested in vessel, and then it can be combined
with composting operations. That intermediate step breaks it down,
makes it more readily composted.
And then, as also -- today often it's collected, treated with lime,
and taken to the landfill. It can be landfilled. Much of what we get
today I understand is taken to Okeechobee. More remote. Not so
much of a problem with odor as we have at our landfill, which as
odor's -- you know, was a big problem, and so this is an opportunity.
There has been a suggestion that this material could be included
in a pyrolysizing option here. Of course, we do not endorse pyrolysis
and do not look on -- favorable on any kind of schemes to make it
look better than it is.
Let's see. I saw mention in there there's going to -- in this
document, there is going to be a meeting where users of this -- or
people who fall under this ordinance will be invited to attend, that it
will be explained to them, I would like -- I would request today to be
invited to that meeting. I'd like to learn as much as I can about this
process.
I'll be seeing you next commission meeting, May 13th, for the
Zero Waste Option presentation. And thank you for your attention to
my comments today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, thank you.
I make a motion to approve.
Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Coyle.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just a couple of questions, if I
may. I think this is an excellent product.
Basically what it's doing is it's going to remove that cost that the
Page 80
April 22, 2003
average consumer out there of the water, you know, homeowner, that
has been bearing the burden of this for some time when it's a problem
that's mainly coming from the commercial establishments, and it will
put that cost on them to be able to hold our other costs down.
I've seen enough grease reclamation plants to last me a lifetime.
This is something that's been a long time coming.
But I do have one question. It says here on page one of our
executive summary, industrial users are identified as any commercial
industrial customer who discharges greater than 25,000 gallon per day.
Who would that be?
MR. CHEATHAM: It would be anyone that uses a lot of water
for their industrial process. We don't have that many in Naples. In
fact --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm trying to think of one that
would ever use 25,000 gallons, and I can't think of one.
MR. CHEATHAM: We don't. If they -- everyone -- someone
came to Naples, they would fall under that category. But right now
we don't have that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: How about the fat farm?
MR. CHEATHAM: Sir?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: A fat farm? Never mind.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Item #9A
Page 81
April 22, 2003
RESOLUTION 2003-158 RE-APPOINTING BARBARA MINCH
ROSENBERG TO THE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
Al ITHORITY-ADOPTF, D
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item is 9(A), appointment of
members to the education facilities authority. Entertain a motion.
I'll make a motion to approve the applicant.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second. Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2003-159 APPOINTING DR. JOAN COLFER TO
THE COLLIER COUNTY HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY-
ADOPTED
Appoint members to the Collier County health facilities --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- authorities.
Page 82
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- Dr. Colfer.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Motion carries, 4-0.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2003-160 RE-APPOINTING GARY D. LIND AND
APPOINTING SUZANNE BRADACH TO THE HOUSING
FINANCE Al ITHORITY-ADOPTED
Appoint members to the housing finance authority.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion we approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
Halas, second by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
Page 83
April 22, 2003
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2003-161 RE-APPOINTING BARBARA M1NCH
ROSENBERG AND JOHN R. HUMPHREY TO THE INDUSTRIAL
DF, VF, I.OPMF, NT Al ITHORITY-ADOPTF, D
Appoint members to the Industrial Development Authority.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve the two
nominees.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll second the motion.
Motion made by Commissioner Coyle, second by Commissioner
Henning.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Item #9E
RESOLUTION 2003-162 APPOINTING DR. FAY R. BILES AND
W.J. "JACK" MARKEL TO THE WATER AND WASTEWATER
Al ITHORITY-ADOI~TED
Appoint members to the Water and Wastewater Authority.
Page 84
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: A motion by Commissioner Halas,
second by Commissioner Coyle (sic).
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Item #9F
RESOLUTION 2003-163 APPOINTING DONALD SPANIER TO A
4 YEAR TERM TO THE PELICAN BAY MSTBU ADVISORY
COMMITTF, E-ADOPTF, D
Appoint members to the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory
Committee.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that we approve
the nomination of-- yeah.
MS. FILSON: Donald Spanier.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Donald Spanier, excuse me, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll second that motion.
Motion made by Commissioner Halas, second by Commissioner
Henning.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 85
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
Item #9G
RESOLUTION 2003-164 RE-APPOINTING BILL L. NEAL,
SHARON KING AND RONALD FOWLE TO SERVE 2 YEAR
TERMS, AND APPOINTING BRUCE BABBITT TO SERVE THE
REMAINDER OF A VACANT TERM EXPIRING ON MAY 22,
2004, ADDITIONAL POSITION TO BE RE-ADVERTISED AND
LETTER TO BE SENT TO PETER VANARSDALE TO TAKE
ACTIVE PART IN COMMITTEE AS A PRIVATE CITIZEN-
ADOPTED
Item G, appoint members to the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
Local Redevelopment Advisory Board by the Board of
Commissioners and the CRA.
So we're acting on behalf of the CRA also?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Do we need to change our
hats? Turn them around?
MS. FILSON: Since they're approving this as the BCC and the
CRA--
MR. WEIGEL: Pardon me. Yes, I'd like for you to take two
votes --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: -- if you would, identifying yourself as to which
Page 86
April 22, 2003
agency you're representing at each vote.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Entertain a --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, let me -- can I say something
about Bayshore before we continue?
I was just in the back doing a little bit of work on that, and it says
that Julian Stokes is located on Davis Boulevard. I couldn't find him
in the phone book. I know I've heard he's a property appraiser. So I
have my secretary checking. He's located on Arnold Avenue -- and
that's off Airport.
Now, I can't find any appraiser office on Davis Boulevard at all.
I looked all through the yellow pages. So my suggestion would be,
being that the committee, the Bayshore CRA committee suggested
that Peter VanArsdale, who had been involved with the CRA
downtown, would be so good, I would suggest -- what they're trying to
do is get people that have a business or work on Bayshore or in the
triangle.
But Mr. Stokes, although it says -- well, he doesn't give an
address on here. It says in our agenda packet that he's on Davis
Boulevard, but I can't find any knowledge of that. I have Kathy now
checking with our real property upstairs.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What do you want to do? What would
you like to do?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I would prefer to have Peter
VanArsdale on that committee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So --
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MS. FILSON: He doesn't fit the criteria listed in the ordinance to
be a member.
Page 87
April 22, 2003
have
does
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
a business or live on that--
MS. FILSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
either.
Well -- you mean because he doesn't
Well, I don't know that Mr. Stokes
MS. FILSON: And I can't verify that. Staff sent that back in
their memo when they reviewed it --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A question if I may. Why would
he be listed if he's not eligible? Why not have a little note --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Human error.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- after the name?
MS. FILSON: Why would who be listed, sir?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why would Peter VanArsdale
be listed if he is not eligible?
MS. FILSON: Because he applied. And if you'll look under
category, that -- that section is blank.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It would help a little bit, I think,
in our research if maybe some note was made in there about a person
not being --
MS. FILSON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can I make a recommendation -- is
that we appoint one, two, three, four members, and readvertise that
other one, and we can also allow Commissioner Fiala to do some due
diligence on the one applicant.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would agree with that
entirely. I would like to also include in the motion a recommendation
that Peter VanArsdale become actively involved in the meeting as
private citizen, because he would be an excellent resource for the
board. He has got -- he has a lot of experience and a good record of
Page 88
April 22, 2003
success in community planning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, he was the one that
alerted us to the fact that we didn't have a plan. You know, we all
thought we were working under a plan, and here we only have an
overlay. No plan.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And so it was Peter that came
forward and suggested that, that's why I -- he's already been a little bit
active. I'd love to see him very active.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could we recognize him as ad
hoc member?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think Commissioner Coyle's
suggestion is great -- is ask him to attend. I'll be glad to draft that
letter.
And that was a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was a motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It was a second.
I thought it was -- Commissioner Coletta, that I should recognize
the motion on the floor. There's a motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Page 89
April 22, 2003
Item #9H
RESOLUTION 2003-165 EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE
COMMUNITY CHARACTER/SMART GROWTH ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR ONE YEAR, TO EXPIRE ON JUNE 26, 2004-
ADOPTED
Next item is 9(H) --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do we need a second vote on this?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- for the board to support an
amendment of the ordinance extending the term of the Community
Character/Smart Growth Committee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Item #9I
DISCUSSION RE: EMPLOYEES AND COMMISSIONERS
ETHICS ORDINANCE. COUNTY MANAGER TO
Page 90
April 22, 2003
INCORPORATE MEMO INTO EMPLOYEE'S PAYCHECKS
CONCERNING GIFTS-ORDINANCE TO lie AMENDED
The next item is my discussion item on the employees and the
commissioners ethics ordinance.
I am asking the Board of Commissioners -- and I have worked
with the state's attorney's office, the county attorney's office, and also
the chairman of the Republican Executive Committee to amend the
ordinance requesting the county manager to change the section
35-11 (F) of the human relations resource rules as follows:
No employee shall accept or agree to accept, either directly or
indirectly, any favor, gift, loan, fee, services, or other items of value in
any form whatsoever for any or -- from -- from any organization or
individual in -- in the intent to reward or influence the employee
carrying out his or her appointed duties.
And that's not saying they cannot accept gifts, it's just saying any
gifts to try to influence the employees of doing their job.
Other ordinances, or other personnel rules should provide that the
employee shall not participate in the selection of vendors or approvals
of contracts if the employee has received a gift from someone
representing a vendor, or a contracting party, or representative of the
vendor or contracting party is a relative of the employee.
And all that is saying is, hey, if anybody has a friend who is a
vendor and that person is on the select committee for that contract, is
ask that person to step down.
The Board of Commissioners should also work with the county
manager to make sure that all employees are adequately informed of
the ordinance of personnel rules prohibiting employees from accepting
gifts from anyone who intends to award or influence the performance
of their public duties as an employee of Collier County.
And we also need to educate the employees of Collier County
Page 91
April 22, 2003
that they can accept gifts, because there's a misunderstanding of the
employee ethics ordinance, and -- that it does not allow any gifts.
Well, that is not true. And I think we can do a better job, with the help
of the county manager, to educate our public employees.
And I think that these are simple, straightforward reforms, should
help and promote public confidence in the integrity of Collier County
Collier County government. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think-- I think these are
good improvements to the ethics ordinance, but one of the toughest
things in dealing with an ethics ordinance is to eliminate or at least to
reduce unintended consequences.
One of the problems I've always had with -- with the restriction,
which includes the term intent to influence, is how do we determine if
there was an intent to influence, and that's one thing I would suggest
we take a close look at.
If someone can accept a gift as long as there was no intent to
influence, who is going to determine whether or not there was an
intent to influence? The employee could always deny that there was
no (sic) intent to influence, so it was legal to accept it. And when I
use the term employee, I'm applying to -- applying that term to us also
because these things should equally apply to us.
I think one of our challenges is to make sure that we have an
ethics ordinance that is not ambiguous. And when we have to get into
somebody's head and try interpret whether or not a gift was made with
the intent of-- to influence, I think we -- we tend to -- to create
problems for ourselves.
The other -- other concern I have -- and it's not about these
recommendations, because I think they're good recommendations, but
we need to address them whenever we -- we approve or give guidance
to the staff to develop something. The question is, who investigates
Page 92
April 22, 2003
these things? Who is going to gather the data and amass the evidence
necessary to prove someone guilty here? And I think that that's
something we need to proceed to take a look at that.
One of the reasons that I know that Mike Carr has been interested
in improving this is that, quite frankly, the state's attorney doesn't
consider these things serious enough to prosecute very vigorously.
And if that's the case, who's going to investigate it if we don't have
something that is fairly clear-cut?
And those are the kinds of questions I think I have with respect to
these -- to these changes, but I wholeheartedly support the intent of the
changes.
There are -- there's one thing I would consider that -- would
throw out for your consideration, is that if an obligation is placed on
an employee or a member of the commission to avoid participating in
any decision-making process where they might have received gifts
from someone, then that places the onus on us and the employees to
avoid making a decision for someone from whom we might have
accepted some gift.
Now, let me give you an example. If I were to go to lunch with a
friend who has -- is not a lobbyist, has nothing to do with the business
of the Collier County and he were to buy lunch -- and by the way, I
don't permit that to happen -- but let's suppose we did that, and then a
year later that person comes before us looking for a variance. Now,
there is no connection between the two events, perhaps. But does that
mean then that I would be in violation?
The best way to solve that was to be -- would be to recuse
myself, I presume, but that gets into a bit of state law, I think. But
nevertheless, I think that's sufficient to express my concern about how
we implement these provisions, and I think that's very, very important.
Now, I think it would be appropriate to hear from our -- hear
from Ramiro about his reaction to some of this, too.
Page 93
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you want to address that now,
Ramiro, or do you want to wait for the other board members to
address it?
MR. RAMIRO: Whatever the pleasure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't we take it one at a time. If
you don't mind, if you can address Commissioner Coyle's questions
and concerns.
MR. MANALICH: Good morning, Commissioners. Mr.
Chairman, for the record, Ramiro Manalich, chief assistant county
attorney.
With regard to the last question, I -- we have a standard that
currently says that public officials shall not accept any gift from
anyone who the public official knows or reasonably should know has
or is seeking contractual or other business or other decisions or
influence with a board member. That's the current standard.
In the scenario you presented, Mr. Coyle, if those circumstances
are not present at the time of that particular lunch, then I would think
there would not be a violation if later the person comes in to seek
business later on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But how do you determine -- how
do you determine whether or not that's the case though, Ramiro?
If someone were to buy me lunch and then come in later on and
ask for something to be done, I could always maintain I didn't know
that these two things were connected and I could deny that they were
connected, and thereby I would be -- be found innocent, supposedly.
But, in fact, suppose they were connected. Who proves the
connection, is the thing I'm straggling with.
MR. MANALICH: Well, I would -- under the ordinance, it
would be the state attorney. They would have to investigate through
the sheriff and other law enforcement. In the case of employees, it
would be through the manager and his supervisory chain of command,
Page 94
April 22, 2003
eventually being reviewed by the manager.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think you're talking a little bit about
personal integrity, too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Exactly, that's exactly. And that's
the weakness of all of these ethics ordinances is that -- is that we have
to prove that somebody really had an intent to do something here, and
that's a very difficult standard. And I'm looking for a way to devise
some guidelines so that we don't have to involve ourselves in those
kinds of things. Is there a way to do it?
MR. MANALICH: I think, obviously, we'll want to hear Mr.
Carr's comments on this, because I think he has some ideas also, but
one of the things I would say is that in the standard that I just read to
you from, there is a knowledge element that would input, and it's not
only actual knowledge, but it's constructive knowledge. Should a
reasonable person under the circumstances have known.
So even if the person denies that they have actual knowledge, if a
reasonable person should have known from the circumstances, that
could still be known shown, and that is something that appears in this
standard governing public officials. Perhaps it's something also, that
knowledge -- or know or should have known is something that you
should put in for employees also.
I don't know if Mr. Weigel had anything to add on that, but those
are my thoughts to your question.
MR. WEIGEL: If one removes all elements of interpretation,
then I think you set a standard, a trip wire standard, and that can be,
obviously, difficult for the unwary where there is no intent to violate
and potentially even no connection between, I'll call it the inadvertent
receipt of a gift, and a request of a job-related nature that may come
later, whether it's in the employee sector or the board decision-making
sector.
MR. MANALICH: I believe that when you hear from Mr. Carr,
Page 95
April 22, 2003
what he might add to that -- and I'll obviously let him speak for
himself. I know in our discussions, what we have talked about is that
in the ordinance there are a number of references to gifts being
prohibited where they are designed to influence or award the
performance of public duties, and that obviously some common sense
and application has to be used here with that being the guiding
principle, that it's those circumstances where something of value is
given that a reasonable person would understand under the
circumstances was to reward or influence performance of public
duties.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just one final comment, and I don't
want to belabor this, because I think the intent is relatively simple, and
I'd like to get on with it.
But the thing I have always struggled with in creating these
ethics ordinances is that it doesn't take a gift of great value to
influence people. A smile and handshake sometimes will influence
people if it's regularly given, so that a small gift given frequently can
have a cumulative impact of influencing people to do certain things,
and that's unfortunate, but it does happen, and that's human behavior.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You mean you'd sell your vote for a
pretty woman?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I wouldn't, I wouldn't. I
wouldn't sell my vote for anything, but -- in fact, I have a pretty
woman already, so I don't need another one. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Touche.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But we need to tie these loose ends
up if we're going to have something that achieves our goals, I think,
and we do have a number of loopholes that require interpretations by
somebody.
MR. MANALICH: You raise a good point on that. And as a
matter of fact, Mr. Mudd, Mr. Hay (phonetic) and Mr. Carr in our
Page 96
April 22, 2003
discussions have pointed out that one of the things he would propose
here would be to delete, at least from the HR rule, there was a
provision that said, only items of nominal or intrinsic value can be
accepted. That would actually come out. So even if it was of nominal
value, if it's given with that improper purpose, which is to influence or
award public duties, that would also be prohibited.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll be quiet after this -- this
comment, I promise.
One of the things I think most of the commissioners, if not all of
the commissioners do, is that they just don't accept anything. End of
story. I mean, whether it's nominal or not, we don't accept anything.
And if we do go out to lunch with someone, we pay our own way.
And is there any reason employees can't do the same thing?
MR. MANALICH: Well, the only thing with that, of course, it
makes it difficult on employees in terms of being able to be social
within their own communities. I don't think the idea is to say that they
can't go to a neighbor's house and have dinner with a good friend or a
neighbor that has no business pending with the county. I don't think --
so far the board has not wanted to take it to that point. And I tend to
think that would be maybe going too far.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner
Halas, and then Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Three questions.
The first one -- and it really goes back to earlier in this thing. It
isn't anything that's been changed. But we were talking about the
lobbyists who have to first comply by registering and so forth. You
know, as I was reading through this I thought, we never know who's
registered and who isn't. I was just wondering if there's some way of
identifying those who have registered so that we know who's speaking
before us.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'll get you that.
Page 97
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I mean, do they wear like a button
or pin or something so that we know who -- and so the audience
knows who is a registered lobbyist and who isn't? I'm just letting that
-- you don't even have to answer me now, but that's something I would
like to see, so that there's some kind of an identifying ribbon or
something.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We could carve an X on their
forehead.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I think--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But -- now, back under the gifts
again. Gifts -- for instance, I was just concerned, like our
administrative assistants; for instances, this is secretary's week, and
we'd like to do something nice for them. Is that -- is that acceptable?
That's acceptable.
MR. MANALICH: You're talking about for--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What about Christmas gifts
exchange? I mean, amongst employees in any department, you know;
can we do that?
MR. MANALICH: I think if there are no circumstances
indicating that those things are given to reward or influence
performance of public duties, it would normally not be prohibited.
Now --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that would be an
interpretation. I would like to say to my administrative assistant,
gosh, you're doing a good job. Here, you know, have a big cookie. Is
that a reward?
MR. MANALICH: Well, that I would not -- that direct linkage,
that would be a bit problematic. In our office, we've dealt with the
situation where David has indicated that we are not to receive or
accept gifts up the chain because we're in a supervisory role, and it
could be misconstrued, even if not intended that way.
Page 98
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I just want to make sure that
whatever we did, that we -- you know, that this was legal. I think that
that's going a little too far when can't even reward our own employees.
MR. MANALICH: I think it gets back to Commissioner Coyle's
comment about -- that we wanted to have precise language here so
that we're not ambiguous --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. MANALICH: -- and people are left guessing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And a Christmas gift exchange, you
know. You're all doing it amongst your own departments, no matter
what department it's in. And so I just want to make sure that we -- that
we still have the little niceties that we -- you know, that we -- that
create a company and a camaraderie, that we don't give that privilege
away.
MR. MANALICH: And obviously you're trying to balance these
competing concerns, and be careful. What I would ask for direction
today is, when you make a decision here, is give the manager, our
office, direction to work closely to craft very careful language with the
input of Mr. Carr, and come back to you with precise language that
hopefully achieves and eliminates that ambiguity that Mr. Coyle
mentioned we have to watch out for.
Now, we do provide -- David has led the effort in coordinating
seminars where we, with the manager, work to inform employees of
some of these standards and try to explain these on a periodic basis,
and that also helps.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think these are confusing, really.
MR. WEIGEL: I'd like to jump in just a moment here and say
that as we give our seminars to staff particularly, we are approached
with questions, sometimes quietly after the -- after the seminar
discussion is over, probably to protect the innocent, so to speak, and
that is, the question may come up from a person who works in the
Page 99
April 22, 2003
field in the service aspect of our cotmty employment, whether--
outside service, and they say, well, if I'm working and the resident in
front of whose home we're constructing -- could be water related,
sewer related, water related -- and they offer me a Coca-Cola, what do
I do? And this is -- they're asking after they've heard our sermon
about ethics and gifts.
And we've been very cautious with our response to them, and
indicating that at a minimum, if they do accept the Coke or the piece
of pizza, or whatever it might be, it had better be under circumstances
that doesn't seem apparent that it's influencing their work to that
particular piece of property, that resident's property as opposed to the
job in chief that they're doing along the line, and that they make an
offer to -- at least make an offer to pay the person the 50 cents or
whatever the token is.
But it's problematic, and to some degree, as we go to sharpen our
pencils and make the rules more specific, that removes ambiguity, but
it also removes flexibility as well and can have a bit of a chilling
affect on us in the employee area.
Additionally though, as in any piece of legislation that you adopt,
such as amendments to the ethics ordinance, the kind of discussion
that you're having right now and that Ms. Fiala has just brought up
about clarity, Christmas gift exchange, things of that nature, would be,
I think, of great assistance to the record that's created with the specific
language that's ultimately adopted so that whether it's Mr. Mudd and
his hierarchy of supervision that occurs .with the employees or the
county attorney that advises, or, in fact, since we're talking about the
ordinance, the state attorney, which will, of course, continue to be
involved, that they will have legislative history to help them make
those interpretive decisions that may still remain within the -- within
the legislation that we deal with.
Thank you.
Page 100
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: As I was reading through this
thing, I was a little stressed in the fact that the only penalty that was
stated was $500 fine or 60 days in jail. Nothing in the ordinance did it
say that if you were found blatantly to be in violation, that it meant
termination of your job or whatever else in there, okay?
The other thing I really believe is that -- there was nothing also to
address the vendors, because they also have a responsibility, okay?
The vendors and consultants, they have a responsibility that they can't
-- they shouldn't try to intimidate the employee, and that wasn't
brought out in this ordinance.
And the -- getting back to what Commissioner Fiala said, I think
it's very important that we, some way or another, make sure that we do
a provision in here so that when there is gifts to be given, whether it's
in a department and you may have a supervisor that's involved and it's
exchange of gifts, that we don't get into a bind as far as like Christmas
time or Hanukkah or whatever else that may come into effect here.
The other thing that surprised me when I was reading this
ordinance also was that in-- page eight, I believe it is -- yeah, page
eight, that section two, it was very broad scoped. And, in fact, if you
read into this thing, it's like basically what Commissioner Coyle was
saying, and that is, if you happen to get involved with birthdays,
anniversaries, holidays, house warmings, or something of this nature,
and then somebody comes before the board and you took a gift and
this person is a good friend and basically comes up and petitions the
board, if you read that, it looks like you could be in violation, or that
the -- that the -- anybody could be in violation that works for the
county. And if you read that closely, it's -- there's some -- it's -- it's
way too broad, I think, and that's just my first reading of it. I'm not a
lawyer. But it just -- the way I look at it, it's just -- but I really think
that we've got to address the vendors and everything else.
Page 101
April 22, 2003
And really, it comes right down to the bottom line, let's hope that
people who are in either an elected position or work for the county,
whether you -- or you work for the company on the outside, that you
use conscience. Let your conscience be your guide and let's hope that
people can make a wise decision.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think the county manager can
address some of your questions, Commissioner Halas.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Halas, on July 29th, 2002, we put a
-- we put a clause in for bid invitations and RFPs out to bidders, and it
basically states, prohibition of gifts to county employees. No
organization or individual shall offer, either directly or indirectly, any
favor, gift, loan, fee, service, or item of equal value in any form
whatsoever, if it is intended to give the appearance of rewarding or
influencing county employees in carrying out his or her appointed
duties. Violation of this provision may result in one or more of the
following consequences. And again, this is to the vendor.
Prohibition to the individual firm and/or employee of the firm
from contact with county staff for a specific period of time,
prohibition by the individual or firm from doing business with the
county for a specified period of time, including but not limited to
submitting bids, RFPs or quotes and immediate termination of any
contract held by the individual and/or firm for cause. And I think that
pretty much gets at that vendor, okay? It basically says, if you go out
of your way, we'll terminate on you.
Now, can we add this particular thing --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That should be added to this then.
MR. MUDD: The problem I have, Commissioner, with adding it
to that ordinance -- because you go back to, one of the penalties for
violation of the ordinance, which is a misdemeanor, a $500 fine and
60 days in jail, okay.
And what I'd say to you, in our contract language, that would be
Page 102
April 22, 2003
a better place to put that because at that juncture you can boot them
and you can blacklist them. And I will tell you that particular action is
more severe than a $500 fine, which I've never seen anybody get yet,
okay, even when they're found guilty. I've never even seen any
penalty. It's been, you're bad and I'm sorry, and I could give you
Naples editorial pages if you'd like, and I've got it in my folder, and I
can show you exactly what happens.
So I would tell you, having those particular hammers are
probably more stringent against that particular case.
But when you're done, I have a couple of things I would really
like us to take a look at in this ordinance, and I know, with
conversations with Mr. Carr and Ramiro and Commissioner Henning
and with the commissioners on the dais today, that I can tighten up my
particular policy and get that done.
And I think words like gifts within the employee body are
exempt, you know, in amongst themselves within. I think if you put
that statement there, okay, it clarifies taking a secretary out to lunch or
an executive assistant, which I plan to do tomorrow, by the way,
because it's a professional day, and we have reservations at a
restaurant across the street. Am I influencing, yeah, I want them to do
a better job, okay? They do a good job and want them to do even a
better job, and so that helps in the harmony in that process.
But I think that gets at those particular instances that some of the
commissioners were mentioning just a second ago. Some other--
some other things I'd like to do -- Mike, can I -- MR. CARR: Jump in.
MR. MUDD: What I would like to do to the ordinance is -- and
specifically -- and this has to address some of the things that the
commissioners have talked about. There's a definition --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Sir?
Page 103
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before we do that, Commissioner
Coletta has a burning desire to have some input on this discussion, and
I don't want to -- for him to burn up.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, no. Yeah, I appreciate it
very much, Commissioner Henning. Of course, we always save our
best for last.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are we at the end?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I had my hand up too, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But I do appreciate you
recognizing me. I do want to make a couple of cormnents.
