BCC Minutes 11/18/2003 RNovember 18, 2003
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, November 18, 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
Jim Mitchell, Office of the Clerk of Court
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA
November 18, 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 ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL
LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES
(INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS".
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
1
November 18, 2003
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO FIVE (5)
MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
e
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Pastor Roy Fisher, First Baptist Church of Naples
AGENDA AND MINUTES
Ae
aJ
Ce
De
Ee ·
Fe
Ge
Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
October 7, 2003 Value Adjustment Board Special Masters Meeting
October 8, 2003 Value Adjustment Board Special Masters Meeting (rear half
of room)
October 8, 2003 Value Adjustment Board Special Masters Meeting (front
half of room)
October 8, 2003 Board of County Commissioners/Land Development Code
Meeting
October 13, 2003 Value Adjustment Board Meeting
October 14, 2003 Board of County Commissioners Regular Meeting
2
November 18, 2003
e
He
October 21, 2003 Board of County Commissioners/Collier County Public
School Board Meeting
I. November 3, 2003 PUD Monitoring Workshop
SERVICE AWARDS
4. PROCLAMATIONS
Se
Ae
Be
De
Ee
Proclamation to recognize Abe Skinner, Property Appraiser, for his 35 years
of service and dedication to the residents of Collier County.
Proclamation to designate the month of November as National Hospice
Month. To be accepted by Diane Cox, President and CEO of Hospice for
Naples.
Proclamation to designate December 1, 2003 as World AIDS Day. To be
accepted by Cle Tenerowicz, Anthony Racey and Karen Simander.
Proclamation to designate the week of November 21-27, 2003 as Farm City
Week. To be accepted by David Santee.
Proclamation to recognize Collier County Transportation Road Maintenance
employees, Nancy Summers, Javier Hoyos and Raymond Arca who exceed
expectations with their good deeds and examples.
PRESENTATIONS
Presentation of the Phoenix Awards by John Dunnuck, Public Services
Administrator.
Be
Recommendation to recognize Joyce Ernst, Planner, Community
Development and Environmental Services Division as Employee of the
Month for November 2003.
PUBLIC PETITIONS
Ae
Public Petition request by Mr. Gerald Bums to discuss Kensington PUD.
3
November 18, 2003
Public Petition request by Mr. Bob Stone to establish a resolution to appoint
members to a Charter Commission for the purpose of the study and writing
of a Charter document for Collier County in accordance with Florida
Statutes 125.60-64.
Public Petition request by Mr. F. Joseph McMackin III, regarding City of
Naples Airport Authority, Petitioner, v. Federal Aviation Administration,
Respondent, Case No. 03-1308, United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Item continued to the December 2, 2003 BCC Meeting. This iten,
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. PUDZ-2003-AR-VA-2003-AR-4525,
James B. Malless AICP, of Wireless Planning Services, LLC, representing
Pinnacle Towers Inc., requesting a variance to reduce the required tower to
residential separation dictated by Section 2.6.35.6.2. from a distance of
1,750 feet to 1,060 feet. A variance is also requested from Section 2.2.2.4.3.
to reduce the side yard setback for the northwest guy anchor from 30 feet to
24 feet. A third variance is requested for the tower to exceed the 250 foot
tower height limitation by 450 feet to allow a communications tower at 700
feet in height, as established in the agricultural zoning district within Section
2.6.35.6.2.3. (Companion to CU-2003-AR-4524)
Item continued to the December 2, 2003 BCC Meeting. This ite,,
ree~uires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure bc
provided by Commission members CU-2003-AR-4524 a Resolution
providing for the establishment of Conditional Use "13" in the "A" Rural
Agricultural Zoning District for a communications tower pursuant to Section
2.2.2.3.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code for property
located in Section 3, Township 51 south, Range 26 east, Collier County,
Florida. (Companion to VA-2003-AR-4525)
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Request the Board approve an ordinance amending Chapter 110, Article II
of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, which Amendment (1)
except for Naples Park, prohibits the enclosure of swales within the public
rights-of-way but provides guidelines to permit the enclosure of swales on a
4
November 18, 2003
Be
Ce
De
Fo
case-by-case basis, and (2) authorizes ongoing inspections of, and requires
necessary improvements and repairs to, existing culverts and swale
enclosures within the public rights-of-way.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex partc
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Item continued froJr
the October 28, 2003 BCC Meeting. PUDZ-2003-AR-3607, Jeff
Davidson, PE, of Davidson Engineering Inc., representing Barton and
Wendy Mclntyre and Joseph Magdalener, requesting changes to the existing
Nicaea Academy PUD Zoning. The proposed changes to the PUD
document and master plan will eliminate the uses of private school and
assisted living facility and allow for a minimum of 580 residential dwelling
units. The property to be considered for this rezone is located on the east
side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) south of the Crystal Lake PUD, in
Section 26, Township 48 south, Range 26 east, Collier County, Florida.
This property consists of 119+ acres.
Item continued from the October 28, 2003 BCC Meeting. Approve an
ordinance to be known as the Advanced Broadband Infrastructure
Investment Ordinance, establishing an advanced broadband infrastructure
investment program available to eligible businesses to encourage private
sector investment in advanced broadband infrastructure.
Item continued from the October 28, 2003 BCC Meeting. Approve an
ordinance to be known as the Job Creation Investment Ordinance; approve
an associated budget amendment for $400,000; establish the job creation
investment program available to eligible businesses to mitigate the economic
effects of increased development fees and relocation or expansion costs.
Item continued from the October 28, 2003 BCC Meeting Approve an
ordinance to be known as the Fee Payment Assistance Ordinance; establish a
Fee Payment Assistance Program allocating $950,000 to eligible businesses
to mitigate the economic effects of increased impact fee rates.
Item continued from the October 28~ 2003 BCC Meeting Approve an
ordinance to be known as the Property Tax Stimulus Ordinance; establish a
property tax stimulus program available to eligible businesses to mitigate the
economic effects of increased relocation and expansion costs.
5
November 18, 2003
e
10.
Ge
Item continued from the October 28~ 2003 BCC Meeting. Adoption of an
ordinance amending Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances, as amended by Ordinance No. 2001-13, the Collier County
Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, 2001-13, as amended, by establishing a
deferral program for the Immokalee Area to reduce the economic effects of
increased impact fee rates.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Ae
Item continued from the October 28, 2003 BCC Meeting. Impact fee
credits for existing building or structures. (Commissioner Henning)
Appointment of members to the Black Affairs Advisory Board.
Appointment of members to the Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU
Advisory Committee.
Recommendation of adopting a resolution to dissolve the Health and Human
Services Advisory Committee due to meeting goals and objectives set forth
by the Board of County Commissioners and to provide a final report of
activities of the committee. (Commissioner Coletta)
COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
Ce
Approve the settlement in the lawsuit entitled Collier County v. WCI
Communities, Inc., to allow construction of the Vanderbilt Beach parking
garage. (John Dunnuck, Public Services Administrator.)
Approve a purchase agreement for $635,000 and accept a warranty deed for
land located within the area known as the Gateway Triangle for the purpose
of stormwater retention, contingent upon an environmental audit suggesting
only minimal concerns (or none at all) and give staff direction and approval
with regard to future purchases for this project. (Norman Feder,
Transportation Services Administrator.)
To obtain Board approval to award RFP #03-3505 ansportanon Roadway
"Tr ' "
Asset Inventory Database" and authorize staff to commence negotiations.
Estimated fiscal impact to be $250,000. ('Norman Feder, Transportation
Services Administrator.)
6
November 18, 2003
11.
12.
13.
14.
Presentation of Collier County's 2003-2004 Legislative Priorities Program.
(Beth Walsh, Assistant to the County Manager)
Ee
Adopt a resolution authorizing condemnation of temporary easement
interests required for the construction of a six-lane section of Vanderbilt
Beach Road between Airport Road and Collier Boulevard (CR 951) (Capital
Improvement Element Nos. 24 and 63, Project No. 63051). Estimated fiscal
impact: $665,900. (Norman Feder, Transportation Services Administrator)
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Ae
Approval of settlement agreement and mutual release between Collier
County, Texas Industries, N.V., and Collier Cultural and Educational Center
in reference to Case No. 01-4571-CA-HDH that is now pending in the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit Court for Naples, Collier County, Florida.
Approval of Resolution No. 2003- which authorizes the expenditure by
the Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board of funds in an amount less than $60.00
for a recognition plaque to be awarded to the "Hispanic Affairs Advisory
Board Citizen of the Year".
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
AJ
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
Item continued from the October 28, 2003 BCC Meeting, Request
to grant final approval of the roadway (private), drainage, water and
7
Novombor '18, 2003
2)
3)
sewer improvements for the final plat of "Links at the Strand". The
roadway and drainage improvements will be privately maintained, the
water and sewer improvements will be maintained by Collier County.
Authorization for the Environmental Services Staff to approve off site
relocation of gopher tortoises for Horse Creek Estates (formally
known as Little Palm Island) prior to final plat approval.
Execute the Participating Party Agreement (PPA) with the Florida
Agricultural Products, Inc., to occupy the Immokalee Airport
Manufacturing Facility II and comply with the State of Florida Small
Cities Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Agreement and
approve budget amendments in the amount of $21,000 to allocate
funding for leasehold improvements to accommodate the tenant
needs.
4)
S)
6)
Board of County Commissioners adopt resolution as recommended by
the Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority to support
continued inclusion of Local-Sources-First policy contained in
Chapter 373, Florida Statutes, and oppose any amendment to Florida's
Water Resource Policy which will allow, encourage or promote water
transfers from one geographic area into other geographic areas.
Request to approve for recording the final plate o McCarty f,,
Subdivision" and approval of the Standard Form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
Lien Resolutions-Code Enforcement Case Numbers:
2003051172/Barbara L. Galloway; 2003050814/Norman Snellings;
2003080456/Dominguez, et al, John R.; 2002120967/Lewis Tr.,
Evelyn G; 2003080900/Hu11, Richard and Rosana; 2003080900/Hu11,
Richard and Rosana; 2003070998/Silver Trs., Stuart;
2003050760/Dominguez, et al, John R.; 2002120283/Gray, Est.,
Charlie Mae; 2003010033/Ramirez, Licimaco; 2003050823/Buitrago,
Alvaro; 2003070388/Patton, Lorraine and Ellison, Nicole;
2003060309/Caspain Builders, LLC; 2003080928/Wilkinson-Meffert
Construction Co., 2003070373/Wilkinson-Meffert Construction Co;
2003070376/Wilkinson-Meffert Construction Co;
2003070375/Wilkinson-Meffert Construction Co;
8
November 18, 2003
2003070378/Wilkinson-Meffert Construction Co;
2003040809/Montclair Fairway Estates Bldg, Corp;
2003060185/Fenton, Bonnie; 2003060304/Avila, Filomeno and
Maria; 2003070439/Wisniewski, Leonard; 2003070528/Schumacher,
Hermann; and 2003050827/LaRue, Claude.
7)
Approval of the mortgage and promissory note granting a two
hundred thousand ($200,000) dollar loan to Creative Choice Homes
XIV, Ltd., through the Affordable Housing Rental Development
Assistance Program.
8)
That the Board of County Commissioners authorize the Engineering
Services Department to petition the South Florida Water Management
District to delegate a portion of the Environmental Resources
Permitting Program.
9)
Petition CARNY-2003-AR-5015, Pastor Ettore Rubin, c.s., Our Lady
of Guadalupe Church, requesting permit to conduct a carnival from
November 26 through November 30, 2003, on the church property
located at 207 South 9th Street in Immokalee.
Request by the Lake Trafford Task Force for reimbursement of a
permit for amplified music for a free concert given by the United
States Navy Band Country Currents to be held November 16, 2003.
Board of County Commissioners to provide direction to staff to
amend the redevelopment plan applicable to the Immokalee
Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) to authorize the use of the
specified tax increment financing funds for the Immokalee Residential
Impact Fee Deferral Program, Fee Payment Assistance Program, or
Property Tax Stimulus Program, as a partial funding source for the
programs as recommended by the Immokalee Community
Redevelopment Advisory Board and the Community Redevelopment
Agency.
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
l)
Item continued from the October 28~ 2003 BCC Meeting. Request
the Board approve a resolution implementing certain procedures and
9
November 18, 2003
Ce
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
guidelines to standardize Traffic Impact Studies (TIS).
Request the Board approve a resolution to amend the Construction
Standards Handbook for work within the public rights-of-way, by (1)
permitting only one driveway access for lots having fi'ontage of less
than 100 feet, subject to case-by-case review of requests for deviation
from this policy, and (2) eliminating the requirement for securing a
permit to perform turf maintenance in public rights-of-way.
Approve a resolution to allow the Chairman of the Board of County
Commissioners to enter into a joint project agreement (JPA) with the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to provide for the
construction of Phase Two of the countywide Advanced Traffic
Management System by Collier County.
This item has been deleted.
Authorization to increase Collier Area Transit monthly bus pass fare
and establish an express daily fare and monthly premium bus pass.
Approve Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $3,830,285.95 to
Apac-Florida, Inc., to incorporate two additional travel lanes to the
Immokalee Road and Utility Improvement Project, from CR 951 to
43rd Avenue NE, Project No. 60018. (Bid No. 02-3419)
This item has been deleted.
Board approval to utilize Transit Enhancement Funds (313) to
purchase four new transit buses under State Contract Number FVPP-
02-MD, trolley decal wraps and necessary equipment (in the estimated
amount of $547,248).
Board approval of Adopt-A-Road Program Agreements at the Board
of County Commissioners meeting on November 18, 2003.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
1)
Approve a work order amendment, under Contract #01-3271, Fixed
Term Professional Engineering Services for Coastal Zone
Management Projects, with Humiston and Moore Engineers for Work
10
November 18, 2003
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
Order HM-FT-02-07, Hideaway Beach Renourishment Design,
Project 90502, for an additional $1,262.50.
Authorize a work order to Professional Service Industries (PSI) under
Contract No. 03-3427 ("Environmental Engineering, Remediation and
Restoration Services for Collier County") for design services for the
improvements to the Naples Landfill Household Hazardous Waste
Center, truck scales, scalehouse and County landfill operations center
in the amount not to exceed $125,000.
Award Bid #03-3566 to Atlantic Truck Center and approve budget
amendment for the purchase of one replacement roll-off truck in the
amount of $98,285.00.
Waive formal competition for the purchase of 200 remote transmitting
units and standardize the acquisition of radio telemetry for wastewater
pumping stations on data flow systems, in the amount of $1,333,307
for Project 73922.
Award a contract to Douglas N. Higgins, Inc. for construction of the
Reuse Water System Service Connections, Phase 2, Bid 03-3560,
Project No. 74020, in the amount of $577,000.
Approve the purchase of a 6.66-acre site on 9th Street SW, Naples,
Florida, located adjacent and contiguous to the Raw Water Booster
Pumping Station at a cost not to exceed $198,985 (Project 71008).
Accept and authorize the Chairman to execute a grant agreement from
the South Florida Water Management District in the amount of
$100,000 for the Manatee Road Four New Potable Water Aquifer
Storage and Recovery (ASR) Wells System, Project 70157.
Amend Work Order CDM-FT-02-5 with Camp Dresser McKee for
professional engineering services for the Manatee Road Four New
Potable Water Aquifer Storage and Recovery Wells Project, Contract
00-3119, in the amount of $383,310, Project No. 70157.
Pursuit of legislative support for wastewater and storm water grants
under the Florida Water Quality Improvement and Water Restoration
Grant Program.
