BCC Minutes 09/02/2003 E (Lethal Yellowing)September 2, 2003
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
EMERGENCY MEETING
Naples, Florida, September 2, 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 districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:05 a.m. in
EMERGENCY SESSION in Building "F" of the Government
Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
TOM HENNING
DONNA FIALA
JIM COLETTA
ALSO PRESENT: Jim Mudd, County Manager
David C. Weigel, County Attorney.
Page 1
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS TO CONSIDER DECLARATION OF
LETHAL YELLOWING EMERGENCY
Notice is hereby given that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County will
hold a special meeting on TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2003, at 9:00 A.M. in the Boardroom,
3rd Floor of the W. Harmon Turner (Administration/F) Building, Collier County Government
Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida. The Board's agenda will include:
Consideration of Recommendation of the Public Services Administrator to
Declare a Lethal Yellowing Emergency under Collier County Ordinance No.
2000-23.
All interested parties are invited to attend, to register to speak and to submit their
objections, if any, in writing, to the Board prior to the special meeting.
All registered public speakers will be limited to five (5) minutes unless permission for
additional time is granted by the Chairman.
Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the 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.
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.
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, FL 34112 (239) 774-8380.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Tom Henning, CHAIRMAN
Dwight E. Brock, CLERK
by: /s/ Maureen Kenyon, DEPUTY CLERK
(SEAL)
September 2, 2003
Item #2
RESOLUTION 2003-261 DECLARING A STATE OF
EMERGENCY REGARDING LETHAL YELLOWING-
ADOPTED
MR. DUNNUCK: Good morning. For the record, my name is
John Dunnuck, Public Services Administrator.
Thank you for joining us in this special meeting.
Pursuant to ordinance 2000-23 as amended, we are here today
requesting that the board approve a declaration of emergency for
lethal yellowing in two specific areas that we've identified lethal
yellowing in the county, one's up in the Naples Park area, and I
believe you have a map with you, and the other is in the Grey Oaks
area as well. Under this declaration, we're asking for it to be actually
countywide in case other areas pop up so that we can go ahead and
administer the ordinance accordingly.
Under your present ordinance, what we would do is, we would
post it in the newspaper for 15 days for the affected areas and we'd
go and post those houses in the affected areas and give them 15 days
to follow our inoculation process. Absent them doing that, we would
go ahead-- we would inoculate them and you could proceed with
code enforcement hearings if they didn't follow our ordinance in that
respect.
We're asking for up $20,000 be allocated for this declaration.
We expect that not all 20,000 would be spent in this fiscal year since
we're wrapping up, but that under this declaration over the period of
time leaking into next year, we could spend up to $20,000. Are there any questions?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the members of
the board?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Are we-- will this
Page 2
September 2, 2003
$20,000 allow us to get a handle on it or do we have something that's
already a major disaster?
MR. DUNNUCK: No, this will more than allow us to get a
handle on it. These things pop up from time to time. We still are
actually under a previous declaration in the Poinciana Village area
and down in Isles of Capri as well that we've had to, from time to
time, go ahead and utilize this ordinance under a previous
declaration, so I anticipate that this is a relatively minor cost, but that
we have to address it to keep it from spreading.
MR. MUDD: John, did you tell them which areas
were affected?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, one question, it's highly
contagious and it's -- and it travels by air, it was interesting that you
have some way up in North Naples and some in Grey Oaks, but
nothing in between and I was wondering, how does something like
that happen, do they buy them infected or what happens?
MR. DUNNUCK: It can. You know, Mr. Caldwell from
extension services can describe lethal yellowing if you'd like.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was just wondering if there's --
MR. DUNNUCK: It's one of those things. We have pockets
similar to how you would have a health situation where you try and
contain it in the surrounding area as quickly as possible, but it can be
-- it can be a purchased tree that comes in from out of county or it
could be that somebody transported it, there's lots of variations in
that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So we have somebody now
checking to make sure that it isn't spreading? MR. DUNNUCK: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Dunnuck, the action you're
asking the board to take today is not only inoculation of the palms,
but removal of palms if need be. How does -- in light of the fact of
Page 3
September 2, 2003
the citrus canker in the State of Florida and the action that the judge
has taken in the recent past, is that setting up Collier County to be
drug into the court system?
MR. DUNNUCK: That's probably more of a legal question for
Mr. Weigel.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. I'll be happy to
respond. David Weigel, County Attorney. Good morning,
commissioners. It would seem to me that the parallel that may exist
from the court actions relating to citrus canker and the potential
declaration of emergency and administration by staff thereafter upon
a declaration of emergency concerning lethal yellowing is this, we
have -- we have learned from the court cases on citrus canker that a
judge has -- has ruled, at least from time to time, different judges,
that going on the premises and enforcing the boundary, the
significant aerial boundary around where infected trees are found to
remove other trees has been problematic. Our ordinance on lethal
yellowing, which incidentally is ordinance 72-6 as amended, our
ordinance does not provide for an aerial removal, but rather specific
removal of infected palms as well as the inoculation of all trees upon
-- upon a declaration of emergency, so it should be clear for the
board and then ultimately for the public through the public notice
process that's required under the ordinance, that if a declaration of
emergency is declared for a specific part of Collier County, and it
appears that our discussion today is essentially the unincorporated
areas of Collier County and the municipalities that may not already
have in place a lethal yellowing ordinance of their own, that in all
areas so declared is first a requirement to inoculate as well as an
accompanying requirement for removal. That requirement for
removal is initially upon the property owner. If the property owner
does not remove the tree, the county has the authority and certainly
the ability and, by authorization, the authorization of expenditure for
staff to see to the removal of trees within-- where infection is found
Page 4
September 2, 2003
and confirmed.