What we're here hearing is the echoes from a previous
commission that did not exercise the same ethics standards that we're
trying to exercise. We're trying to get it down in a way that we can
assure ourselves that in the future this will continue, what we're doing
today.
I can tell you for a fact -- and Jack Pointer was with me. We
attended an ethics course put on by Florida Association of Counties up
in Orlando back about four months ago, and you would be absolutely
surprised in how the rest of the commissioners from other places
approach the same problem.
The idea of the no gift rules completely baffled them as a choice.
I mean, they were asking such things as, well, what was I supposed to
do when I got the turkey at Christmas time from waste management?
Well, why'd you accept it in the first place? Well, you know, I didn't
know what to do.
And the discussion went around and around and around. It kept
coming back, try no gift. But some people did pick up on that. I think
Jack was quite amused by the whole discussion that took place.
There's a big different between a glass of water and a Christmas
card and a $100,000 loan. That's very plain. That's blatant. And I
resent the fact that these things are treated so lightly by the court
Page 104
April 22, 2003
system. And I agree, we need to tighten this up.
I want to tell Jim Mudd that I appreciate what he has put
together. We had a problem that I think woke the interest of the
commission, the Republican Executive Committee, with an employee
situation that Mr. Mudd handled accordingly to the rules and
regulations that he had in front of him at the time.
And I think by coming up with something firm that puts the ball
back in his park so that it's -- they fully understand, and when the
same circumstances prevail where somebody blatantly accepts gifts,
meals, trips to a racetrack, that under those circumstances, there's no
leeway, there's no forgiveness. That's not a gift that we can find any
exceptions for calling it a gift, and that the person be terminated and
possibly legal action taken. I think those are the directions we're
looking to go.
When it comes to our employees, you make a very good point,
how do we interact with the people around us? We can't remain
completely sterile and pretend that each other don't exist and not be
able to reciprocate with small gifts back and forth. And I think an
exchange of gifts is pretty harmless in the fact that you're exchanging
something of like value back and forth. That's great.
But as far as buying meals or whatever, or accepting meals, I
think it should be very simple, you pick up the tab for everything,
except for your kid, which will stick you with it every time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And that's full price, right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No discount?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No discount. Well, no, the
same discount that's given to everyone. I mean, if you go out for the
blueberg -- Blue Plate Special, you should be entitled to the same
price that's advertised for everyone else.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Now one other question.
Page 105
April 22, 2003
Margie Student's mom just died, and I would like to send a donation to
a charity on-- you know--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hospice.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- in her name, or you know -- just
-- now, is that -- I wouldn't want to get Margie in any trouble, and I
don't want to get in trouble. Am I allowed --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's no provisions against that.
You're fine. And maybe what we ought to do is join into one of these
workshops that David Weigel has, because, Commissioners, we're
cutting into our lunch hour. But we're here for the public and the
public wants to speak, and the county manager, I'm sure he wants --
has a lot of things that he would like to say. So if we can do that, if you don't find.
MR. CARR: First I'd like -- my name's Mike Carr, and I'm the
Republican party chairman.
I'd like to compliment all of you for your taking the time and
dealing with this issue.
The -- our county attorney is quite right, you need to trip wire in
there. If you take out all elements of intent, you end up with a statute
like statutory rape doesn't have any intent required, and I think for this
kind of a statute, it's not quite the same, you have something there that
intent's involved. It makes it harder to prove. There's got to be
something in there.
The initial proposal that's in front of you deals specifically with
eliminating the personal relationships exception to the gift definition.
Now, the reason that one came up is because in that talking with
the state att -- with the state attomey's office, with the representative,
they felt that that particular exception swallowed the rule. By saying
that if somebody was a personal friend, it was okay, basically you
were saying if they give you that first paper bag full of hundred dollar
bills, that showed real personal friendship, and then it was no longer
Page 106
April 22, 2003
corrupt because they were your friends. The second one, of course,
made them best friends, and then as it went on down.
So their rationale, which -- and as a defense attorney, I promise
you I understand. They said, well, some defense attorney's going to
say that a bag full of money makes you a friend. And, you know, it's
nice to take that out, because nobody wants to write an ordinance that
is deliberately unenforceable. The way it's written right now, with
that personal relationship exception, it is literally unenforceable.
You'll never get them to prosecute anybody for anything.
And I know that's not the intent of this board. It's to immunize
people from doing bad acts. That's why that's in there.
The second -- the county manager section, we talked with the
county manager. One complaint that everyone comes out with is, we
don't understand what the rules are, it's complicated, we don't
understand what the consequences are, nobody ever really explained.
And I know you've done numerous briefings.
And the first thing they say when they're caught taking stock car
tickets and free hotel rooms and free mails -- meals and other gifts is,
we didn't really know that was exactly what you meant and we had no
idea there was any real consequences involved, and I think
Commissioner Halas has pointed out that there needs to be a clarity --
I suggest in their next paycheck putting a little thing saying, if you
violate the policy, termination is the standard consequence.
The manager's going to have the power to review what his
employees do. But we've had past corruption in Collier County. And
the citizens have a right to expect honest government, and you guys
are honest. And they have a right to expect that county employees are
going to work for all, work for us, and not work for developers.
And the problem is that some people still haven't gotten the word,
if-- they feel free to say, I don't understand that it's not to take pit
passes to the stock car races, have hotel rooms paid for, have meals,
Page 107
April 22, 2003
you know, paid for, if they don't understand that that is morally,
ethically, and legally wrong, then, perhaps, we need to beat it in their
heads a little more harshly because everyone here pays taxes, and we
all want to understand that our employees work for us and not for the
guy that wants the contract, that wants our money.
And that's really the fundamental thing we're trying to get at here
is make it clear that we stand for honest government, and if people
don't want to work here and understand that they're going to be honest,
there's plenty of other jobs out there somewhere else, but this is an
honest government, and we demand honesty from our employees, and
that's what is being addressed here.
And I hope that you-all ask Ramiro to help do some of the fine
drafting here to incorporate these -- no one ever intended to prohibit
gifts from you-all to your employees. That's -- and that's nowhere
reflected in any of the ordinance, but it doesn't hurt to put that stuff in
black and white and create a legislative, you know, history for this
thing.
All your comments have been excellent, but we've got to make
something really crystal clear. We are not going to tolerate corruption
in Collier County, we're not going to tolerate employees getting lavish
gifts from people and then helping them get contracts. And if people
do that, they're going to be employed somewhere else, and that
message has got to get out so we don't have -- I get so tired of reading
in the newspaper, you catch them with their fingers -- they're red hot,
and they say, I didn't understand. No one ever explained it to me.
Well, this is all public. Nothing here has been said in legalese.
This is pretty much English. The only person paying the employees
should be the taxpayers, and that's what this is all about. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And Mike, I'm sure you didn't
reference any employee taking bags of money. It's just --
Page 108
April 22, 2003
MR. CARR: No.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- an example of what could happen.
MR. CARR: No. That's an example. We've got past
commissioners and others that have -- that are standing trial or have
plead guilty to crimes dealing with taking things of significant value,
including golf memberships. Some of those memberships were worth
up to a hundred grand, okay? You get a little embossed card saying,
you're now, you know, entitled to be treated as a member here.
Other citizens, when they buy into these memberships, have to
pay 50, 60, a hundred grand. The price varies from place to place.
Those are not subtle things that are confusing.
When people get invited to go to Daytona for stock car races and
somebody else is picking up the tab, there's no subtly involved here.
This isn't, gee, okay, I don't understand the ordinance. Gee, I don't
understand. This is confusing. It's complicated.
They've got their fingers out, they've got their palms outstretched.
This has got to stop, and we've got to put everybody on notice. It's no
longer going to be accepted.
You guys are honest. We expect the people that work here to be
honest. I think they generally overwhelmingly are honest. And I like
your suggestion about -- and this is also -- Commissioner Henning put
it up -- vendors that try to corruptly buy and sell our employees need
to be removed from the vendor list. This -- no more free ride, no more
walking in and dumping things off on folks and expecting that to buy
their good will.
I was appalled at the remarks from that water company guy that
said, gee, I've always found that, you know, giving them things made
them feel much more finely towards us. Well, yeah, if you give them
a paper bag full of money, they'll all love you. But anyway, thanks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County manager, do you have any
Page 109
April 22, 2003
other thing that -- any suggestions?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I have -- yes, sir.
I have the -- I have the essence of the county manager's section
53-11, Fox Trott (sic), okay, and that's there, and I'll work that hard
with Ramiro, and we'll get that changed, and I'll moshe-goshe (sic),
we'll highlight that, and I'll get that out in -- in the paycheck,
whatever, in the relatively near future. It's a good idea, Mr. Carr.
But there's some things I'd like to talk about the ordinance, okay,
and that's the piece of law that you -- that you make. And first, you
have to understand that ordinance 2000-58 amended ordinance 99-22.
So the first place that I'm going to go to is 22-58 (sic), and it has
a section called three, and it's a definition. And it says, county
managerial employees, and that's the one where the ordinance applies,
okay, in this particular case, and I'd like to expand that definition.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What page are you on?
MR. MUDD: Sir, I'm on page four of-- of 20-58 (sic).
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And paragraph?
MR. MUDD: It is section three, definitions, and it's paragraph
three.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: And it says, county managerial employees.
It says -- right now it says, shall mean the county manager and --
county manager, and I'd like to add deputy and/or assistant county
manager, because we had a little bit of a change, and we don't use the
assistant right now, but Leo's the deputy. I wouldn't -- and we did
have a deputy and assistant at one time.
County attorney, chief assistant county attorney, and all division
administrators, comma, strike out the and, authority directors of
Collier County government and any employee actively engaged in
supervising, overseeing, or vouchering for contract performance, and I
think that's important, okay.
Page 110
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Excellent.
MR. MUDD: And that gets specifically at not only the other
folks that are at the director level and above, but it also gets at the
folks that are contracting officer representatives or they're out there
monitoring those contracts so that this ordinance and the penalties of
this misdemeanor would apply.
And then I'd like to add-- and we talked about significant other
in there and some changes to the next paragraph. And again, I think
Commissioner Coyle brings out a good point when he says an
employee should be exempt-- should exempt or recuse themselves
when there is a conflict from a selection committee or the contract
officer representative, if he's being appointed or she's being appointed
to that position, say, wait a minute, I've got a conflict, I don't want to
go here, and we should put that in the specific language on the next
page.
And then one other hot button that -- nominal intrinsic value.
Just -- we've got to talk about that particular -- it says -- it talks in here
-- we need to do something about that.
But the last -- the last piece goes to ordinance 99-22, and it's --
and it goes to section six, post-employment restrictions. And I am not
going to be popular with this recommendation, but I think it needs to
be made.
There's a section one, it says, no county managerial employee
shall personally represent another person or entity for compensation
before the government body or agency of which the individual was an
officer or employee for a period of two years following vacation of
office, resignation of employment, or termination of employment as
applicable except for the purposes of collective bargaining.
And then it has a paragraph two, it says, these post-employment
restrictions shall apply only to those county managerial employees
who began employment with Collier County on or after March 9th,
Page 111
April 22, 2003
1999. That's garbage. Get rid of that paragraph two. There isn't an
exception here.
And I would also add a paragraph that says, in any case the
employee cannot lobby this board on any project they worked on as an
employee of the county govermnent forever. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
MR. MUDD: Okay? And I think if you do that, I think you'll
solve a lot of problems that we've got right now as far as perception is
concerned and reality, for that matter, in our every day activities in
front of this board the second and the fourth Tuesday of every month.
I think--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll go along with that.
MR. MUDD: -- we need to add those, and those need to be
explicit in detail.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I like that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would that be retroactive?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I think it's going to be very
difficult to make that retroactive, okay, as far as legally binding, but I
think that the clause that says, in any case it cannot lobby on a project
that they worked on as an employee forever, I think, that gets at that
forever issue or that retroactive piece that you want to get at,
Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Any other direction that we want to give our staff?.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. That was exactly the issue I
wanted -- wanted to address. I put that in the City of Naples' ethics
ordinance five years ago, and it has worked fairly well, the revolving
door clause.
The applicability or the effective date can be the effective date
whenever this thing is approved, so there's not a question of
Page 112
April 22, 2003
retroactive. I think your concerned about retroactivity was whether or
not you can make it effective to all county employees, whereas right
now it's not effective -- not applicable to all the county employees. It
can be made applicable to all county employees by merely saying the
effective date of this application's going to be as of the date we
approve it.
Now, that, by the way, I will tell you at the risk of offending a lot
of employees, is the biggest loophole in the entire ethics ordinance,
because giving -- giving somebody $50 or $100 or a trip to the
racetrack is peanuts compared to giving them a $150,000 job to come
to work for them after they have served in county government and
made some decisions that are favorable. I'm not saying that's
happened. I'm merely saying that that is a way of influencing people
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Possibly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- and it's probably the biggest
loophole in the entire ethics ordinance.
So I strongly support the revolving door provision. The
provision we had in the city of ordinance -- the City of Naples
ordinance said that for three years you could not represent anyone
before the county commission for whom you had made any decisions
in government.
But nevertheless, I think it's a good idea, and I commend the
county -- county manager for proceeding with this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. So I think we have enough
direction from the dais.
Is there any clarification that our staff needs?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. It is now 12:30. We have a
one o'clock -- one o'clock time certain, so it's up to the board, would
you like to take a half an hour break or 45-minute break?
Page 113
April 22, 2003
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, can I ask a question?
Commissioner Coletta's the one that asked for the time certains
because of folks out in his neck of the woods that might want to be
here in order to do that. Would they -- would they mind, if that 1:00
and 1:15 are related --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think they would mind if
we started at 1:15.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or 1:30.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. We're going to break until
1:20.
(A luncheon recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would everyone take their seats,
please.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2003-19 AMENDING SECTION 130-3 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,
CITED AS ORDINANCE #83-35, SECTION 1, RELATING TO
RESTRICTING TRUCKS WEIGHING OVER 5 TONS FROM
USING THE LEFT LANE ON MULTI-LANE ROADWAYS-
ADOPTFD WITH CHANGES
The next item that -- we have a time certain, which we're not
certain on the time, but this item is --
MR. MUDD: 8(A).
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 8(A).
MR. MUDD: And it's an ordinance amending section 130-3 of
the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances also cited as
ordinance number 83-35, 1, relating to restricting trucks weighing
over five tons from using the left lane on multi-lane roadways except
Page 114
April 22, 2003
for passing or preparing to make a left turn, providing for conflict and
severability, providing for inclusion in the Code of Laws and
Ordinances, and providing for an effective date.
And Ed Kant will be our principal presenter.
MR. KANT: Good afternoon, Commissioners, Edward Kant,
transportation operations director.
This ordinance comes to you as a result of prior board direction.
We were asked to look at an effective way to get the trucks from -- to
prohibit the trucks from using the left lane to make sure we keep
traffic flowing on multi-lane roadways.
In reviewing what we already had on the books rather than trying
to recreate the wheel, the county attorney's office pointed out that
ordinance number 83-35 already speaks to truck restrictions, and
therefore, that we could merely amend that ordinance, and that is
what's before you today.
The ordinance that you see, ordinance 2003 dash whatever is a
restatement of ordinance 83-35 with amendment to section 130-3,
which descri -- talks about trucks over one ton weight, which prohibits
the -- any truck or other commercial vehicle with a rated capacity in
excess of five tons from using the left lane of any multi-lane street or
roadway except when passing or preparing to make a left turn
whenever those particular roadways are appropriately posted.
And then it goes on to provide for several exemptions, one of
which has raised a question, and that is the exemption for the
operation of garbage or trash trucks while actually engaging in the
collection of garbage or trash along the roads or streets designated in
accordance with this section.
The intent at the time this was originally written was to provide
an exemption for county vehicles and any other vehicle that may be
actively picking trash up in the median or adjacent to the median;
however, the question also arose as to, the normal waste management
Page 115
April 22, 2003
type trucks wouldn't be doing that because they always pick up from
the right side.
So that -- that can be addressed if the board chooses to do so by
requesting that we amend that to clarify that.
That, in a nutshell, is what has been proposed, and, you know,
we're -- we're open to any discussion or comments that you may have,
and it's what's your pleasure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the members?
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I don't have a question about
the ordinance, but you've indicated the fiscal impact will be $100 for
each sign that you install. In order to make a decision as to whether or
not I vote for the ordinance, I need to know how much it's going to
cost us to put up the sign, and how many signs will we need.
MR. KANT: We looked at the number of signs that might be
needed. It's very difficult to try to pin it down obviously. But if we
look at all of the major access points to the county and several internal
points where we have major intersections, we figured that the cost
would be somewhere between 25 and $40,000 depending on the
number of signs that might be needed.
The reason we're -- we're trying to be -- exercise an abundance of
caution is because this is the type of thing that, because we get a lot of
out-of-town traffic, it's very possible for somebody to say, well, I'm
from Sarasota. I didn't know. And we want to make sure that it was
clear.
We can limit that, obviously. There are six -- seven major access
points to the county, and we can limit it to that, or we can limit it in
any way the board deems appropriate, but we wanted to make sure we
had everything covered.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This would also include the
Page 116
April 22, 2003
interstate, too, is that correct?
MR. KANT: Well, it would be after they get off the interstate off
ramps. We can't post on the interstate, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They can't post on the interstate?
MR. KANT: No, sir. We'd have to get federal government
permission.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. The reason I asked that --
because if people were coming in on the interstate and you had a sign
there that in Collier County all traffic -- slow traffic or truck traffic
had to be in the right lane, that would automatically alert everybody as
they came in that we have laws and regulations in regards to Collier
County, and that may help alleviate the amount of signs that we'd have
to put up.
MR. KANT: We can do that. And again, as part of the
implementation, I would have no problem writing a letter to FDOT
and requesting that they get FHWA permission for us to do that.
We've done that in the past with, for example, construction signs,
to let people know there's construction. I just don't know what that
reaction would be to permanent signs, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas brings up a good
point. And I have many a times gotten behind a truck that's taken off
from the traffic light, and it takes them a while to bring up speed and it
is kind of frustrating because always the rules of the road is, slower
traffic keep right.
But we're not saying that here. What we're doing is -- actually
what I see is picking on the industry. And I do get behind the big
luxury vehicle in the left-hand lane.
Why don't we create something that's fair for all is -- and be
courteous and warn them through signage that slower traffic keep in
the right-hand lane? That's my preference, what we do here. And it's
Page 117
April 22, 2003
not just singling out one person. It's just being courteous and
reminding people of that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can we -- would we be able to
enforce that? If we saw that somebody was lolly-gagging in the
left-hand lane, is that a possibility, since we've got some people in the
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I mean, we have that on the interstate
now. Why can't it be enforced?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But a lot of-- also what a lot of
communities do have -- that trucks are not allowed in the left-hand
lane unless they're passing. There's a lot of those in different locales
throughout the country, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. I want to remind
you that what we're discussing here today is very specific, it has to do
with the trucks, which we've been receiving tremendous amount of
complaints on, because of the fact that these vehicles weigh 70,000
pounds when they're fully loaded. It makes it very difficult for them
to be able to be compared with a recreational vehicle, although I
imagine that problem does exist.
I think we need to be site specific with the ordinance that we
already have and amend it so that we're dealing right with the truck
issue and the real problem with the issue. I think that's what the public
out there is requesting us to do.
And I don't think it's imposing anything on them that's unusual.
You know, they can still use them for passing, they can still use it for
left-hand tums, and the whole system will run quite smooth.
I don't think we need to complicate it by saying, well, this rule
will apply to every single vehicle out there equally. It's the track issue
that we're dealing with here today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you don't want to be equal to
Page 118
April 22, 2003
everybody?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I want to be equal with
the fact that we're dealing with an entity that isn't equal to begin with.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I need to -- need to understand a
little better how we're going to enforce this, and I'd like to hear from
the sheriff's department about the enforcement of either one of these
alternatives, whether it applies to all vehicles using -- slow traffic
using the right lane or whether it just includes trucks.
MR. KANT: I'd like to introduce Ms. Osceola from the sheriff's
office.
MS. OSCEOLA: Hello. Tina Osceola, for the record, Collier
County Sheriff's Office, public affairs supervisor.
Basically on either one of those issues, if it's a county ordinance,
we can enforce it. It's up to you to decide, of course, which one you'd
like to go with; however, we already have a statute on the books now
that allows us to write a citation or at least a warning for those drivers
who are impeding the flow of traffic.
Any one of these types of vehicles -- it could be a small,
two-door compact vehicle that decides to go 15 miles an hour down
Golden Gate Parkway. That vehicle is impeding the flow of traffic
and doing just as much discourtesy to the other drivers on the
roadways as any other vehicle. So that basically is all that we can say
or do at this -- at this point prior to an existing ordinance.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Here's my problem, Tina. I --
we're being asked to spend about, what, 30 to $40,000 for signs, and I
don't want to spend that much money on signs unless I have some
degree of comfort that we're going to be able to enforce it and that we,
in fact, will enforce it.
I continue to be frustrated by the fact that we have probably the
Page 119
April 22, 2003
highest number of red light runners in the entire United States. We
have the worst drivers in the world here. And every day I leave there
are five of them, minimum, who are turning on red right here at the
intersection of Airport Road and 41.
I know you can't be everywhere, but if we -- if we spend this kind
of money telling trucks they can't do certain things, is it really going to
do us any good?
MS. OSCEOLA: It's awfully hard to do without -- we haven't
been allowed to buy the crystal ball yet. They don't make them yet for
us. So it's really hard to tell.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I've got one.
MS. OSCEOLA: It's -- I'm sure every one of you would love to
have one. If I find a vendor, I'll pass the information along.
It's really difficult to say, because what we find in the
enforcement game, regardless of what statute, law, whether it be a
United States code, whether it be Florida statute or county ordinance,
is just what you said, we can't be everywhere all the time.
Can we concentrate enforcement effort on this -- on this issue?
Yes, we can, at various times as our scheduling and resources permit.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, the thing I'm trying to
understand -- I think you've mostly answered it for me -- is, will the
expenditure of 30, $40,000 solve the problem?
And Ed Kant's shaking his head, and I tend to agree. The
expenditure of the signs -- for the signs will not solve the problem.
The only thing that will solve the problem is if we actually enforce the
law.
Now, if we enforce the law, it appears to me we can enforce it
even without the signs because we have a law right now on the books.
So the bottom line to me is that we probably should enact this
ordinance and then depend upon it to be enforced by the sheriffs
department and -- rather than spending 30 to $40,000 on signs.
Page 120
April 22, 2003
MS. OSCEOLA: Yeah. And I guess a good analogy to use
would use speed limit signs. There's an incredible amount of speed
limit signs, but we're out there on the streets every day writing
hundreds of tickets and traffic citations because people don't read
those signs, so it's a combination of enforcement, education, and
engineering.
The education, I keep going back to that. I don't know what the
fix is out there to educate a person not to pull out in front of a dump
truck driver. I don't know what that fix is either.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I do. Just do it once.
MS. OSCEOLA: A headstone normally, right, exactly.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, and then
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I guess the bottom line here,
let's just cut to the chase. And what we need is we need more law
enforcement out there on the roads to enact that the speed limit signs
and the red light nmners and everything else.
We could spend the $40,000 to put the signs up to say the trucks
have to be out of the left-hand lane. But if the sheriffs department
doesn't get out there and doesn't enforce the laws, then we're just --
we're just going to throw away 30 to $40,000.
And what I guess we're asking is, can you enforce those laws that
are on the books, and if we come up with this, can you enforce it?
MS. OSCEOLA: Yes, we can, and yes, we are.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. But you need the --
this particular ordinance that's specific to trucks, because tracks seem
to be the biggest offenders in what we're talking about; you really
need this ordinance to be able to enforce anything; is that correct? To
be able to enforce it, you need an ordinance to be able to work with,
correct?
Page 121
April 22, 2003
MS. OSCEOLA: Unfortunately, no, we don't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then why do we have a
problem out there now?
MS. OSCEOLA: We don't need it because we have the Florida
statute on the books now. I believe that part of the problem that we
have is we don't have -- and of course, it's easy to blame government
and it's easy to blame law enforcement, which is why both of us are
here today.
But the other part of this puzzle is the fact that we need
responsible drivers. We need people to understand that it's their
responsibility too. I think what we can do -- and we've been doing a
lot of that, not just the commission, but the sheriff's office as well as
county transportation and state, have been having these public
meetings to try to get that information out there.
Look at what your government agencies are doing, trying to fix
these problems, but there's a missing piece to that puzzle, and that's
the people --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well --
MS. OSCEOLA: -- the drivers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think it's a question of what
comes first, the chicken or the egg. So think about it for a minute.
This problem has been ongoing for just about forever. We've seen
some slight slacking of the problem recently because of all the effort
that's being put into it.
But without solid ordinances that say you can do and can't do
this, without something in the way of some signage, maybe not
$30,000, you're not giving any directions to the public out there of
what's permitted and what isn't permitted.
The efforts that are being put out there will wane as time goes by.
The signs will remain there in place. So I think we need to give
serious consideration on the direction we're going. We need to listen
Page 122
April 22, 2003
to what the public's needs are out there, and we need to respond.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think I have a solution to this.
Commissioner Coletta apparently has some specific areas that
he's concerned about in his district. Why don't we agree to put some
-- a limited number of signs in those areas where Commissioner
Coletta feels this is the biggest problem. We pass this ordinance, it's
on the books, you've got some signs in those areas where it appears to
be the biggest problem as far as Commissioner Coletta's concerned,
and we don't spend $40,000 on it.
So we haven't -- haven't done ourselves any harm by taking this
action, and then we depend upon the sheriff's office to enforce really
what is a state law, which you already have the capability to do, right?
MR. KANT: We can work that out, Commissioner, as far as the
locations of signs.
As I said, that's an outside number. We were looking at worst
case. Obviously the fewer signs, the less cost.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd say $1,000 would be a great top
limit here.
MR. KANT: We can probably get somewhere between 10 and a
dozen in there or something for that kind of money.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that should hit most of the
roads that Commissioner Coletta's concerned about.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Actually I was concerned about
Immokalee Road for pretty much the full length of it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Put one on one end, one on the
other end, and you've got it made.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I won't argue with that point,
but it's not a problem, this District 5 alone. This problem's shared
throughout the whole county, maybe not so much in the City of
Naples, but it's pretty universal. I mean, it's not just District 5. This is
Page 123
April 22, 2003
all through the county. Bit I agree with you, I'm willing to limit the
signs, come up with something more realistic than $30,000, which I
think is -- is a fairly high number to begin with.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I believed signs would really
solve the problem, I'd vote to put do-not-run-red-light signs at every
intersection in Collier County, but I know it's not going to help.