November 18, 2003
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
Authorize the expenditure of budgeted funds for the development of
Best Friend Park.
2)
3)
4)
5)
Award contract for RFP 03-3463 "Parks and Recreation Management
Software" to Class Software Solutions in the amount of $72,337.50.
Approval of a Certificate of Public Convenience and necessity for the
Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department.
Recommend that the Chairman sign an agreement with the Agency for
Health Care Administration that would authorize the use of $164,280
from the FY '04 Human Services Department budget to be considered
part of a local match requirement to obtain State and Federal funding
to operate a primary care clinic in the Greater Naples community.
Authorize a budget amendment recognizing Community Development
Block Grant revenue in the amount of $684 for the Human Services
Department to provide prescription medications to low income
residents in Immokalee.
6)
Approve the purchase of a TelestaffAutomated Staffing System from
Principal Decision Systems International (PDSI) in the amount of
$38,790 to be purchased with the State of Florida 100% grant funds.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1)
2)
3)
Approve extension of Contract 02-3345 Annual Contract for
Underground Utility Contracting Services.
Approve extension of Contract 02-3359 Annual Contract for
Telemetry Service.
Request approval from the Board of County Commissioners to
provide funds from operating budgets for high speed internet service
for select management staff who require access to County data
resources from their homes.
12
November 18, 2003
4)
Recommendation to award Bid No. 04-3574, Appraisal Services for
GAC Land Trust. (Estimated value not to exceed $5,000.00)
5)
Approve and authorize the execution of a partial release of easement
for a portion of that certain temporary beach restoration easement
recorded in Official Records Book 2066, Pages 917-920. The total
cost of this request will not exceed $10.50.
6)
Recommendation to award RFP No. 03-3555, Bi-Weekly 30-Minutes
News Magazine Television Show (estimated value $60,000.00).
7)
Recommendation to award Bid No. 03-3563, Communications
Services. (Estimated value $50,000.00)
8)
Recommendation to approve Cigna Dental Plan as the provider of
group dental insurance coverage.
9)
Recommendation to declare certain County-Owned property as surplus
and authorize a sale of the surplus property on December 13, 2003.
lo)
Report and ratify staff-approved change orders and changes to work
orders to Board approved contracts.
Approve a budget amendment in the amount of $94,893 to execute
Change Order No. 1 increasing Contract No. 02-33 77 with Brooks
and Freund, LLC, for the construction of the North Naples
Government Service Center.
Approve selection committee ranking of firms for contract
negotiations for RFP 03-3549, "Consultant Services for Developing a
Public Land Survey Section (PLSS) base layer for the County's
Geographic Information System (GIS)." (Estimated dollar amount of
contract is $250,000.)
COUNTY MANAGER
1)
Approve Agreement #04HM-9-09-21 - 15-001 between the State of
Florida, Department of Community Affairs and Collier County in the
amount of $83,640 (75% State/25% Local) to provide wind protection
to eight (8) public safety facilities as specified in Collier County's
13
November 18, 2003
Gm
local mitigation strategy and approve a budget amendment to
recognize and appropriate revenue.
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
He
Ke
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1)
Commissioner Fiala's request for approval for payment to attend the
Lake Trafford Lives On event.
2)
Commissioner Halas' request for approval for payment to attend the
Lake Trafford Lives On event.
3)
Commissioner Coletta's request for approval for payment to attend
the Lake Trafford Lives On event.
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1)
Recommendation to adopt the budget amendment appropriating carry
forward and expenditure budgets for open purchase orders for non-
project funds and for unexpended budget for project funds at the end
of fiscal year 2003.
2)
Request that the Board of County Commissioners approve a budget
amendment for Wireless 911 expense related to GIS mapping and 911
data base in the amount of $53,000.
3)
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
and authorize the expenditure of county funds to satisfy said
purchases.
COUNTY ATTORNEY
14
November 18, 2003
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Acquisition of
Parcel 130 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. David J. Frye, et al,
Golden Gate Parkway Project No. 60027.
Approve the Stipulated Final Judgment relative to the Acquisition of
Parcel 132 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. David J. Frye, et al,
Golden Gate Parkway Project No. 60027.
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
Parcel 120 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Calusa Pines Golf
Club LLC, et al, Case No. 02-5140-CA (Immokalee Road, Project No.
60018).
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
Parcel 112 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Norma E. Banas, et
a/, Case No. 02-5137-CA (Immokalee Road, Project No. 60018).
This item has been deleted.
17.
6)
Recommend that the Board consider ratifying a settlement agreement
in the case of Emerald Lakes Residents' Association v. Collier
County, Case No. 02-2364-CA.
7)
Approve the settlement agreement relative to a code enforcement lien
imposed on property located on 1020 DeSoto Boulevard, Naples,
Florida, and upon transfer of property to Collier County, authorize the
execution and recording of a release of lien.
8)
Approve the mediated settlement as to Parcel 125,702, 703, 825A and
825B in the lawsuit entitled Collier County v. Edith G. Street, et al,
(Goodlette-Frank Road Project 60134). Total cost of $346,250.
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
15
November 18, 2003
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.
Ae
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members Petition SNR-2003-
AR-4055, Peter Goodin, representing Oakes Estates Advisory, Inc.,
requesting a street name change from 12th Avenue Northwest to Bur Oaks
Lane, which street is located in Unit 96, of the Golden Gate Estates
Subdivision, located in Section 32, Township 48 south, Range 26 east,
Collier County, Florida.
Be
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members Petition SNR-2003-
AR-4058, Peter Goodin, representing Oakes Estates Advisory Inc.,
1 th
requesting a street name change from 0 Avenue Northwest to English
Oaks Lake, which street is located in Unit 96, of the Golden Gate Estates
Subdivision, located in Section 32, Township 48 south, Range 26 east,
Collier County, Florida.
Ce
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members CU-2003-AR-3906 St.
Paul's Antiochian Orthodox Church, requesting Conditional Uses 7, 11 and
16 in the "A" Rural Agricultural with Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO)
Zoning District per LDC Section 2.2.2.3.7, to allow a church/place of
worship, a child day care center and an assisted living facility on 8.3+ acres
located on the west side of River Road, abutting the south side of Immokalee
Road in Section 30, Township 48 south, Range 27 east, Collier County,
Florida.
De
To adopt a resolution approving amendments to the Fiscal Year 2002-03
Adopted Budget.
16
November 18, 2003
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
17
November 18, 2003
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Everybody come to order.
Welcome to the Board of Commissioners for Collier County's
meeting of October or November 18th, 2003.
Invocation will be led by Pastor Roy Fisher of First Baptist
Church of Naples, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, and County
Attorney David Weigel will lead us in that.
PASTOR FISHER: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would you all rise.
PASTOR FISHER: Good morning. It's a privilege to be here.
I'm thankful that we can have U-Tums in Florida. Let us pray
together.
Almighty God, our loving eternal father, we are thankful for this
morning. We are thankful for this new day. We are so grateful for all
of your blessings to us. And Lord, especially today to remember the
family of Lorenzo Walker. We pray, Lord, that you will be a comfort
and a strength to them, and we want to thank you for all that he was
able to do here in Collier County.
We thank you for our county. We thank you for the
commissioners. We pray, Lord, that you will give them the wisdom
and the courage that they need in the decisions that have to be made;
that, Lord, ethically and morally and will certainly be to the full
integrity, Lord, that is second to none; and that, Lord, you will
continue to bless this county.
We are grateful for all of your blessings, and as Thanksgiving
Day fast approaches, Lord, we acknowledge that you have blessed us
beyond our deserving. So be with this meeting, Lord. In every
decision that's got to be made, may you be glorified in and through
everything. And it's in the name of Jesus that we pray. Amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Pastor.
2
November 18, 2003
Item #2A
REGULAR, SUMMARY, AND CONSENT AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
Thank you, David Weigel. Mr. Weigel, do you have any additions,
corrections or deletions to today's agenda?
MR. WEIGEL: No, I don't, thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager, you walk us
through the change list, please. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
Agenda changes, Board of County Commissioners meeting,
November 18, 2003.
First item, continue 10(C) to December 2nd, 2003, to obtain
board approval to award RFT#03-3505, transportation roadway asset
inventory database and authorize staff to commence negotiation.
Estimated fiscal impact is $250,000. That's at staffs request.
The second item. Withdraw item 10(E), which is adopt a
resolution authorizing condemnation of temporary easement interests
required for the construction of a six-lane section of Vanderbilt Beach
Road between Airport Road and Collier Boulevard, which is County
Road 951. Estimated fiscal impact is $665,900 --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: County Manager, I think some of
the people say they can't hear back there in the back. Maybe we can
mm the volume up a little bit.
MR. MUDD: The second item was to withdraw item 10(E),
which was the condemnation of temporary easement interest required
for the construction of a six-lane section of Vanderbilt Beach Road
between Airport Road and Collier-- Collier Boulevard. The estimated
fiscal impact of that item was $665,900, and that was at staffs request.
The next item, the third item, is move item 16(A) 10 to 10(F),
and that's a request by the Lake Trafford Task Force for
3
November 18, 2003
reimbursement of a permit for amplified music for a fee -- a free
concert given by the United States Navy Band Country Currents to be
held. That was on November 16th, 2003, and that's at Commissioner
Coyle's request.
The next item is move item 16(B) 6 to item 10(G), and that's to
approve change order number one in the amount of three million,
eight hundred and -- eight hundred and thirty thousand, two hundred
eight-five dollars and ninety-five cents to Apac-Florida, Inc., to
incorporate two additional travel lanes to the Immokalee Road and
Utility Improvement Project for County Road 951 to 43rd Avenue
Northeast, which is project number 60018, that's bid number 02-3419,
and that's at Commissioner Halas's request.
Next item is continue item 16(D) 1 to December 2nd, 2003, and
that's to authorize the expenditure of budgeted funds for the
development of Best Friends (sic) Park, and that's at staff's request.
Item 16(K) 8 is the next item, and this is just a correction to the --
to the item as far as the executive summary is concerned. It should
state, in the fiscal impact statement you should have the following
sentence, in addition, county will incur closing costs including title
insurance not to exceed $3,000, and that's at staff's request.
Item 17(B) should read, English Oaks Lane rather than English
Oaks Lake, okay? So it's a road and not a lake that they're asking to
be renamed.
And the last item is to continue item 17(C) to December 2nd,
2003, and that's Conditional Use 2003-AR-3906, and that's St. Paul's
Antiochian Orthodox Church requesting conditional uses, seven, 11,
and 16 in the "A" rural agriculture for mobile home overlay zoning
district per the Land Development Code section 2.2.2.3.7 to allow a
church/place of worship, a child day care center, and an assisted living
facility on 8.3 acres located on the west side of River Road abutting
the south side of Immokalee Road in section 30, township 48 south,
range 27 east, Collier County, Florida, and that's at staff's request.
4
November 18, 2003
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Halas, do you
have any ex parte on today's summary agenda or any changes --
additional changes to the agenda today?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have no changes to the agenda,
and I have no ex parte.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No changes, no ex parte.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I have, on item 17(A) and 17(B), a
change of name off of Oaks Boulevard. I have some correspondence
from emails to letters on this item.
I have no changes to today's agenda.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no changes and I have no ex
parte disclosures on the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you.
I have a request from Clarence Tears, Lake Trafford Task Force,
on the refund for the permit. They just as soon pull it. They don't
think it's worth the commission's time for $40 to consider it, and so,
with your permission, I'd like to have that just removed from the
agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any objections to that--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: None.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: None.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- the amendment to today's agenda,
removing that one item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, sir.
And also, I have no other changes, and I have no disclosures
under the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Entertain a motion to accept --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So move.
5
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- today's regular, consent and
summary agenda as amended.
Motion by Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 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 unanimously.
6
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSlONER~' MEETING
November 18~ 200_3
Continue Item 10C to December 2 2003 BCC meetin : To obtain Board approval
to award RFP #03-3505 ,,Transportation Roadway Asset Inventory Database" and
authorize staff to commence negotiations. Estimated fiscal impact to be $250,000.
(Staff request.)
Withdraw Item 10E_'. Adopt a resolution authorizing condemnation of temporary
~asement interests required for the construction of a six-lane section of
Vanderbilt Beach Road between Airport Road and Collier Boulevard (CR 951)
(Capital Improvement Element Nos. 24 and 63, Project No. 63051). Estimated
fiscal impact: $665,900. (Staff request.)
Move 16(A)10 to 10F: Request by the Lake Trafford Task Force for reimbursement
of a permit for amplified music for a free concert given by the United States Navy
Band Country Currents to be held November 16, 2003. (Commissioner Coyle
request.)
Move 16(B)6 to 10G: Approve Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $3,830,285.95
to Apac-Florida, Inc., to incorporate two additional travel lanes to the Immokalee
Road and Utility Improvement Project, from CR 951 to 43rd Avenue NE, Project No.
60018. (Bid No. 02-3419) (Commissioner Halas request.)
Continue Item 16 D 1 to December 2 2003 BCC meetin . Authorize the
expenditure of budgeted funds for the development of Best Friend Park. (Staff
request.)
~ The fiscal impact statement should include the following sentence:
"In addition, County will incur closing costs, including title insurance, not to
exceed $3,000. (Staff request.)
Item 17B'_. Should read" · · · English Oaks Lane" (rather than English Oaks
"Lake").
Continue Item 17C to December 2 2003 BCC meetin . CU.2003-AR-3906 St. Paul's
Antiochian Orthodox Church, requesting Conditional Uses 7, 11 and 16 in the "A"
Rural Agricultural with Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) Zoning District per LDC
Section 2.2.2.3.7, to allow a church/place of worship, a child day care center and
an assisted living facility on 8.3+ acres located on the west side of River Road,
abutting the south side of Immokalee Road in Section 30, Township 48 south,
Range 27 east, Collier County, Florida. (Staff request.)
November 18, 2003
Item #2B, Item #2C, Item #2D, Item
#2H, and Item #2I
#2E, Item #2F, Item #2G, Item
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 7, 2003 VALUE ADJUSTMENT
BOARD SPECIAL MASTERS MEETING, MINUTES OF
OCTOBER 8, 2003 VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD SPECIAL
MASTERS MEETING (REAR OF ROOM), MINUTES OF
OCTOBER 8, 2003 VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD SPECIAL
MASTERS MEETING (FRONT OF ROOM), MINUTES OF
OCTOBER 8, 2003 BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS/LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE MEETING,
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 VALUE ADJUSTMENT
BOARD MEETING, MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 2003 BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING,
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 21, 2003 BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS/COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL
BOARD MEETING, MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 3, 2003 PUD
MONITORING WORKSHOP- APPROVF, D
Entertain a motion to accept the October 7th, '03, Value Adjustment
Special Masters Meeting; 08 -- October 8, '03, Value Adjustment
Board Special Master Meeting; October 8th, '03, Value Adjustment
Board Special Masters Meeting; 08/03 Board of Commissioners Land
Development Code meeting; October 13, '03, Value Adjustment
Board Meeting; October 14th, '03, Board of Commissioners Regular
Meeting; October 22nd (sic), '03, Board of Commissioners --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 21 st.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 21st -- thank you, Commissioner,
Board of Commissioners and Collier County Public School Board
Workshop; and October (sic) 3rd, '03, PUD Monitoring Workshop.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So move.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So move.
7
November 18, 2003
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 unanimously.