If, however, a property owner, and this gets back to the citrus
cancer -- citrus canker question, if a property owner that has a
confirmed infected tree does not allow the county to go forward to
administer the lethal yellowing actions that are authorized, there
would be a code enforcement problem. We have seen recently that
Code Enforcement has had to wrestle a bit with questions of being
allowed on premise,s for whatever kind of code enforcement issues
may purport to exist on the property and staff, through the county
manager's office has very carefully and adroitly not subjected the
county staff to trespass issues in that regard to this point and they've
worked very carefully there, so I would tend to think that if the board
authorizes staff to go forward here through a declaration of
emergency, that they will continue to work closely with the County
Attorney's Office to reduce issues of private property -- both private
property specifically relating to trees and private property relating to
access onto that property. I've been a little wordy, but I appreciate
the opportunity to respond.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, Mr. Weigel, I hear what you
say about what the judge's ruling was on the citrus canker case with
the radius of removal of trees, but I think there were some other
things that were said in there in his ruling and I'm just trying to go by
memory. I'm going to vote on -- based on your recommendations,
that the Board of Commissioners is doing everything legal in an
emergency for lethal yellowing. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, last question. I'm sorry. I
know that I have trees I was advised a few years back were suspect
of lethal yellowing, I was advised I needed to have them inoculated
and I find that I have to have them inoculated, I think it's three or
four times a year. We're not going to assume that responsibility, are
we? Will it be the homeowners who have those trees assuming the
responsibility of continuing the inoculations from here on in?
Page 5
September 2, 2003
MR. DUNNUCK: Well, that's under your ordinance. What you
would do is, you would post the area and the radius under my
recommendation to inoculate those areas and we typically do it
within 100 yards of an infected tree, and then it is the homeowner's
responsibility. Absent the homeowner actually doing it and
providing us documentation that they're doing it, we would go in and
do it and then they would be subject to code enforcement actions
against them, similar to like if somebody owned a property and they
weren't cutting their grass and we went and cut their grass for them,
that's the type of process we'd utilize.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So we don't assume the financial
responsibility of the dollars. Thank you. MR. DUNNUCK: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to make a motion for
approval. I believe this is a quality of life issue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: With staff's recommendations, Mr. --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll say it, that's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just for
clarification, it appears that the board is being asked for a declaration
of emergency for-- under the lethal yellowing ordinance 72-6 as
amended and I want to be very clear about the areas to be affected.
Mr. Dunnuck has talked about a radius around known infected trees
and I think the board has the power to craft the designation very
expressly and specifically if they wish to, but I want to be very clear
that if we're talking countywide or something countywide, unless
we're clearly limiting-- providing some limitation language, then all
properties with a tree in question will have, as Miss Fiala indicated, a
requirement to inoculate and I'm not sure that I heard that -- that
that's the request that's coming from staff to the board, that all trees
of the kind that are affected here be inoculated or merely trees within
Page 6
September 2, 2003
a radius of where -- where infection has been determined and I'd
appreciate if that could be cleared up on the record. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Dunnuck?
MR. DUNNUCK: Absolutely. We have two known areas at
this time. Our recommendation is that in the areas that are
designated and if we do identify that there are infected trees, then
again, we would go ahead and enforce that infected tree with the
removal and that we would require within 100 yards of that area that
they inoculate as well.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But Mr. Dunnuck, it's a countywide
declaration, but we're only handling these two infected areas?
MR. DUNNUCK: That -- no, that's what we have for the
infected areas presently. What we're requesting is that you declare it
countywide excluding municipalities that already have an ordinance
in place, so that if another area does pop up, you can go ahead and --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I'm still a little unclear about the area of
inoculation because the ordinance says upon a declaration of
emergency, it is -- it is required that the owners in an area designated
as a -- under emergency, inoculate the trees.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct, and the area could be
countywide.
MR. WEIGEL: So I hear so far. I'm a little unclear about that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think we're looking for an
area as far as feet, inches, miles. I assume that this is all --
MR. DUNNUCK: My recommendation would be within 100
yards of the -- of an infected tree as identified.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that is included in the
ordinance that you have written?
MR. DUNNUCK: The 100 yards designation? I do not believe
it is, but that is -- that has been the protocol in the past. That's what
we feel comfortable with.