People continually ignore the signs because they are really, really
bad and discourteous drivers. And we can put signs on every comer,
and I don't think it's going to do any good.
The real solution is that they get slapped with a $500 fine every
time they do it, and pretty soon they'll stop it. And unfortunately we
can't make the fine that high, but nevertheless.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We might want to go to the
speakers pretty soon.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think that's a great idea,
Commissioner Coletta.
MS. FILSON: For 8(A), we have two speakers, Mr. Chairman,
B.B. Brantley, and he will be followed by Pat Humphries.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Brantley? On the second --
MR. BRANTLEY: On the second issue for Brantley.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ms. Humphries?
MS. FILSON: Well, it says 8(A) and 9(J).
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that's all right. He corrected it.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Pat Humphries.
MS. HUMPHRIES: Good afternoon. My name is Pat
Humphries. I'm from the Golden Gate Estates area Civic Association.
The Golden Gate Estates Civic Association board of directors
favors this ordinance. We feel it will alleviate an unsafe traffic
condition whereby two dump trucks ride side by side for prolonged
periods and cause unnecessary delays as well as handicapping the
driver's behind them by blocking their view. This happens quite
Page 124
April 22, 2003
frequently going south on Collier Boulevard, as it did this morning on
my way to work.
But not to get off the subject, even worse than that, as I was
coming here, four trucks, dump trucks, went through a red light on the
corner of Pine Ridge and Livingston Road. I couldn't believe it. Four;
not one, but four. So these drivers really need to be told that they need
-- that they need to drive more carefully and more safely.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Thank you. No more public
What's the pleasure of the board?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make a motion for approval
with the limitation on the amount of money that's spent for signs to be
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
compromise.
COYLE: One thousand dollars.
COLETTA: Fifteen hundred?
COYLE: One thousand dollars.
COLETTA: Twelve hundred fifty?
COYLE: One thousand dollars.
COLETTA: One thousand dollars.
COYLE: So we reached a compromise.
COLETTA: Yeah, a City of Naples
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Now, is this going to be just in
District 5, or is this going to be a county-wide ordinance?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: County-wide.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: A county-wide ordinance, does that
-- okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the signs won't be limited
Page 125
April 22, 2003
to District 5 either. They'll be used where they're most needed.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right, because --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Maybe the civic association would
like to kick in some money for these signs.
MR. KANT: We'll develop a sign plan and mn it past you before
we actually do any installations.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just for public consumption, what
Commissioner Henning said earlier about this applying to everybody
in fact does, fight? This is a state law, if you're driving in the left lane
and you're going slower than somebody else, it doesn't make any
difference what kind of car you're driving, the sheriff's office can, and
hopefully will, ticket you. So we've covered both ends of the
spectrum here. What we are doing right now really is just reinforcing
an existing law and making it specific.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And what are the signs going to say?
MR. KANT: Most likely the wording would be something to the
effect of, trucks over five tons prohibited in left lane with a very small
reference to the ordinance underneath it so they'll know what
ordinance they're violating.
I haven't -- frankly, I haven't worked the wording out. We need
to look at the way it will lay out on a plate. It's not a standard sign, so
it's something we'll have to develop.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So actually what we're doing here
today is recognizing -- the county's recognizing the dump track
driver's need to drive in the right-hand lane, but the hokey pokey
driver, without any warning, can still live in -- drive in the left-hand
lane, but they just don't get any warning by the county? They might
get ticketed by the sheriff's department, but they don't get any warning
from the county.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What about that, for the dumb
Page 126
April 22, 2003
truck, should we remove that from--
MR. KANT: I'm sorry, sir. I'm not sure I understood the
question.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think Commissioner Henning's
referring to, in our executive summary, about dump trucks allowed to
be in the left-hand lane -- not dump trucks, refuge trucks, waste
carrying trucks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I didn't say anything about--
MR. KANT: We haven't really spoken to that. As I said, if the
board is concerned about having that as an exemption --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I am.
MR. KANT: -- we can receive direction to ask to have that
stricken.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would like to include that as
part of my motion. I'll explain why. There's absolutely no reason why
waste hauling trucks or garbage trucks should be exempted from being
in the left-hand lane. There's no reason for them to pick up. If you
ever notice, their picking up mechanism's on the right-hand side of the
truck. For them to be an exception to the rule, I think, would be --
would be wrong.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think Commissioner Henning is
right. What we're really trying to do is stop slow traffic in the left lane
and/or stop people from backing up traffic by going well below the
speed limit and blocking both lanes.
Does it make any difference whether or not it's a dump truck or
waste truck or an automobile?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I didn't say a waste truck.
Mr. Kant, I did not say a waste track. I just -- in general, about
people driving slow in the left-hand lane.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, in the car.
Page 127
April 22, 2003
MR. KANT: I believe that the waste track issue is what
Commissioner Coletta brought up. But with reference to whether it's a
truck or a car, the wording on the signs can reflect that slower traffic is
to keep right. And again, we can -- we can note on that the ordinance
or state statute violation.
But as I said, we haven't worked the wording out yet, we will,
and I'll be certain that we run it past you before we actually do any
fabrication.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you see, that would address
Commissioner Henning's concerns that we treat everybody equally.
MR. KANT: That's not a problem for us to put that into the sign.
As I said, we're looking for the direction, and we want to go in the
direction you want us to go in.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have a motion on the floor that
doesn't reflect what was just said, and there's not a second.
So I'm asking, is there a second to the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, I ask Commissioner
Coletta if he would like to amend or restate the motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Restate the motion so that it--
the sign would be generic to include vehicles -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Everybody.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- going slow, slow vehicles, use
the right-hand lane only, something of that nature.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can I ask a question before we go
any farther on this, and maybe this -- the gentleman, the people out
here from the sheriffs department, can answer this.
What is the determination for a slow vehicle in the left-hand -- in
the left-hand lane in regards to what the law is? In other words, if it's
35 mile an hour, if somebody's doing 25, is that considered a slow --
traffic in the left lane being slow?
Page 128
April 22, 2003
MR. MINCH: It's not actually in the left lane. Harold Minch for
the sheriffs office. I'm a lieutenant of the safety and traffic
enforcement bureau.
Let me read you the statute. It's very small. It says, no person
shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede or block
the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced
speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with the law.
That's how the statute reads. It's a speed statute.
And if you are impeding traffic to the point that there's no reason
for, you don't have another reason like a car in front of you, somebody
rolling across the road, a tumble weed, you know, earthquake,
whatever the case maybe, you cannot just drop the speed to whatever
it may be. It's an arbitrary speed. It depends on where you are and
what the flow of traffic is, to impede traffic behind you.
That is not going to include a heavy track taking off from a light.
That's as fast as that truck can go. He's not impeding traffic. He's
driving away from a light. That's as fast as he can go, he or she.
So this statute is for both lanes and -- or even a single-lane
roadway where you're impeding the flow of traffic. And the catch
with this is, you can't impede the flow of a police car, so if we're
behind you and you're going too slow, that's just too bad for us, really.
We have to observe it, we have to see it, but it could be in either lane.
So what the statute is for is people that are on a 55 mile an hour
roadway, nobody can get around them, and traffic's backing up behind
them, so that's what we're looking at at this point. That's -- the state
statute reads, it's a speed statute, but it's not a specific speed limit.
And we don't need signage for that because it's on the books. And we
write it fairly regularly when it occurs. And single lanes as well. So
that's the difference.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I could. We're still dealing
with a problem that has not been solved. It's still a real problem, it's
Page 129
April 22, 2003
still out there, and I maintain that what we're going to see is probably a
little bit of spurt of enforcement. There'll be nothing out there to
remind the motoring public of what the laws are and what the will of
the people is.
You're still going to have people stuck behind these tracks in the
left-hand lane if we don't take something in the way of a proactive
stance on this now. I mean, this isn't before us just because it's a whim
of one commissioner. There's been numerous phone calls on it, emails,
a meeting's taken place with the sheriffs department, civic association
meeting, all expressing the same things, unified, one thing.
This is why I'm not too sure what the will of this commission is,
and I'm not going to drag this out forever. We've all got a life to get
on with. But the whole thing is, is that, we do nothing, nothing is
done, nothing is solved. We're not working towards any final solution.
So I don't know, what is the will of this commission so we can
get this on and over with there?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a second on the motion.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I was just going to say that I'm in
favor of the -- what obviously is just for slow traffic, but I'm -- what I
think we need to do is come up with an ordinance in regards to
addressing the trucks specifically in the left-lane lane. That's where I
stand.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's the motion I made,
and no one seconded it. So I withdraw my motion and make a new
one. I make a motion that we --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Should I ask the second if she wants
to withdraw hers?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, go ahead.
Page 130
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, would you like
to withdraw yours?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I either second
Commissioner Halas's motion or I'll make that motion and he can
second it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that we address
the issue of the trucks in the left-hand mm -- or left-hand lane and that
all trucks five ton or higher have to be in the right-hand lane unless
passing or turning making a left-hand mm.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to -- it would be a
pleasure to second your motion, and I appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, on the fiscal
impact? Did you want to put a dollar amount on the fiscal impact?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, $1,200.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Go ahead. Hit him.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How about a thousand?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Twelve hundred. I think we're
going to have a lot of writing on the sign.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that included in your second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll tell you what. Think about it
for a moment. If it means a vote, you might want to consider it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that included in your second,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That will be included in my
second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
No further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Thank you.
All in favor of the motion, signify by
Page 131
April 22, 2003
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
MR. KANT: Thank you, Commissioners.
You want me to go with the next one, Jim?
MR. MUDD: Yeah, go ahead.
MR. KANT: The next item--
MR. WEIGEL: Ed--
MR. KANT: -- is a request for the --
MR. WEIGEL: Mr. Chairman, I'm just going to jump in for the
record for a moment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. WEIGEL: The board has taken a vote, I believe it was
unanimous. And please correct me, board, but I think what you have
done is move to adopt the ordinance?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: With a--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know it's hard to understand
how we got there, but that's what we did.
MR. KANT: And we understand the limitation on the funding.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you very much.
Item #9J
Page 132
April 22, 2003
REGARDING THE INSTALLATION OF SIGNS REQUESTING
TRUCKS NOT TO USE ENGINE BRAKES IN/NEAR
RESIDENTIAL AREAS. MOTION TO NOT POST BRAKE SIGNS
AND FOR CHAIRMAN TO WRITE LETTER TO LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AS WELL AS JACOBSON BRAKE
COMPANY TO WORK WITH TRUCKING FACILITIES TO HELP
IMPIJEMENT SAFE AND PROPER EQI IIPMENT-APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a companion item on this, and
that was 9 --
MR. MUDD: J.
MR. KANT: 9(J) is a request for the board to reconsider prior
board direction to staff to fabricate and install signs requesting trucks
not to use engine brakes in or near residential areas.
Just to fill you in on this one, in February we received board
direction to prepare some signage requesting that trucks do not use
their engine brakes in or near residential areas, specifically the areas
out around Immokalee, Randall, Oil Well. And we determined that
there were some appropriate places where those signs could be placed.
One of the Board of County Commissioners requested that this
be brought back for reconsideration. I believe it's Commissioner
Halas. And so we're here before you now. We have not proceeded to
do any fabrication or installation, and we're here before you now
looking for further direction on this item.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas brought this
item up.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I did. It's in regards to -- we
found that -- I think what we found was the fact that it was an
unenforceable because Jake brake is considered a safety item on a
truck, and the -- where we need to probably address this is, again,
Page 133
April 22, 2003
where we'd have to call upon the law enforcement agency of the
county to address making sure that tracks had proper mufflers on
them. And this is basically the source of the noise.
If the trucks are not equipped with OEM standardized mufflers
and they run straight pipes and they use the Jake brake, there's been --
there's data here that -- if somebody would like to take a look at it --
where there's an exceptionally loud increase in sound pressure level
measurements off of vehicles.
So there is some states in the union that come up with specific
laws stating that tracks without proper mufflers are subject to a $500
fine. So I guess where we're at right now, if we decide to come up
with some type of an ordinance where the operators of these tracks, if
they make any changes in the existing exhaust system that does not
comply with the way that the truck was built, then the operator is out
of compliance and, therefore, should be subject to -- subjected to a
violation, and that would be whatever, I guess the -- they have to
probably go by the state statute on this, but also what the value of the
ticket would be. And I'm not sure what the value for excessive noise
ticket here in Collier County is at the present time. But there are states
in the union that have as high as $500 fine for each occurrence.
MR. KANT: The current state statutes do require that trucks --
for that matter, all motor vehicles have the proper muffler. The motor
vehicle compliance office, they are the ones that typically are the folks
that -- they're the white cars with blue stripes that get the trucks on the
side of the road.
It's our understanding that they're very strict about it. Typically
if a trucker sees one of them, he just -- he doesn't want to have one of
them stop him.
I also understand-- and if Lieutenant Minch wants to amplify on
this, that the sheriffs office is currently looking to staff up so that we
have some at the county level trained deputies that can go out and also
Page 134
April 22, 2003
do this type of enforcement.
But the current state statutes for motor vehicles requires mufflers
and that the mufflers be in good operating order, and it's part of the
daily inspection the truckers are required, under state law, to do on a
daily basis.
I don't know if you want to amplify at all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can I make some recommendations?
It sounds like -- that we already have laws to fix this problem.
Two things we can do, we can ask Jake to come down from the
brake company and talk to the industry to make sure that they're aware
of the OEM specifications for their exhaust system. The next thing is
have the chairman write a letter to FDOT that enforces this.
MR. KANT: It would be the Department of Highway Safety and
Motor Vehicles. It's the motor carrier compliance office.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: To request that they come down to
inspect the dump trucks or whatever kind of trucks that has -- make
sure they're in compliance because we're getting a lot of complaints
from our residents in the county that their Jake brakes are amplifying
noises throughout the community. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
I do appreciate Commissioner Halas bringing this back, because
he's right. Just putting up signs asking for voluntary compliance is
never going to be the answer.
You're going to have your very best people probably comply, but
those are the people that don't have a problem.
The engine brakes by themselves -- and we call them Jake
brakes, but Jake brakes is a brand name, so you want to be careful
about ever referring to them in a sign of any kind, are not really the
problem, those that are maintained and those that have the proper
muffler system very much, as Commissioner Halas said, is completely
Page 13 5
April 22, 2003
correct.
But the problem being is, it's the noise, and there is a Florida
statute that deals with that noise.
And I'll tell you what, David, do you have the same paper?
MR. WEIGEL: Not in front of me, but I think you're going to
refer to 316.293.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right, very good, David.
And that particular ordinance says, the operating noise limits, no
person shall operate or be permitted to operate a vehicle at any time or
under any condition of road grade load acceleration or deceleration in
such a manner as to generate a sound level in excess of the following
limits for the category of motor vehicles and applied speed limits at a
distance of 50 feet from the center of the lane of travel under the
measurement procedures established under subsection three.
And then going down here, for any motor vehicle with a gross
weight, 10,000 pounds or more, sound level limits would be 35 -- at
35 miles or less, be 86 decibels. Over 35, it would be 90.
Now, there's already an ordinance in place, Florida statutes,
rather, in place that tells exactly what's permitted and what isn't
permitted.
The offenders that we're trying to deal with are a very small
number of the truck drivers out there. They're the ones that this noise
carries for miles and became a real problem for the citizens all through
Collier County.
What I'm saying is, if we could come up with a sign that says the
correct kind of verbiage -- and this is not it. That doesn't really say it.
I would -- I'd like to see something that would refer to the Florida
statutes as far as noise goes; in other words, noise monitoring area for
trucks -- truck brake noise monitoring area. It would say something
like that, and maybe Florida statute number underneath it, and a very
small number of signs would be needed, but then we've got something
Page 136
April 22, 2003
in place that the sheriffs department can enforce.
Did you have something to add to that, David?
MR. WEIGEL: Just a little bit, thank you.
Mr. Chairman, did you have a question?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I was going to recognize
Commissioner Halas, but that's fine. We always welcome your input.
MR. WEIGEL: Timing is everything.
Well, just to respond to Commissioner Coletta, is that he's -- he
and Mr. Halas have both done a lot of homework on this, as well as
we have, and learned a lot in the context.
Many other states have what would appear to be inappropriate
signage up based upon the -- clearly the state law here in Florida, but
even the state law in those other states.
Communities, villages, towns, have taken it upon themselves to
address a problem, so it's not here purely a problem here in this -- in
this area with trucks.
Mr. Coletta and Mr. Halas are correct that the question is noise,
not the safety accessory equipment of the Jake brake, or Jacobs brake,
or any other similar type devices.
I've had the opportunity over our lunch break to speak with
Captain Thompson of the FDOT, whom had spoken with
Commissioner Coletta, and he is right on target with all of us with our
research in regard to the key statute, which is 316.293, which does
provide standards for noise for trucks over five and 10,000 pounds,
vehicles over 10,000 pounds. It could be something other than a,
quote, truck.
He did indicate, however, and he's correct, that the statute does
talk about working in conjunction with the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection.
He's going to provide me with the name of the appropriate
official with the FDEP. It seems to me, again, with a complete review
Page 137
April 22, 2003
of the statute that the FDEP works with the local law enforcement,
meaning the sheriffs office, and obviously in conjunction with the
people that are involved in any kind of-- well, county government
here in regard to signage. And so in kind of a complimentary way, the
technical ability to monitor and enforce sound can come into being.
And again, without asking my opinion, it seems to me that
signage in regard to education would be of assistance as well as the
fact of the local sheriff having the oppommity to implement the
standard that's essentially addressed under the statute by the DEP. So
it will take two or three governments working together over a little
period of time, and I think that there could be some relief obtained.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, then
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. What I'm thinking about, if
we're able to establish some type of criteria, since we've already got
Ed Kant working on a sign, maybe we can put the verbiage of both of
these ordinances on one sign to cut down the cost so -- and also it
doesn't clutter the whole roadway up with all different type of signs.
So if we have the issue of a five-ton track and also an issue of noise --
making sure that we have proper noise abatement on the tracks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, then
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. My concern was, in our
executive summary it says that these types of advisory signs are not
legally enforceable. And -- is that the case?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's Jake brake.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, Jake brake.
MR. KANT: And advisory -- an advisory plate or an advisory
sign is not a regulatory sign. A regulatory sign, like a speed limit sign,
is an enforceable sign.
The issue that has been made clear to us through the -- working
Page 138
April 22, 2003
with the sheriff's department, is that because the mechanism is a legal
mechanism, they can't necessarily cite someone for having that on the
vehicle.
As Commissioner Coletta and Commissioner Halas have brought
up, and based on the research we've done, this is not really a
transportation issue, it's a noise issue. And the state statute requiring
mufflers goes a long way to implement a cure, if you will.
We've seen legislation from other states, and not necessarily
scientific corroboration, but certainly where that has been enforced,
the noise level has gone down. So the issue is one of whether or not
the mufflers are on the vehicles. If the mufflers are on the vehicles and
the vehicles are in otherwise good mechanical condition, it should not
be a problem where it exceeds the allowable level.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So the answer to your question,
Commissioner Fiala, is yes, you're right.
Commissioner Coletta, then Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, thank you. I do appreciate
the time that you're allowing us on this item. It looks like what we're
going to have to do, after we hear the speakers, of course, is maybe
consider having this brought back in another forum later when we
have the details worked out on signage. That's purely a suggestion at
this point in time. It may even be a little bit early in our deliberation
to make that suggestion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: As Mr. Kant brought up, that states
where they enforced the regulations in regards to the amount of sound
level that's being emitted from the vehicles, not only did the -- was the
area quiet, but also the amount of complaints dropped off
dramatically. When they found out that the trucks were properly
equipped with the muffler there they're supposed to have on it, that the
issue basically went away.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't we go to public speakers.
Page 139
April 22, 2003
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is B.B. Brantley. He will be
followed by Pat Humphries.
MR. BRANTLEY: Thank you. I'm pleased to say that a lot of
the things that I had on my list to talk about were covered in the
conversation up here.
One thing that comes to my mind that did not -- and I know years
ago we used to have an automobile inspection, and I assume truck too,
but apparently we don't -- I know we don't on autos anymore, and I
guess not on trucks.
But in the past week, I've been actually out on the streets of
Naples three times. I saw three dumb trucks without license plates. I
saw eight dump trucks with tires so slick that if they had to stop on a
wet pavement, it would have been impossible. You know, this kind of
brings -- and I know it's not part of this -- this particular ordinance
you're discussing, but what do we have to do, have somebody killed or
something to stop these things?
And just like this noise factor with mufflers, what do we have to
do, have somebody come to -- by my house and say, well, gee, I'm
going to give you 20 percent less than you're asking for it because it's
too noisy here.
And then when that happens, the tax dollars go down, and we
can't even afford $1,200 for the signs, even combining the two signs.
So, you know, the noise is a factor, but it's not the only one.
Bald tires. Brakes that screech real loud on a car, that means
they need replacing. And I don't know what the answer is, but I just
wanted to bring these things up.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I address something here,
Commissioner Henning?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Thank you.
Please.
Page 140
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Lieutenant Minch, would you
please take the podium over here.
I'm glad you brought that up. The meeting that we had last night
of the advisory committee from the sheriff's department brought up a
very interesting point that I want to share with you and the rest of the
public out there and what we can do to be able to try to bring a
balance to the situation out there, like you mentioned with the bald
tires and the lack of license plates.
Lieutenant Minch is going to give you his own personal number
at work, and he wants to know of each one and every one of these
violations, and we're going to see what we can -- what he can do. He's
going to see what he can personally do to try to rectify it or at least
know where this is occurring so that they can do some sort of
enforcement.
And I'm asking everyone to take a moment to grab their pen,
their pencil, or a sharp crayon and write down this number and carry it
with you when you're driving around. And when you see a problem
with an obvious violation, it doesn't have to be tracks only, it can be
other vehicles out there on the road maybe acting in an inappropriate
manner, you may wish to give a call to Lieutenant Minch's office, and
he, himself, personally or his secretary will take your call and route it
to the right direction.
And I do appreciate him offering this service last night when he
did, and I'm sure he wants to pass it on to the rest of our audience
today.
MR. MINCH: I would briefly address that we had some
discussions this morning reference our discussions last night on a tips
line similar to the one we have for narcotics violations and other
violations -- we, of course, haven't since last night at 8:30 been able to
work that out, but that is coming. For the meantime we can use
793-9505.
Page 141
April 22, 2003
But let me also say, in an instance where you see a track, or any
vehicle for that matter, because I don't pick on -- I don't want to pick
on dump trucks, because we have some very responsible dump truck
drivers --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: True.
MR. MITCHELL: -- and some that are not so much, which is
our problem. However, on any instance where you see a vehicle that
you don't feel is safe to be on the road, we're a cell phone call away to
our dispatch center at 793-9300, and we'll be more than happy to
respond to that area if we have a vehicle of any kind that is unsafe. It
doesn't matter what it is. It can be a motorcycle, it could be a truck. It
doesn't make any difference. And we'd be more than happy to handle
that, and I would appreciate a phone call if you see one that is not safe
at that point. We can certainly do that.
But we are going to devise a tips line if people would like to
make certain phone calls about that so we can keep a data base, which
would be reasoning for that, like we do with the others. It's an
intelligence data base that we can gather on trucks.
Also let me say something really quickly, that you have to
remember, these are not the same trucks we're using every single day.
This is not a one-time fix thing. Several hundred trucks come in and
out every day. We may only see them for a week or two, we may see
them for a month at a time, then they go somewhere else, move
around the state, move around the country. We've seen trucks from
other states.
They're contractors, and the equipment they use changes as well
when they go and come and so forth, because they're going to modify
their vehicles as they go and come. So we'll be dealing with different
vehicles on a regular basis.
We do this every day. I brought Corporal Leffin with me today
for some informational purposes, if I need it. He's on the road far
Page 142
April 22, 2003
more than I am doing every single day, every day. So we work on this
on a regular basis.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I really appreciate you standing
up here offering this assistance.
MR. MINCH: My pleasure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It shows that the sheriffs
department is being proactive in trying to come up with a solution.
I might suggest that maybe you might want to get together with
the county manager and we can make this as a public service
announcement on our television station so that the public can be made
aware of this on a regular basis, let them know that there is a caring
sheriffs department out there, which there is.
MR. MINCH: The sheriff does care, I can tell you that right now
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That he does, that he does.
MR. MINCH: -- and he's asked me to make this happen.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Number one more time though.
MR. MINCH: 793-9505.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's Tina's number.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. For that advertisement, we
appreciate that.
Now we get public speakers.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Pat Humphreys, and she will
be followed by Michelle Hondzinski.
MS. HUMPHRIES: Pat Humphries from the Golden Gate
Estates area Civic Association, board of directors -- and it's not deja
vu -- is in favor of placing signs in designated areas requesting dump
truck drivers to refrain from using Jake brakes. These signs would
serve the purpose of reminding the veteran drivers, as well as new the
drivers, that there are residents these neighborhoods that are being
Page 143
April 22, 2003
impacted by the land mining traffic.
Further, the association requests that the Collier County
Commissioners -- to pursue a noise ordinance violation that would
support the elimination of this type of intrusion on the peace and quiet
of said areas.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Michelle, she will be followed by Bob Streheli
(sic).
MS. HONDZINSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My
name is Michelle Hondzinski. I'm here today as an Orange Tree
resident and also a member of the civic advisory group, which has
been formed to address traffic issues in the Orange Tree and
Waterways communities.
Residents of Orange Tree and Waterways had voiced their
concerns months ago to Commissioner Coletta about these engine
brake noises, and he has responded to where we are here now.
These residents, we're not just what's been called the SUV soccer
moms and dads talking on their cell phones. They were the
homeowners in their kitchens, in their bedrooms, and they were
deafening -- deafened by the repeated blasts of these engine brakes
from all hours of the morning and night.
First of all, I'd like to inform you that the loud and obnoxious
noise from the engine brakes have improved probably 70 percent since
this education process through the commissioner's office has started. I
feel the reason -- this improvement was brought to the attention of the
general public and the educators of our community, these educators
are some of the pit owners and the truck owners who, in the past
month, have educated the drivers and most have learned that these
engine brakes are not a device they need to use on our Florida roads.
If they drive their trucks in a responsible manner, they'll never
Page 144
April 22, 2003
need them. The engine brakes were designed to slow a truck with a
heavy load on a downgrade, not just to use as another means of
downshifting to slow the vehicle.
Engine brakes are an optional equipment. They cost more. They
don't come standard on a truck like a seat belt or tires or headlights.
So if the driver of this vehicle on flat Florida roads was driving
the speed limit and had control of his or her vehicle, that engine brake
would not be necessary.