Next item is four. This is proclamations.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE ABE SKINNER, PROPERTY
APPRAISER, FOR HIS 3 5 YEARS OF SERVICE AND
DEDICATION TO THE RESIDENTS OF COLLIER COUNTY-
ADOPTF, D
First one, I have the privilege to recognize a valuable public
servant to Collier County.
And Commissioners, I am going to step down to the podium to
deliver this proclamation.
And if I -- at this time, if I may call up the honorable Abe
Skinner to the dais, I would appreciate it.
Commissioners --
MR. SKINNER: Where do you want me?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right here.
Commissioners, staff members, and the public, it's a true honor
today in Collier County as we recognize a public servant of the
magnitude of service that this property appraiser has given all the
8
November 18, 2003
residents of Collier County, so bear with me as I read this
proclamation.
Whereas, Abe Skinner has worked in Collier County Property
Appraisers (sic) since 1962; and,
Whereas, the appointment (sic) of an elected position of Collier
County Property Appraiser in 1991 by then the (sic) honorable
Governor Lawton Chiles; and,
Whereas, he has served (sic) the third property appraisers (sic) to
held (sic) this position in (sic) Collier County was founded in 1927;
and,
Whereas,
proficiency of
most effective
Whereas,
during his tenor (sic), continually advanced the
the office by upgrading systems to the last (sic) and
(sic) computer applications; and,
he has brought to (sic) Collier County the 21 st century
by developing a state of the art geographic information system (GIS)
that has been (sic) shared with government agencies as well as the
general public;
Whereas, Abe has recognized (sic) members of the Florida
Association of Property Appraisers for the past several years of
service as its presidents (sic), as well as other capacities and his (sic)
respectful (sic) peers throughout the state for his integrity, honesty,
and leadership; and,
Whereas, Abe was bom in Southwest Florida and has been a
proud resident of Collier County for the past 50 years. He and his
lovely wife, Martha, continues (sic) to serve the community as well as
participating (sic) in civic and other social activities.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Commissioners
of Collier County, Florida, that the citizens of Collier County
recognize Abe Skinner for his 35 years of exemplary service and for
his commitment and contributions to all the citizens of Collier County.
Done in this order, 18th day of November, 2002 (sic).
Commissioners, I make a motion we move this proclamation.
9
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
seconded by --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Everyone.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
-- Commissioner Halas.
Confirmed by Commissioner Fiala,
Commissioner Coyle, and Commissioner Coletta.
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. Thank you.
We want to -- we have some other things that we wanted to do
here today, but first of all, we want to get a picture with you, and then
your lovely wife, with the Board of Commissioners. MR. SKINNER: Oh, boy.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This picture's not for your benefit.
It's for ours.
COMMISSIONER
dedicated service to this
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER
here?
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
HALAS: Thank you very much for your
community.
COYLE: Thanks, Abe.
COLETTA: May the next 35 be as lovely.
FIALA: Did you want to get Martha up
And, of course, Abe, we know that
10
November 18, 2003
your
your
commitment to family is very important, so if you would ask
wife up -- to join us for a picture also.
MR. SKINNER: I have to ask. I don't tell.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I know.
We're not quite done, Commissioners. If you would join me to
the dais (sic), we have some other things. I'm sorry, to the podium.
Abe, right here.
MR. SKINNER: That was unrehearsed, folks.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Abe, we appreciate the opportunity to
recognize your service here in Collier County. Just a little token of
our appreciation, we have a 35-year pin with the Collier County
symbol on it. If I could pin this on you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Martha, how many combined
years of service do you have?
MS. SK/NNER: Well, he have has 37, and I have --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Seventy-four years total.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Also, we want to give you this --
another small token of our appreciation with a plaque congratulating
you of your service here in Collier County, and another small token of
our appreciation with all the fine dedicated service. MR. SKINNER: It's not full of money.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The -- do we have anything for
Martha? We know this is to -- MS. SKINNER: No, no.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Martha, here.
MS. SKINNER: I have mine. If you remember, it was
September the 1 lth, 2001.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right, that you retired, yes. Martha --
Martha's been a long-standing employee of Collier County of social
services and has done a fine job, and I understand that our staff
constantly calls you for information.
MS. SKINNER: Not too often anymore.
11
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Not too often anymore.
Congratulations, thank you. Yes.
MR. SKINNER: Can I say something?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MR. SKINNER: As I always say, I'm a man of few words, and I
won't disappoint you this time. I know you've got a lot of business to
take care of.
And I wondered what I was going to say. As you know, the
constitutional officers are duly elected officials, and those five
positions were created in the constitution of the State of Florida.
We -- what we do affects the county, but we are different. We
are not under the authority of these folks, with all due respect. And
there is one thing that we all have in common. Whether you're a
constitutional officer, a county commissioner, or staff members, we're
all public servants, and we should never lose sight of that. We're here
to serve the public.
Now, a number of years ago, I had a group of high school
students come through my office, touring my office, the office, and I
told them that. We're your servants. We're just custodians of this
office. It's your office. And one young man said, well, if this is my
office, I think I'll sit in my chair, and I said, don't push it, kid.
But I do want to thank the commissioners for -- for this
proclamation, this honor. It duly (sic) is an honor, and I want to thank
my staff-- some of them are here -- for making me look good, my
wife Martha for putting up with me all these years, and the people of
Collier County for allowing me to serve.
And I just want to say that I'm looking forward to serving in the
capacity of property appraiser for many years to come.
Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
Item ~4B
12
November 18, 2003
PROCLAMATION TO DESIGNATE THE MONTH OF
NOVEMBER AS NATIONAL HOSPICE MONTH TO BE
ACCEPTED BY DIANE COX, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF
HOSPICE OF NAPIJES - ADOPTED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next proclamation will be
delivered by Commissioner Coletta. This proclamation is to designate
the month of December (sic) as National Hospice Month. To accept
this proclamation would be Diane Cox, president of (sic) CEO of
Hospice of Naples. Ms. Cox.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, please, come up front.
Whereas, November, 2003, marks the 25th anniversary of
National Hospice Month; and,
Whereas, last year, approximately 885,000 terminally ill patients
and their families received care from the 3,200 Hospice programs in
communities throughout the United States; and,
Whereas, thousands of citizens of Collier County have received
medical service, pain and sympathy (sic) control and emotional and
spiritual support from Hospice of Naples over the course of its 20-year
history; and,
Whereas, Hospice care allows patients to live in dignity, be
treated with respect, be surrounded and supported by loved ones,
family, friends, and committed caregivers; and,
Whereas, Hospice of Naples strives to inform all residents of
Collier County of the benefits of Hospice care and advanced planning;
and,
Whereas, professional and compassionate Hospice staff and
trained volunteers, including physicians, nurses, social workers,
therapists, counselors, health aides and clergy, provide comprehensive
care making the wish of each patient a priority; and,
Whereas, family members and loved ones receiving (sic)
13
November 18, 2003
counseling and bereavement care to help them cope with the many
losses they face during their illness and the grief they experience
afterwards; and,
Whereas, providing high quality Hospice care reaffirms our
beliefs, the essential dignity of every person, regardless of age, health,
or social status, and that every stage of human life deserves to be
treated with the utmost respect and care.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, the month of November be
designated as National Hospice Month.
Done and ordered this 18th day of November, 2003, Tom
Henning, chair.
And I make a motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
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:
you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA:
couple words.
MS. COX: May I?
Any opposed?
Motion carries unanimously.
Thank
Thank you.
Diane, you might want to say a
14
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You sure may.
MS. COX: I think Jim Coletta knows me very well. He said I
could say a couple words. Never pass up the opportunity.
I want to thank the Board of County Commissioners for bringing
some public awareness to what is the ultimate service that nobody
wants to ever access. It's been said that only in the United States of
America is death an option. Everywhere else in the world people
recognize that it's the human experience that we're all going to share.
So I thank the Board of County Commissioners for helping us to
raise awareness as we go about doing our work from Copeland to
Immokalee every day in caring for thousands of people in the county.
It's not only a privilege to do this work, but it's a privilege to do it
in this county where there is just such tremendous support for our
agency and so many others. So thank you all very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item ~4C
PROCLAMATION TO DESIGNATE DECEMBER 1, 2003 AS
WORLD AIDS DAY, ACCEPTED BY CLE TENEROWICZ,
ANTHONT RACF. Y: AND KARFN SIMANDF. R - ADOPTF. D
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation will be read by
Commissioner Fiala. This proclamation is, designated December 1,
'03, as World AIDS Day. To accept this proclamation is Cle -- oh, I'm
sorry. We got a new list. Anthony Racey, Karen -- I'm sorry, I can't
read that.
MR. MUDD: Karen Simander.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- Simander will accept this
proclamation. Please come forward.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Whereas, the global epidemic of
15
November 18, 2003
HIV infection and AIDS requires a worldwide effort to increase
communication, education and united action to stop the spread of
HIV/AIDS; and,
Whereas -- you can face the audience if you'd like, by the way.
Whereas, UNAIDS, U-N-A-I-D-S, estimates that over 37 million
adults and three million children are currently living with HIV/AIDS
with young people under the age of 25 accounting for more than half
of all new infections; and,
Whereas, the American Association for World Health is
encouraging a better understanding of the challenge of HIV/AIDS
nationally as it recognizes that the number of people diagnosed with
HIV and AIDS in the United States continues to increase with 900,000
people in the U.S. now infected; and,
Whereas, Collier County has 846 AIDS cases reported as of July
31st, 2003; and,
Whereas, World AIDS Day provides an opportunity to focus
local, national, and international attention on HIV infection and AIDS
and to disseminate information on how to prevent the spread of HIV;
and,
Whereas, the World AIDS Day 2003 theme, HIV and AIDS
Stigma and Discrimination, as individuals infected with HIV have
been rejected by their families, their loved ones and their
communities; however, across the world HIV/AIDS has shown itself
capable of triggering responses of compassion, solidarity and support
bringing out the best in people, their families and communities.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Collier County will
observe World AIDS Day on December 1st, 2003, and urge all
citizens to take part in activities and observances designed to increase
awareness and understanding of HIV/AIDS as global challenge, to
take part in HIV/AIDS prevention activities and programs, and to join
the local effort to prevent the further spread of HIV/AIDS.
16
November 18, 2003
Done and ordered this 18th day of November, 2003, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning,
chairman.
Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Iql 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: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
(Applause.)
MR. RACEY: On behalf of the World AIDS Day Committee, I'd
like to thank the commissioners.
This year our goal for the committee was to show Collier County
how HIV and AIDS does affect everyone. Regardless of the fact if
you know someone personally who is infected or affected, maybe
your neighbors, someone you work with, someone at a business that
you may frequent, you're going to know someone, you're going to
come in contact with someone who is HIV positive and living with the
disease on a daily basis.
HIV is no longer a death sentence. People are managing their
HIV and AIDS on a daily basis, working, being viable members of the
community.
And this year we wanted to showcase how there is discrimination
among even HIV itself. There's pockets of populations that are greatly
17
November 18, 2003
affected by HIV. And one exciting thing is, through the health
department, your local health department, the Joe Logsdon
Foundation, Planned Parenthood, the offices in Immokalee Health
Department, we're out in the community every day targeting people,
doing education and testing people to bring awareness.
This year was all about getting out into the community more and
more and becoming visible in the community. This year we'll be at
River Park starting in the afternoon at 4:30 with a procession to the
Depot where the services that evening will start at seven p.m.
I would encourage everyone to please come out and see what it's
like, talk to the people that are actually providing services and meet
people infected, and see that they're just average people. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION TO DESIGNATE THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER
21-27, 2003 AS FARM CITY WEEK, TO BE ACCEPTED BY
DAVID SANTFJFi- ADOPTF, D
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next proclamation will be read by
Commissioner Halas. This proclamation, to designate November 21st
through 27th, '03, as Farm-City Week, Commissioner.
And to accept this would be David Santee. Mr. Santee, would
you please come forward.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hi, David Santee.
I just want to take a moment and say that my roots started off on
a farm also in -- up in the state of Michigan. So it gives me great
pleasure to read this proclamation this morning.
Whereas, November 21 st through 27th is National Farm (sic)
Week, a time set aside to recognize and honor the contributions of our
18
November 18, 2003
country's agriculturalists and to strengthen the bond between urban
and rural citizens; and,
Whereas, in Collier County the highpoint of Farm-City Week is
the annual Farm-City Barbecue sponsored by Collier County,
University Extension, and a committee of volunteers.
Whereas, agriculture is an important element of Collier County's
economic machine, with the total economic activity of over $300
million annually; and,
Whereas, 22 percent of Collier County is utilized for agriculture,
providing vital ecological benefits, including habitat for wildlife and
recharge area for our aquifer; and,
Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners support local
agriculture through programs, including cooperation with the
University of Florida Extension Service; and,
Whereas, we encourage all citizens to pause and to recognize the
contributions of the local farmers and ranchers to our economy, our
food supply and our society.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, that on behalf of the citizens of Collier County, great
appreciation and honor is owed to all of the county's agriculturalists
and that November 21st through the 27th be designated as Farm-City
Week.
Done and ordered this 18th day of November, 2003, Board of
County Commissioners. Signed by Tom Henning.
I move that we accept this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I 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.
19
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Thank you.
Any opposed?
The motion carries unanimously.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And we'll all be there.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can we get a picture, please.
MR. SANTEE: Sure.
Can I take the podium for a second, please?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure.
MR. SANTEE: I'd like to thank the county commissioners for
bringing out the awareness of agriculture in Collier County, and I'd
also like to invite each and every one of you out to our Farm-City
Barbecue, which is the day before Thanksgiving.
This year it's going to be held at the Collier County Extension
Office right off of Immokalee Road. We have a real nice feed there.
Starts about 12 o'clock, great fellowship.
And at this time I'd like to call up Mr. Jack Price.
MR. PRICE: I've got to get up, first.
MR. SANTEE: This gentleman here is a native of Florida who
moved to Sandland area of Collier County in the early 50's. He's been
operating a cattle ranch and the county's second oldest citrus grove
since that time.
He served as the president of Collier County's Cattlemen
Association, served 12 years as Collier County Water Management
Advisory Board, and eight years on the Cypress Basin Board.
On behalf of the Farm-City Committee, I present to you Mr. Jack
Price, Farm Family of the Year.
(Applause.)
20
November 18, 2003
MR. SANTEE: He also wants to make sure that Russell and Lisa
back here come on up to accept this award with him.
MR. PRICE: This is a small family.
Thank you. I love both of you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta would like to
say a few words. Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I just wanted to tell you
that this is something that's been traditional for many years now. It's a
wonderful event, and every one of the commissioners, I'm sure, will
be there. It's only $15, and they'll pay the fee. And I kind of hope
they'll join me on the serving line to help serve the food. In other
words, earn your money, kids. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item #4E
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE COLLIER COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION ROAD MAINTENANCE EMPLOYEES,
NANCY SUMMERS, JAVIER HOYOS AND RAYMOND ARCA,
WHO EXCEED EXPECTATIONS WITH THEIR GOOD DEEDS
AND F, XAMPI~FiS- ADOPTFJD
Next proclamation is truly a pleasure, and Commissioner Coyle
will read the proclamation. This proclamation is to recognize three of
our outstanding employees in our transportation department for their
good deeds in setting examples for the rest of our employees.
So if-- I call up at this time Nancy Summers, Javier Hoyos, and
Raymond Ama. Would you please come up. Right up front here.