Page 7
September 2, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And this is based upon science
that you have received from --
MR. DUNNUCK: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Tell you what, I feel a little
uncomfortable at this point bringing forward -- or going forward.
Could we possibly get a more definitive answer as to what the
science is behind this?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you have somebody here, Mr.
Dunnuck, that--
MR. DUNNUCK: Sure, Doug Caldwell is here from extension
services.
MR. CALDWELL: Okay. I'm not sure what the specific
question is, but typically we monitor -- we do a couple of helicopter
surveys, aerials, and if we see a suspect tree, we go and take a closer
look at it and some symptoms are just classic. Other symptoms, we
send in samples to the University of Florida, Fort Lauderdale. All
lethal yellowing experts throughout the world and Dr. Nigil Harris
have a process where they can analyze the tissue, send it in and
confirm if it is the disease.
MR. DUNNUCK: I think the question is, why do we do it
within 100 yard radius?
MR. CALDWELL: That's based on Dr. Nigil Harris'
recommendation, so it's spread by a plant hopper and I guess it can't
fly more than 100 yards. I can't tell you specifically.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do we want to increase that
range or is 100 yards sufficient?
MR. DUNNUCK: A hundred yards is sufficient.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then I'll include that in my
motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll include that in my second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Just to clarify, staff is recommending
to remove the infected trees and inoculate within 100 yards or feet?
Page 8
September 2, 2003
MR. DUNNUCK: Yards.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yards, and also any other infected
areas within Collier County are to be proactive and inoculate those
trees or remove, if necessary?
MR. DUNNUCK: That's correct.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if there are any other places
outside of 102nd and Grey Paw -- or Gray Oaks. I've got Bear's Paw
and Grey Oaks in my mind. If we have any other areas besides those
two, we'll give you the designations when we notify you so that
you'll know where those areas are if it has any effect on your district.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Does our legal staff feel comfortable
with the direction?
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Well, what I will do is assist with a
slight redraft of the declaration that's before you. There will also be
a resolution for tracking with the clerk's office. It appears that we
have identified two specific areas here. It sounds as if staff is talking
about that there may be additional areas that are found. I'll work
very closely with them because notice requirements are very
important if we're going to have any kind of a code enforcement
follow-up for failure to inoculate or failure to remove.
It appears, and I want the record to be clear for me, that we are
not looking for, quote, countywide inoculation at this time and I
think it should be very clear on the record so that the notice that we
put out that must go in the newspaper or general circulation 15 days
before enforcement, that it indicates specifically what areas we're
concerned with at this time and if there are additional areas that crop
up later, that we stay in conference on this and keep the board
apprised so that the board can act conceivably at a regular meeting at
that point to do any further crafting or adjustment of the area of
emergency.
It does not appear that the board is enacting a countywide
emergency right now because under the ordinance, that requires
Page 9
September 2, 2003
inoculation wherever the area of emergency is declared, so it looks
like we're going for potentially enlarging it with further information
that comes over-- that comes -- becomes apparent about infection,
but staff has done a very good thing to come forward with a notice of
infection to try to nip it early and we can -- we can assist with the
document that helps do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further questions? Any other
discussion on the motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just one thing I want to make
sure I'm clear on. My belief is that we're giving you the
authorization, because this thing can spread if the wind comes up,
any number of conditions can happen that will move it forward, if
we're only limiting this to two areas, I don't think we're doing justice
to the process itself. We're going to have to come back to the
commission every -- the next area and the next area have to wait for a
commission meeting and in two weeks, it could be disastrous, the
area could expand greatly, that cost could be prohibitive for a number
of people out there to act in a timely manner. My understanding of
what we're putting together here is giving you the authority to be able
to declare these emergencies as they pop up so they can be treated in
a timely fashion. Am I wrong on that?
MR. DUNNUCK: No, I think you're correct. I think what Mr.
Weigel's saying is that he needs to craft the language that will be
consistent with the ordinance to help you get where you need to go
and --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, my question would be,
are we going to have to delay the implementation of this ordinance
while we recraft it or are we going to be able to start --
MR. WEIGEL: No, Commissioner, but we will have a
requirement under the ordinance to get a notice out in a paper,
probably the Naples Daily News, a paper of general circulation
which indicates those areas to be affected, and it appears from our
Page 10
September 2, 2003
discussion that the board is not looking necessarily to require all
owners throughout essentially all of the county to have to inoculate at
this point and that's why we're kind of doing this surgical honing in
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think we're all clear on the
direction of the motion by the Board of Commissioners. Any further
discussion? All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Thank you. Any further business? Great. See everybody next
Tuesday. We're adjourned.
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 9:20 a.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZOINING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
TOM HENNING, ClelAIRMAN
Page 11
September 2, 2003
ATTEST:--~,~3~'~% ',.,,, :
WlOI-}-W~'."I)~} CLERK
These m~nute'S approved by the Board on
as presented ~ or as coxected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING
BY: Heather L. Casassa
Page 12