Continued education, I feel, is the key issue. Posting signs along
residential roads reminding our fellow truck drivers to please be
considerate of your neighbors -- of their neighbors, I should say -- and
refrain from using the brakes would help the issue.
Not to muddy the water, but the other part of the issue is the
speed limit in the residential areas, especially Orange Tree and
Waterways. The speed limit on Oil Well Road is 45 miles an hour.
That's going into a school zone. You take a left-hand -- or excuse me
-- a right-hand mm off Immokalee Road and go down Oil Well Road,
the first thing you see is 45 miles an hour, so that tells people, okay, I
can go 45 miles an hour.
But a block and a half later, here's the elementary and the middle
school, so that's another issue in itself, because now I understand that
some of these school zones aren't properly marked or zoned.
Corkscrew Elementary and the middle schools, if they -- if there's
a problem in these areas, that's what -- that's where the problem's
going to occur.
If a speed limit is reduced, say for an example, two miles on each
direction of any kind of school zone going into the school or going out
of the zone, school zone, down to 25 miles an hour, that would at least
reduce the flow of traffic in those areas, and then, again, reduce the
need for any kind of additional braking.
I ask the commissioners to continue to do the education process
Page 145
April 22, 2003
and to increase the safety in our communities by posting some kind of
signage to help in this area and to reduce the speed limits in our school
areas.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I--
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Mr. Chairman is --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Could we get through the speakers,
please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: All right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: I'm sorry. Bob Streheli (sic).
MR. STAEHELI: Hello, my name is Bob Staeheli, and I live in
Waterways on a piece of property that's right next to Oil Well Road.
I've lived there since the project began, and, unfortunately, I wasn't
aware that Naples was growing as fast as it's growing and that there
would be a zillion tracks going by my house every day.
I have done a number of things. I called Lieutenant Tony
Martindale, Lieutenant Leroy Hamilton, Sergeant Minch, the
Department of Transportation, Commercial Enforcement, Sergeant
May, Collier County sheriff, Commercial Truck Enforcement,
Lieutenant Thomas -- or Thompson and Sergeant Richards to report
noise after hours, all day, every day. I don't think Sunday they work.
But it's my understanding that, to start with, these trucks are
allowed to work from seven in the morning till seven at night. They
start at 4:30 and they're going at 12 at night.
So I mean, it isn't about noise for the truckers. It's about speed. I
get paid for every load I deliver, and I got to get moving, that's why I
have to go as fast as I can. That's why -- my brakes would be gone in
a week if I didn't have a Jake brake to slow the truck down because it's
full of dirt and it's heavy, and I have to stop it, but I have to get to the
Page 146
April 22, 2003
comer as fast as I can because I have to get this -- this load delivered.
It's about speed.
Now, the result is, we all have to put up with a lot of noise, and
I've been putting up with it for a lot of-- lot of years.
My neighbor and I bought a little device from Radio Shack to
measure the decibels. We got educated as to the regulation you
referred to earlier, 316.293, motor vehicle noise, and on and on.
I run my life on the principle that it's easier to get forgiveness
than permission. I did everything I could with all the people who
could decide to put a sign up on the road, and nobody could help.
Nobody knew whose responsibility it was. So guess what, I spent $35
and put up my own sign. No Jake brake area.
So if you think that it's improved 70 percent because we've been
educated, no. It improved 70 percent -- and I agree with the lady --
because I put up a sign. I didn't know I was violating the Jake brake
manufacturer.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Don't go there.
MR. STAEHELI: I mean, if that's actually a product, I'm sorry
to them, but it solved my problem a little.
And we've got the school. I think the solution -- I don't think you
should come to complain about a problem if you don't bring some
solutions.
Reducing the speed would help, as she pointed out. There's a
road that runs parallel to Oil Well Road. It's called Randall. It's about
a mile over. You can get it by going across Everglade. It's about
three miles of road, just like you have to pass the school and my house
and everything else that's residential. On Randall Road it's a golf
course.
Now, I don't think I'd set up a tee time for seven o'clock ifI had
to listen to those trucks and their Jake brakes because, you know,
golfers need it quiet. But that would be a solution. Randall Road
Page 147
April 22, 2003
would be a great solution. There's a stoplight right at Immokalee. No
problem. Over Everglade to Randall, down Immokalee, and you're
home.
And since that's probably not going to happen either, the Jake
brake sign did help. It might not be enforceable. In fact, it helped so
well, it upset somebody, and I'm presuming a truck driver, because I'm
gone to Minnesota six months of the year, so I only live here six
months of the year. When I came back, the Jake brake noise was as
loud as it was prior to my putting up the sign. So I went to find out.
Somebody had sprayed it over with orange paint so it couldn't be read.
So I made a stencil and I went back and put it back up. But
there's one or two guys that just don't like it, and they stop their Jake
brake -- or start the Jake brake noise right at about my house, so
maybe they know who did it.
And the trucks that are equipped properly have a softer sound, I'll
agree.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, sir.
MR. STAEHELI: But she pointed out, there's no need to use
Jake brakes. Jake brakes are for safety, not stopping your car to save
your brakes because you're driving too fast. And that's the problem,
speed, I've got to get there. I got to get the load delivered, because
that's how I make my money.
And I don't blame these guys. I'm not trying to put an end to
commerce. But I think we could all be sensible and come to a
consensus to solve the problem so everybody could win.
And fixing the equipment is obvious. If you're running a straight
pipe and you're using a Jake brake, it's an enormous noise.
So -- well, let's just -- let's just single out the people who don't
have proper mufflers. Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Did you take any sound level
readings with the sound level meter?
Page 148
April 22, 2003
MR. STAEHELI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what levels were you getting?
MR. STAEHELI: Well, they were over 90, well over 90. But
you see, my house is like maybe 50 feet from the berm, and the center
of the highway is about another 30 feet. We sat this device on the
berm right on the road so when they came down -- and of course, after
they saw us and let everybody know we were there, you know, we've
been keeping track, then -- well, even today, they must know this
meeting's going on, because it's like a morgue out there. It's really
very quiet.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't mean to interrupt.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We should discuss this every time
then, shouldn't we?
MR. STAEHELI: There you go.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I could bring it back to the
agenda every single time if you'd like.
And listen, I love the direction you're going. You're showing
some real unique civic activism in putting up the sign. Whether it's
legal or not is another question. But it did get some results -- MR. STAEHELI: It did.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and I've shared your email
with my fellow commissioners, and I called you and asked you to be
here because I was very impressed with what you had to say and what
you had to contribute to this discussion.
So we are looking at something that has to do with a real
situation, something that can be monitored by a simple little tool from
Radio Shack by a person that's a non-technician. So I think that we're
on -- we're on the track. I would suggest that we give David Weigel
and the sheriff's department and DOT a chance to be able to work out
some of the finer details and bring it back to us. In fact, I'd like to
make that a motion.
Page 149
April 22, 2003
I'd also like to give some consideration into directing staff to
come back with a speed limit sign, reduction of speed limit for Oil
Well Road for the first mile and a half or so till you're well past where
the new high school will be. I'd like to give some consideration. I
don't know what would be the legal speed we could go down to, but I
agree, I think that would have a dampening effect on what's taking
place there.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Could you restate your motion,
please?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would be more than happy to,
but it won't be the same.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I hope not.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I make it -- I'll make the
motion that we direct staff and our county attorney, Mr. Weigel, to
bring this back with due consideration what we've said here today for
a proper type of signage that will address the situation of the noise
issue under Florida statutes that allow for us to do so, enforceable
Florida statutes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is this going to be part of the
$1,2007
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. There won't be any cost
with this. I found a guy that can make signs for next to nothing, so I
can save you a fortune.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The --
MR. STAEHELI: It will cost you $35.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let's have some order here, please.
So what you're saying is -- what do you want to say on the sign,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's what we don't know. If I
knew that, Commissioner Henning, I wouldn't be asking for staff to go
back and work on it and bring it back to us for consideration.
Page 150
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion the floor.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there any possibility that we
combine what we passed earlier so that we don't have like a bunch of
signs, or do you think we need to have a separate sign?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We can't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: How about assisting in enforcing the
laws on the books instead of trying to create, my opinion, nuisance?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't agree. There's no new
laws you're creating.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I didn't say new laws. I said
nuisance.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Nuisance, the sign.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Nuisance, not new laws.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I really would like to solve
this now. This is the second time we've spent a long time talking
about Jake brakes here. I'd like to get through the Jake brake issue and
make a decision and get on with this. I don't want to keep bringing it
back to every -- every commission meeting that we have.
There seems to be a recognition by most -- most people here that
the laws prohibit loud noises and require appropriate mufflers with
these kinds of engine-assisted brakes. That is an enforcement issue
again.
I would say that we appeal to the sheriff's office to enforce this
issue, particularly in an area that seems to be causing the most trouble
for Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if I may comment on that.
I think you're going in the right direction. We do need the help of the
sheriff's department.
But as you heard stated earlier, we need some signage up there to
remind these people so that they're not blind sided when they drive
Page 151
April 22, 2003
into these particular areas. And we don't need a ton of these signs.
We just need enough to make it work.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I've got a suggestion then. Why
don't we work with the owners of the facilities from which these
trucks are emanating and provide a sign right at the entrance?
MR. KANT: That's already being done, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. KANT: At least in the three major pits that are out there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. KANT: There are a bunch of smaller ones also.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then if we're telling them there,
why do we think that telling them again somewhere else is going to
solve the problem?
MR. KANT: The -- I believe it was Mr. McDaniel who has the
Big Island Pit, the Shady Cypress Pit, and then there's the Jones Pit,
which is the big one on 846. It's my understanding that they've all put
large signs up at the -- as the trucks leave, not only reminding them
not to use their engine brakes, but also reminding them, trying to
instill some degree of professionalism and reminding them that they
do represent the trucking industry.
We've had, we think, very good success in working with the pit
owners, the track brokers, the sheriffs department and the Motor
Vehicle Compliance Office.
I think as Lieutenant Minch pointed out, there are some gypsies
and some rogues out there, and they're the ones that they're going to
have to focus on. The people that live in this county that are making a
living in this county don't want to lose that living.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we've got the educational
program going on at the point where it should be going. I mean, you
educate them at the source, not once they get disbursed on all the
streets.
Page 152
April 22, 2003
MR. KANT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that's a very good idea. The
other issue then is one of enforcement. MR. KANT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I don't see that adding more
signs at more places is going to make things any better.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The motion that was made I
consider failed because there wasn't a second on the motion.
So where we're at is, I'm going to make a motion that we not put
Jake brake signs up, that we get the enforcement, whoever inspects the
trucks, down here to inspect not only the vehicles with faulty exhaust
systems, but other items such as bald tires, and for the chairman to
write a letter to Jackie (sic) brake or Jakey (sic) brake company to
come down here and --
MR. KANT: Jacob's Engine Brake Corporation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to here to hold a -- to work with the
pits or the truck drivers to educate them on the proper equipment to
have on for their Jake brakes. That's my notion
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Of course I don't think
much of the motion, but I'm going to have to explain why.
I'll remind you that we also have speed limit signs throughout
whole county, and they're spaced so far apart to remind people what
the speed it. We don't post one of them at one of the pits.
Also, too, I'd also like to remind you that there's a lot of
independent pits out there that don't go to these main pits where they
do have these signs posted, so you're right back to the same situation.
Enforcement's going to be great and I'm sure it's going to work for a
while, but we're going to be right back to it, and I guarantee you we're
going to be back here in the same situation six months from now or a
Page 153
April 22, 2003
year from now when people fall back into their old routines.
The only way you can ensure that there's going to be some sort of
public awareness that this thing is a law is a limited amount of signage
to be able to make it happen.
And I would recommend, if anything, that we just -- that we just
go with a small minimum, maybe 10 signs total, to be placed at the
places that the county would think would be appropriate.
Remind you that you can't combine them, because if you
combine them, you're going to be saying, on something other than a
four-lane highway, you're going to be directing people that it's okay to
make left-hand tums in the left lane when it's a two-lane highway. So
it would be impossible to combine the signs.
But I'd hope you'd give due consideration for the needs of these
people that are here today and those that couldn't make it by allowing
for a small amount of signage to be placed up that would allow for this
ordinance to be made public knowledge, not only to the public, but to
the truckers that are out there.
And meanwhile, keep the other efforts going forward which have
already been instituted, with the exception of the letter you're going to
write, and I do thank you for that.
But, please, give that consideration. I do think we're falling short
on this one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. Signs do not fix the
problem. Enforcement does. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Would signs help with the
enforcement?
MS. OSCEOLA: Tina Osceola, for the record, Collier County
Sheriff's Office.
Signs -- I'm sorry. Signs are a good source of an educa -- they
educate people, they warn people, those who read them and pay
Page 154
April 22, 2003
attention to them, of course.
So really, that's going to be, again, up to -- we would leave that
up to the commission as far as what you believe you want to do with
your signs. That's your area.
Our area, as far as the enforcement is concerned on any one of
these issues -- you know, we have close to a little more than 500
certified law enforcement officers employed with the Collier County
Sheriffs Office. So when enforcement is brought up as -- it's a very
broad term, we're out there to enforce every law that's on the books as
much -- as far as our resources will allows us to.
Every year we have what we go -- we go through our own
strategic planning process. Part of what we're doing, which is
independent of any other source other than what we have seen as a
community need, is a unit that specifically deals -- it's within our
traffic enforcement unit, but it specifically deals with commercial
vehicles.
We went so far as to apply for a grant for that. Unfortunately, the
competition is pretty steep, and we did not get the grant. That did not
deter us. We're still looking to do that, as resources will allow. That
unit specifically will be able to make up for what we can't get by way
of enforcement from the state level.
But just as I probably at this point could bring up Corporal Leffin
or Lieutenant Minch and show the whole entire room a gun, I wouldn't
be able to ask any one of the people if they weren't an armor or person
trained in firearms to be able to identify that gun or tell me whether it's
working safely without having someone trained to be able to do that,
except for you.
And it's the same thing with the commercial vehicles, whether it
be the Jake brake issue, whatever the case may be. Even on cars, we
have training that has to happen first. We're getting to that point, but
unfortunately, for the commercial vehicles, as far as the commercial
Page 155
April 22, 2003
vehicles, it's not just dump trucks. It's anything over five tons.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So a sign wouldn't help you to
enforce that law? That was my question.
MS. OSCEOLA: It wouldn't help us in the enforcement and as
far as enforcing those who are violating. What a sign can do, and it
has been seen, it does promote voluntary compliance. People see the
signs --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It does promote that?
MS. OSCEOLA: It promotes it because those people that are
driving down the roadway that may forget or it hasn't entered their
mind, they see it -- when you're going -- Golden Gate is a classic
example, Golden Gate City. For many people that lived in that area,
35 has always been -- or 30, the residential speed limit. That's --
everyone thinks, I'm in a residential area, or at least those of us who
are courteous drivers think, I have to slow down. I'm in a residential
area.
The interior portion of Golden Gate City, the speed limit was
decreased to 25. Posting the speed limits at 25 throughout that Golden
Gate City area reminds people, ooh, it's 25. And I think those of us
who travel in that area will see people that approach the sign, and you
see the brakes come on, you see the people start to slow down. That's
just an analogy.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
have rebels out there.
MS. OSCEOLA: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
about.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
But the -- it is -- like you said, you do
And that's what enforcement is all
To start with, you talk about
Page 156
April 22, 2003
education. These people are professional truck drivers. They have to
have a commercial license. They have to have additional training
beyond what -- the normal person that would have a privately-owned
automobile license.
What is the problem.9 We can put up all sorts of signs. These
people should know that this is part of their livelihood, that they're a
commercial driver, and that they're supposed to be professional and
they should know more laws -- be expected to know more laws than
anybody else, and yet we still have this type of problem.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
MS. OSCEOLA: You don't need a --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No.
MS. OSCEOLA: That wasn't a question? Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It was a statement, a statement
of fact, too.
I just want to remind Commissioner Henning that when he came
to us for signs in his neighborhood of Golden Gate City for 25 miles
an hour, we didn't say, well, we'll post them at the convenience stores.
We don't need it, signs don't do any good. We went and we posted
them without any other thought or any other discussion, because that
was the need of that neighborhood and the will of it.
I'm asking for a legal sign to be placed to be able to meet the
needs of these people in their neighborhood for a very minimal cost,
and I don't see what the problem is. I don't -- I really don't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't know why we're
delaying the action on this for so long.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- let me correct it. I did not come to
the board asking for signs at 25 miles an hour. I did not.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then how did they go up?
Because I'd like to use the same mechanism to get these up.
Page 157
April 22, 2O03
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, I'm just correcting the
statement.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Well, I stand corrected,
and I would like that same mechanism to be put in place for District 5,
which deserves it as much as any other district.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. OSCEOLA: Can I make --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm ready to take a vote on the
motion, unless you want to -- we've got some other people that want to
address us on other things.
MS. OSCEOLA: I just have one item just to insert in here when
you're making your decision, in light of the sheriff office or as far as
when you're considering enforcement efforts in regards to traffic. It's
important that you may want to use this same guide post as you go
through your decisions.
When we look at traffic enforcement, noise, of course, is an
issue. And I'll stand here before you today on behalf of the sheriff's
office and let you know that -- because I don't want it said outside of--
outside of this meeting, I'll say it myself.
Our priority when it comes to traffic is traffic fatalities. That's
number one. The second, traffic injuries. The third, we would look at
traffic crashes. And the fourth, property damage.
Noise, unless you can directly co-relate noise with any one of the
four with the resources that we have allocated to us, that is going to
come in at number five. So keep that in consideration.
That's how we see things, and that's how we have to operate
because, frankly, we really hate to have the same men and women that
are enforcing the traffic laws -- they're the same men and women who
are standing on the roadways cleaning up traffic fatalities. And if
you've ever seen one, I do mean cleaning up.
So enforcement, yes, it is important, and you're not looking at
Page 158
April 22, 2003
any more devoted group of people or any more people more devoted
to enforcement than the Collier County SherifFs Office.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Tina.
Call the motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I need a parting comment.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure, anything you need.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. I do appreciate that.
So now we do know that -- and I agree with the priorities the
sheriffs department sets. And, of course, noise would be number five
on the list.
So now enforcement of the noise ordinance will not take
precedence, which is understandable. We've got to deal with the safety
issues first. Plus, we're not going to put signs up on the road,
according to the motion that's on the floor. I don't see where there's
any gain or any measure of balance for this community what they're
asking. I cannot, in any way, shape, or form support this motion, just
for the record.
Now, go ahead and call for your --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, let me say that what Tina said
was, she said, being that they can't enforce the noise ordinance
because they have other things, she did say that the signs, though, are
a reminder--
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
once the signs are there.
COLETTA: Exactly.
FIALA: -- and they've noticed a difference
And being that that isn't a priority, I think
that that's something we need to keep in mind.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think one thing we need to keep
in mind is that -- is that nmning a stop sign or a red light is a safety
issue. And if putting up a sign will solve a noise problem, then I'm
going to be before this commission asking for signs at every
Page 159
April 22, 2003
intersection to tell people they shouldn't run a red light.
Now, you can imagine how -- how expensive that is. And so I
think if you're -- if you're thinking that a sign's going to solve the
problem, it simply won't.
I believe that what the staff has already done is apparently
producing results, putting those signs at the source of all -- almost all
the traffic, and that's how you educate people. And I think that is a
logical thing to do, put the signs where they will do the most good,
and then enforce them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could you state the motion,
first?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The motion was -- is not to install
signage to deal with the engine braking issue on public roadways and
for the chair to write a letter to the enforcement mechanism, vehicle
operations, State of Florida, whatever it is, asking them to -- sharing
with them our problem in Collier County, asking them for their
assistance to enforce the -- not only the muffiering of the trucks, but
also other safety equipment and invite Jake Brake Incorporated
Company to come down to assist us on a seminar or whatever to
inform the truck drivers of the proper muffiering equipment to solve
this problem.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 3-2.
MR. KANT: Thank you, Commissioners. I understand your
Page 160
April 22, 2003
clear direction is not to fabricate and install those signs, and we'll
work on that basis. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't we take a 1 O-minute break
and convene in -- five to three, and we'll see if we can get through this
agenda posthaste.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: By four o'clock.
(A recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would everybody take their seats,
please.
Item # 10A
REQUEST BY MELANIE AND TIM BEEBE FOR WAIVER OF
VARIANCE PETITION FEES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 245
22ND AVENUE NE. PETITIONER TO PAY $1000.00 VARIANCE
FEE-APPROVFD
The next item is 10(A), a request by Melanie Beebe and Tim
Beebe for waiver of variance, petition fees for property located at 245
22nd Avenue Northeast. Mr. Beebe?
MR. BEEBE: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. For being here today.
MR. BEEBE: Thank you.
Commissioners, I'm Tim Beebe. My wife Melanie. We bought
this house -- this has been brought up before. I think we were here a
few months ago. And I don't know if you guys got to do any research
on this or not, but we bought this house in 5 of 2001, we closed on it.
After we closed on it, we started repairs, trying to increase the
property value. We went and got a fence permit, we put a new roof on
Page 161
April 22, 2003
the house. When we went in for a fence permit, they requested that
we have an accurate survey done, so we had a new survey done. It
cost us $300. The permit for the fence was $53.
In mm, they gave us the permit for the fence and assured us that
it met county requirements. There were no restrictions on it.
At that point we figured that our house was located in the right
place. Like I said, there was a well permit, and further there was a --
there was a roof permit.
Because we complied with the county, that means that we have
to assume monetary responsibility for another's financial benefit in
1984, when this house (sic) was split.
This house was built in 1979, and the ones who approved this
split for this property, if I'm not mistaken, was Collier County
property appraisers.
There's no remarks there was no changes, there's nothing that was
put in the file that -- at that time that it was split that our house was
located too close to the property line.
We have no permit violations. We worked on this house to build
what we have today, and now they want us to move the housing.
Now, that -- what we ask you, the commissioners of Collier
County, is that the department of Collier County that was responsible
for the approval of this parcel of land in 1984 not burden us, first-time
home buyers of Collier County, residence of 22 and 31 years -- that
they don't make us responsible but they make them responsible for the
oversight or the human error on a situation that's caused lost wages,
energy, and especially officials like you and ourselves, the time that
could be devoted to much more positive aspect in daily life, like our
families and community awareness.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
What's the staff's recommendations?
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, for the record, Joe Schmitt,
Page 162
April 22, 2003
administrator of community develop and environmental services
division. Before you today is -- quite frankly, what it is is a request
for a waiver of fees.
Mr. Beebe came in and began the process for a variance, as you
recall, on the -- February 25th, Mr. Beebe and his wife petitioned the
board asking the board for consideration in this motion, also asking
that the board waiver -- waive the fees.
The petitioner came in, applied for the variance, has decided not
to pay the fees. As a result, we've not initiated any of the staff work to
begin the work for the variance. But what's before you today is that
he -- we waive the fees, and in doing so, you would have to approve
that, in fact, this is within the public welfare and that we would have
to transfer funds from the general fund of $1,000 to pay for the staff's
time to process the variance request.
So before you today is that recommendation, and we
recommended disapproval.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Wishes of the board?
Questions?
I -- I'm very much in support of waiving the after-a-fact (sic)
variance, but not --
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- but not the variance process, and
I'm going to make that motion to the effect.
MR. SCHMITT: And that was staffs recommendation as well,
that, in fact, the violation was not caused by Mr. Beebe, it was the
previous owner, and, in fact, the issue involved of recording of the
splitting of the property in the property appraisers office, but it's still
incumbent upon the property owner, the previous property owner, to
ensure that the dwelling units that remained on site still were -- met
the setback requirements with the Land Development Code. That did
not happen. So that's how we got to this point in time.
Page 163
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a --
MR. SCHMITT: We do recommend that it just --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to the motion?
MR. SCHMITT: -- be the standard variance request of $1,000.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I'll second the motion for
discussion purposes, but a have a question.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure. Commissioner Coyle, then
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You need 15 feet, roughly, right?
MR. BEEBE: We have 14 feet, seven inches, I think, is what we
have.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. The discussion with the
county manager recently concerning this issue, he had suggested that,
perhaps, rather than spending the money on a variance, that you see if
you can't negotiate the purchase of a small amount of that --
MR. BEEBE: We've tried that, exhausted that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It didn't work? Did you have title
insurance on your policy -- on your -- MR. BEEBE: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And what does the title insurance
company have to say about all that absolutely?
MR. BEEBE: That's the only thing that they do not cover,
because it's the county's responsibility, which would be the property
appraiser's office, to make sure that when they allowed that property
to be split, that they assumed responsibility for it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But the -- my position is that I
would -- I would support the after-the-fact variance for you. I would
really vote in favor of that under these circumstances, but what I can't
do is support a waiver of the fee. If we did that, we would set a
precedent that would be rather costly for us, and it would essentially
mean that someone else in Collier County, some other taxpayer, is
Page 164
April 22, 2003
paying your fee for a variance.
I understand the financial burden that places on you, but I hope
you understand the constraints that we have. I think -- I think, from
what, that Commissioner Henning says, we would give you the
variance if you came in-- if you paid the fee and came in, you'd get
your variance.
MR. BEEBE: And even though -- that the property appraiser is
paid to do this? Because they failed do so in a professional manner,
which made it a binding document to our title insurance company, that
I should be responsible for their mistake?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't know that the property
appraiser is responsible for that, and I'm not going to argue this issue
with you. I'm merely sharing my opinion and I'm trying to help you.
MR. BEEBE: Yes, I understand that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. If-- you have the option of
choosing the course of action you'd like to pursue.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, then
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Is there an actual cost, I
mean, so that -- so we don't have a lot of extra costs involved in this, is
there an actual cost that it would take to process this so that -- I mean,
I realize these people bought in and they had all of the surveys done
properly and applied for the variance properly, they tried to do what
they were supposed to do, and it was to no fault of theirs at all that
they've been hung with this enormous bill, and first-time homeowners
it's really tough. I'm wondering if there's -- if there's like an actual
cost that we could consider rather that were $1,000.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, if there were an actual cost,
they probably would not want to pay it, because we're talking about a
variance request, and the staff's time to produce that request, staffing it
through the Planning Commission and then on to the Board of County
Page 165
April 22, 2003
Commissioners, the hourly rate associated with the people involved in
doing that is far more than $1,000.
Again, we set rates based on an aggregate total cost to run the
department, and we spread those costs over the number of
applications, so no there is really no hourly rate. I do have hourly
rates. I'd be glad to share that with Mr. Beebe and yourself if you so
wish, and I know it would be more than $1,000, considering the time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just trying to find any way to
help.