Don't be bashful.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whereas, the Road Maintenance
Department crews, by the nature of their duties working along Collier
21
November 18, 2003
County roadways find themselves near motorists in distress and in an
effort to exceed customer expectations offer assistance;
Whereas, on Thursday, November (sic) the 25th, 2003, one such
crew was on Livingston Road just north of Pine Ridge Road when a
car carrying an expectant mother and the pregnant woman's mother
blew a tire; and
Whereas, the crew consisting of Nancy Summers, Javier Hoyos,
and Raymond Arca, was able to exceed expectations and provide
excellent customer service by changing the flat tire in a rainstorm,
allowing for the continued safe passage of the pregnant woman and
her mother; and,
Whereas, the mother of the pregnant woman, insisting on
remaining anonymous, contacted the Collier County Commissioners
to alert them to the employees' good deed and express her sincere
appreciation for the crews' compassion and assistance in a time of
need, wanted to make certain the employees were recognized; and,
Whereas, these employees provided service above and beyond
their job requirements to exceed the expectations of these two
residents; and,
Whereas, since the time of the emergency roadside assistance by
the employees, the expectant mother has delivered a healthy baby;
and,
Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners, the county
administration, and county staff are very proud to be represented by
such outstanding employees and wish to recognize these three road
maintenance staff members as fine examples of so many
transportation staff who work along the county roadways and have
offered assistance to others in need.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that Nancy Summers,
Javier Hoyos, and Raymond Arca, be recognized for their good deeds,
and as examples of employees who exceed expectations when
22
November 18, 2003
performing their duties on a daily basis, and that the Board of County
Commissioners offer this proclamation as a token of their
appreciation.
Done and ordered this 18th day of November, 2003, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Tom Henning,
chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I move that this proclamation be accepted.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Coletta.
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 unanimously. Thank
yOU.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Who's going to take this? Who
wants to take -- you want to take it? Okay. You've got to hold it and
we'll take a picture.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for making us all so
proud. Thank you. See what kind of staff we have?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you for taking time out of
your schedule to be here. (Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Nancy, the -- Nancy Summers is the supervisor of
23
November 18, 2003
the crew. She just basically said they were just doing their job, and it
was a pleasure to serve the public.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: County Manager, I think it's going
above and beyond their job by far. And I can tell you that I've heard
from the public on how Nancy interacts with the public, and nothing
but praise for the work that she does along with her crew. So we are
very fortunate enough (sic) to have employees like these three people.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And how many cars passed these
people by with their flat tire in the driving rain before our people
stopped, right? You're absolutely right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
Item #5A
PRESENTATION OF THE PHOENIX AWARD TO EMS
PERSONNEL BY JOHN DUNNUCK, PUBLIC SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR- PRF. SF. NTF. D
Next item on today's agenda is 5, presentation. This presentation
of the Phoenix Award will be given by John Dunnuck, our public
services administrator. And I'm sure you want to call up some very
special people in Collier County.
MR. DUNNUCK: Absolutely. I'd like to begin with a prayer.
God grant me the ability to give emergency care, with skillful
hands, knowledgeable minds, and tender love and care. Help me deal
with everything when lives are on the line, to see the worst, administer
aid, and ease a worried mind. So help me as I go today, accept what
fate may be, touch these hands, use this mind.
The Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department has
adopted the Phoenix Award to recognize those EMS paramedics,
firefighters, and sheriff's officers who, through their skills and
knowledge, have successfully brought back to life individuals who
24
November 18, 2003
have died. The Phoenix was a mythological bird who died and rose
renewed from its own ashes.
Using their skill, knowledge, and expertise, this group brought
back to life seven members of our community since our last
presentation in May.
We are proud to recognize the following heros -- if they could
please come forward -- Greg Baker, Rick Bassing, Ryan Carroll,
Bruce Gastineau, Paul D. Joseph, Margo Klingensmith, Craig
Marshall, John Morrison, Steve Riley, Russell Steward, Matt Vila,
Diana Watson, William Woods, and Mathew Zaleznic.
(Applause.)
MR. DUNNUCK: This is truly the best part of the job.
yOU.
Thank
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: All good employees today.
MR. DUNNUCK: Thank you, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for all you do, guys.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
Item #5B
RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE JOYCE ERNST,
PLANNER, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION AS EMPLOYEE OF
THFJ MONTH FOR NOVFiMBFR: 2003 - PRF, SFNTF, D
Next item on the agenda, the Board of Commissioners has the
pleasure of recognizing an Employee of the Month. And I can tell you
this Employee of the Month that I have interacted with, and I -- it's a
true honor to show our appreciation.
So at this time, if I could call up Joyce Ernst from the Planning
Department.
25
November 18, 2003
Joyce -- Joyce has the ability to assist the public in their needs at
Community Development by explaining the roles and regulation (sic)
of the Board of Commissioners at a -- at a public level, and I -- and
truly do appreciate that.
Joyce has done a lot of great things not only for the public but
also some of her colleagues, and this award is really recognizing Joyce
by a vote of her peers.
So Joyce, I want to give you this plaque recognizing you as
Employee of the Month for this month, and just a small note from the
chairman, and just a small, nominal -- monetary nominal fee for your
great service at Collier County, so thank you. (Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can we get a picture?
Joyce, you met (sic) our Public Community Development
administrator. I want to thank -- pass on to thank your employees for
recognizing Joyce for such a great opportunity of the Board of
Commissioners to recognize you.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY MR. GERALD BURNS TO
DISCUSS KENSINGTON PUD- TO BE BROUGHT BACK ON A
FI ITl IRF, BCC AGF, NDA
Next item is public petition. This item of the agenda, the public
petitions, it's elected officials to take certain action. There are no
public comments under that. The board has the opportunity to bring
whatever the request is to a future agenda.
So the first public petition is a request by Mr. Gerald Bums to
discuss the Kensington PUD. Mr. Bums?
MR. BURNS: Good morning. My name is Gerry Bums, and I'm
the president of the Kensington Park Master Association. With.me
26
November 18, 2003
today is Mr. Joseph McMackin from Bond, Schoeneck & King.
The Collier County Commissioners passed ordinance 2002-54 on
October 22nd, '02, allowing the developer of Kensington-Hiwasse, to
have ingress/egress onto Eatonwood Lane, a private road. Mr.
McMackin has a copy of that ordinance.
However, in all fairness to the commissioners, after reading the
minutes of May 14th, 2002, the representatives of Hiwasse never told
the commissioners that Eatonwood Lane was a private road belonging
to the Kensington residents according to the PUD.
The residents of Kensington do not intend to grant access to
Eatonwood Lane from the Hiwasse property, and the developer has no
right to use this road; therefore, we are asking the commissioners to
rescind their earlier decision and to declare ordinance 2002-54 null
and void.
I'd like to just take a few minutes to look at some supporting
documents. It's hard to see this. And in summary, what this is is --
Kensington is located in the general area where -- Grey Oaks,
Wyndemere, Arlington Lakes.
The key point here is within two plus square miles. Furore
growth is talking about somewhere around 5,000 housing units or
10,000 people. I'll come back to that point.
This here is Kensington, and roughly 565 condominiums and
homes exist there, over 1100 people. We're getting to a point where a
very high percentage of our residents now are Florida residents, so
they're educated voters. I'm going to come back to the demographics
here.
This is the Kensington PUD. And the key point here is clearly
it's denoted that Eatonwood Lane is part of the Kensington PUD. I
might mention at this point that this is the Hiwasse property, five
buildable acres. They are requesting a curb cut onto Livingston Road,
as well as prior access to Eatonwood Lane.
You know, I've been at this for a year, and I really researched.
27
November 18, 2003
And what it comes down to -- and I'll address it at a later point -- is the
main reason they want to come onto Eatonwood Lane is money. In
other words, they know they can develop and sell that property, but
they've been told by real estate people that they can get about a
million dollars or plus if they can come on, to access.
Our point is, why would we want all the headaches -- which I
will enumerate later on -- to give them the money? Now, down the
street here is the Evans property, and they also are applying for a curb
cut onto Livingston Road. So the situation's similar in that point.
Now, just to support further about Eatonwood Lane being part of
the PUD. Here's Tract R. And as you can see, again, Eatonwood
Lane is so designated.
Now we go to a dedication. This dedication was done by J.
Dudley Goodlette, trustee for the property, witnessed by his law
partner, Ken Johnson, and the owner and developer, Antone Steiner
(phonetic).
What this publication -- dedication says is, all of the road
right-of-way lying within the lands indicated hereon as Tract R for
private road purposes with responsibility for maintenance, subject to
easement here for (sic) set forth, said Tract R is a private road
right-of-way, and Collier County has no maintenance responsibility
with respect therein.
The interesting point is that the developer and Jeffrey Mangan,
who is the operating officer of Kensington Park and also the president
of Hiwasse, has no disagreement that Eatonwood Lane is part of the
PUD and that this right-of-way is a private road.
In fact, J. Dudley Goodlette graciously came down July 5th and
talked with us right on site, and he expressed that yes, he's in full
agreement. He also said he agrees, access is not right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain. a motion to bring this back
on a further board meeting's agenda.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second that.
28
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I'd like to make a motion
that we bring it back.
I have talked with the residents' representatives at length, and I
am convinced that what Mr. Bums is saying is correct, that it was
never revealed to us that this was a private road when this ordinance
was passed. So I would like to have it brought back and reconsidered.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. There's a motion by
Commissioner Coyle, second by Commissioner Halas. Mr. Burns, any further discussion?
MR. BURNS: Can I go on for a few minutes?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, you may.
MR. BURNS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's your dime.
MR. BURNS: IfI sound a little emotional, I am.
I'd like to point out a grant of easement that was, I guess -- I don't
know what the formal word is -- but it became a grant of easement
which we considered illegal.
In a nutshell -- let me read this to you. Please note that there was
an illegal grant of easement from Kensington Limited Partnership. It
took place after the county passed the ordinance which we're talking
about granting access after the plat and re-plat were recorded.
Now, Kensington was bom in 1992. And 25 minutes prior to the
turnover of the Kensington Park Master Association, this easement
came into life; 25 minutes. Now, we were--'92 to '03? In our
judgment, it's just not valid.
Let's take a look at some of the practical aspects of-- if this
access was granted. First of all, there's a likelihood of security
infringement, okay? Then you have potential liability of accidents,
possibly head-on collision. I wouldn't want to be a part of some
young woman over there in the dentist's office taking her child home
29
November 18, 2003
and have a head-on collision. How about the insurance liabilities? It's
our private road. Surely somebody's going to sue us.
Traffic problems. Remember I mentioned before that there's
roughly going to be 10,000 people in the area? Already Eatonwood
Lane's got 600 trips, and we're all built out. That's between
commercial vehicles and our residents. Our residents are using
Eatonwood Lane, thanks to you. Livingston Road has been a dream.
And we just go up and down Livingston Road.
Now you got 10,000 people in the area, we'll probably have
1,000 trips for ourselves, and then when that commercial property is
developed, it will be another 1,000 trips. We could have a
tremendous, tremendous backlog there.
Let's take a look at property value, and you're affected by this. If
this went through, there's a strong likelihood of-- our property values
will not commensurate. Now, they might go up, but not
commensurate with comparable communities in the area.
Now, we're talking -- there's some homes in there that are well
over a million dollars. There's a lot of property value and revenue
coming to you. You need that money for schools, you need that
money for building your roads. Well, what will happen is, you're
going to get less because our values are not going to go up, you're
going to get less. Developer wins again. Everybody loses.
I'd like to take -- here's another point. It's on the guardhouse. I
don't know if you can read it, but if you can't, I will read it for you.
What this is, it's an unfulfilled obligation of the developer. The
Kensington residents are entitled to a guardhouse on Eatonwood Lane.
The developer of Kensington-Hiwasse refuses to build this
guardhouse unless we provide access from Hiwasse .onto Eatonwood
Lane. What a trade-off.
Now, there's two different ordinances -- one ordinance, 98.8, that
has two different references in there that we're entitled to it. But I just
want to go in the interest of time to this consent agreement. This is a
30
November 18, 2003
consent agreement that was signed by Antone Steiner, developer of
Kensington, back in '98, and Florida Power and Light. And it
definitely specified in this area here -- you can't read it, but it says,
proposed 15 by 15 guardhouse. So there's all kinds of-- all kinds of
references to this guardhouse. We even have a two-page letter from
Jeffrey Mangan saying that they're going to build the guardhouse.
When we just met with J. Dudley Goodlette about two weeks
ago, he was astonished that we don't have a guardhouse. Because -- I
met with him back in July, as indicated. He was so darned involved
with the insurance issue up in Tallahassee, we left him alone. When
we came back to see him, he said, well, my partner gave you a copy of
what the guardhouse looked like. And he was -- he was absolutely
floored by it, so are we.
So I guess the question that I have is, do the Collier County
Commissioners have the legal right after turnover to force the
developer of Kensington to comply with the PUD?
Okay. I'm going to just skip to a -- I guess -- I want to bring this
down to life, quality of life, the importance of your decision. This is
not a game of X (sic) and O's. You're affecting the lives of-- okay, I'll
be real quick -- 1100 people. And we're going to live with that
decision the rest of our life, and all the people that come behind it. So
if they have to live with that obstruction and that-- all of those things
that I pointed out, it's just not right. It comes down, as I said, to some
greed.
And, you know, I watched, you know, for a year. I told
Commissioner Coyle, I read the local paper, and sometime I want to
come back and talk about the job you people do. Not just you, but
everybody.
But in your ultimate wisdom and good judgment and fairness,
please don't reward this kind of behavior. Say no to the access.
Please do. And we have a lot of people here from Kensington, and I'd
like to have them stand up.
31
November 18, 2003
(Applause.)
MR. BURNS: And what they're stand -- they're standing there --
they're standing there and saying no curb cut, and we want a
guardhouse.
Thank you very much. We really truly appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
Thank you.
All in favor of the motion, signify by
Aye.
Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
We're going to bring this back and correct it.
Thank you, Mr. Bums, for bringing this to our attention.
MR. BURNS: Thank you very much. And please, let me come
back and talk, okay, sometime --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes.
MR. BURNS: -- just about the whole county.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. As people are exiting out of
the room, if we can do it quietly so we can continue the people's
business, we would appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wow, they've got a lot of people out
there.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY MR. BOB STONE TO
32
November 18, 2003
ESTABLISH A RESOLUTION TO APPOINT MEMBERS TO A
CHARTER COMMISSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
AND WRITING OF A CHARTER DOCUMENT FOR COLLIER
COUNTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTES
125.60-64- TO BE BROUGHT BACK ON A FUTURE BCC
AGENDA
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next public petition is a request by
Bob Stone to establish a resolution by appointing members to the
charter commission for the purpose of study and writing a charter
document for Collier County in accordance to Florida Statutes 125.60.
Mr. Stone?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, maybe he wants to wait a
minute until--
MR. STONE: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
my name is Bob Stone, chairman of Citizens for Charter for Collier
County.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Wait.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mob.
of Collier County. They're not mobs.
of Collier County.
They're mob? They're residents
They are voters and taxpayers
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Don't worry. They'll vote for you,
Tom.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: They're not in my district, sir.
MR. STONE: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
my name is Bob Stone, chairman of Citizens for Charter for Collier
County.
Commissioners, this morning we are presenting to you a petition
asking the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County to adopt
a resolution to appoint the members to a charter commission for the
purpose of a study and writing of a charter for Collier County, and that
these members be appointed within 30 days of that resolution in
33
November 18, 2003
accordance with statute requirements.
Article VIII of our Florida Constitution gives the citizens of any
county the right to petition their board of county commissioners to
establish and appoint members to a charter commission for the study
and writing of a charter for that county.
Florida Statutes 125.60 through 64 outline the procedures to be
followed in this process. And today, the Citizens for Charter
Committee of Collier County is submitting this petition to you in
accordance with those statutes asking the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County to establish and appoint members to
a charter commission.
As an attachment to this petition, we are providing a draft charter
document which we are asking that you provide the appointed charter
commission as a guide in the preparation of a charter document for
Collier County.
This draft charter document is the result of many months of
research of existing charter documents of other counties and
discussions with many individuals and will provide valuable
assistance to the members appointed to this commission in their
deliberations.
We respectfully ask that the Board of County Commissioners
appoint to this commission a majority of a representative average lay
citizens of the county who have no special interest affiliation in order
to ensure that the charter written for Collier County will represent the
desires and will of those representative average lay citizens of the
county.
Commissioners, the charter form of government is not a new
form of government. It is the representative form of government we
have today. We still elect our Board of County Commissioners, we
still elect our constitutional officers, and we still have a county
manager to manage the county government.
The major difference between a non-charter county and a charter
34
November 18, 2003
county is in the voice and power that citizens of charter counties
obtain. And we believe the citizens of Collier County need that voice.
In a charter county, citizens obtain the right of initiative,
referendum and recall. They obtain the right to put initiatives on the
ballot for vote by citizens, and they obtain the right to amend or
appeal county ordinances. They also obtain the right to call for a
referendum on legislation to be passed, and they obtain the right to
recall an elected official for certain abuses of that official's office.
The draft charter document you have today lists many of the
things that citizens may ask the charter commission to study and
deliberate. It is not an official document. That can only come from
the charter commission appointed by you.
Commissioners, today 80 percent of the population of Florida
counties have elected a charter form of government. All cities in
Florida have the charter form of government, and the total population
of Florida citizens who reside in those counties and cities represent
over 85 percent of the total population of Florida.
Today the citizens of Collier County are in the 15 percent
minority population of citizens who do not enjoy the rights which the
charter form of government gives citizens. We believe the citizens of
Collier County deserve the right to choose which form of government
they desire.
In the petition before you today, Citizens for Charter is only
asking that you form a resolution to appoint a charter commission for
the study and writing of a charter for Collier County. We are not
asking you to elect a charter form of government. Only the citizens of
the county have the power to do that.
After this charter document is written, they will go to the polls to
determine if they desire the charter or the non-charter form of
government for their county.
The major difference that will occur if the charter form of
government is elected are the powers of initiative referendum and
35
November 18, 2003
recall which provide more voice and a measure of control for the
citizens of the county over those they elect to office to serve them.
In other counties that have elected the charter form of
government, this has brought about a more effective, efficient,
accountable, and responsible government body and better
communication between citizens of the county and those they elect to
office to serve them.
It has brought about better understanding of the decisions that
face the elected Board of County Commissioners and the county
manager through the involvement of citizens in those decisions. It has
allowed the elected Board of County Commissioners to better assess
the will of the citizens and actions they contemplate necessary in the
mechanics of governing the county.
Commissioners, our county is growing at a tremendous rate, and
we need more local control of our destiny. We need the collective
wisdom of the people in conjunction with those we elect to office to
serve us to determine this destiny.
We have seen corruption in our government in the past which
could have been avoided with a strong charter document and the
involvement of citizens. We have seen a catering to special interests
in the past which also could have been avoided if citizens had the
powers of initiative, referendum, and recall to avail themselves of,
which the charter form of government provides.
The charter form of government in any county has never been the
means to the end but rather one that provides the control factors for
citizens that bring about more responsible, efficient, and accountable
government at the local level.
The in-depth comprehensive study that must be made of the
county government body to the lowest levels during this process has
proved that this body can be made more effective, efficient,
responsible, and accountable.
Today we believe we stand on the threshold of a historic moment
36
November 18, 2003
in Collier County's history. If this Board of County Commissioners
honor the petition brought to them today by the citizens of the county,
this will mark a new beginning in the cooperation between the citizens
of the county and their elected representatives. It will mark a moment
which will lead to the citizens of the county being allowed to cast their
individual vote on whether they desire to continue the present form of
government or elect a charter form of government with the right of
initiative referendum and recall for citizens. We believe the citizens
deserve the opportunity to choose which form of government they
desire.
Commissioners, in closing, I hope that you will agree to establish
this charter commission and appoint those representative average lay
citizens of the county to it which will give us a well written, fair, and
honest charter document which will become our local constitution for
Collier County.
We believe that the citizens of the county deserve to be a part of
the decision-making process in our county. We believe that if this
occurs, our local government body will then become what we all
envision our government body should be, and that is a government of
the people, by the people, and for the people. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Well, in recognition of all
the work that's been put into it by this study committee, I would like to
make a motion we bring this back as an agenda item for a future
meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what this is for, right, is to
ask us to bring this back, right, so --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The ordinance?
37
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- we can vote on that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct, to bring it back
for-- be able to go through it in great lengths as a regular agenda item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I do have a-- have a
concern. I agree with Mr. Stone, there are a lot of things about the
government here that we can improve, both from a standpoint of
accountability and efficiency, and I do think the public, the voters,
should have a right to choose.
But aboUt three years ago, if you will recall, a group of people
came before this commission and they asked us to do something in
Naples Park. And assuming that that was what the voters wanted, we
proceeded, or at least the commission at that point in time proceeded
with that effort, and it turned into an absolute disaster, and we found
out that it really wasn't what people wanted to do. So I believe that
the best approach is to follow the law that we currently have.
This is a very, very difficult and important decision that requires
consideration. It's going to take a lot of time.
I think the first thing we have to do is determine whether or not
there's sufficient people in Collier County who want to change their
form of government before we launch into -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- this very long and potentially
expensive and time-consuming process.
Now, there is a way for this to be done, and that is to collect the
signatures necessary to put this on the ballot. And I think that venting
process was put into the law for good reason, so that the
commissioners don't start reacting to issues that do not employ -- or do
not attract the interest of a large number of voters.
38
November 18, 2003
So let's find out how many people want it, let them bring it back
to us, and then if that's what the voters wish to do, then we ought to go
about doing it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The -- if I may ask a question,
Commissioner Coyle, your -- what you're asking for is, provide the
opportunity for the residents to come back through a petition outlined
under state statute 125.61.1 ?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's correct, that is correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And I agree with that. I think
this is an important issue and we ought to allow the citizens to petition
the Board of Commissioners by showing at least a strong interest in
changing the form of government. And that's part of your motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, that is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I made the motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: He made the motion, but it was
different.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I was -- wanted to bring it
back for an agenda item. At that point in time we could make a
motion in that direction after we fully reviewed the whole thing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: If we include that, then we just have
more material for us to make a --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, bring it back as
an agenda item?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But also have the alternative to
be able to look at the idea of making it -- suggesting they go out on the
petition method --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- to be able to apply to have it
put on the ballot?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm willing to leave all avenues
39
November 18, 2003
open.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll include that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I could make an observation
about that. That's going to delay the process, and I think that -- if the
citizens are really serious about this, they want to get about doing it as
quickly as possible. I mean, why come back and sit around and
discuss it for four or five hours if our intent is to ask the citizens to
collect the signatures?
I think we should give them an indication right now where we
think we're going with this thing and get about doing -- doing the job
at collecting signatures.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner, if I may chime
in here, there's a certain procedure for a petition initiative. And I think
it would need some assistance for the petition to be written by the
citizens who are asking the commissioners to take action, the county
attorney, and also the supervisor of election (sic).
So that's -- that's a process. It's going to take time, but I would
imagine if we direct the county manager to bring this item back to the
Board of Commissioners in a timely fashion, it would give the citizens
ample enough time to do the petition method if the board so desires.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, just a comment. I can't
think of a better place to get into a deep discussion in a future meeting
where it's a regular agenda item, and all the parties out there that have
an interest could come before us --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- to be able to explain their
interests. And at that point in time, we can take a look at the petition
method, we can consider all the different options that are out there, but
I really don't want to reach a final decision today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
40
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. And I understand that we
can't really. All we can do today is consider bringing it back or not
bringing it back. That's what we're charged with as far as a petition
goes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct. And, you know, whatever
aspects we want to add on to it. And that's part of your second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd like to have a restatement of the
motion so that we understand what it is that we're voting on.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd be happy to. I'm making a
motion that we bring this back as a regular agenda item, and one of the
parts would be, is to be able to have consideration for a petition that
would be -- all the due legal aspects of it would be included in it for
our consideration also at that point in time. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, I'm sure it doesn't sound
exactly the same as the first time, but I think I've met all the
requirements. What do you think by my second there? Did I cover
that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I think you got it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
Seeing none, 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 unanimously.
41
November 18, 2003
Thank you, Mr. --
MR. STONE: Commissioners, if I may say something. We are
asking you for a decision of a resolution, to adopt this resolution, and
in that resolution, to appoint the members to a charter commission.
NoW, we have two alternatives. If you do not wish to do that,
then our next alternative, in accordance with the statutes, is to go get
15 percent of the signatures of the registered voters of the county and
then bring it to you, in which case you will not appoint the members to
this charter commission. That then rests with our legislative
delegation by statute. You do understand that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, sir. We haven't reached
that point yet. That's why we need to have a regular meeting with this,
with an agenda item.
And I think Commissioner Coyle is right, it will probably be
about a two- to three-hour meeting, and that's fine, because we need to
get all the facts out in front, be able to tear it apart and digest it and
hear frOm everyone out there in the community that would like to have
a say in this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you, Mr. Stone.
MR. STONE: Thank you, sir.
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION BY MR. F. JOSEPH MCMACKIN III,
REGARDING CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY,
PETITIONER, V. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
RESPONDENT, CASE NO. 03-1308, UNITED STATES COURT
OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT-
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO WORK WITH MR. JOSEPH
MCMACKIN'S OFFICE TO HELP FILE A LETTER OF
ENDORSEMENT
42
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Next public petition is a public
petition by Joseph McMackin regarding the City of Naples Airport
Authority petition (sic), versus the Federal Aviation Administration.
I guess we're -- Mr. Soliday is --
MR. SOLIDAY: Ted Soliday.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- petitioning the board. Thank you.
MR. SOLIDAY: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, my name's Ted
Soliday. I'm the executive director of the City of Naples Airport
Authority, and it's a pleasure to be here this morning.
Also with me is Commissioner West, one of our commissioners
who's been assigned to help us with the legal issues, and our attorney,
Joe McMackin. We appreciate your assistance --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Soliday, can you hang on until
the fine citizens of Collier County exit the room? MR. SOLIDAY: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please continue.
MR. SOLIDAY: Thank you. We appreciate the assistance that
the -- Collier County provided in our most recent efforts with the FAA
on our Stage 2 noise ban, a Stage 2 ban of aircraft. And as we move
forward, we would appreciate your assistance further.
With me today is Mr. Joe McMackin, who will try to give you
more details, and then Mr. West and I will be available to answer any
specific questions. Thank you.
MR. McMACKIN: Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. My name is Joe McMackin. I'm the attorney for the
City of Naples Airport Authority.
To give you some background that will refresh your memory, I
was in front of this commission in May, at which time the City of
Naples Airport Authority had asked that the county authorize the
county attorney to file an amicus curiae brief, or a friend of the court
brief, which would have been filed post our hearing in front of the
FAA.
43
November 18, 2003
That hearing in from of the FAA lasted four days in Tampa. The
hearing officer issued a decision in part awarding what the Airport
Authority needed but in part awarding what the FAA wanted. That
matter was then appealed internally in the Federal Aviation
Administration to the associate director, Mrs. Woodruff (phonetic),
who issued her final determination in August.
Again, the final determination withheld grant money from the
City of Naples Airport pending our rescinding of the jet -- of the Stage
2 ban. That matter was then appealed in early October to the United
States Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
In the federal court system, the trial court is called the district
court. We are in the Southern District of Florida, and our district court
sits in Fort Myers. Its main office is in Tampa.
The next appeal level in the federal system is to the United States
Circuit Court of Appeals. There are 11 circuits. The circuit in which
Florida finds itself is the 1 lth Circuit. The District of Columbia has
its own district court and its own Circuit Court of Appeals. And the
District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals hears about 90 percent
of appeals from federal agency decisions, and we filed our notice of
appeal in that court.
Under the present rules of the United States Supreme Court, they
have expressed a dismay at the number of amicus curiae briefs that are
filed in the United States Circuit of Appeals.
In cases similar to this one where there are a number of issues at
play, the right of free air transportation across the United States,
environmental issues, but primarily the issue where the line is to be
drawn between federal agency authority and local government.
In situations like this that have a national appeal, an appeal
beyond the facts of our case but get into the theoretical and
constitutional issues, the Supreme Court has said, we don't want a
great number of amicus curiae briefs. They, in some cases, can get
literally 50 to 100 of these amicus curiae briefs.
44
November 18, 2003
The Supreme Court has stated that that tends to overburden the
staff of the judges and their clerks in the Circuit Court of Appeals, and
what they are recommending is a very short brief of three to five pages
from potential amici which would simply endorse the position of
either the petitioner, in this case the City of Naples Airport Authority,
or the respondent, in this case, the Federal Aviation Administration.
What they're looking for is a fresh or different perspective on the
issue, not a rehash of the petitioner or the respondent's position. And
what we are seeking this morning is authority from the commission to
authorize the county attorney to assist us in filing the endorsement of
position brief. It will be, as I indicated, much shorter than the brief
that was filed on behalf of Collier County in June.
But we believe that it is important for the United States Circuit
Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia to hear from the county
as to their view on the issue of banning Stage 2 aircraft from the City
of Naples Municipal Airport.
We would, therefore, respectfully request that you authorize the
county attorney to work with my office in filing this endorsement of
position brief.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I guess I have a question for our
county attorney. How does this affect the county and the county
tax-paying coffers?
MR. WEIGEL: Very little, actually, Commissioner. We are
familiar with the -- with the subject matter and worked with the
Airport Authority and Mr. McMackin previously. The type of request
being made right now is one which, based on our knowledge of our
comprehensive plan, the noise corridor language of our comp. plan
relating to the airport geographic area, is easy to work with and assist
us to formulate a response.
So the time requirement which computes into a dollar resource
type of thing is relatively minimal, and I believe Mr. McMackin
would be telling you that the time to do this would be soon, it be done
45
November 18, 2003
in the next week or two, I believe, maybe less.
MR. McMACKIN: It is necessary for the county to file its
motion for leave to participate by December 1st. That's not in the
brief. That's simply a request of the Circuit Court that the county may
appear in an amicus situation.
MR. WEIGEL: But ultimately, as far as actual costs and things,
aside from postage and paper, it would be a few hours staff time from
my office in a subject matter we're already pretty familiar with.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Coletta.
Any further discussion?
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just had one concern, and I'll
just bring it out because I have no other way of discussing it with you.
We've always been supportive of the Naples Airport Authority,
but I know that right now they're kind of duking it out with the FAA,
meanwhile, the Collier County Airport Authority is going to need the
assistance of the FAA. We're planning on some runway extensions
and some grant money, and I'm really concerned, will that affect our
ability to get any grant dollars?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: I'd tend to think not. I don't believe what -- the
kind of information we're providing here is not an opinion or argument
so much as, in fact, it's a discussion of fact of our comp. plan and how
it works with significant facility operations like the Airport, so I would
tend to think that there would not be a connection.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's my only concern. I just don't
want to jeopardize any of our granting -- grant ability for the future.