MR. SCHMITT: And, in fact, there has been no variance request
as of yet. Mr. Beebe did come in and fill out the forms, but until
proper payment is made, there's no staffing even involved, because
that variance request does involve the -- also involves the planning
commissioner and both public notices, both for the Planning
Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. The staff pays
for those advertisements as well. That's all part of the fee.
MR. BEEBE: In order it file for a request, told us that we had to
pay -- and I think it was $2,050, that's what they requested at that
time, and they said the only way around that was to come before you,
the commissioners --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. BEEBE: -- and do it that way. That's the only reason we
haven't applied for one is because we weren't going to pay $2,050 for
something that I still don't feel $1,000 is fair.
MR. SCHMITT: And I would point out that the property
appraiser allows for the dividing of the properties. We do allow that.
You can take a five-acre tract and divide it as small as two and a
quarter acre. There is a disclaimer notice when they do that that the
applicant is responsible for ensuring that all dwellings meet setback
requirements. But as far as the agencies coordinating with each other
and I signing off or somebody on my staff signing off approving that,
Page 166
April 22, 2003
there's no policy. We do not do that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was done years ago, right?
MR. BEEBE: That was done in 1984. The house had been there
for five years, so they had an accurate survey when that went in and
was redivided.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, then
Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Just so I fully
understand, so what happened here was, is that the lot originally was
-- met all the specifications with the house on it, that the -- at the time
that it originally started out, it was duly permitted and everything at
that time?
MR. MUDD: It was a five-acre lot, Commissioner, and then they
split it into --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They split it in two after the
house was built?
MR. BEEBE: Yes, sir.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I didn't mean--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the tax appraiser did not--
the appraiser did not give them a warning or did give them a warning?
He did give them a warning at that time, the previous owners?
MR. SCHMITT: There's no warning involved. You can go in
and ask for a -- to subdivide your property, and it's just a recording. It
goes through the property appraiser, and I have to mm to legal for the
correct terminology as far as what happens. But, in fact, it's recorded.
It's still up to the applicant to ensure that the dwelling units that are on
site -- this is the dwelling right here. What had happened is, this was
the entire property, there was one home, the property was split, and
then there -- this -- there was a second house that was built on this site
here.
So when-- prior to the property being split, there were -- there
Page 167
April 22, 2003
were no setback requirements, or no setback violations. Once the
property was split, the house then becomes a nonconforming structure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So what happened was is the
right hand did not tell the left hand that something was wrong; is that
correct?
MR. SCHMITT: That's -- well, not necessarily. There's no
requirement to do so. That's the responsibility of the property owner --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah.
MR. SCHMITT: -- to ensure that the dwelling units that are on
the property -- the property appraiser does not ask, well, are you going
to leave that house up or are you going to raze that house, or what are
you going to do? They're just -- they subdivide it, it's recorded, and
then they can sell the adjacent property or adjoining property.
There's -- there's no compelling requirement other than -- and it's
incumbent upon the property owner to ensure that the dwelling unit
complies with the setback requirements.
And what's happened here is we have a shed here, almost right on
the property line, and the one in the back as well. That's -- and that
led to a complaint. The complaint was investigated by code
enforcement. Code enforcement then notified the property owners
that in order to abate the problem, you'd have to file for a variance.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we have two different arms
of government, one, the property appraiser, who can freely divide
property at his own discretion, and our own code enforcement, which
comes under the county manager and, of course, your department,
that, after the fact, finds out about something like this -- MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- then meanwhile, this
gentleman here and his family are left on the short end of the stick.
I'm not too sure how fair this is.
Tell me one other thing -- and I won't keep this going forever.
Page 168
April 22, 2003
MR. SCHMITT: It really is a civil matter between he and the
previous owner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Or him and the property
appraiser.
MR. SCHMITT: That's all I'm going to offer, and I'm not going
to give legal advice, but it really is a civil matter.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In any case, let me ask you
another thing. Has this come before us before, and have we ever made
an exception of any kind for this?
MR. SCHMITT: For a variance?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: For not requiring a variance or a
waiver of the fee?
MR. SCHMITT:
Oh, for a waiver of the fee. Commissioner, no
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Or situations similar to this.
MR. SCHMITT: Not to my knowledge, Commissioner.
But, in fact, to follow what Commissioner Henning said, if, in
fact, you waiver the fees, you're either asking the general public to
pick up those -- to pick up that fee, or if I absorb it in-house, I'm
asking all the people who come in and pay for fees to pay for his
service.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand that. But I'm just
trying to -- I'm just trying to feel comfortable enough that the
responsibility should fall on the landowner for what took place here,
and I don't have level of comfort yet. Possibly I will as we on with
that discussion.
MR. SCHMITT: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, we're not going to -- hopefully
we can come to resolution on this shortly. And I encourage the
commissioners to talk to the property appraiser. I don't think he has
any responsibility here. Never has.
Page 169
April 22, 2003
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There is a request for variance
under item 17(C). It's being approved. MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Did that person -- did that
petitioner pay the fee?
MR. SCHMITT: Yes. Yes, Commissioner, certainly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Did they pay the $2,000 fee
or did they pay the $1,0007
MR. SCHMITT: They paid a $2,000 fee. It was after-the-fact
variance.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so you have agreed to cut the
fee in half in this circumstance?
MR. SCHMITT: In this circumstance I would recommend to the
board that this is frankly not an after-the-fact variance for Mr. Beebe.
But you can certainly make that determination that, in fact, it would be
after-the-fact variance. I was only trying to offer maybe a solution to
at least come halfway.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you've -- you have proposed a
$1,000 fee rather than a $2,000 fee?
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And for the reasons that have been
stated before, I think it's a good deal. I know you don't -- you're not
happy with it.
MR. BEEBE: No, we're not.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But we've never done this before.
MR. BEEBE: Neither have I.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We've never waived a variance fee
for anybody, ever. And if we start doing it now, we're going to be
faced with that same problem over and over and over again.
I can promise you I'll support your variance request if you get it
Page 170
April 22, 2003
in, but I can't support the waiver of the fee.
MR. BEEBE: This isn't like a variance was issued earlier today,
like the house was half built. This house was completed in
construction 24 years ago.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, so was the one under
17(C). It's exactly the same situation as you. And they paid the fee
and we approved it, and we'll do the same thing with you, I suspect, if
we can get the variance before us.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do we have a speaker?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Motion carries, 4-0,
Commissioner Coletta descending (sic).
Next item is 10(B) --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the motion was that he pay the
$1,000 variance (sic) --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. MUDD: -- in order to get a variance?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
Item # 1 OB
BLACK AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD WORK PLAN
PROPOSAl J-APPROVED
Page 171
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item is approve the work
plan proposed by the Black Advisory Board.
I'm going to make a motion to approve except for no other
moneys no different than any other advisory group that we have other
-- that is similar to the Black Advisory Board. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
MR. DUNNUCK: For the record, my name is John Dunnuck,
public services administrator, liaison to the Black Affairs Advisory
Board.
Just for clarification purposes, the reason we had put in that
$2,000 request was typically, like if you have a Planning Commission
or so forth, some of those costs absorb within the planning department
themselves.
As liaison in the public services division, I don't really have any
money budgeted to help out when they want to advertise for
community meetings similar to what you do for town hall meetings.
What I was doing for clarification purposes, as part of a fiscal
impact statement is saying, yes, in fact, we would like to utilize a little
bit of funding for this program, you know, whether it's encumbered
within my division budget or so forth, but that was the genesis of the
request, because we recognize that we need to lean on some staff
support as we help them with their work plan.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And if you was to have a fund raiser,
I would not only support it, but I would encourage others to attend.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How about the use of our
government channel to be able to notify the public; would that be
permitted?
Page 172
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: For public awareness?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Public awareness, what the
advisory board's all about. I think it would be an excellent product or
excellent way to get out what we have to the public, and not only for
the Black Advisory Board, but Hispanic Advisory Board, whatever
else we have there, to use the resources we have in-house.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's the commissioner's advisory
board, and it's the commissioner's channel, so I agree, that's a proper
venue.
MR. DUNNUCK: Well -- and I think we agree, that is one of the
venues. I think one of our things too, is when we go into the
Immokalee community and so forth, there's some times that you have
to use some unique marketing tools, from our standpoint, whether it's
fliers or so forth, when you go to the churches. And what we are
doing is looking for very minor costs to go along with that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What's minor, 2,000?
MR. DUNNUCK: Well, I wrote up -- I wrote on that up to
$2,000, recognizing we want to have three community meetings. But
from that standpoint, you know, the board can give us direction in that
regard.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And with church bulletins, you can
probably just notify them through email, right, and they can pull those
things up?
MR. DUNNUCK: In some cases. You know, we'll work within
the parameters of what the board gives us.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. John, maybe the lady from the
Black Advisory Board would like to say something.
MR. DUNNUCK: Yes, I have Marion Thompson here, the chair
of the Black Affairs Advisory Board.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
MS. THOMPSON: Yes, I'm Marion Thompson, the chair of the
Page 173
April 22, 2003
Black Advisory Board. And, you know, you set us up to work
through -- the Black Advisory Board to get the community involved
so that you know the issues, but you're tying our hands if you don't
give us any kind of-- no seed money. All we're asking for is money
for fliers to make the community aware of the Black Advisory Board.
You want to us do a good job for you, but you're tying our hands
to do a good job. And we feel as though if we make ourselves known
throughout the community, through the fliers, pamphlet, we could do a
better job, and you would be proud of the job that you set us up to do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner
Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just had a -- I just had a town
hall meeting, and I had fliers and I had to distribute them, and I've
never found that fliers help a bunch, to be quite honest with you. But
if you print something up in your computer and you take it around to
the different parks and you it on their bulletin board possibly and you
email each and other, and with using the telephone, the government
channel, to help publicize it as well, and through the church bulletins,
I think-- and those are all free, and even a letter to the editor. Write a
letter to the editor. That's what all the other clubs are doing, you
know, the Republican Club, the Democratic Club, Women's
Republican Club, and use that. That's, again, another free avenue, and
that way you'll begin to get your word out.
And I would bet that our -- our public information office can --
can assist you in -- and that's an important thing for you, by the way,
so -- because most people aren't adept at how to get the word out, and
so they can assist with it.
MS. THOMPSON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
I would kind of hope that we would give consideration, a very
Page 174
April 22, 2003
nominal amount of money, just to be able to cover such things as the
copies to be handed out and be able to meet that. It doesn't even have
to be money that trades hands, but services could be rendered in here
that have a cost to them. In other words, if they came to information
technology or wherever and asked for a hundred copies of something,
it would be charged towards an account that would be outstanding for
them to be able to be passed out in the neighborhood.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We do that with other advisory
boards, don't we?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would assume so.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I mean, I would want to make sure
we do for this advisory board anything we did for other advisory
boards.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, what we do for the other advisory
boards is we provide staff assistance to the board, and within the staff
in the department that they come from, within their budget, we
provide whatever administrative type supplies that they need.
If they wanted to do a flier, then John would get with the PIO
folks, okay, from his department saying, help me with the flyer, and
then he'd work that in dissemination. Now, he's going to try to keep it
-- external costs outside of staff time down as much as he possibly
can, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would that work for you.'?
MS. THOMPSON: Would he have money in his budget to make
copies for us?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: According to the county
manager.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
MS. THOMPSON: Well, yeah, that would work for us.
Anything to help us to get the word out, sure, we would appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's motion approved, isn't it?
Page 175
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor, and
there's a second.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Opposed?
The motion carries, 5-0. Let the
record reflect what the motion was.
Item #10C
COLLIER COUNTY LANDSCAPE BEAUTIFICATION MASTER
PLAN AND FUNDING. MOTION TO ACCEPT TYPE B AND C1
MASTER IJANDSCAPING PI JAN-APPROVED
The next item is 10(C), approval of a Collier County landscaping
beautification master plan and funding, approve a level of landscaping
beautification for medians, retention ponds, and interchanges.
MR. MUDD: Hang on. Commissioner, the reason this item is on
the agenda today is, back in October -- and, you know, I have a whole
list of paperwork that follows this. Back in October the board had a
landscaping workshop, at the same time we talked GIS and whatnot,
and there was some discussion with the commissioners about going
out and doing a survey to see if the taxpayers of Collier County would
support an increase in taxes to do a -- an urban area landscaping
scheme, at which time at that board, the board directed us that the
minimum landscaping piece that would be funded by impact fees
Page 176
April 22, 2003
would be a median, Bahai grass, sleeves for future irrigation, some
bullnoses so people wouldn't take shortcuts and tear through the
medians in order -- in case -- like my wife who takes sharp tums
sometime in the van.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Other dirt.
MR. MUDD: This way she ruins the tires, she doesn't ruin the
dirt, but I won't tell her I said that. The -- and that would be the
minimum, and that was impact-fee funded.
You asked the staff about the survey. In the meantime, Chuck
Mohlke and the League of Women Voters had a survey question on
the last survey that basically said that the taxpayers would not support
an increase.
Now I will tell you, that question was a little convoluted and the
landscaping piece was buried in the latter part, talked about decorative
streetlighting prior to that in that question, and the landscaping piece
came at the end.
But there was also discussion of the board to come up with a
standard that would be beyond the impact fee fundable landscaping.
And the staff has been after that in order to lay that out to try to figure
out what the board would like to have happen, and then once we
figure out what the standard is, to try to come up with a cost per mile.
You know, we couldn't even give you a cost per square foot when we
had that workshop because we really didn't know what the standard --
you wanted for the standard.
And so we spent some time to do that, and that's what Ms.
Flagg's going to try to present to you today is that work that the staff
has done to try to lay out the costs to let you know what the fiscal
impact will be over a number of years.
And in your report it's a three-year plan, but she's even carried
that forward for the next 10 years so that you'd have an idea of what
those costs would be as far -- to our budget.
Page 177
April 22, 2003
And then in -- the latter part that I'd like to say is if you approve a
standard, a standard, whatever one you decide today, what I would
also say, instead of approving the outlay of dollars at this particular
time, tell us to put that into the budget and see how that lays down for
our '04 budget.
And as we go through those discussions in January, we can see if
we've got the dollars to do it or not. Don't get yourself locked into a
dollar amount already. Tell us to put it into that budget so that we can
work that thing through and provide you the best way to expend those
dollars for the '04 budget.
That's all I have.
Ms. Flagg?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that a zero increase of tax rate?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Those are my guides that you gave me, keep it
flat.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ms. Diane Flagg, thank you for being
with us.
MS. FLAGG: Sure. Good afternoon, Commissioners. Just
briefly, we're going to cover a couple topics today because it was
requested to have a master plan, so you're going to get a full master
plan. One is to approve a Collier County landscape master plan and a
funding source, to approve a level of landscape, to -- for both medians,
retention ponds, and interchanges and to adopt a Collier County
landscape beautification master plan as a policy for arterial and
collector roadways.
What we have before you are different types of landscape
beautification levels, which we're going to ask you to give us some
direction on which level you would choose for both the medians, the
side roads, and also the retention ponds, both dry and wet retention
Page 178
April 22, 2003
ponds.
Over here we have a map of the nonpotable water line map, and
we'd like for you to give us some direction where we'd like to line up
this master plan for nonpotable water to the overall landscape master
plan. And then here on this map you have all of the roads in the
format.
And what I'm going to do now is mm this over to Ms. Pam
Lulich, and she's going to give you a very brief overview of the total
master plan.
MS. LULICH: Thank you. For the record, Pam Lulich. Good
afternoon, Commissioners.
What we're recommending is revisions to the right-of-way
ordinances to bring the ordinances up to standards and to have an
enforceable landscape ordinance in the future.
Within the three-year-- within the three-year landscape plan,
which is basically a catch-up program, there are mechanisms for
partnerships. Within the plan, if the developer wants to propose
landscaping outside of it, they can do so. And once the plan catches
up segmentally, then the county would assume the maintenance based
on the approved level that you pick today.
Let's see. We're looking -- and also, depending on which level
you pick, if the developer wants -- or an MSTU wants to come in and
add to that level, then they can do so, and then based on our costs that
we're proposing, pay the difference.
So we are -- we're looking at-- we've looked at numbers very
closely based on the built landscape, and we tried to simplify it into
these different types.
The first -- the first type is base level landscaping. This was
proposed in September of 2002 in the landscape workshop. This is
what it is. I mean, this is the base preparation. Ideally, this goes in
when the road is expanded.
Page 179
April 22, 2003
It includes electrical, irrigation sleeving, media backfill, curbing,
Bahai sod, brick pavers at the median end.
Type A. There's only one Type A within Collier County. That's
the Radio Road landscaping that includes main line irrigation,
bubblers at the trees, and planting beds at the median tips. This is
Bahai -- this is characterized by Bahai sod in the middle.
Sometimes you can see in the plan it can mm brown during the
dry season. We do receive complaints about that.
Type B. This 100 percent irrigation. This is the predominant
landscape that you find in Collier County. It includes, such as 100
percent irrigation. You can have either shrubs or St. Augustine sod,
flowering trees, planting beds, canopy trees or palms.
Examples are Davis Boulevard, Phase I and II, Collier
Boulevard, and U.S. 41 North, also Pine Ridge.
Type C 1. Type C 1 is a street tree planting. This is the side road
canopy trees, 50 to 100 feet on center. Either a canopy tree or a palm.
It's irrigated through a bubbler system, and the Bahai sod is in place
from the road widening project.
Median landscaping type C2. This is a buffer-type landscaping.
It includes the side road canopy trees, flowering -- flowering trees,
planting beds, and there's 100 percent irrigation where there is St.
Augustine or shrubbery.
Another result of road widening projects are the retention ponds.
We have both wet and dry retention ponds as a result of the projects.
We've got a Type A. And a Type A has palms, native trees,
littoral zone plantings, planting beds. An example is Orange Blossom
and Yarberry Lane.
It's important that the board adopt a level for this as well because
early on a littoral planting requires a shell within the retention point,
and this needs to be reviewed early in the construction review process
of the engineering plans.
Page 180
April 22, 2003
Wet retention pond, Type B, palms, native trees, littoral zone
plantings. This -- this also includes a lighted aeration fountain,
benches, and pathways. On U.S. 41 East we have an example of this,
and it can create a park-like setting within a community.
Dry retention ponds, palms, native trees, Bahai grass. Example,
Max Hasse Park. In this instance, we did preserve a lot of the existing
trees that we did propose as a native-type planting as well.
The three-year plan, the catch-up plan. These are the roads that
are presently completed and have all of the -- the base level
components in place. For our three-year program, we tried to look at
every district and proposed landscaping for each district.
For fiscal year '04, Airport-Pulling Road, Pine Ridge Road,
Rattlesnake Hammock, Immokalee Interchange and Golden Gate
Boulevard,
'05, U.S. 41 North, Vanderbilt Beach Road to Immokalee Road,
Livingston Road, Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road, U.S. 41
East, Pine Ridge Interchange.
'06, U.S. 41 North, Immokalee Road to Wiggins Pass, Immokalee
Road, which is this small segment of 111 th to U.S. 41 North, U.S. 41
East, St. Andrews to Barefoot Williams, Golden Gate Boulevard,
remaining segment, and U.S. 41 North, Wiggins Pass to county line.
MS. FLAGG: Okay. The -- and I know we went through that
pretty quick, so just to recap for ya.
We have Type A, which is just Bahai grass in the middle, trees
50 to 100 feet apart with plantings at medians ends.
Then we have Type B, which is shrubs, flowering trees
throughout the length of the median, St. Augustine turf, and fully
irrigated. So those are the two types of median.
Then C 1 and C2. C 1 is street trees only, and C2 is flowering
shrubs and flowering trees in addition to the street trees. So that
would be for your medians and for your side roads, and that's on your
Page 181
April 22, 2003
visualization here.
In addition, we have the retention ponds. The difference between
Type A retention pond wet and Type B retention pond wet is Type B,
in addition to having the plantings, also has paths, park benches and
fountains.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MS. FLAGG: To talk about a little -- yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Go ahead. I didn't mean to --
MS. FLAGG: To talk a little bit about the funding, what we did
is we took all of this, put it together into a full implementation plan so
that as we did the three-year catch-up plan, which catch-up is only for
the roads that have been widerled and they're just sitting there with
Bahai grass. It's going to take us three years to catch up.
Then the other aspects of the plan is that as the roads are
constructed, that once they're constructed, then we would landscape it
according to the level that you've selected.
So if you select a Type A, C 1, which, again, is the Radio Road
example, what you have there is -- I have to get the expert to do the
machine here.
What you have there is Type A, C 1, is you have out to fiscal year
'11 what the total cost is, and then the cost, and we're recommending
out of Fund 111, and then the resulting millage for this full
implementation of the plan, which is 0.21 mills.
If you select Type B, C 1, Type B, C 1, is the flowering trees
throughout the length of the median plus street trees, again, you have
the total cost for full implementation, and then the resulting millage
would be 0.2569 mills.
And then we also have breakdowns, if you're interested, for Type
A alone, with nothing on the side roads, type B alone, with nothing on
the side roads, and then Type B, C2, which is full planting of the
median and full planting of the side roads.
Page 182
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We have 15 speakers, and it's up to
the commissioners whether they have any questions, or do you want to
go to speakers.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just have two questions.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
With the MSTUs that are in existence now, will they still remain
as they are, or would you incorporate all of them together?
MS. FLAGG: The only MSTU that would be impacted -- let's
say that you selected Type A.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MS. FLAGG: Radio Road MSTU is a Type A. All the rest of the
MSTUs are -- have a Type B median. So we would make the decision
based upon this master plan. If you select Type A, then Radio -- then
the county would maintain -- would pay for the maintenance of that
Type A median. Radio Road could then take their MSTU money and
enhance the current landscaping on that median, and they would use
their MSTU funds for that, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: The MSTUs that are in place right
now would continue to exist; is that what you're saying?
MS. FLAGG: Correct. The MSTUs, because -- depending on
what level you choose, what we've developed is a mechanism where is
-- if the MSTU chooses to continue and wants to enhance whatever
level the board approves, they would use the MSTU to do that.
If the Radio -- on the converse though, if the Radio Road MSTU
said -- you know, if you-all chose a level A and the Radio Road
MSTU said, well, we don't want any more than level A, then they
could make a decision to say, we'll let the county take it from here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So then, the existing MSTUs would
remain. So say, for instance, we chose a level A for Rattlesnake
Hammock, which has no existing MSTU, but they really would like a
Page 183
April 22, 2003
level B, C1, so then would they establish a new MSTU in order to pay
for that?
MS. FLAGG: Correct. If you-all chose a Level A, then a group
along Rattle -- what that would mean is that it would be Bahai in the
center, plants on the end, then a group in Rattlesnake Hammock,
under a Level A selection, could get together and say, what we want is
a -- really Level B, and they would have to pay the difference. They
would have to pay 100 percent of the plant material and the difference
in the maintenance between a Type A and a Type B.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So they would have to go through
the MSTU process to upgrade?
MS. FLAGG: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Let's go to public speakers.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, we have eight speakers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, only eight.
MS. FILSON: The first one is Dex Groose. He will be followed
by Robert Slebodnik.
MR. GROOSE: Chairman Henning, Commissioners.
In the past three years you have come a long way in moving
traffic. You've built new roads, widened existing roads, reduced
median cuts, and synchronized our signals. We have caught up with
fixing the worst of our traffic problems, and the remaining ones are
being addressed.
Traffic is moving again. This is especially true on our two
busiest roadways, Pine Ridge Road and Airport-Pulling Road. For
this, I solute you and Mr. Feder and his capable staff.
In our zeal to get traffic moving, however, one issue has been
overlooked, ambiance. The golden egg of Naples. Naples' ambiance
is the catalyst that grew our general revenues by almost 45 percent in
the past two years. It is a magnet that attracts affluent people to
Naples.
Page 184
April 22, 2003
I would suggest to you today that now is the time to catch up on
restoring some ambiance, and what better way than with landscaped
medians and shoulders to create linear parks?
I have reviewed the plan brought forward today by the division
of the county manager, the Department of Transportation, and
particularly Diane Flagg and her staff. It is well conceived and
comprehensive. It recognizes that one level of landscaping is not
appropriate everywhere.
Some roadway, by virtue of their gateway status and traffic
volumes should be enhanced to levels B or C. I would also
recommend that wherever existing roadways have been partly
landscaped, such as on Pine Ridge Road, we finish them to the same
standards. If they were built already with -- to a B standard, we finish
it to a B.
We can do nothing about landscaping if we choose, but doing
nothing would put our appeal and growing tax base at risk. The better
choice is to approve this plan to provide landscaped roadway
beginning with next year's budget that will not only calm traffic but
also restore a certain ambiance to driving in Naples.
Thank you and thanks to the county staff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Robert Slebodnik. He will be
followed by Mary Ellen Rand.
MR. SLEBODNIK: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name
is Robert Slebodnik, and I reside at 32 Pebble Beach in Lely. I'm also
the MSTU chairman for our Lely Beautification Committee.
Our MSTU is responsible for the landscaping and the medians on
Pebble Beach Boulevard, Forest Hills, and for that portion of St.
Andrews that runs from our entranceway off of 41 to Forest Hills.
On April 17th I attended a meeting with other MSTU
chairpersons to hear the presentation made by Diane Flagg and county
Page 185
April 22, 2003
staff regarding the proposal that you just heard. This was a historic
day because this was the first time that MSTU chairpersons met as a
group to exchange ideas.
We met with county staff, we had a terrific meeting, learned a
lot, and it was suggested that we continue these meetings at least once
or twice a year.
In the plan we heard on last Thursday and what you've heard
today, it was evident that this plan that was presented was thorough
and comprehensive. It was evident that a lot of planning was put forth
into its development.
I don't know what plan the commissioners will approve. I'm
going to make the assumption that it will be plan A since this is a
low-cost plan.
If the county commissioners approve the plan as presented, U.S.
41 or-- as presented with Type A, U.S. 41 from Rattlesnake
Hammock to Collier Boulevard would be destined to a level of
landscaping that just doesn't follow the continuity as that that was
established closer to downtown Naples, and our MSTU has a problem
with that.
I would like you to visualize the landscaping that is currently in
place from the Gordon Bridge, past the Collier County Government
Center to Rattlesnake Hammock Road. It is truly beautiful.
Landscaping is classified as C1, two grade levels above A.
It is the feeling of our MSTU board that the continuity of level
C 1 landscaping should be maintained beyond Rattlesnake Hammock
Road all the way to Collier Boulevard. Remember, this is a gateway
road into Naples.
If there ever was an area that needs to be spruced up, this is it.
Roadway fronts, Naples Manor, Treetops and Whistlers Cove. It
would be money well spent for East Naples.
Last Thursday I also attended the town hall meeting in East
Page 186
April 22, 2003
Naples. I listened intently to each speaker. I can honestly say that the
Collier County board and the county manager, Jim Mudd, have
assembled a cadre of intelligent and creative individuals working for
their administrative team. They found a way to fix the lighting
omission on U.S. 41 and are working on the drainage problems that
we have in East Naples.