MR. McMACKIN: We understand, Commissioner. And as a
matter of fact, I think that the executive director, Mr. Soliday, is on
46
November 18, 2003
personally good terms. He, just yesterday, learned that the FAA had
invited him to speak at a seminar they're offering in Washington, D.C.
in March. They want to draw down on his expertise to help educate
their staff as to the problems of operating a small regional airport.
So I think our relations, on a practical basis, are good. This is a
very theoretical argument. This is -- you know, as a lawyer, I've been
involved in some very personal and very acrimonious disputes. This
is a little higher than that, and I think that the respect that the FAA has
for the Naples Adm -- Naples Airport administration will carry over,
and I think that Mr. Soliday might be an asset in helping the county
Airport Authority in obtaining their grants.
MR. SOLIDAY: I appreciate also the commissioner's concern
there. I'd point out that the FAA in their evaluation of grant has a
pretty standard calculation process that they go through, which is not
anywhere near affected by relationships, or they try to take the
relationships out of it anyhow so that they don't just give to the
airports that are their best friends. They give out based on a formula,
and this would not affect your formula at all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further questions? Any further
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 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 unanimously.
47
November 18, 2003
MR. SOLIDAY: Thank you very much. We appreciate your
courtesy, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. We're going to take a
1 O-minute break at this time. (A recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Everybody take your seats, please.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, you have a hot mike.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2003-58 WHICH AMENDS CHAPTER 110,
ARTICLE II OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES, WHICH AMENDMENT (1) EXCEPT FOR
NAPLES PARK, PROHIBITS THE ENCLOSURES OF SWALES
WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY BUT PROVIDES
GUIDELINES TO PERMIT THE ENCLOSURE OF SWALES ON A
CASE-BY-CASE BASIS, AND (2) AUTHORIZES ONGOING
INSPECTIONS OF, AND REQUIRES NECESSARY
IMPROVEMENTS AND REPAIRS TO, EXISTING CULVERTS
AND SWALE ENCLOSURES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-
WAY- ADOPTF. D
The next item is 7 -- or 8(A), request the Board of Commissioner
(sic) approve an ordinance, Chapter 110, Article II, of the Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinance (sic), which amends the --
except for Naples Park, prohibit the enclosure of swales within public
right-of-way, to provide guidelines and a permit (sic) enclose the
swales on (sic) a case by case basis; and, two, authorize the ongoing
inspection of, required (sic) necessary improvements of repair to
existing culverts and swales enclosed within the public right-of-way,
and I'll make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
48
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Motion by Commissioner Henning,
second by Commissioner Coyle.
Mr. Kant, thank you for being here today.
MR. KANT: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Any further discussion? Any public
speakers on this item? (No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 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 unanimously.
MR. KANT: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #8B (tabled to later in the meeting)
ORDINANCE 2003-64: PETITION PUDZ-2003-AR-3607, JEFF
DAVIDSON, PE, OF DAVIDSON ENGINEERING INC.,
REPRESENTING BARTON AND WENDY MCINTYRE AND
JOSEPH MAGDALENER, REQUESTING CHANGES TO THE
EXISTING NICAEA ACADEMY PUD ZONING. THE PROPOSED
CHANGES TO THE PUD DOCUMENT MASTER PLAN WILL
ELIMINATE THE USES OF PRIVATE SCHOOL AND ASSISTED
LIVING FACILITY AND ALLOW FOR A MINIMUM OF 580
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS. THE PROPERTY TO BE
CONSIDERED FOR THIS REZONE IS LOCATED ON THE EAST
SIDE OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951) SOUTH OF THE
49
November 18, 2003
CRYSTAL LAKE PUD, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.
PROPERTY CONSISTS OF 119+ ACRES - ADOPTED
THIS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 8(B). This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosures be
provided by commission members.
The item was continued from October 28th, 2003, BCC meeting.
It's PUDZ-2003-AR-3607. Jeff Davidson, PE, of Davidson
Engineering, Inc., representing Barton and Wendy Mclntyre and
Joseph Magdalener, requesting changes to the existing Nicaea
Academy PUD zoning.
The proposed changes to the PUD document and master plan will
eliminate the uses of private school and assisted living facility and
allow for a minimum of 580 residential dwelling units.
The property to be considered for this rezone is located on the
east side of Collier Boulevard, which is County Road 951, south of the
Crystal Lake PUD in section 26, township 48 south, range 26 east,
Collier County, Florida. This property consists of 119 plus acres.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. All wishing to participate in
this item, please rise, raise your right hand, and be sworn in by the
court reporter.
(All speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We had this item on our last agenda,
so that is part of our disclosures this morning, hearing this item.
Any -- any further ex parte communication; Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I have some additional
correspondence and email in my folder for anyone that cares to see it,
and I have talked to staff about it a couple times since the last meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have not been contacted since the
last meeting, although, I revealed some ex parte items at that point in
50
November 18, 2003
time. I have talked with the representatives of the petitioner.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have talked with staff in regards
to this and I haven't had any contact with the lobbyist in this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The lobbyist. That's good.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've spoken with staff. Of
course, we've had-- we've heard this at a previous meeting. And also,
somebody was in my office, not here -- not there to meet with me
about Nicaea, but they were talking about it, except I can't remember
who it was. I had my assistant look through all of my records, but I
can't track down who the person was, but I've spoken to somebody
about it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. And all the ex parte
communication, I have in my file, talked to Bill Hoover, our staff, and
some other people. And it's all in my file for the public to review.
Mr. Kant.
MR. KANT: Good morning, Commissioners, Edward Kant,
Transportation Operations director.
I just want to make a brief comment before the petitioner makes
his presentation. As a reminder, at the last meeting when the staff was
asked to go back and try to get the parties with the properties both at
Nicaea Academy and surrounding area in an attempt to resolve the
access issues and the traffic flow on County Road 951, I just want to
report to you that we did meet. We had -- matter of fact, we had
several meetings since. We had -- they were good meetings.
We tried as hard as we could to bring this about. Unfortunately,
it was not to be. But we did not feel it was appropriate to continue to
hold up Nicaea Academy, and that's why we're here this morning, to
let them continue on with their project. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any questions for Mr. Kant at this
time? None?
51
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Well--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- if I may. On the entrance to
farm -- Farm Road, what is the holdup on that? MR. KANT: Tree Farm Road?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Tree Farm Road, correct.
MR. KANT: Well, I believe that the petitioner is going to
discuss that as part of his presentation this morning, but that issue
came about because Tree Farm Road is a private road held in fee
simple by one of the adjoining property owners.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that adjoining property
owner, at some point in time, is going to want to develop his property;
is that correct?
MR. KANT' Either that or sell it to a developer or sell it to this
developer. That's why I said, I believe that the petitioner is going to
address that issue as part of his presentation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'll wait for his
presentation. Thank you, Mr. Kant. MR. KANT: Yes, sir.
MR. MURRAY: Good morning. For the record -- excuse me.
I'm a little dry. I'm Don Murray. I'm a planning consultant, and I'm
here representing the owners, the petitioners. And I appreciate
everything that staff has done. Ed's worked pretty hard with us to help
try to bring this all to fruition so that we could have a development
that the county can consider well done, well developed.
And also, just wanted to -- before I get started too far here, there
is a handout. I'll talk about that in just a minute. We've made some
changes to that even as we've been here this morning, so the things
that are crossed off are no longer applicable.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Murray, before you continue, I
must ask you, are you a registered lobbyist with the Clerk of Court?
MR. MURRAY: No, I'm not.
52
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. My understanding -- and our
county attorney or the Clerk of Court can assist me -- you're asking --
if you're a paid lobbyist lobbying the Board of Commissioners to take
action, you must register yourself with the Clerk of Courts.
MR. MURRAY: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that correct, Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: That is correct. It does not prohibit him from
speaking, but that is the -- that is the law of the ordinance, yes.
MR. MURRAY: I'm not lobbying. I've not communicated with
anybody other than I'm here representing the owners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The only thing is that you want us to
take action.
MR. MURRAY: Yes, we do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You want elected officials to take
action.
MR. MURRAY: Yes. I'm here with Mr. Jeff Davidson. I was
going to introduce him, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, that's great. You're being paid
to do this, right?
MR. MURRAY: Yes, I am.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Mr. Mitchell?
MR. MITCHELL: It would be no problem to escort him upstairs
and get him registered real quick, if that's his desire. MR. MURRAY: I'm sorry. I could not hear.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's -- Mr. Mitchell stated that he'd be
glad to walk you upstairs to register you as a lobbyist -- MR. MURRAY: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
MR. MURRAY: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
-- with the Clerk of Courts.
Mr. Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Chairman, would it be
possible to move on to the next item while we're waiting for this to
53
November 18, 2003
take place so we could keep this proceeding moving forward?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. That's fine with me.
Does the petitioner have a problem with that? Mr. Davidson?
MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you for the opportunity to come back
before you on the next item or so, thank you. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. WEIGEL: Mr. Chairman, it would be appropriate for you
to entertain a motion to table this item, and then it can be brought
back.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
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: Great.
Item #8C
ORDINANCE 2003-59: TO BE KNOWN AS THE ADVANCED
BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT
ORDINANCE, ESTABLISHING AN ADVANCED BROADBAND
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PROGRAM AVAILABLE TO
ELIGIBLE BUSINESSES TO ENCOURAGE PRIVATE SECTOR
INVESTMENT IN ADVANCED BROADBAND
INFRASTRI JCTI IRF, - ADOPTF, D
54
November 18, 2003
Item #8D
ORDINANCE 2003-60: TO BE KNOWN AS THE JOB CREATION
INVESTMENT ORDINANCE; APPROVE AN ASSOCIATED
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $400,000; ESTABLISH THE JOB
CREATION INVESTMENT PROGRAM AVAILABLE TO
ELIGIBLE BUSINESSES TO MITIGATE THE ECONOMIC
EFFECTS OF INCREASED DEVELOPMENT FEES AND
REIJOCATION OR EXPANSION COSTS - ADOPTED
Item #8E
ORDINANCE 2003-61: TO BE KNOWN AS THE FEE PAYMENT
ASSISTNACE ORDINANCE; ESTABLISH A FEE IMPACT
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ALLOCATING $950,000 TO
ELIGIBLE BUSINESSES TO MITIGATE THE ECONOMIC
EFFECTS OF INCREASED IMPACT FEF, RATES - ADOPTED
Item #8F
ORDINANCE 2003-62: TO BE KNOWN AS THE PROPERTY
TAX STIMULUS ORDINANCE; ESTABLISH A PROPERTY TAX
STIMULUS PROGRAM AVAILABLE TO ELIGIBLE
BUSINESSES TO MITIGATE THE ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF
INCREASED RELOCATION AND EXPANSION COSTS-
ADOPTED
Item #8G
ORDINANCE 2003-63' AMENDING CHAPTER 74 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, AS
55
November 18, 2003
AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 2001-13, THE COLLIER
COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE, 2001-
13, AS AMENDED, BY ESTABLISHING A DEFERRAL
PROGRAM FOR THE IMMOKALEE AREA TO REDUCE THE
ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF INCREASED IMPACT FEE RATES -
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to items 8(C), (D),
(E), (F), and (G), and Mr. Schmidt is going to present all five items,
and I'll read them.
These items were continued from the October 28th, 2003, BCC
meeting because of how moneys were going to be disbursed from TIF
Fund for the CRA in Immokalee.
Staff has got that resolved, I believe. We've had conversations
with the clerk and staff and the county manager in order to do that, but
-- 8(C), approve an ordinance to be known as the Advanced
Broadband Infrastructure Investment Ordinance, establishing an
advanced broadband infrastructure investment program available to
eligible businesses to encourage private sector investment in advanced
broadband infrastructure.
8(D) is approve an ordinance to be known as the Job Creation
Investment Ordinance; approve an associate budget amendment of
$400,000; establish the Job Creation Investment program available to
eligible businesses to mitigate the economic effects of increased
development fees and relocation or expansion costs.
Item 8(E), approve an ordinance to be known as the Fee Payment
Assistance Ordinance; establish a fee payment assistance Program
allocating $950,000 to eligible businesses to mitigate the economic
effects of increased impact fee rates.
Number 8(F), approve an ordinance to be known as the Property
Tax Stimulus Ordinance; establish a property tax stimulus program
available to eligible businesses to mitigate the economic effects of
56
November 18, 2003
increased relocation and expansion costs.
Number 8(G), adoption of an ordinance amending chapter 74 of
the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances as amended by
Ordinance Number 2001-13, the Collier County Consolidated Impact
Fee Ordinance, 2001-13 as amended, by establishing a deferral
program for the Immokalee area to reduce the economic effects of
increased impact fee rates.
Mr. Schmidt will present all five items, and then I would ask the
board, take a vote on them independently.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. And we have numerous
speakers.
Mr. Schmidt?
MR. SCHMIDT: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
I'm Joe Schmidt, administrator of communities development,
environmental services division.
I thank Mr. Mudd for reading through the ordinances, at least the
titles. I'm going to go rather quickly through a slide presentation.
You've seen these before. I'm going to conclude with one slide that
will basically highlight, or at least synthesize the recommendations,
and then we can proceed from there.
These are the four economic incentives, as Mr. Mudd just pointed
out. First one I'm going to talk about is the impact fee deferral
program for Immokalee. This is basically an impact fee deferral
program for residential homes in the Immokalee area. We've
discussed this in the past.
Staff has gone back and reworked this. What we're looking for
right now is, this will be confined specifically to the Immokalee
Enterprise Zone. The dwellings must be owner-occupied, as we
discussed previously. The maximum selling price will not exceed
$175,000, and this, to qualify, will be 100 -- joint income, household
income of $100,000, as you so chose.
I want to point out the difference between the Immokalee -- at
57
November 18, 2003
least the CRA -- the Immokalee CRA and the Enterprise Zone. As
part of this ordinance, we will have to come back to you -- and I will
discuss that at conclusion -- but we'll be looking at making these two
boundaries the same, and that will be a follow-on process in another
board meeting.
The initial funding for this will require $500,000 from the general
fund. And this is already budgeted money that's been budgeted for the
economic incentives. We're looking at-- the program will support
approximately 126 homes a year, and realize that that will -- it's a
three-year program, as we discussed, and that will require a half
million dollars of budgeted support for this program for the next three
years. You already -- you've already done it for this year, so there are
two follow-on years that will require budgeting as well.
The repayment period based on the allocation of funds will be
over 11 years. What we're looking at is taking 95 percent of the tax
incremental funds associated with each qualifying development to
repay a portion of the impact fees and the $500,000. So coupled
together they will repay back (sic) the impact fees that are associated
with these dwellings over an 11-year period.
And I want to point out, as you well know, that these have
already gone through the CRA Advisory Board in Immokalee and had
also been through your board, the CRA -- the Collier County CRA,
and that was this past Friday.
Please understand that there will be a lien placed on each unit
until the property is sold or transferred or refinanced at which time, if
it's under the 11-year period, the impact fees will be assessed to the
property owner and they'll be paid back to -- on a prorated basis for
the general fund and to the impact fee fund based on the payment.
After 11 years, the lien will be lifted -- actually the lien will stay
on the property and the lien will -- the moneys will be paid back to the
TIF Fund after the 11 years. I correct myself.
That is the Impact Fee Deferral Program, and we can talk about
58
November 18, 2003
that, or I can run through the others and we can talk about them all
together.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a fast question.
MR. SCHMIDT: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You were saying that you were
going to -- you were going to change the lines between the CRA and
the Enterprise Zone.
MR. SCHMIDT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are you going to be expanding the
CRA to meet the Enterprise Zone lines?