We are asking for you to get creative once again and continue
with level C landscaping to maintain the continuity that started in
earlier landscape developments along 41.
This area really needs it, and I thank you for giving me this
opportunity to speak to you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Mary Ellen Rand. She will
be followed by Paula Cohen.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't think Ms. Rand is with us
today.
MS. FILSON:
Newman.
Paula Cohen.
She will be followed by Cheryle
MS. COHEN: Good afternoon. My name is Paula Cohen, and
I'm the landscape chairman for Carlton Lakes Condominium.
Our western boundary of Carlton Lakes parallels Livingston
Road. The area between the beautiful new sidewalk that the county
has put in and our property is either county owned or at least
maintenance supervised by the county. I'm not quite sure.
By our north gate, there is an approximately nine-acre stand of
Melaleuca trees, all Melaleuca trees, which are a constant problem for
US.
I know -- I have found out that this particular parcel belongs to
the wastewater department of the county. We would like to know
when something is going to be done about those trees. I've been given
some nonspecific information.
Page 187
April 22, 2003
In addition, that whole area, there is the Pelican Bay pumping
station there, which is not attractive to look at.
In addition, the county has been very lax in maintaining that strip
of property. Recently, within the last two weeks, they have come and
cleaned up a lot of the debris. It looks better, but it really is a very,
very unattractive piece of county property, and we'd like to know
what's going to be done and when.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have any recommendations
for the item that we're talking about today, the level of landscaping,
whether you're in favor of it or not -- not in favor of it?
MS. COHEN: We would love to have it done, because you-- we
have some very affluent communities just north of us that have been
able to landscape right to the road, and they're absolutely gorgeous,
and we have that stretch that is really very, very unattractive and not
well maintained at all.
Livingston is being widened at this point --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MS. COHEN: -- you know, and they did put in a nice new
sidewalk, which looks lovely. But from that point on to our boundary,
there's a utility road there, we have the buildings -- the building from
the pumping station, which is -- really looks terrible. We have a few
Melaleuca in front of our property, and it really needs to be --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ma'am, if you would call my office, I
would -- or step in there and talk to my assistant, Sam, and give your
name and telephone number, I'll get back to with you those answers.
MS. COHEN: Good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. COHEN: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Cheryle Newman, and she
will be followed by George Fogg.
MS. NEWMAN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Cheryle
Page 188
April 22, 2003
Newman, for the record, chairman of the Golden Gate MSTU
Beautification Advisory Board.
First, I'd like to say thank you very much to this board, and
especially to Diane and her department and County Manager Mudd,
for putting together such a creative -- and I think it's been needed for a
while.
Golden Gate established their MSTU in the early '80s, and it's, I
think my knowledge, that it was the first beautification MSTU
established in the county.
And we saw a lot happen in Golden Gate, and it's progressed
throughout the county, and I think this would be a wonderful thing to
have a standardization, and then if any of the MSTUs want something
over and above that, they can do that. We've done that for years.
And I think, personally, Golden Gate Parkway is one of the most
beautiful in the county. We are very proud of that, and we are very
happy to spend our money doing that and keeping it that way.
I had an awful lot to say today, but it's gone on so long that I --
with what some of the other people have said, they've been very
creative in what they had to say.
I just wanted to let you know that the Golden Gate area is behind
this. We would support -- obviously, we'd like to support a Type B or
higher because Golden Gate Parkway is a B, and we would be willing
-- if you went to a C, we would like to do that as the MSTU. We
would like to do this side, we would like to do the right-of-way,
because we are a B level on Golden Gate Parkway.
Golden Gate does have a master plan. They've had a master plan
for quite some time. It was to have been incorporated with your
original street scape. That did not happen. Somehow or another it did
not happen.
I would just like to ask at this point if Golden Gate's master plan
that was approved by you -- not you, but a previous board -- be
Page 189
April 22, 2003
included as an addendum to this standardization. Ours was a little bit
more stringent, restrictive, and we have been unable to enforce that in
the Golden Gate community because it was not on the books. We'd
like to make sure that that does happen.
There was a question about collector roads and arterial roads. I
would have a question -- I can't see the maps, but we did have a good
opportunity to see all the displays on the April ! 7th meeting.
There was talk at one time of Green Boulevard being a collector
road. The Golden Gate MSTU had a partnership with the county on
beautification of Green Boulevard when it was widened where the
median was established. We didn't want to go in and go ahead and do
something until the time that it was completed.
We would like a definition on is -- if, in fact, Green is going to be
a collector road, what we'd like to see is, whatever your
standardization is, we will enhance that on our part rather than the
50/50 split we had talked about before in our partnership agreement.
If it's included, we'll go ahead and take what the standardization is.
And if we want to improve it more than that, the MSTU will pay for
that difference.
The same thing will apply with Sunshine. I don't believe
Sunshine has been established as a collector road. There is talk that
that could be a collector road coming out of Golden Gate City. We
would love to have that as a partnership with you. And we would
accept just curbing because that is on our schedule for the next interior
road. We wouldn't expect you to pick up the maintenance on that.
That's our responsibility. But it is a county road, and we would like to
see the county put curbing in for us. Let's see.
I really think that's all I have to say. Everybody -- everybody else
had an awful lot to say.
I do want to commend Ms. Flagg and her department. And I
Page 190
April 22, 2003
have a little -- little bit of information I'd like to tell you.
Ms. Flagg, of course, you know, was in charge of a three-letter
department before, EMS, and she was able to get that to a very high
level. And now she is in charge of ATM, which is another three-level
department. And the MSTUs are going to expect the same level of her
experience.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'm sure that we're all going to
get it. I think we all have a lot of confidence in Ms. Flagg's ability to
make things happen.
MS. NEWMAN: Okay. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is George Fogg. He will be
followed by Phil McCabe.
MR. FOGG: Thank you for this opportunity to speak. I haven't
appeared before the board for quite some time. Some of you may
know me. I'm a fellow in the American Society of Landscape
Architects and a resident here in Collier County for 14 years.
I have been most concerned recently about the lack of aesthetics
in relationship to our new highway system. I commend the board for
the highway system, and now hopefully I will able to come back in the
near future and commend the board for taking appropriate action
today to direct the staff to the development of the highest level of
landscaping that we can possibly afford to do. I am realistic. I do
understand the cost factors.
As an emphasis in relationship to an earlier comment of, the
roads become a linear park or a linear park system, I think that all too
frequently we forget that when you are moving about the county, the
primary thing that you see is the immediate road and roadside. The
landscaping of those roadsides, not only the median but the roadsides,
and the enhancement of this environment is extremely important and
can provide a significant amount of additional recreational capability
to the county.
Page 191
April 22, 2003
We have walk systems, significant walk systems now. When I
was chairman -- co-chairman of the pathways committee several years
ago, we had very few walks. Now they have become a major
component.
Some of you may not be aware, but probably the largest single
recreation activity in the country today is walking, bicycling,
rollerblading.
Our walk system provides a lot of opportunity for that. Utilizing
the road system as we are developing it and landscaping it to an
appropriate level of C 1, or C2 preferably, not only the median but the
roadsides, would be a major step in the right direction for Collier
County.
Thank you for this opportunity, and I hope that you will take that
kind of an enlightened direction.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I appreciate him coming up
here.
And while Phil is coming up, I wanted to tell you an experience.
I just went down to Fort Myers the other day to give a presentation to
their smart -- Smart Growth Committee. And I drove in down MLK
Boulevard, and that's always an -- I don't mean this to be unkind, but it
has -- really has some rundown buildings and things there. And, you
know, it's -- well, it's not a pleasant drive.
And I got on there the other day and I couldn't believe that they'd
landscaped the whole thing and along the sides as well. Same scrappy
buildings seen-- buildings on the side --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Say what you really mean.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- but it masked it. It absorbed the
softness of it. It was amazing, the difference. So I just wanted to
mention that as this gentleman was just up saying about the sides of
Page 192
April 22, 2003
the roads makes a difference. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker's Phil McCabe, and he will be
followed by your final speaker, Gail Boorman.
MR. McCABE: Thank you. Chairman Henning and
Commissioners, my name is Phil McCabe, 699 5th Avenue South, and
I'm here to support agenda item number 10(C), the landscaping and
beautification plan of our roads and right-of-ways, and I would like to
think that I'm also here speaking for that silent majority of Naples
residents. Those of us who live here or who have moved here for the
beauty of our community.
You have a plan in front of you that was very, very smartly
produced by your staff, and I congratulate them. I congratulate Diane,
Pam, and Norm Feder for doing a great job in building the roads, and
your management for bringing this in front of you. It's a very
comprehensive plan, very thorough and very detailed. They've put a
lot of time into it.
I've been involved in the median landscaping since the original
Naplescape of 1987 with Ned Putzell, your former mayor of the city,
and Donna as well, going way back, and I'm committed to this cause.
In front of you, I think the major issue is cost. Clearly the issue
at hand is how to pay for this beautification. We're looking at costs
here that are less than one percent on a per mile basis as it relates to
the cost of construction of the road. In fact, they have actually driven
it down point four tenths of a percent of the cost of what the
construction of that road is out there. And I think they have come up
with a very, very viable -- excuse me -- viable plan in how to pay for
this.
I also think that your staff-- excuse me -- additionally, I would
like to make the point here, very humbly, that we are one of the richest
counties in the State of Florida, and I think if other communities
within the State of Florida are able to find the means to do the
Page 193
April 22, 2003
beautification, surely Naples can do the same.
Further, I believe in the investment of landscaping and
beautification, and I believe it is one of the few areas where the county
can spend money and actually get paid back for it. No question that
with investment into beautification, there is a direct benefit of real
estate appreciation.
Look at the investment that we have made into Bayshore Drive,
East Trail, Davis, Golden Gate Parkway, and as Donna highlights, up
in Fort Myers. Clearly there has been a stabilization of the
neighborhoods and an appreciation of the real estate would increase as
to the tax base.
Look at how developers invest in landscape beautification. They
know it comes back in the form of a successful project.
When I see FDOT come into town and widen Route 41 and
improve the interchange of 75 without any consideration to
beautification, I'm personally outraged. We need to be proactive with
any road construction in keeping our eye on beautification and
landscaping and making our community pedestrian friendly. We need
leadership and boldness to ensure that the future quality of life in
Naples is maintained.
I urge your support for agenda item 10(C). Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. McCabe, thank you for being
here today.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Gail
Boorman.
MS. BOORMAN: Good afternoon. Thank you for considering
what I feel is one of the most important issues hitherto unrecognized
in our community.
For about the past 20 years or so, Collier County and the City of
Naples have been growing a quality environment, if you will. And as
has been pointed out, that reflects favorably on every single property
Page 194
April 22, 2003
owner within Collier County.
I think we -- it's time for us to acknowledge that our aesthetic
infrastructure has real value to us and to every property owner within
the county.
This program gives us a basis to move forward in a -- an
organized and rational manner to build on the aesthetic infrastructure
that we already have in place.
To me the choice is clear. The standard for the community has
already been set with Type B landscaping predominating throughout
our roadways. I would encourage you to adopt a Type B with C 1
including street trees along the sides of the road, because being back
and doing it later often just never happens.
I believe that we have the wherewithal and the political will
behind this effort to do a Type B, C 1, up front as an initial landscape
treatment for all road widenings, retrofitting of existing roadways that
were not given appropriate landscape treatments and building of
roadways in the future.
I'm also very encouraged by the interconnectivity of this effort
vis-a-vis looking at our aesthetic infrastructure as not just a landscape
effort. I believe that all of the infrastructure that we build should have
some aesthetic value.
The landscape treatment that is being proposed for the water
retention ponds, be they wet or dry is a case in point where we can get
multiple use out of what has heretofore been a singular use of public
property and property dollars.
If we can create pathways along roadways in a tree-lined
environment, that creates a linear park effect, we get double the value.
If we can use our water retention and water management facilities in a
way that creates a park benefit, a nature appreciation benefit, these are
all things that really cost us very little. We're doing these anyway.
Why not take the next step and include the aesthetic infrastructure
Page 195
April 22, 2003
portion of that so that we get double value out of our furore
infrastructure that we construct.
I urge you strongly to adopt this program, to move forward with
a Type B with C 1 as your base level landscaping and to look for
opportunities of interconnectivity of all infrastructure in an aesthetic
fashion in the furore. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Questions or direction from the board members?
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Question. I'd just like to
understand the mechanics, Jim Mudd.
If we adopt a policy now on landscape standards that implies a
particular level of expenditure and we get into the budget negotiations
in the next month or so and you find the funds are not available, how
do we deal with that? Can you ignore a policy as far as median design
and landscaping is concerned, or do you need a modification to that?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I don't want to be flippant, but I'm
going to tell you you've got two ordinances on the books right now,
and you've ignored them, and that's tree, and part of the
recommendation for staff is to go and fix those, and that's paragraph
three of that recommendation.
All of this is budget dependent upon how it comes out as far as
how the funding is concerned. What we tried to do with staff is give
you a doable plan and give you a menu that you could look at to see --
and visually see it, okay, not just, you know, hear the idea and have a
tough time trying to conceptualize it in your mind, but give you a
visual so that you could take a look at that process, and then try to --
try to be fair to everybody, even the MSTUs that are out there,
because we have MSTUs that have different standards all over the
county, okay? And maybe there's a standard between A and B
someplace that an MSTU has, and some have between B and C in
Page 196
April 22, 2003
varying levels, but we tried to do what we could to lay it out as
straight as we could in different levels, A, B, C1, C2.
We have retention ponds that Norman's building right now on the
major roads that we've never had before. For instance, Immokalee
Road, whenever we get that permit --and I have to call somebody on
that today -- but the -- we're going to have 11 to 13 new retention
ponds out there. How -- and they're going to be beside the road. What
are they going to look like? Are they just going to look like a dried up
hole in the dry season, and then all of a sudden look wet and like a
swamp in the rainy season, or are we going to put something around
it?
Mr. Nance -- you know, we have that standing offer of a
thousand trees that are sitting here, and the reason we haven't
implemented it is because he was going to place those plants with
voluntary labor on non-irrigated medians at the present time. The
likelihood of those surviving because they're smaller plants would be
-- would be slim to none. But if we decide to put those on an
interchange area where we could put volunteers out there and be
safely done, we could do that in a -- in a Saturday morning type
environment with the Boy Scouts and we probably could do
something very good for the community and use some of those
particular plantings around the ponds and those interchanges to make
those happen and still use that generous offer from Mr. Nance at the
time.
But again, to answer your question, Commissioner, it's resource
dependent as far as how the budget is going to do. And what I asked
Diane to do is come up with a recommendation where we could have a
million dollar budget for that and we could see how that plays out
during budget time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have a couple questions. In this
plan, does it include Green -- Green Boulevard?
Page 197
April 22, 2003
MS. FLAGG: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any consideration of adopting the
Golden Gate master plan beautification?
MS. FLAGG: We can -- and I -- we'll take care of that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioners, the
community character plan in there, it tells you the wishes to adopt a
level of service on the roadways. Did not -- I don't think it included
the retention ponds, but that's very creative on the part of staff.
The level that it was supposed to be adopted -- Sally Barker had
to leave. I think she was going to explain this -- was tree-lined roads
not only in the median but off to the side. And what that does, it does
many a things. It actually is a traffic calming device because you feel
that you're so close to those trees, it actually slows it down.
The other thing it does, I think there's a sense of people feeling
safe about walking and biking on the sidewalks. And I know Diane
Flagg, in her previous position, would love to have some kind of a
spacing in between those sidewalks and the drive lane and something
else in there to help motoring, bicycling, walking public as far as their
safety.
So I hope that we can set a goal here, and I think that's what
we're asking today is set a goal, and I think our goals should be high.
I hope it is.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. If you would be so kind,
Diane, as to show me Golden Gate Boulevard on there going out to
the estates. And that would be also a candidate for this particular
plan?
MS. FLAGG: Golden Gate Boulevard is scheduled in '06, yes,
sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. At that point in time
there would be -- there would be watering in the median if we go with
Page 198
April 22, 2003
MS. FLAGG: Whichever--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- that particular level?
MS. FLAGG: Whichever level you choose.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would '06 be too late to hold
those trees in reserve to be able to enhance?
MS. FLAGG: We actually have plans for those trees.
going to use them.
We are
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'm sure we are. I'm just
trying to see if there was some way we might be able to tie it in. They
were originally designated for the Boulevard, but I understand that
without irrigation, it's almost a futile effort to put it in and watch them
die. I'm sure people would be very displeased with it, plus the dangers
of having unskilled people out there trying to plant them in the
median, the liability that's there, and I understand that very much.
But I just want to -- just trying to get a feel for it, because I know
the people live out in District 5, they'll be very excited about knowing
that this is going to be on their -- their schedule in '06. Granted, '06 is
still a little ways away.
What about Immokalee Road when it goes in?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: My district, my district.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, in the plan -- let me make a
correction here. It's in both years. It's in '04 and '06.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Golden Gate Boulevard is in '06 here, but it's also
up here in '04, so they're going to do two different portions of it, and
they're going to start it in '04 and then they're going to finish it up --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So there'd be some benefits that
will be coming in short order. That's important.
MS. FLAGG: And a mile a time is -- a mile to two miles at a
time, it was cost dependent.
Page 199
April 22, 2003
Immokalee Road, in answer to your question, is the blue. At the
completion of construction of the road widening project, then would
be landscaped under this current plan.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Of course, I hope it meets
Department of Environmental Protection's --just kidding. I didn't
mean to go there.
When we start to build the roads, we'll be -- if this plan is
approved, then we'd be probably installing some of the sprinklers at
that point and time and moving forward with it?
MS. FLAGG: What we've done is we've put a team together that
as the road is fully widened, that it will be mined to the landscape
team to landscape the road. So at part -- and they'll be involved prior
to the construction of the road so that anything that needs to be done
for road construction from a landscape perspective will be included at
the front end.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I like what you put together,
Diane, I really do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner
Halas.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
I'd just like to say that this is our opportunity to create an
ambiance forever, and what an opportunity it is. And I agree with
Commissioner Henning, as long as we're going to do it, we should do
it right.
And I would like to make a motion that we adopt Type B, C 1, as
the standards for our landscape -- for our master landscaping plan.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, I was going to say the same
thing, because I was just looking at the figures here, and it looks like
it's -- we're looking at about a half a million dollars more, or, I mean --
Page 200
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's not a lot.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: About a half a -- between Type A
and Type B, we're looking at about $452,000.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: For the total project, with all the
roads?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, I agree.
Is that a second?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's a second, yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
Any more discussion?
All in favor of the motion, signify by
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Opposed?
Motion carries, 5-0.
Thank you, Diane.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, a half a million dollars
here, half a million dollars there, pretty soon we're talking about real
money.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Diane, I would just like to say --
Commissioners, there's one on here -- Wyndemere has been, my
opinion, been shorted in the process of Livingston Road and the
MSTU just falling apart. They've always committed to it. Even
though Livingston Road borders on two districts, I would rather put
Page 201
April 22, 2003
that -- my feeling, put that in next year, and you pick any one you
want from my district to make it happen so Wyndemere has
landscaping on Livingston Road.
MS. FLAGG: So you're suggesting that we move the Livingston
Road, Golden Gate Parkway to Pine Ridge Road up to '04, and take
something from '04 and move it to '05?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, ma'am. Thank you. If would
make that happen, I would appreciate that.
Item # 1 OD
SUPPLEMENTAL TDC CATEGORY "A" GRANT
APPLICATION, BUDGET AMENDMENT AND TOURISM
AGREEMENT AMENDMENT FOR LOWDERMILK PARK
RF. NOVATION-APPROVFD
Next item is 10(D), and this is a continuance from the last
meeting, and that's Lowdermilk Park for rebuilding the concession
stand.
And, Commissioners, I can tell you, I don't know if you have
received the same information that I got as far as backup material --
and what I asked for is the -- what it referred to in the executive
summary was the engineering report. I don't see an engineering report
here.
And, John Dunnuck, if you could guide me, tell me what I'm
missing, I would appreciate it.
MR. DUNNUCK: Sure. Good aftemoon. For the record, my
name is John Dunnuck, the public services administrator.
I believe we have representation here as a follow up to the
previous meeting from the City of Naples, Mr. David Lykins,
community services director, to explain the issue related to a report as
Page 202
April 22, 2003
is alluded to in the executive summary. I think he can answer any
questions that you may have regarding an engineering report or the
decision not to renovate versus build new.
MR. LYKINS: Commissioners, good afternoon. For the record,
David Lykins, City of Naples.
I believe there's some misunderstanding about what the
engineering report really consisted of.
In the beginning, back in early 2000, there was a consensus at the
time to look at possibly renovating the Lowdermilk Park Pavilion
rather than replacing it.
At the time, the city hired a company by the name of
Architectural Concepts to take a look at all of this. When they got into
looking at it, they gave a cost estimate what they thought it would take
to actually renovate the facility. There was no firm that was actually
hired to do an engineering study at the time to give an in-depth or
detailed report, which you may be looking at as a part of this packet.
We thought that the funding would be available relatively
nominal, such as $200,000 to renovate by using the existing pilings
and the decking and stringers that supported the facility.
When we actually got a contractor to give us a deadline and a
price for the actual work, that cost was actually double to what was
anticipated by the firm who did an assessment, not an engineering
report, but an assessment on the condition of the existing facility based
on what the residents of the community really wanted to see there.
We held off on the project. Nothing was done because we
decided as the city, through city council policy, to go and get some
more input from the neighbors, from the users, from the participants,
and to take a little bit longer to look at this.
We actually then contracted with the company to do several
construction projects within the city. OAK was the construction
management at risk firm. They took a look at it, came back with a
Page 203
April 22, 2003
price. If we were to replace rather than renovate, it would be around
350 to $370,000.
We asked them to go and take an in-depth look at it. They came
back with a guaranteed maximum price of 325 to replace rather than
renovate. The problem with renovation was, when we started tearing
up the decking and looking at the pilings and stringers, that there was
a lot more rotted than we had anticipated. No one really took a look at
that. The stringers were very dilapidated. It was not worth saving, it
jeopardized the future of the facility. And as a policy decision, we
looked at replacing rather than renovating.
So the short answer is there was not a detailed engineering report
that happened. There was an engineering assessment by a firm that
was hired to work with the city to look at an original concept of
renovation rather than replacement. It was much more economically
feasible to replace. The lifespan of the replacement would be much
better than the renovation. The taxpayers, the residents, the
community, the tourists get much more for their money, and that's the
report and the request that you see here today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So there is an assessment and
not an actual report?
MR. LYKINS: That is correct. And we apologize for that
misunderstanding.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The -- well, I mean, you know, what
we're asking to do is based on an engineering report. And this is tax
dollars that -- you know, I'm a little bit concerned about the request
when there actually wasn't a report. So there is an assessment. Was it
an oral -- I shouldn't say report because there isn't a report. The
assessment, how did you-- was it a written assessment or--
MR. LYKINS: We had information come back to us from the
construction management company we hired to actually do the
construction of work.
Page 204
April 22, 2003
The company that originally looked at this purely went and
looked at the existing exterior structure. They really didn't pull
plankings up, they didn't look at the pilings that were in the soil, they
didn't look at the stringers underneath the decking. They gave an
overall assessment of what they could visibly see from the outside
because the original concept was to consider renovation.
Once we had the construction management company take a look
at it and firm up the numbers and give us an assessment whether we
could renovate, they came back with numbers that were just off the
scale, so we had to then take a much more in-depth look, and that's
where we wound up with a policy decision. The staff went back to the
city council, they felt it would be much more economically
advantageous to everyone if we would replace because you would get
virtually a 20- to 30-year structure, more than a 1 O-year structure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, I understand that, and it's
probably wise. But I guess my concern is, it reported before the
Tourist Development Counsel based on a report, and --
MR. LYKINS: Well, we certainly apologize for that, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Yeah. And I -- you know, I want to
help out the City of Naples and Lowdermilk Park, but I know that we
use -- use that, and I've been there myself. And maybe there's a
broader picture in this.
We've got a beach parking agreement that has expired, and I
would like to see some kind of resolution for that, two months ago. So
I -- I guess what we're going to need is legal help to make sure that
we're approving it under the right basis, and I just don't see it here.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's my understanding that you
received approval from the Coastal Advisory Committee and the
Tourist Development Council for the original $216,424.
MR. LYKINS: That's correct.
Page 205
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Right? When you found out you
needed an additional 150,000, you went back to the Coastal Advisory
Committee and the Tourist Development Council and they
unanimously recommended that you get this funding? MR. LYKINS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, in the past, it has been our
practice to accept the recommendations of our advisory boards with
respect to the commitment of TDC funds.
And I would really hate to see this particular issue tied to some
other issue like beach parking. I don't think it's fair to use this as a
leverage to extract from the city some kind of settlement on that, but I
do agree it's something we need to settle.
But I -- it generally is our procedure that whenever the Coastal
Advisory Committee and the Tourist Development Council
recommend to us the expenditure of funds, we generally will go along
with it unless there is something horribly wrong it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I can tell you I sit on the Tourist
Development Council as chair, and when this item came through, I
stated I support it because it will give the city the opportunity to
provide that report because it wasn't there at that time, and you were
there at that?
MR. LYKINS: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There was another representative
from the city. And I felt assurance that I was going to get that. And I
don't know how many other TDC members wanted that report but I --
I hope that -- I'm not sure if they were dependent on -- for me to make
sure that the report is accurate in what is being asked.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. I, for one, can
understand where the City of Naples is coming. They've been an
excellent parmer for Collier County for long time, providing the needs
Page 206
April 22, 2003
for public out there. I know there's been a little bit of slippage with
some of the parking places disappearing. I'm very well aware of that,
and I'm sure that we'll find some way to correct that and take it into
our equation when we come up with a final agreement.
Meanwhile, when you take a look at what's available in Collier
County, if the City of Naples keeps stepping forward to offer that
beach access, almost nonrestricted from one end to the other-- and
who uses Lowdermilk Park the most? I assure you, that one of the
favorite places for my family, and I, for one, am going to support this
motion to move it forward.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know the City of Naples will
be there when it comes time for us to negotiate our parking deals. I
have no doubts about that at all.
MR. DUNNUCK: And just as a sidenote, if it helps the
commission and the chair a little bit, we have scheduled a meeting
with the city manager for tomorrow to discussion the beach parking
agreement. Hopefully wrap it up, because that has been something
that's been in the works for quite some time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Like to make a motion for
approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And before we take a vote, I guess I
have to go to counsel based on the information that was given to us
that was not accurate.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I understand
correctly, the executive summary indicates that --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would you pull your mike up for us,
please.