MR. SCHMIDT: Actually the proposal -- and I'm looking for
Fred or Ray. I think the proposal will be to make the CRA boundary
coincide with the enterprise boundary.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
MR. SCHMIDT: And that -- because -- because of the
uniqueness of the enterprise boundary, it gives a-- it creates special
authority for these type of programs, and it's a federally sponsored
program. And the initiative from the board is to recommend that the
CRA boundary become -- coincide with the enterprise boundary.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You will have more TIF Funds too,
because a lot of this expansion is going to be taking place within those
boundaries, so I was glad to hear that.
MR. SCHMIDT: Yet. And in fact, one of the developments
impacted by this is the Arrowhead Development. And by doing that it
will encompass the entire Arrowhead Development.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Motion to approve.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, let him -- let him finish all five so
that you got an idea of the total breadth of the economic incentives,
and then--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I thought we were going to take
59
November 18, 2003
them one at a time.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: After he gets done.
MR. MUDD: We will at the end, sir.
MR. SCHMIDT: The Advanced Broadband Infrastructure
Program, you've seen this before, but this is basically to provide the
repayment for investments into broadband technology. The
companies will pay their annual ad valorem property taxes, and, of
course, upon verification, they can seek reimbursement.
The cost of the system will not exceed $25,000 and will repay
over a three-year period not to exceed eighty four hundred dollars
(sic). That's basically that proposal. We can go into detail in that
again if you so wish.
The third is the Job Creation Program. This is a program where
funds will be taken out of the general fund. It's proposed to be a--
countywide, and you see it down below in the last slide, there are
three programs, one for the Immokalee enterprise community, one for
areas east of Collier County, and one for what are going to be
designated high impact areas.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I need to stop you there.
MR. SCHMIDT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I noticed in three of these things
they talked about the high impact areas, yet, I thought at the time that
we were all discussing this, we weren't going to be trying to focus
business into the high impact areas. What we were trying to do was
encourage business to go into the other areas, and I thought we deleted
that. Did I misunderstand that?
MR. SCHMIDT: Well, as the guidance was, it would be on a
case by case basis for the high impact area. We would have to come
back to the board for approval on a case by case basis.
That, for instance, if a company was going to move into the -- oh,
our new technology center -- thank you, Tammie -- the new tech.
center which is really not east of 1-7 -- east of 951, they could come
60
November 18, 2003
back on a case by case basis and ask for support to the program. That
was what we believed your final guidance was.
And if you do want to change that, we'll certainly --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Boy, I got hands all over the place
with that explanation.
Commissioner Coyle, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I'd like to clarify this.
Our debate at that point in time was -- and I was the one who
raised the point -- that I didn't think that 115 percent of the average
salary was an appropriate target level for areas west of 951. I mean,
we don't need any more low --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- salaries, and -- the people can't
afford to live here in this portion of the county anyway at that salary.
So what we wanted to do was to make sure that there was an
opportunity to encourage higher paid jobs in the western part of the
county. And for that reason, we established that high impact area of
consideration. In other words, there's two different sets of criteria.
In the Immokalee area and in the eastern part of the county, the
companies can qualify if they create jobs at 115 percent of the average
MR. SCHMIDT: And ifI could go through, you'll see the
difference. I mean, I'll go back to the three slides.
The enterprise community is $3,000; five jobs and 50 percent of
the private sector wage. That's pretty much the highlight. And if you
could see the private sector wage, that would be about $15,000, and
that's for Immokalee. That's a -- it's a minimum number of jobs, and
50 percent of the median income in order to entice industries to
participate and move to Immokalee. The --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before you go any further,
Commissioner Halas has a question.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What -- did we -- in the discussion,
61
November 18, 2003
was there anything in regards to the triangle zone in your area? Was
there some discussion that we were looking for jobs to put in there too
or not?
MR. SCHMIDT: That would -- Commissioner, that would be on
a case by case basis if they -- they would be deemed as part of the
enterprise -- or correction -- the high impact -- which I'm going too
fast -- the high impact area, which is 150 percent of the private sector
wages, which is the guidance that we received from the board, as
Commissioner Coyle stated, and that would be, in order to qualify,
they would have to pay a minimum of $46,491.
So if I can quickly go through these three slides. It's -- you can
see five and 50 percent, 10 and 115 for eastern Collier County, and
then 20 jobs and 150 percent. So those are the three criteria for the
three different positions -- three different qualifying entities for this
program. And that's the way we understood the guidance we received
from the board when this was last presented.
So the high impact area would be something that would have to
come back to the board on a case by case basis.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, then
Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. To do it otherwise, you
would essentially be cutting out all of Collier County west of 951
from any job creation at all.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I don't think that's a bad idea.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I do, because there are --
there are places in East Naples where people need to upgrade their
standard of living, they need to get more money, they need to have
more attractive jobs, and the same thing is true in lots of other areas
east of-- or west of 951.
And I believe that we should not spend all of our money creating
incentives to create $15,000-a-year jobs in the eastern part of the
county. Certainly we need to do some there, but we cannot afford to
62
November 18, 2003
ignore those people in other parts of the community who do want jobs
that pay better closer to where they live so they can afford to live in
this part of the county.
And for that reason, I -- you know, I think that the staff has done
exactly what we asked them to do last time.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, then
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm glad you clarified that, because I
hadn't remembered that section of it before. I had -- I had thought we
decided to put that to rest. But thank you for bringing that up. That's
all I wanted to say.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. In all cases though, the
commission gets to weigh each one of them for their significance and
what -- the value we're going to get for what we're paying them. MR. SCHMIDT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And this is true with all the
incentives through there. So just because we got it out there doesn't
mean that any particular one, be it in the eastern part of the county or
in the coastal part of the county, it still has to come back to the
commission.
MR. SCHMIDT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. SCHMIDT: The job creation investment will require an
annual funding of $400,000. That's already budgeted and part of this
program, and those are some of the examples of what would be
deemed the payback. The direct economic impact is almost-- almost
$4 million.
The next program is the Fee Payment Assistance Program. This
is the program basically to offset some of the costs of relocating to
Collier County. And it's, again, the same breakdown. The Immokalee
Enterprise community, those areas east of Collier Boulevard, and the
63
November 18, 2003
high impact area. And this is relatively -- or almost the same -- same
information, the 10 jobs, 115 for the -- in the high impact is the 20
jobs, 150, and Immokalee is the five jobs at 50 percent.
The last -- or the Fee Payment Assistance -- let me see where --
I've lost track here.
This is the Fee Payment Assistance Program, and this job would
require -- this program is $950,000, 350,000 earmarked for Collier
County, and 600,000 specifically earmarked for Immokalee.
This will require 50 percent of the TIF dollars for the incremental
impact of a business moving into any one of these areas. But what I'm
-- what I'm talking about is the CRA, with specifically the Immokalee
CRA, 50 percent of the incremental money would have to come back
to the county to pay for the program in order to create the type of
program, kind of self-generated or self-funding.
The last program is the Property Tax Stimulus Ordinance. And
this program, again, broken down into three areas, the enterprise
community, as before, eastern Collier County, and the high impact
area. The same qualifiers for those programs as well.
This program is associated where you would-- you would
basically pay your property tax and you would -- you would apply for
reimbursement.
In order to fund this in the CRA, we're asking that 95 percent of
the incremental moneys associated with the impact of that industry in
the CRA would come back to replenish the program. And you can see
the economic impacts.
So that in a nutshell -- this is the recap of the incentives, the
Advanced Broadband, the Job Creation, the stack-- the Tax Stimulus
Program, and the Fee Payment Assistance. You can see the difference
from the -- as far as from the Immokalee enterprise area, eastern
Collier County, and the high impact area.
The job creation talks about the 3,000 for Immokalee, the 2,000
for eastern Collier County, and specifies how many jobs, likewise, for
64
November 18, 2003
the tax stimulus, the qualifications as well as throughout the county.
Now, I need to point out for the broadband where we showed
down below the funding, the broadband and the tax stimulus I list as
unfunded in '04. Now, I only say that because there is no budgeted
line item for those programs, but there's two reasons for that; one is,
we don't anticipate there's going to be a claim in '04, because where
we are now, almost a quarter into this fiscal year, and by the time the
industry moves and applies, we'll be in the -- into the fiscal year '05,
so it will be budgeted for an '05 program.
The other investment programs have already been budgeted, the
Job Creation, the Fee Payment Assistance, and the Immokalee Impact
Fee have all been budgeted, and the moneys have been divided as
shown.
So subject to your questions, that concludes my brief overview.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I noticed there was a sunset in
one of these. I can't remember which one. MR. SCHMIDT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do we have a sunset in all of them?
MR. SCHMIDT: That's a good question. We have a sunset in
the Impact Fee Program for Immokalee for the residential housing. It
was three years. We did not set a sunset provision for the economic
incentives. We basically never received guidance from the board to
do that.
Understand that, of course, these are going to take a little bit
longer to implement, meaning that there's not anybody out there
knocking on the door ready to come and apply, as far as I know.
Tammie might be able to certainly -- Ms. Nemecek may be able to
provide more guidance on that. But, no, we have not established a
sunsetting.
Now, we were directed by this board to establish a sunsetting for
the Immokalee Impact Fee Deferral Program. Only -- one reason is to
65
November 18, 2003
make sure we come back in three years and access the impact and
access whether or not the program was worthwhile to fund.
I look to your guidance if you want to establish some sort of.a
sunsetting for one of the programs.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before I go to Commissioner Coletta
MR. SCHMIDT: Yeah, and I need to point out that, of course,
these programs are only going to be -- be able to be implemented if
they're funded annually.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There you go.
MR. SCHMIDT: The issue is, if they're unfunded, we can't
implement, so it becomes a moot point to sunset because it's going -- it
will come to you in an annual funding as part of the budget. And it can
be on the records as an ordinance, but without the funds, we can't
implement the program. So in that -- in that standpoint, you certainly
have the opportunity to kind of put the kibosh to the program by not
funding it there during the budget cycle, during the budget hearings.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The high impact area and the low
impact area, is this -- this is a new discussion what we had previous on
our agenda?
MR. SCHMIDT: They're high impact -- okay. Well, I didn't --
I'm --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. Let me ask the question
again.
MR. SCHMIDT: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The last time that we discussed this
on the public hearing, was the word high impact area, low impact area,
part of the discussion, or is this something new?
MR. SCHMIDT: Well, no. What was part of the discussion,
Commissioner, was the Immokalee Enterprise Zone, areas east of 951.
At one time we talked one mile -- one mile east of-- east of that zone.
We just said for ease, it would be east of 951. And what we called is
66
November 18, 2003
-- the high impact industries that move in. I called it high impact area,
but high impact industries that move into other areas of Collier County
that are not part of the other two areas, either Immokalee or eastern
Collier County, and those would, again, be the areas as we discussed,
whether they're going to move to the tech. park or some other area of
the county that wants to partic -- they're a qualifying industry that can
participate in these programs.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, to answer your question --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: -- high impact area was added because of your
conversation on the dais last time to talk about upgrading the
percentage of the base salary and whatnot when you went west of 951.
And that item came up -- most of the discussion was 951 -- on 951,
left and right of the property and to the east, okay, but then there was a
discussion not to limit your -- your selection of maybe an item that
came into East Naples or into the Bayshore CRA or whatever with the
impact item, so we added that category. So yes, sir, it is a -- it is a
new item on this particular chart for discussion today.
MR. SCHMIDT: IfI could correct the manager, it was briefed in
the last presentation. It was briefed as a separate area, because the first
time we presented this, we got the guidance. We came back during the
last presentation -- and I can pull the slides on the last presentation.
MR. MUDD: Then I stand corrected. I'm sorry.
MR. SCHMIDT: We discussed it, because that was the guidance
we received, that we would -- we would consider those, again, on a
case by case basis.
The issue was the 150 percent versus -- which we came back. It
was one time 115, I believe -- 11 $, and we came back based on
Commissioner Coyle's recommendation, that to qualify they had to
have at least 150 percent of the median -- median income.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I thought-- I remember the
discussion as actually a motion, and the motion was based on
67
November 18, 2003
Commissioner Coletta and myselfs concerns where we were putting
these jobs, or trying to -- correct. And we were trying to figure out at
that time who owns the property west -- just west of 951.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, that's what I remember, too.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I never would have voted for --
just on the basis of, you know, we're going to create jobs in -- west of
951. But, you know, my search what property values are and housing
costs west of 951, we're still not going to be able to house people with
$43,000 of income -- whatever, the -- west of 951, so we're just going
to exacerbate the traffic problems that we have on Immokalee Road
and all the other roads going to the coast. That's what I thought. But
that's -- you know, doesn't sound like what the majority of the
commissioners' understanding was. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I -- Commissioner Henning,
I understood the same thing, although listening to this and the
direction we're going, I think that we ought to weigh some credence
not to so much the rest of the county, but to the technology park that's
going to take place over there in North Naples; is that correct?
MR. SCHMIDT: Yes, that's North Naples.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm willing to open that up for
discussion for allowing that with that 150 percent, because that's going
to be reality, it's going to take place. And unless there's some sort of
economic stimulus to make it happen, there may be some difficulty.
So I can understand that.
I agree with you on the rest of it, when we take a look at it, do we
really want to start encouraging industry to go into our highly
populated, coastal area? It just doesn't -- it doesn't make sense, you
know. And we heard from our citizens numerous times, they didn't
want it. And so -- that's my thoughts on it.
MR. SCHMIDT: Realize, certainly, Commissioner, that they
can't move into areas unless they get the proper zoning, so I mean, that
68
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know, but we're setting up a
mechanism to give them something to try and fail each time with, so
let's try to cut the rules to the point where it's something that's
tolerable and livable with (sic). And I could be -- I could be very
agreeable to the technology park as the only entity past 951.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle, then
Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think then, if that's the
case, we need to tell the people on Bayshore and East Naples and
some of the other places that, tough, you're not going to have an
opportunity to have a decent job in your neighborhood, you're going
to have to travel somewhere else. You're going to have to tell some
Allen Systems that provides a very fine workforce and high pay, that
you really shouldn't be located east of-- or west of 951. You ought to
go out in Immokalee.
You know, that's -- you know, I think we've got this thing all
backwards. The problem that the coastal communities have in most
cases is that they are the ones employing all of the low-paying jobs.
They're employing the service workers that service the tourists.
Now, what we would like to do is to have some high-tech or
other high-paying jobs along those areas so that people could work
there. Are we saying we want to create $15,000-a-year jobs in
Immokalee so that people from the coast can go out there and find a
job? I don't think so.
Well, what we're trying to do is find -- find a way to encourage
the growth of good, clean, high-paying jobs near areas where people
live. And if you don't believe that the people -- a lot of people in East
Naples and Naples Park and other places don't need better paying jobs,
then maybe you better go out there and take a look at them, because
they do.
And I think that to just decide all this incentive money goes east
69
November 18, 2003
of 951 is a very distorted use of taxpayer funds, and I think we need to
take a real close look at that to make sure that we -- we're providing a
balanced program to achieve the needs of the overall community.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I was under the same
impression, that I -- in one of our earlier discussions I thought we were
talking about the Bayshore Triangle area and East Naples area, that we
felt that some of those people in that area needed to have relief as far
as job training, upgrading themselves, and I thought that's where we
were headed, in that direction, not only in Immokalee, but in those
particular areas, as Commissioner Coyle brought up.