MR. WEIGEL: It appears that the executive summary indicates
Page 207
April 22, 2003
that there is a report and -- but this board has not had the opportunity
to review the report.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. WEIGEL: And that is -- that has called an underlying issue
of discussion at least here in the sense that the board would like to
have had the report to review the items that are there, to understand
the individual aspects as well as the aggregate aspect of the request.
And that report is not part of the record here and has not been
provided to the commissioners independently of the meeting. So it
appears the question is, there is a report in the sense that it's been
stated that there is a report, but there's been an inability to either
produce it or for the commissioners to review it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I am confused. What report are
you talking about?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, if I understand, there was an initial -- an
additional -- excuse me -- an initial assessment that was made by an
engineer which provided the initial information as to the amount of
funding that would be needed to renovate the facility, and then it was
discovered that there was additional work that had to be done, and it
appears from executive summary, and I thought the statement before
you today was that a report was, in fact, provided by a different
specialist, engineer, to -- indicating the degree of alteration, in fact,
absolute rebuilding of the structure as opposed to renovating and
repairing it.
And if I understood the chairman correctly, he'd looked for that
report as chairman of the TDC, had heard that there was a report, but
up to this point and through this meeting has not seen the report, and
that was the question, is, if there is a report, why couldn't this board
have seen it.
Page 208
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: We can probably -- David, maybe
you can help us. We can probably approve this if the executive
summary states what the gentleman said, but also don't we -- if we are
going to do that, should we not do it under the advice of the CAC and
the TDC? Should we take it back through those committees since the
same information was or was not provided? The reasoning was but
the information was not.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Well, the CAC and the TDC apparently
made recommendations regardless of whether they had the report
physically before them or not and accepted the affirmations that were
made by the speakers on behalf of the city and the county staff, et
cetera, that spoke to them.
There's no legal requirement that this go back to the CAC or the
TDC. You could recommend that it do so as a board, for it to be
reviewed with both those agencies consistent with the report that they
didn't see either, but it's not required by law.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So the motion is to accept it
based on a report. And if the board wishes to approve it, maybe the
motion and the seconder needs to amend it, or if their wish is to bring
it back through the advisory boards to make such a motion.
The motion is --
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. The motion was to approve. It did not
state that there was the lack of a report or a need for this board to see
the report now or at some point in the future.
So if the question is, does the motion maker wish to amend the
motion and the second -- person making the second amend their
second consistent with a report or a report to be forthcoming, is the
question for those people who made the motion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So we're okay legally?
MR. WEIGEL: Legally you're okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's my question.
Page 209
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, just a comment.
I think it's a real -- really, really good policy when a chairman of
a committee asks for a report, that he ought to get it, David.
But I have no reason to believe that the City of Naples has
falsified anything here or is trying to get money that you're not
entitled to. But I think that if a report exists, I think that out of
courtesy, it should be given to Commissioner Henning.
But my feeling here is that you've gone before both of these
advisory committees, you've presented the evidence that you need
this, they have agreed that you need it. I'm willing to vote for it, and
the staff has recommended approval, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas, and then
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there any way that you can
produce some -- a report for us?
MR. LYKINS: What I can provide -- and forgive me for any
inconsistencies here. What I can provide is the original Architectural
Concepts' design report summary of April 17th, 2000. That is the only
report that actually exists.
There was someone else that substituted for me going to
meetings with the Coastal Advisory Committee or the TDC, I'm not
exactly sure which one, that indicated a report existed for the
replacement rather than a renovation. That report does not exist. We
did not hire a company to do an engineering report to determine that
factor.
What I can provide, and I have it, I'll be happy to leave it with the
staff, is this preliminary report for the consent of the renovation. That
does exist and I have copies of that here this morning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think something of that nature
should be put into the record just to make sure that everything is
straightforward here.
Page 210
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was right behind
Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, no, I wasn't. I was just looking.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Forgive me. I thought I
was jumping in front of you.
So we have the TDC, which approved it at this point in time, we
also have the Coastal Advisory Committee that gave approval on it,
and I'm sure that when we get the final numbers we get it through, if
there was something seriously wrong, which I seriously doubt there's
going to be -- and I hate to delay this any longer -- we could always
call an emergency meeting if we found for some reason there was
some sort of-- what do you want to call it -- underhanded dealing
going on, which I doubt very seriously we're going to find.
My motion remains as is, and I don't know where the second is at
the moment. I'm sure they'll be back.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think there's a total
misunderstanding, that all I wanted to do is clarify that we are doing
something legal.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine. That's good.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And we got that from the attorney
here that we were within the legal means there, and I think we ought
to just go forward.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So we got our answer.
So there's a motion by Commissioner Coletta, second by Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
Page 211
April 22, 2003
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-0.
MR. LYKINS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING; The next item is -- used to be 17(A)7.
Now it is-
Item # 10E
RESOLUTION 2003-166 OPPOSING PROPOSED SENATE BILL
NO. 654 AND HOI ISF, PCB FIR 03-06-ADOPTF, D
MR. MUDD: It's 10(E). We're at 10(E), sir, which is adopt a
resolution opposing proposed senate bill no. 654 and house PCB BR
03-06 which have the potential to allow telephone companies
unconscionable, unjustified rate increases and prohibits local
government's authority to enforce cable franchise agreements with
regard to services and quality of services related to broadband or
information services.
And Mr. Bleu Wallace will present.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries.
MR. MUDD: Thank you, Bleu Wallace.
Page 212
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
He's always short, isn't he?
Item # 1 OF
COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION PERMIT NO. 59.856/AR-3916,
"CREATIVE HOMES COMMERCIAL EXCAVATION", SITE
BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY 31 sT AVENUE NE RIGHT-OF-
WAY, ON THE WEST, NORTH AND EAST BY VACANT
ESTATES ZON1NG-APPROVFD WITH STIPI II,ATIONS
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item is 10(F), it used to be
16(A)7, commercial excavating permit on 31st Avenue.
Commissioner Fiala pulled this item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Thank you.
It's rather simple. In this report it stated all of the different
criteria with which the trucks must comply, and I just -- it -- when
they can leave, what hours of operation, and so forth. I just wanted to
add about the engine brakes to it.
MR. VALLE: Thank you, Commissioner Fiala. For the record,
Mario Valle with Creative Homes of Southwest Florida.
Since our last conditional use approval and out last excavation
approval, we have since operated under the program where we've
terminated two truck drivers from hauling fill from our sites for the
use of Jake brakes or engine brakes within residential neighborhood.
We have a strong relationship with our customer base, and, in
fact, two of the homes on this street, one that is in place the other one
to be constructed, are very important to us in terms of our relationship
with those customers because our business is predicated on the fact of
referral business.
So we will still enforce that and maintain that policy throughout
Page 213
April 22, 2003
the time that we have the excavation permit.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. That's all I needed to
hear.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner Fiala, for the record, the
accompanying item to this is 17(B), which is the conditional use
permit itself. And for the record, it clearly states all the criteria that
will be imposed with this permit on page four of 17(B).
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there a second to the motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala,
second by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Mario
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0. Thank you.
Item # 10G
RFP 03-3444, JANITORIAL SERVICES CONTRACT 1N THE
ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $1,251,800 WITH BUDGET
AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $222,800. CURRENT
CONTRACT EXTENDED UNTIL NEW CONTRACT IS
Page 214
April 22, 2003
AWARDED-APPROVED
Next item is 10(G), used to be 16(E)3. This is RFP for janitorial
services contract and amended -- and amendment. Who pulled this
one?
MR. CARNELL: For the record, Steve Camell, purchasing
general services director.
This item was moved from the consent to the regular at the
request of staff because of a changing event that occurred yesterday.
The recommendation is to award a contract, to authorize a budget
amendment and to extend the current contract until we're ready to put
a new one in place.
We received an intent to protest the award yesterday from one of
the competing vendors, and for that reason we need to pull this item
from consideration and not ask the board to act on the award
recommendation today.
Normally I would remove that from the agenda without the board
needing to have discussion. But in this case, there's one mitigating
factor that we do need action from you-all on today, and that is that
we have -- the current agreement as has technically expired, and in
order to continue service and to continue to be able to make payments
to the contractor and receive service, we need authorization from the
board to extend the current agreement until we can hear the protest
and bring the award recommendation with the protest duly considered
back to you for action.
So I am asking for one of the three parts of the executive
summary today, and that is for direction to extend the current
agreement until the new contract is awarded. I would anticipate that
occurring in May, but I simply need that direction from the board at
this point --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So move.
Page 215
April 22, 2003
MR. CARNELL: -- to be able to proceed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I'd just ask Jim Mitchell for
any comments on that. I mean, do you have a -- would the clerk's
office have a problem paying?
MR. MITCHELL: Oh, absolutely. If the contract is expired, we
would definitely have a problem with paying it.
So Steve is correct, that you definitely need to do a formal
extension of the contract.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So if we do this formal extension,
there would be no problem with the --
MR. MITCHELL: That would be great.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- clerk's office. Thank you. I just
wanted to --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner by -- the motion by
Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Item #1 OH
WAGE AND RETENTION ISSUES RE: EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICE S- A PPR OVED
Page 216
April 22, 2003
Next item is 10(H), wage and retention issues with EMS. This
item used to be 16(D)5, and Commissioner Coyle asked for it to be
removed off the consent agenda.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I asked for it to be removed
primarily because I hope that someone from union would issue here to
try to explain to us why they did not want us to increase the salaries
and fill 18 vacant positions, but no one's here to explain that.
MR. DUNNUCK: I don't believe you have any registered
speakers.
MS. FILSON: No speakers.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much, Mr.
Chairman. We're finished.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would you like to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I make a motion that we approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
Item #10I
TDC CATEGORY "A" GRANT APPLICATION AND BUDGET
AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,000 FOR
Page 217
April 22, 2003
INSTALLATION OF GATES AT SOUTH MARCO BEACH
ACCESS PARKING AREA. STAFF TO LOOK AT EXTENDING
BEACH ACCESS HOI IRS AND BRING BACK-APPROVED
Next item is 10(I), and that has to do with Marco Island --
MR. MUDD: Gates of the South Marco Beach parking area, and
that used to be 16(A)9.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct. And Commissioner Coletta
asked that to be pulled.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. And--okay. I
have a -- this is going to be to -- explain what exactly it is. It's to
install gates on our parking lot there to be able to shut them off after a
certain hour.
MS. RAMSEY: Yeah. For the record, Marla Ramsey, Collier
County Parks and Recreation director.
Currently, up until maybe six months ago or eight months ago,
we had gates at this location, but when we did the renovation of the
parking lot and added the rest room facility at the location, we also
looked at the -- some of the gates at that time, which have totally
corroded and rusted, and we're needing to replace them. It was not
part of the original TDC application that we had at the location so we
went back for a second grant asking for $16,000 to allow us to replace
the existing gates at that parking lot.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. What are the -- what are
the hours of operation? When are those gates closed?
MS. RAMSEY: Well, normally the beach is open from eight
o'clock in the morning or seven o'clock in the morning to about 30
minutes to an hour after sunset.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. The whole reason I
pulled this, because of my concern on beach accesses. This is another
beach access issue. While people that live on the beach or in short
Page 218
April 22, 2003
walking distance have the pleasure of enjoying it at their discretion,
those of us that live inland are subject to gates and all sorts of other
restrictions.
Now, I can understand some reasonings for it in some cases. But
since these gates have been down, have there been reoccurring
vandalism or--
MS. RAMSEY: Well, yes. Actually we've had complaints from
the condos that live adjacent to our parking lot. If you're not familiar
with Marco Island, there the MICA parking lot, and then there is our
parking lot, and we are up against the condos at that location.
We've had a number of complaints while we were doing the
parking -- the bath room facilities, as a matter of fact, that there were
partying in a parking lot, and we've even found the evidence of the
beer cans and the bottles. And in one instance, there was a car that was
left overnight and a gentleman was sleeping it off, so to speak in the
parking lot.
So yes, we do have an issue with people utilizing that parking lot
after hours, late hours. So, you know, currently, we would like the
dawn to dusk situation, but we could go a little bit later if we wanted
to, but not late.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I would like reconsideration
sometime. I'm not going to oppose the gates. In fact, I'll make a
motion before I finish to go ahead with this, because they do serve a
purpose. We can't have an attendant on duty 24 hours a day, and we
can't expect for total cooperation from the police on a 24 hour basis. I
don't think that's going to happen. So we've got to be realistic.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: They're open 24 hours a day.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, they may be, but-- we
won't get into this now this late in the evening.
But I would like to have some consideration given to people to be
able to have access to the beach earlier than that. Maybe prior to
Page 219
April 22, 2003
sunrise, just be about sunrise time, until well after sunset. There's
nothing more romantic for those that are young and so inclined to
walk along the beach and under the moonlight and be able to enjoy the
surf beating up again the shore, and it's a lot better there in person,
rather than having to watch it on some video.
So I would like to see if maybe when-- we might be able to give
some consideration, not only for the one at Marco, but all our beach
access points, for the idea being that we want to be as user-friendly as
possible.
And with that, I'll make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion and a second on the
floor, and then after I take the motion, then I'll ask if there's two other
nods to bring Commissioner Coletta's ideas back.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is there any consideration in
extending the beach access hours?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You mean about the romantic
walks?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, there's plenty of places you
could do that. I think we're talking about extending the hours of the
beach.
Page 220
April 22, 2003
that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Does it cost any extra money to do
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yep.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, I'd ask you to let us take a look at
that as far as staff is concerned to figure out what the fiscal impacts or
that are going to be, and we'll come back to you and talk about that
particular case.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: More than okay.
MR. MUDD: Yeah. Because we are -- we are getting into the
late hours and we still have a couple more items, and I want to make
sure that you put -- that is a different side, Commissioner Coletta, than
we've ever seen from you. That's pretty good.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'm trying to be super nice
to the people in Marco.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was real nice to the people in
Naples too. I hope you noted that also.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner Coletta, are you also
going to have a gondola and soon (sic) the sunset?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You might hear me sing a little
opera too, it goes along with it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No thanks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item is 11, public comments
under general topics.
MS. FILSON: And we have no public comments today.
Item #12A
SETTLEMENT OF PAYMENT ISSUES BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY, THE CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT AND KRAFT
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., IN CONNECTION WITH
Page 221
April 22, 2003
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORTH NAPLES LIBRARY-
APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. So the next item is the
county attorney's 12(A).
That's a recommendation the Board of Commissioners approve
the settlement of all issues concerning payment that has arisen
between and Collier County and the Clerk of courts and Kraft
Construction.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Move for approval.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I'll second that.
I could just -- ifI could just ask the clerk if he's -- if the clerk is
in agreement with this proposal.
MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Chairman, for the record, Jim Mitchell,
the director of finance.
We have participated very significantly in this settlement
agreement, so the answer to that question would be yes.
But there's a couple things I wanted to get on the record before
you actually take a vote on this. We would just like to say that Kraft
Construction and their counsel, along with the county attorney's office
and the clerk's office, worked very closely together to reach this
settlement. My hats off to each one of those individuals and those
groups participating in the settlement agreement.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Any further questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
All in favor of the motion, signify by
Aye.
Aye.
Page 222
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hold on.
MR. MITCHELL: Counsel just informed me there are a couple
things that he'd like to get on the record also, okay? CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is he signed up?
Yes, please, Tony. Always a pleasure to have you here.
Mr. PIRES: I'll be brief, and thank you. For the record, Anthony
Pires of Woodward, Pires, and Lombardo representing the clerk of
courts.
I think just for the record, and Jim -- I'll reiterate what Jim
indicated, and one of the items was change order 19, which was one of
the items that led to the particular audit in this particular instance, and
I think it's important for the purposes of this board's consideration that
it's recognized, and I think it's part of the motion, that the stated
purpose for the change order 19 was to provide Kraft additional funds,
which Kraft stated would then be provided to its subcontractors with
whom Kraft had lump sum contracts representing moneys not
expended by virtue of the purchase of materials for the project by
Collier County.
As a governmental entity, the county is in charge of state sales
tax on materials and supplies purchased for the library project.
The balance of the unspent estimate resulting from this direct
material purchase program was stated to be the $56,544.42 as
indicated in this settlement agreement as of the date of submittal of the
change order 19.
The clerk thought and believed that this change order was not
supported by the contract and contrary to state statute. As part of this
whole process, we were resolving all these issues, and we recommend
a settlement agreement.
Absent affirmance and ratification by the county commission of
Page 223
April 22, 2003
the cost in terms of the project as reflected in amendment number one
to the contract encompassing to the concept of the direct purchase as
articulated by Kraft and stated to be the understanding of county staff
and consultants, the clerk believed that the payment requested by
change order 19 was not legally supportable.
Part of the purpose of this settlement agreement and the
presentation forming the basis for the board's no end consideration of
the agreement is the ratification of the concept articulated by Kraft and
stated to be the understanding of county staff at the time of execution
by the staff of amendment number one as to the scope, purpose and
implementation of the direct purchase program.
I think that's something that needs to be part of the record and is
part of our discussions, and we've talked with the various parties
concerning that, and we actually handed this out to them beforehand.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And our counsel is in agreement to
that?
MR. PETTIT: Yes, Commissioner. For the record, Mike Pettit,
and I am in agreement with what Mr. Pires has described.
I would just add, too, that that program saved the taxpayers
$87,000, which sum was then used for enhancements to the north
library project, the north library building.
And I think it's also important for people in the public to know
that this project was brought in at over $400,000 below budget, it was
brought in two weeks early. And it's my understanding, based on
figures I received today, that it was delivered at $19,000 less than the
guaranteed maximum price that we had arranged with the contractor.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Thank you.
Any opposed to the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Motion carries, 5-0.
Page 224
April 22, 2003
Item #15A through #15C
STAFF COMMI JNICATIONS
Now we're under staff communication.
Mr. Weigel, do you have anything for us?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman, just two items.
You'll note today in the grease trap ordinance, as I call it, that
ordinance says others have numbers along the side. It had been a
policy adopted by the board in 1995 for the staff in submittals of
resolutions and ordinances to provide in the agenda, published agenda,
ordinances with numbering along the side.
We've discussed this matter with -- amongst ourselves, with the
county manager. We note that in all these years we can't recall
anyone ever, ever utilizing the number system on the side, and it does
require a lot more paper in preparation of the items over time.
So we just wanted to check with this board to see if they wish for
us to continue with that be numbering process. Again, you can see it
in 8(C) of today's ordinance, which was a very detailed, lengthy
ordinance. And, again, no one referred to the numbers on the side of
the page. If they had a question, they went to the page and paragraph
and subparagraph for distinction.
We just wanted to kind of take the temperature of the board to
see if we should continue that practice or move off it and see if it
needs to come back at some point in the future.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How much extra does it cost to do
that?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, it's a lot of extra paper from the offices.
And then what is submitted and published here is duplicated elsewhere
in some regard, so I'd say it's significant, the formatting, although
Page 225
April 22, 2003
done through the machines, through the computers, is a process that
we have down pat. It still is extra steps and time.
But in -- since 1995, I cannot now recall that it's ever been used.
Betty Matthews, yes. Commissioner Matthews asked for it to be
implemented, but it hasn't been used since that time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Betty Matthews is gone, so let's
do away with it also.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you very much.
Now, the second thing is, we have a case that county attorney
would like to bring to the board for a brief closed session meeting at
the next board meeting of May 13th. It's the case known as Terracina,
1.1.c., versus Collier County. It's one of our, quote, adult living facility
cases that involves the attempted assessment of school impact fees.
They sued us in this case just prior to our suing them, and within
a matter of minutes the lawsuits were filed separately. But we'd like
to meet with the board on the 13th in closed session. And if the board
-- I'm going to be bringing that forward as an agenda item, but if the
board does have a preference for a specific time, I'm very happy, of
course, to work with Mr. Mudd and the chairman for a specific time to
bring that forward. That's all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You've got our permission to go into
closed session --
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- to have resolution on it.
County Manager Jim Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we all received a letter from the
Collier County Airport Authority for repayment of monetary advances
Page 226
April 22, 2003
from the Board of County Commissioners to the Collier County
Airport Authority.
I would ask your permission and your indulgence in the fact that
-- to wait and hold on that particular information until Commissioner
Coyle and I have had an opportunity to review their five-year plan,
which they're due to give us on or about 1 May, and then take a look
at some other options so that -- I just want to make sure that they
know we received it, you have it, and we're examining the possibilities
of their particular request.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, I agree with that.
MR. MUDD: Second issue is to let the board know that last
meeting you asked the chair to send letters out about the red tide to
federal and state agencies, and he, indeed, did that and copied our
representatives, not only at the state level, but if it was a federal
agency that he wrote a letter to, he made sure that he got our
congressman and senators from the state to make sure that they were
aware of those particular issues, and those letters went out.
And the next one I'm going to ask Commissioner Halas, are you
going to talk about the 1986 piece?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, yes, that's coming up, and
that's in regard --
MR. MUDD: Okay. I just want to make sure you're going to do
that so I don't have to.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. To start off with, I've got a
couple of items.
Chairman Tom Henning received from the Bonita Beach -- or
Bonita Beach people a deal about the enforcement of code, the sign
ordinance, up on Bonita Beach Road whereby, as everybody knows,
the northern edge of Collier County butts up against Bonita Beach
Page 227
April 22, 2003
Road.
And the mayor, Mr. Pass, is concerned because there's two
different sections there. And, of course, Mr. Pass's area is controlled
by Lee County.
We just recently passed a new sign ordinance, and he feels that
there's a difference there with the people who have small businesses in
Collier County being able -- not being able to put lighted signs in their
windows. And he claims that they had an overlay study, but the
problem is this overlay study took what was done about the year 2000,
and as of this point in time, I don't think they've done anything about
what they're going to do in this overlay study.
So I've talked with staff, I've talked with Jim Mudd, I've talked
with Joe Schmitt, and also talked with David Weigel in regards to
where we stand on this issue. And I think maybe what we need to do
is kind of refresh everybody's idea.
My feeling is that if Bonita Springs is going to go in any
direction, that maybe they ought to adopt our sign ordinance. But
maybe we need to have some feedback.
I -- last night Jim Mudd gave me a large portfolio here in regards
to the action that's been going on. And I went through that last night,
and it sounds to me as though their overlay plan is so aggressive that
they would never get anything done in the amount of time that they
would need to get it done. I don't think they've even got the resources
to get it done.
So I just want to kind of get -- open this up for discussion from
the board, and let us know what your thoughts are on this.
And maybe Joe could give us a little more guiding light in
regards to this issue.
MR. SCHMITT: For the record, Joe Schmitt, administrator of
community development, environmental services.
Commissioner, all I can recommend is that the businesses get
Page 228
April 22, 2003
together, approach the Board of County Commissioners or they can
hire a consultant or they can approach the staff and ask for an overlay
to be done, and they would have to pay for an amendment to the Land
Development Code.
Now, of course, it takes a super majority. I'm not telling you
anything you don't know. It would take a super majority and -- to
identify this area of Collier County as, quote, being exempt, I guess,
from the sign ordinance. Whether it's even worth it to them, I think
they probably should know that -- what your feelings are, but this is an
issue I certainly understand and empathize, but it is Collier County,
and our instructions are that the code enforcement will enforce the
sign ordinance as directed.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Is this in the City of Naples?
MR. SCHMITT: Actually, no--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Or in the City of Bonita Springs? I'm
sorry.
MR. SCHMITT: It's up in Bonita Springs. One side of the road
is Bonita Springs, the other side is Collier County. The side in Collier
County -- the businesses in Collier County have to comply with the
ordinance, and they feel that they're disadvantaged because their
neighbors on the opposite side of the street can -- they have to abide
by the ordinances in Lee County, and they don't have to -- they feel
that -- they feel that they're being treated unfairly.
And Jim's pulling out a map. I think we could put that on the
visualizer.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: If we -- if they decide to go with an
overlay study, they'd have to come up with how much money to have
an overlay study?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, it would take -- the overlay study, of
course, would take direction from the board, and we would--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: There we go.
Page 229
April 22, 2003
MR. SCHMITT: -- have to try and define what that would cost,
or they could hire a consultant. And they certainly -- that's what we
would recommend, they pursue an initiative to hire a consultant, that
they come in and submit for a Land Development Code amendment,
just like any other-- any other overlay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just to give you a little basis.
There's about one and a half miles of Collier County that butts up
against Bonita Beach Road, right about where Vanderbilt Drive would
intersect with Bonita Beach Road all the way to the west to the Gulf
where Lely Beach is located in that area.
There are some small businesses that are located along the south
side of the road that are in Collier County, so they -- at the present
time they have to abide by our sign ordinance. And, of course, Mr.
Pass feels that this is an infringement.
And if you look at other, north side of Bonita Beach Road, they
have the old type of signs similar to what we just went through, and
I'm not sure if-- in their overlay study, if they were going to look at
signage as one of their studies, but this study was done in the year
2000. And as of this point in time, they haven't done anything in
regards to addressing their overlay study that they made for Bonita
Beach Road.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I understand that. But-- and
I'm not sure if I got an answer to my question. Is this area in the city,
or is it in the unincorporated area?
MR. SCHMITT: It's in the unincorporated area of Collier
County.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Got the full picture. So does
the board want to direct the chairman to write a letter to the mayor
stating if he would like to create an overlay, or if the businesses would
like to create an overlay and come to the board to adopt the overlay --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
Page 230
April 22, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Or Commissioner Halas, your district,
what do you -- which direction are you going to get?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just to get something straight. It's
in the unincorporated area, but I believe that in the area-- is that
considered Bonita Springs?
MR. SCHMITT: No, no. That's in the unincorporated area of
the county. Bonita Springs --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: -- is -- here's a --
MR. MUDD: Here's a -- here's a bigger picture. So you've got
Vanderbilt Beach Road that comes up, and then it's that piece right
there that we're talking about on Bonita Beach Road that belongs to
Collier County, and they're having -- they're having problems with the
businesses on one side having more lenient code enforcement, you
know, can have flat roofs, they don't have the same kind of roofing,
they don't have the same kind of frontage, they don't have the same
kind of signs.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They can have crappy buildings.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You've got it, you've got it.
MR. SCHMITT: That's terms already been used today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's a smart growth term.
MR. SCHMITT: It's the businesses on this side of Bonita Beach
Road, and that's actually in the unincorporated area. They're not in the
COMMISSIONER HALAS: To get back to Commissioner
Henning, yes, maybe we ought to have you, as the chairperson, write
Mr. Pass and tell him that if he wants to -- if he's got a problem with
that, that we have an overlay, but that the people have to come up with
the money for the overlay. That's not going to be a free game here.
MR. SCHMITT: We can prepare that, and I'm sure my boss is
going to task me with that, so we'll prepare that letter basically
Page 231
April 22, 2003
advising them on the procedure, to proceed with the overlay, and how
to approach it through the Land Development Code, because that's
what it would be, a Land Development Code amendment, similar to
what was done for Goodland, same type of overlay, of course,
understanding that the -- opening Pandora's box, so to speak, if we
allow these kind of overlays throughout the county, but that you can
deal with when -- if and when they ever bring that before the board.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Commissioner Halas, for
bringing that up.
Do you have anything else?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I do.
There was a memorandum as of April 28th, 1986, and this is in
regards to policy for summer dress code. I dug around in here to
figure out if there was a way that we could be a little more
comfortable up here on the dais.
And it was unanimously approved by John Pistor, who was the
commissioner, and it's summer dress policy for the BCC meetings,
and basically it says, propose that the BCC set policy that each
summer starting the second week of May until the second week of
October, the dress code for the commissions meetings be casual attire
rather than jackets and ties.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Amen.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll make a motion that we rescind
this ordinance.
And there's a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Let's vote on it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't think that's a mandate. I think
it's just stating that, hey, if you want to dress casual, you can dress
casual. Correct?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, it was voted on by the Board of
Page 232
April 22, 2003
County Commissioners. Commissioner Goodnight moved, it was
seconded by Commissioner Haase, and it carried 5-0. So the board set
a policy stating that the first week in May and ending with the first
week in November, that the dress code for the commission meeting be
casual attire rather than jackets and ties.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So it is a mandate?
MR. MUDD: It was a policy that was set by the Board of
County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that was back in the days
when the commissioners didn't even wear socks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Or underwear.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How do you know that,
Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion on the floor and
there's a second to rescind this ordinance, correct?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's absolutely right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's gone.
MR. MUDD: The policy is gone.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
these things up?
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
you have to wear a coat and tie.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
See what happens when you bring
There's nothing that mandates that
That's right, that's right.
Page 233
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: See?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just make sure it's within the
character.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Community character.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anything else, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, that's it. Thank you for your
time.
What a wonderful meeting today. A lot of thought, and Mr.
Coletta -- or Commissioner Coietta, I hope some day that you have a
restaurant and you can serenade us in the moonlight.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In the moonlight. Just got to
find a place to park.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I just want to say, it's been a
great meeting, and I'm heading up to Tallahassee when I leave here,
and I'm going to -- I'm going to be attending the MPOAC meeting,
and wish me -- wish me luck in doing whatever I can to protect our
county.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good. Thank you very much for
going.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. A couple of things. One,
I'll also be attending that MPOAC meeting up in Tallahassee, and
hopefully we'll gain ourselves a couple more miles as far as the dollars
go.
The other item I wanted to bring up to you for your due
consideration, and you know, if you're not interested, you know, just
tell me where to go, which I'm planning on going anyway.
I know I made quite an issue over the sign there regarding the
Page 234
April 22, 2003
noise for the Jake brakes, and I pushed a button a little bit to try to get
somebody's interest, and it didn't work.
So plan B is, would you have any objection if I was to bring back
to you a plan where it would cost the county absolutely zero for these
signs, and maybe we could come up with something to meet the
Orange Tree/Waterway neighborhood?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that direction is just the
opposite of what the board voted on.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They voted not to buy the signs.
They didn't vote against the signs itself.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No. The directions was not to have
no engine brake signs.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
want to go, that's fine. I'll just stop it.
Well, if that's the direction you
But if you wouldn't mind the
community itself paying for a small number of them, I'd be willing to
explore that possibility and bring it back to you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. I heard you say that.
Do you have anything else?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I just hope everybody
sleeps well tonight.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nothing from me.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The -- two things. I want to thank the
county manager for his getting information for me on the agenda. I
have adopted a policy of, whether it be on a Friday night or a Sunday
night, sending out emails to the county manager and copying the
author of any items within the consent agenda, and I get my answers --
my question answered on Monday, and it's worked out great. I haven't
had to be able to pull anything from the consent agenda, and I just
want to thank you for doing that.
Page 235
April 22, 2003
Item #15D
RESOLUTION 2003-167 OPPOS1NG THE REMOVAL OF
TARIFFS ON IMPORTED CITRI IS JIIICE-ADOPTED
The other item is, I received a correspondence from the Board of
Commissioners of Lake County asking the Board of Commissioners to
pass a resolution in support -- citrus -- Florida citrus growers by going
on record opposing the removal of tariffs on import citrus juice, and
they have sent a resolution stating that fact signed by the Board of
Cormnissioners, and it was addressed to the governor, the legislation,
and congressional delegation.
I just want to know if the Board of Commissioners -- now, I
haven't found where there is a time frame where we need to pass this.
And they passed it March 25th, 2003, and I haven't seen anything
where there's a deadline to do this. And I had my assistant call, and
nobody knows up there when there -- if there is a deadline.
So would the Board of Commissioners be interested?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Question for you. Is that -- is that
not a federal tariff?.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what I thought. So it's not
something that our state delegation can deal with.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's probably federal.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Correct. It said congressional
delegation it sent it to.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't mind supporting it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wouldn't either. I think it protects
our farmers here.
Page 236
April 22, 2003
MR. MUDD: And that's opposition to lifting the tariff?.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. MUDD: Without the tariff, the juice industry in Collier
County goes dead on arrival. It puts them out of business.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So is it a recommendation -- or can
we pass a modified resolution today?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I can get that resolution ready to
go.
Here we go on a special meeting, David.
MR. WEIGEL: No, you don't need a special meeting, I don't
think.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I could read it and just modify it if
you want to do that. It's up to you.
MR. MUDD: Or I can get it to you on the 29th when you meet
with -- you have a workshop that morning. We can get that resolution
right there, we can get it done, and we can bring that as an item, and
you can vote on it and then move. David?
MR. WEIGEL: Yeah, we don't have to go that way. We, in the
past, have reserved a resolution number with the clerk. And if we
essentially have the basis, the essence of the resolution, county
attorney's been tasked sometimes to just craft it into resolution form,
substituting the right names, a la Collier County for the other county,
things of that nature, so it could be done that way. If you go on the
record today, take a formal vote for the resolution, it's not just a nod
and a wink, that type of thing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Make a motion that we adopt
a resolution asking our congressional members in Washington, D.C.
not to lift the tariff on imported citrus juice.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second that.
Page 237
April 22, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: A motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
And I don't know -- we don't have any more business, so we're
going to go home.
*****Commissioner Coyle moved, seconded by Commissioner
Coletta and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted:*****
Item #16Al
2003 TOURISM AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES
FOR TOURIST DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL EVENT GRANT,
REGARDING THE CITY OF NAPLES FOURTH OF JULY
CFJ.F. lqRATION, IN THE AMOI JNT OF $507000
Item #16A2
PAYMENT OF NUISANCE ABATEMENT PRINCIPAL ONLY
FOR RESOLUTION NO'S: 90-550, 91-406; 94-252; AND 94-198
STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER
Page 238
April 22, 2003
COIINTY, FIJORIDA VS_ EIJlZABETH CHAMBERS
Item gl 6A3
TRI-PARTY AGREEMENTS FOR SAWGRASS P1NES AND
SADDLEBROOK VILLAGE APARTMENTS - FOR DEFINING
ROI~ES IN THE IMPACT FF.F. DF. FERRAI. PROCESS
Item #16A4
RESOLUTION 2003-144 THROUGH RESOLUTION 2003-148
RR: CODE ENFORCEMF. NT IJF, N RESOI~I ITION APPROVAIJS
Item #16A5
RESOLUTION 2003-149 RE: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE
ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "PELICAN
MARSH UNIT FOUR, PHASE ONE" - WITH RELEASE OF
MAINTF. NANCFi SF. CI IRITY
Item # 16A6
RESOLUTION 2003-150 RE: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE
ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, WATER AND SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "PELICAN
MARSH UNIT FOUR, PHASE TWO" - WITH RELEASE OF
MAINTENANCE SF, CI IRITY
Item #16A7 - Moved to Item #10F
Page 239
April 22, 2003
Item gl 6A8
CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND ESCROW
AGREEMENT FOR SUMMIT PLACE, PHASE I- WITH
WATERWAYS JOINT VENTURE IV, BCC, AND WACHOVIA
FLANK NATIONAI~ ASSOCIATION
Item #16A9 - Moved to Item #10I
Item #16Al0
BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $249,000 FOR THE EXPENDITURE
OF FUNDS FROM FUND 186-IMMOKALEE
REDEVELOPMENT, FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE
IMMOKALEE REDEVELOPMENT AREA- FOR UTILITY AND
ROAD PROJECTS AND FOR THE FUNDING OF AN
ECONOMIC INCENTIVE STUDY FOR THE IMMOKALEE
AREA
Item gl 6Al 1
(COMPANION ITEM TO 17F): FY03-04 (JULY 1, 2003 TO JUNE
30, 2004) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) PROGRAM AND HOME INVESTMENT
PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME) BUDGETS AND
AUTHORIZING FAH DEPARTMENT TO HIRE ONE
ADDITIONAL STAFF MEMBER TO IMPLEMENT AND
ADMINISTER THE CDBG AND HOME PROGRAMS (IN A
SAI,ARY RANGE OF $37~078 - $49,653)
Page 240
April 22, 2003
Item #16A12
(THIS ITEM CONTINUED FROM THE APRIL 8, 2003 BCC
MEETING) $206,000 IN ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO
AUGMENT CURRENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR CONSULTING
AND LEGAL SERVICES FROM CARLTON FIELDS UNDER
THE EXISTING CONTINUING SERVICES CONTRACT FOR
CONTINGENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT SERVICES IN
SUPPORT OF THE CHECKBOOK CONCURRENCY LDC AND
GMP AMENDMENTS, TRAFFIC IMPACT VESTING PROCESS,
DEFENSE OF CHALLENGES TO THE NOTICE OF INTENT BY
DCA TO FIND THE RURAL FRINGE AMENDMENTS IN
COMPLIANCE, AND THE WORK PROGRAM FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF LDC TO IMPLEMENT THE FINAL ORDER
AMENDMENTS TO THE GMP
Item # 16B 1
RESOLUTION 2003-151 RE: CONTINUAL REGIONAL
COORDINATION EFFORTS BETWEEN THE COLLIER
COUNTY MPO (METROPOLITAN PLANNING
ORGANIZATION) AND THE I,EE COl JNTY MPO
Item #16B2
CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,152.75 TO
BETTER ROADS, INC., FOR THE LIVINGSTON ROAD
PROJECT, PHASE III, FROM PINE RIDGE ROAD TO
IMMOKAIJEE ROAD, PROJECT NO. 62071
Page 241
April 22, 2003
Item # 16B3
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE
URBAN IMMOKALEE BAS1N STORMWATER MASTER PLAN
PROJECT (51013) TO THE FIFTH STREET DITCH ENCLOSURE
PROJECT (51725) IN THE AMOI JNT OF $190,000
Item #16B4
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST BIDDER,
BETTER ROADS, INC. FOR THE TRANSFER ROAD
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 69110 BID NO. 03-3453, IN
THE AMOIrNT OF $580,945.70
Item #16B5
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 TO
ESTABLISH A RESERVE FUND IN THE MSTD LANDSCAPE
PROJECT FIEND 112
Item #16B6
VEHICLE LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COLLIER
COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND ATC
PARATRANSIT
Item # 16B7
CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 IN THE AMOUNT OF $22,751.76 TO
AJAX PAVING INDUSTRIES INC. FOR THE GOODLETTE
FRANK ROAD PROJECT, FROM PINE RIDGE ROAD TO
Page 242
April 22, 2003
VANDERBIIJT BEACH ROAD: PROJECT NO. 60134
Item #16B8
WORK ORDER UNDER CONTRACT #00-3184, FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTIONS
SERVICES BY HDR CONSTRUCTION CONTROL
CORPORATION, FOR LAKELAND AVENUE BRIDGE AND
ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION, PROJECT NO. 66042, IN THE
AMOI JNT OF $1477277
Item #16B9
PURCHASE OF ONE (1) SINGLE ENGINE STREET SWEEPER
TRUCK, PER BID #03-3485 - TO ENVIRONMENTAL
PRODIICTS OF Flt. CORP. IN THE AMOI JNT OF $156:447.00
Item #16B 10 - Continued to May 13, 2003 BCC Meeting
(CONTINUED FROM THE APRIL 8, 2003 BCC MEETING)
CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTED RECORDED EASEMENTS AND
DEEDS FOR WHIPPOORWILL LANE; AND APPROVED AN
INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT- FROM PULTE HOME
CONSTRUCTION, INC. AND PR IV, LLC.; AND ACCEPTANCE
OF CASH ESCROW. ALL MATTERS PERTAIN TO THE LAND
ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF A ROADWAY ON
THE PROPERTY ACCEPTED BY THE COUNTY FOR
CONSTRUCTION BY PRIVATE PARTIES OF WHIPPOORWILL
I~ANE- AS DETAII~ED IN THE EXF, CI ITIVE SI IMMARY
Page 243
April 22, 2003
Item # 16B 11
CHANGE ORDER gl WITH BETTER ROADS INC., FOR
MEDIAN MODIFICATIONS ON DAVIS BOULEVARD
(BETWEEN PINE STREET AND COMMERCIAL DRIVE) IN
THE AMOI INT OF $16,740 FROM PROJECT 6001 6
Item # 16B 12
BID #03-3490, FOR "VINEYARDS/PINE RIDGE ROAD MEDIAN
IRRIGATION INSTALLATION", AWARDED TO HANNULA
IRRIGATION INC_ IN THE AMOIINT OF $687111.41
Item # 16C 1
WORK ORDER TO MITCHELL AND STARK CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY, INC., FOR ACID FEED PUMP MODIFICATIONS
AT THE NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT
PI,ANT: PROJF, CT 7005771N THE AMOI JNT OF $657374
Item #16C2
CHANGE ORDER 2 TO DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS INC., FOR
PORT-AU-PRINCE UTILITY REPLACEMENT, PROJECT 73060
AND 70074, CONTRACT 02-3367, IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,000
AND RATIFY CHANGF, ORDER 1
Item # 16C3
WORK ORDER, UNDER CONTRACT #01-3271, FIXED TERM
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR COASTAL
Page 244
April 22, 2003
ZONE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS, WITH COASTAL
PLANNING AND ENGINEERING INC., FOR THE ANNUAL
MONITORING OF COUNTY/NAPLES BEACHES, PROJECT
90004: 1N THE AMOI JNT OF $937825
Item #16C4
BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR THE RE-APPROPRIATION OF
FUNDS WITHIN THE WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT
AND USER FEE PROJECTS - AS PRESENTED IN THE
F. XF. CI ITIVF. SI IMMARY
Item #16C5
THIRD AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH WATER RESOURCE SOLUTIONS
RELATED TO AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY OF
RECLAIMED WATER, RFP 99-2926, PROJECT 74030, IN THE
AMOIINT OF ~550,222
Item # 16C6
CHANGE ORDER FOR AN ADDITIONAL $9,750 IN
CONSULTING FEES TO PUBLIC RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
GROUP (PRMG) FOR A PROJECT FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR
REFUNDING UTILITY SYSTEM REVENUE REFUNDING
BONDS~ SERIES 1994 WITH SF. RIF. S 2003 BONDS
Item # 16D 1
TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE OF SECONDARY
Page 245
April 22, 2003
CONCESSION LOCATION AT NAPLES BRANCH LIBRARY
UNDER CONTRACT NO. 02-3334 "LIBRARY COFFEE BAR
CONCESSION AGREEMENT", WITH PARADISE
CONSI II,TANTS~ lNC
Item #16D2 - Withdrawn
APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY
AGRICULTURAL FAIR AND EXPOSITION, INC. BOARD OF
DIRECTORS FOR 2003-2004 - RAYMOND HOLLAND-
PRESIDENT, DON JOLLY- VICE PRESIDENT, JENNIFER
WARD- SECRETARY, JOHN YONKOSKY- TREASURER,
DAN RAPACZ- EDUCATION, JIM MANSBERGER-
SECURITY, DUANE WHEELER- CIVIC, HOLLY CHERNOFF-
ATTORNEY, AND MARK CREEl. - AGRICI II.TI IRE
Item # 16D3
BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $150,000 FROM GENERAL FUND
RESERVES TO PAY FOR EXPENDITURES INCURRED AND
ANTICIPATED AS REQUIRED BY THE HEALTH CARE
RF. SPONSIBIIiITY ACT (HCRA)
Item #16D4
AGREEMENT WITH TURBOMECCA ENGINE CORPORATION
FOR HELICOPTER MAINTENANCE IN THE ESTIMATED
AMOIINT OF $386,000 OVER A PERIOD OF THREE (3) YEARS
Item #16D5 - Moved to Item #1 OH
Page 246
April 22, 2003
Item #16D6
RESOLUTION 2003-152 RE: NAMING THE NATURE TRAIL AT
BAREFOOT BEACH PRESERVE THE ALICE AND HAROLD
SAYI,OR NATI IRFJ TRAIl,
Item #16E 1
BID NO. 03-3474 AWARDED FOR THE PURCHASE OF
PLUMBING PARTS AND SUPPLIES USED IN COUNTY
REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE ESTIMATING $57,000-
AWARDED TO PLUMBMASTER PROFESSIONAL GROUP,
HUGHES SUPPLY, FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, AND BEST
PI.I IMBING
Item #16E2- Continued to May 13, 2003 BCC Meeting
BID NO. 03-3468, PUMP AND MOTOR REPAIR FOR COUNTY-
WIDE MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT, AWARDED TO
NAPLES ARMATURE AS PRIMARY AND HORVATH
ELECTRIC AS SECONDARY IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT
OF $300:000
Item #16E3 - Moved to Item #10G
Item gl 6E4
BID NO. 03-3487, SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS BUILDING
(C2) RENOVATIONS AWARDED TO SURETY
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $605,182
AND APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT
Page 247
April 22, 2003
OF $163,536 TO FINISH THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
MOVE ALONG WITH THE CLERK OF COURTS 5T}~ AND 6m
FI,OOR RENOVATIONS
Item #16E5
FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
CONGRESSMAN PORTER GOSS TO EXTEND HIS OFFICE
SPACE LEASE ON THE 2Nr) FLOOR OF THE W. HARMAN
TURNER BLDG. FOR TWO ADDITIONAL YEARS AT TOTAL
REVENUE OF $20.00 - TO CORRESPOND WITH THE END OF
HIS CI IRRFNT TF,RM IN OFFICE
Item #16E6
IMPLEMENTATION OF A PROCEDURE FOR REPORTING
AND RATIFYING STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS TO
BOARD-APPROVED CONTRACTS - DIRECTING STAFF TO
COMMENCE THE SUBMISSION OF A MONTHLY CHANGE
ORDER REPORT, IN THE FORMAT SHOWN IN THE
F, XF, CI ITIVF, SI ;MMARY
Item #16E7
CHANGE ORDER NO. 5, CONTRACT #00-3070, DESIGN OF
THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUILDING ADDITION AND
PARKING GARAGE, TO BARANY SCHMITT SUMMERS
WF, AVER AND PARTNFJRS~ INC.~ 1N THE AMOI INT OF $9~000
Item # 16E8
Page 248
April 22, 2003
DECLARATION OF A 1996 FREIGHTLINER MEDIC MASTER
AMBULANCE #20 AS A SURPLUS VEHICLE AND ITS
DONATION TO THE CITY OF NAPI,F,S- ASSET #960122
Item # 16F 1
BUDGET AMENDMENT REPORT-BUDGET AMENDMENT
#03-253 FOR $500 AND #03-254 FOR $15,320 TO PAY FOR
OUTSTANDING ELECTRIC BILLS TO DATE AND FOR THE
REMA1NDF, R OF THE FISCAI, YEAR
Item # 16F2
HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT
FROM MONTELENA DEVELOPERS 1NC., AND THE
MONTELENA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION FOR THE
BENEFIT OF COLLIER COUNTY AND FOR ANY CLAIMS
RESULTING FROM THE CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF AN
ELECTRONIC GATED ENTRY BY MONTELENA
DF, VEl JOPF, RS INC.
Item # 16G 1
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $50,600 TO COMPLETE THE
IMMOKALEE INDUSTRIAL PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
33327 - TRANSFER FROM THE RESERVE FOR CAPITAL
OIITI,AY 1N AIRPORT Al JTHORITY GRANT FIIND (496)
Item # 1611
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE- FILED AND/OR
Page 249
April 22, 2003
REFERRED
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by
the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 250
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
April 22, 2003
FOR BOARD ACTION:
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
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 22, 2003 through March 28, 2003
Minutes:
Community Character/Smart Growth Advisory Committee - Agenda and
Minutes of February 19, 2003 and Agenda and Minutes of February 26,
2003.
2. Local Redevelopment Advisory Board - Agenda for March 26, 2003.
o
Vanderbilt Beach M.S.T.U. Advisory Committee - Agenda for April 3,
2003, Minutes of March 6, 2003.
Isles of Capri Fire/Rescue Advisory Board Summary - Agenda and
Minutes of March 6, 2003.
5. Productivity Committee - Minutes of February 19, 2003.
H:Data/Format
April 22, 2003
Item #16J 1
DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THE PURCHASES OF
GOODS AND SERVICES DOCUMENTED IN THE DETAILED
REPORT OF OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS SERVE A VALID
PUBLIC PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF
COUNTY FUNDS TO SATISFY SAID PURCHASES - FOR THE
PERIOD MARCH 15, 2003 THROI JGH APRII~ 11~ 2003
Item #16J2
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO SERVE AS THE
LOCAL COORDINATING UNIT OF GOVERNMENT IN THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT'S ANTI-
DRUG ABUSE ACT FORMULA GRANT PROGRAM- AS
PRFiSENTF, D IN THE EXF, CI ITIVF, SI IMMARY
Item # 16K1
MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND A
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT TO BE DRAFTED
INCORPORATING THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS
THE MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO
THE ACQUISITION OF PARCELS 102A, 102B, 102C AND 103
IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. 520 FIFTH
AVENUE COMPANY LP, ET AL., CASE NO. 02-1766-CA
(LIVINGSTON ROAD, PROJECT NO. 62071) - WITH
STIPIIIJATIONS AS STATED IN THE F, XECI JTIVE SIJMMARY
Item #16K2
Page 251
April 22, 2003
OFFER OF JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE FEE SIMPLE
ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 177 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. BIG CORKSCREW FIRE DISTRICT, ETAL,
CASE NO. 02-2218-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT #60018)
- $12~900 TO BE PAID INTO THE REGISTRY OF THE COIIRT
Item #16K3
CINCO DE MAYO ANNUAL FESTIVAL TO BE HELD AT THE
IMMOKALEE AIRPORT, INCLUDING SALE OF ALCOHOL
AND WAIVE THE SIXTY-DAY APPLICATION PERIOD-
SATI JRDAY, MAY 3, 2003
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2003-15 RE: PETITION SE-03-AR-3928, AN
ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 02-47, THE ASGM
BUSINESS CENTER OF NAPLES PUD TO CORRECT A
SCRIVENER'S ERROR RESULTING FROM THE
UNINTENTIONAL OMISSION OF THE CONCEPTUAL PUD
MASTER PLAN IN THE TRANSMITTAL COPY OF THE
ADOPTED PUD TO THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF COLLIER
t vArD (ct 9s )
Item # 17B
RESOLUTION 2003-153 RE: PETITION CU-2002-AR-2866
MARLO VALLE OF CREATIVE HOMES, REQUESTING A
CONDITIONAL USE IN THE "E" ESTATES ZONING DISTRICT
PER LDC SECTION 2.2.3.3.7, TO ALLOW A LAKE
Page 252
April 22, 2003
EXCAVATION ON 5.0 ACRES LOCATED AT 4225 31sT
AVENUE NE AND 4235 31 ST AVENUE NE- AS DETAILED IN
PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE
EXECI ITIVE SI IMMARY
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2003-154 RE: PETITION VA-2002-AR-3191,
DAWN WINTERS, REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM THE
REQUIRED SETBACKS FOR THE FRONT YARD AND BOTH
SIDE YARDS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 112 MOON BAY
STREET, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS LOT 112, PORT-AU-
PRINCE SI JBDIVISION
Item # 17D
RESOLUTION 2003-155 RE: PETITION AVPLAT2003-AR3774
TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S
AND THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN TWO PORTIONS OF THE
DRAINAGE EASEMENT LOCATED IN TRACT "A",
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF "CARILLON" AS RECORDED
IN PLAT BOOK 21, PAGES 59 THROUGH 61, PUBLIC
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND TO
ACCEPT TWO RELOCATION DRAINAGE EASEMENTS
WITHIN SAID TRACT "A"- PETITIONER PAID $1,000 FEE
WHICH COVERED THE COUNTY'S COST OF ADVERTISING,
RECORDING~ AND PROCESSING
Item #17E
Page 253
April 22, 2003
ORDINANCE 2003-16 RE: PETITION RZ-2002-AR-3539
VINCENT A. CAUTERO, AICP, OF COASTAL ENGINEERING
CONSULTANTS INC., REPRESENTING HABITAT FOR
HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY, INC., REQUESTS A
REZONE FROM "A" RURAL AGRICULTURAL ZONING
DISTRICT TO "RSF-5(3)" RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY
ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM OF 31 LOTS TO
BE DEVELOPED AS A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION WITH
SOME PERCENTAGE TO BE SET ASIDE FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS. THIS PROPERTY CONSISTS OF 10.3+
ACRES; THIS AREA MAY BE ADDED TO A 26.4-ACRE
SUBDIVISION THAT WAS APPROVED FOR A MAXIMUM OF
79 SINGLE-FAMILY HOME SITES THAT IS LOCATED
IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
IS IJOCATED AT 10401 AND 10407 GRFJFNWAY ROAD
Item # 17F
RESOLUTION 2003-156 RE: THE FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004
COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED PLAN ONE-YEAR
ACTION PLAN, FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANTS (CDBG) AND HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS
(HOME) PROGRAM, AUTHORIZING NECESSARY
CERTIFICATIONS, APPROVING EXECUTION OF CDBG SUB-
RECIPIENT AGREEMENTS BY CDES DIVISION
ADMINISTRATOR, AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION TO THE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE - COMPANION ITFJM TO #16Al 1
Page 254
April 22, 2003
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:07 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
TO~MMI~H E~~~~, ' iRMAN
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
Thes~ m~nutes~approved by the Board on. __ __
preSent¢tt. ~,~ :. ,":'~../ or as corrected
, as
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICES, INC. BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 255