But I also think that if we have the opportunity and have job
training for these people in these areas where they can better
themselves with a higher paying job, they're not going to put that
much more traffic on the road because basically they're going to be
working in the area that they live in, and I'm sure that a lot of these
companies that come to town are going to look at the price of
property, and they're going to go into the areas where the property is
more -- more conducive for them to establish a venue for providing
jobs.
So I think that we're trying to make sure that we have a system
here that is a free enterprise, and anybody that would like to set up in
East Naples can, if they'd rather to go out to Immokalee, they've also
got that available to them. So I think it's a Free Enterprise Zone for all
of the county.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I really appreciate
Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner Halas's comments, and, of
course, they're ringing my bell, you know, that's where I'm going. I do
want people to live and work closer to their -- or live closer to their
place of employment, and I do feel people need to be making a higher
wage.
70
November 18, 2003
And as long as we allow employers to come in and pay them crap
wages -- excuse me, I guess that's not very nice to say -- we're -- and
yet our cost of living continues to rise, we're going to have the
problem with charity cases all over the county. So I'm glad you
mentioned that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Can we go to public speakers
now?
Are you done with your presentation?
MR. SCHMIDT: I am done, unless you have any questions.
And I do have to read a couple of corrections into the record on the
ordinances, but when you're -- if you're ready to deal with those, I'll do
that at that time.
So if you want to have public speakers now, that would probably
be appropriate.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I just wanted to know if
we might be able to expedite this. Generally, it sounds like the
consensus of opinion is agreement with staff going down the line; is
that correct?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd rather hear -- listen to the
public.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We are. Just trying to get a feel
for where we're going with this. Thank you very much for that
consideration.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Okay. The first public speaker.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, we have six public speakers, the
first one being Fred Thomas. He'll be followed by Tammie Nemecek.
MR. THOMAS: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Fred Thomas. I want to thank you all for beginning to even look at
this whole issue and getting us into a place where we can do some
things.
We have two communities, two vastly different communities,
71
November 18, 2003
one that can compete on one plane, and the other, Immokalee, that has
to compete with other central Florida towns.
So just because we have lowered the bar for businesses, we just
made it easier for us to attract any kind of business, including a higher
wage business, so we (sic) going to be looking for high-wage business
also, okay?'
To correct a statement that was made earlier, only in the high
impact area does the decision come back to you, otherwise the
decision is the county manager, according to the ordinances that I
looked at, that the county manager could deal with the job creation
and some of those other things, except in a high impact area, which is
west of 951, okay?
But by doing that, you have a diversified package of programs,
one you can control in the high impact area, one you allow things to
happen east of 951, and our benefit. Our benefit allows us out in
Immokalee to compete with central Florida to help broaden the tax
base. Because the more money we bring into the county, the more
everybody enjoys the benefit of that, and that's what we're trying to
do.
I want to thank you very much for that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Tammie Nemecek. She'll be
followed by Floyd Crews.
MS. NEMECEK: Good morning. Is it still? Yes, is it still
morning. Good morning. I'm a little bit thinner now. The news is, it's
a girl, Lindy Shane. She was bom September 15th. There's your
update. You're welcome.
Thank you again for your support for this program. My name is
Tammie Nemecek, executive director for the Economic Development
Council of Collier County, and I'll tell you, this is an exciting time for
Collier County. This is really an opportunity to be part of the
economic development programs within the State of Florida as well as
72
November 18, 2003
nationally and internationally to attract companies to this community.
I think we've seen the effects of what incentives can do for the
State of Florida with the recent Scripps Institute that located in West
Palm Beach and the proactiveness on the governor's side and the
leaders within West Palm Beach to attract Scripps to that community.
And I fully anticipate that these programs will allow our Board of
County Commissioners to take a lead role in attraction of high-wage
jobs to Collier County.
And I'll tell you from the Economic Development groups, our
EDC Board of Directors and our members of our organization, we
here in Collier County value the youth in our community, and that's
why we do what we do. We are looking to our youth as our future
leaders, to provide opportunities for those young people in the
community, to not only go to school here with Florida Gulf Coast
University, Ave Maria University, but also to be able to work in our
community and work in a business that they can garner wages that
they can also live here, and that is our ultimate goal, is to make our
community a viable community.
In addition to that, with regards to the systemically changing our
community, most of our taxes right now are generated from the
residential tax base. And as we've been briefed before, residential
taxes that are generated in your community, the cost of services over
exceed that tax base that you collect.
And so what we're looking to do is balance that tax base, provide
some additional revenues from the business community that can help
provide additional services, because for every dollar that you collect
from the business, you provide 75 cents in services, versus the $1.15
from the resident versus the dollar that you collect from that resident.
So in the end of the day, we will have more money in our system
to be able to provide infrastructure, to be able to provide services to
the residents in the community, and that's part of what-- part and
parcel of what we're trying to do with the diversification of our
73
November 18, 2003
economy.
So it is -- it is really growing our community longterm and
systemically changing how our community views business. Not only
do we have a strong tourism base, do we have a strong service base
with -- based upon that tourist that comes in here, but we're also going
to have high-wage, high-tech jobs, and not only in the coastal
community, but we're also going to provide those high-wage jobs in
the Immokalee area and in eastern Collier County.
So, again, I thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today
and the leadership that the Board of County Commissioners has taken
with this issue, and I thank you from the EDC Board of Directors and
from our members and the businesses here in Collier County. Thank
yotl.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Floyd Crews. He'll be followed by Richard
Botthof.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Crews.
MR. CREWS: Good morning, Commissioners. Floyd Crews.
I'm from Immokalee. Most of you know me. I was glad to see three
of you all out there this weekend for our deal at the lake, and glad to
have you.
I want to thank everybody for their support on what the county
has been doing for us, and I hope you all will support us, too. And I'm
glad to see that the rest of you commissioners realize there's some
more of Collier County that also needs help, other than Immokalee.
Thank you all.
MS. FILSON: Richard Botthof. He'll be followed by Larry Fox.
MR. BOTTHOF: Good morning. For the record, my name is
Dick Botthof. I am a two-time former chairman of the Economic
Development Council and a retired banker and know most of you.
I, too -- what I'm going to say is probably redundant to
everything that's been said here today. But I want to thank the board
74
November 18, 2003
for their courage, their deliberation, and their thoughtfulness in this
effort.
Diversifying our tax base through the creation of high-wage jobs
is absolutely essential to our perpetuity as a growing and prospering
community.
Tammie's numbers in terms -- that I believe came out of
Enterprise Florida, in terms of the value -- or the cost factors on
residential sector in terms of their revenue and the cost factor in
business is well documented, not only throughout the State of Florida,
but throughout the country.
Our issues are the same with anybody else. Those who would say
that we don't have a skilled workforce. Well, it's a chicken and egg
type thing. Provide the jobs and they will come. Remember Field of
Dreams? I mean, we have a wonderful opportunity here.
This is a wonderful place to live. Our glass is no --
unquestionably half full. But we have provided -- you have provided
a platform for the private sector to get out there and sell our
community. Do not underestimate the value of this Scripps Institute
over on the east coast. The spillover in that type of development
within this community will put Florida on the map. And believe me,
it's a ripple effect when it goes out.
You've done a great job on this. It's very thoughtful. Creating
the higher wage jobs in -- west of 951, making allowances for the
Immokalee area. I just think it's an outstanding effort. I've been
following your efforts now for many years, and I can't remember a
commission in my 24 years in this community that has taken such a
thoughtful, dedicated, and insightful approach, and thank you very
much.
MS. FILSON: Larry Fox.
speaker, Janet Vasey.
MR. FOX: Good morning.
Naples.
He will be followed by your final
My name is Larry Fox. I live here in
I have a business in Immokalee. I've been working -- we've
75
November 18, 2003
had our business in Immokalee for approximately four years. We
have a small manufacturing company, and we also are part of building
the industrial park at the airport. We've been working with the county
for approximately 10 years.
We've had a lot of people come out of the industrial park in the
past five years looking for space, looking for opportunities. Some
we've been able to entice, others we haven't.
As Fred said before, it's a different world, a little bit different
competition out there. We lost companies to Hendry County who
offered a little bit more incentives. So I'm very glad and happy to see
that we're taking a look at this.
We recently at the first facility have relocated another company
from LaBelle, and we're trying to get them in there. We'd like to see
them take advantage of the incentives. We'd like to see them learn
about the incentives. So I'm very excited and happy to see this
happen. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Janet Vasey.
MS. VASEY: Good morning, Commissioners. Janet Vasey for
the record.
I'm very surprised at some of the things that have happened here
this morning. As you all are aware, I was not in favor of the -- these
initiatives. But at your last meeting you made a decision, and I
accepted that decision and was prepared to move on.
Unfortunately, what you have before you today is -- does not
reflect what you decided at the last meeting.
Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Fiala, you were
absolutely right. At the last meeting, the guidance was no to anything
west of 951.
Commissioner Coyle, yes, you brought up the issues on the
high-impact area, and those exact words were used last time, and had
the discussion, and the -- and the vote was in favor of only east of 951.
Now, the first time this came up to you was at the first budget
76
November 18, 2003
hearing, and at that time you said east of 951, and the vote was 4-0. I
was very surprised at the second budget hearing when it came before
you again with this high-impact area, which was west of 951, because
you had already said no. You said no again. You said east 951.
I do not understand how you could get these ordinances before
you today. Either your staff is unable to understand the word no to
west of 951, or they have their own agenda, which is keep bringing it
back and keep bringing it back until you say yes.
Now, I think that's absolutely wrong. When you say not west --
no to west of 951, that means no.
Now, you can go back and look at the record, and I really
recommend that you do because you've heard some testimony here --
maybe we should all be under oath -- that -- that they understood that
you were -- that you had included all of these special high-impact
areas west 951, but that is not what was said.
So I certainly hope that you will investigate as to how this
happened, because that-- your staff is not doing you any service.
They're obviously -- they are obviously being directed by the
Economic Development Council in this instance to bring this back
again and again.
When -- when is the final decision? Here you're all saying now,
well, maybe we should do this. You should not have these ordinances
in front of you. If your staff had done what you were -- what you told
them to do at a public meeting -- now, I don't know what's gone on in
nonpublic meetings, but at a public meeting, you said come back here
with no to west of 951. So how can this happen that you have this
ordinance that says, hey, anything goes? West of 951 is just fine.
So I really hope that you'll investigate that, because that is not
what you said. I'm willing to live by what you said the last time, but
no one else on your staff is.
And how this could be so pervasive, I don't understand. I mean,
who signed off on all of this on the stafff
77
November 18, 2003
When -- the army that I came up in as a civilian, when -- my
general officers let me have whatever say I wanted until a decision is
made, and then when they -- when they told me what the decision is,
that's the direction I marched.
Well, here you told your staff to march east of 951, and they're
still going west. So I really hope you'll reconsider this and not take
any action today on something that is totally different than what you
approved at the last meeting. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Is that it?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, I -- I don't know where
we're going to go with this item, but whether it be the -- we give
direction of what I thought was east of 951 -- I'm not going to vote for
-- in favor of the affirmative, anything different (sic), but I'm going to
charge the county manager, if-- after I've reviewed the minutes of,
you know, taking action.
MR. MUDD: I'm pulling -- Mr. Chairman, I'm pulling the
minutes right now from that meeting, okay, that was the phone call --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: -- I was making, and let us look at that over
lunchtime, get you all copies of that so know what was said --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MUDD: -- so that -- and let's table this item until after
lunch and we can get at this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Hang on. Commissioner Coyle,
Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would like to understand
the legalities of that. The -- the proposal being brought back to us can
or cannot be different from the guidance that we originally requested?
Can we consider something different or must we consider only what
was decided at the last meeting?
78
November 18, 2003
MR. WEIGEL: The answer to that question is, notwithstanding
direction given, you have the opportunity at an adoption consideration
hearing such as this, to make changes, to hear additional information
and have additional considerations in your determination.
I do not believe -- and Joe or Patrick White, assistant county
attorney, can correct me. But I don't believe that the issue of direction
from a previous meeting, as may or may not be reflected in the
minutes, and the discussion of today's meeting run into a problem with
the advertisement of the items themselves, the legal advertisement. I
don't think we have a problem with that. I know they would chime in,
I think, if they believe that there were in regard to this idea or this
question of prior direction or intent and the understanding of staff.
Shouldn't be a problem, I don't think.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. It would seem to me that we
should have the flexibility to make adjustments in our policy or even
our decisions if we feel that we might have not made the right
decisions in earlier meetings.
MR. WEIGEL: That's exactly right. That is correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But, you know, I would-- I would
like to make sure that everybody understands that, since I was a
proponent of this increased compensation, that I haven't talked with
staff at all about this since that last meeting, so there has been no
collusion whatsoever with respect to that. I've had no contact with
staff about that at all.
But if, in fact, the guidance last time was different than what I
understood, it still makes no difference. You know, we're not potted
plants up here. You know, we can -- we can make up our minds based
upon the data that is presented to us and reach some conclusions.
So we'll -- I guess we'll clarify that when we see the -- see the
minutes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm kind of surprised here. I can't
79
November 18, 2003
understand what the stigma is of not providing high-tech jobs for all
the people in Collier County and-- if we have that opportunity. I don't
think we're talking about a smokestack plant here. We're talking about
something that's a -- clean to the environment.
And to put a -- to put a stigma on it that says that we don't want
this west of 951 -- as I said earlier, I think the price of land will dictate
where these places are going to locate. And if they feel that they have
a workforce that's located in the triangle area and that they can afford
land, then so be it, and I think they're providing a service for the
people of Collier County. And I don't understand what the problem is
here.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anyways. Any more speeches before
we continue this item?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I just want to make sure -- you
know, we're not out -- you know, we were -- you know, I'm trying to
show you the slides as we were going through the discussion. This
was the slide that was used, I think it was in September when we did
this or the first part of October, when we were having the discussion
and staff was taking the changes as it was coming from the dais.
So, you know, this is in red, it came from Denny, and here's the
slide we used the last time. And we were doing the 145 percent. I
mean, I remember Commissioner Coyle saying the $38,000 for a
salary was a detriment to Collier County. We've had discussions
about that particular statement before, but --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
MR. MUDD: But these were the notes that we were taking.
So I don't -- if staff made a mistake, we'll -- we'll go through the
records and we'll so state that on the record. But I don't think it was an
intentional mistake, okay? It might have been an unintentional
mistake based on the discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
80
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I, for one, don't see any
need to delay this any further as far as waiting for the minutes to come
back.
As Commissioner Coyle so eloquently put it, you know, we have
the option to change our minds to be able to reconsider, and possibly
new facts have entered into it. I'm in no way opposed to doing it
countywide. The reason -- I just want to see this thing go forward.
And I'll vote with the majority, if that's what they would like to do as
far as countywide.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: What's the wishes of the board? My
perspective is, we gave marching orders and it's -- the material in front
of us today is different than the marching orders.
So I would like to -- I know we could change our mind, but with
-- the material in front of us is different than what I remember, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I can't agree with you more
on that, but also, too, I don't want to ever get to the point where we
stymie staff where they don't offer suggestions that are new and
creative to pick up the ideas and bring them forward.
I feel that I'm mature enough to be able to reject something if it's
wrong. In this case they came back with a new proposal that seems to
meet more of the needs of Collier County than just the eastern part,
and I can support it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Tell me, once again, Mr. Mudd,
that slide just put up here was from what meeting?
MR. MUDD: That was September 9th and 10th is when we --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So that -- that was a
meeting after the board meeting where this decision that Ms. Vasey
made reference to; is that correct?
MR. SCHMIDT: That was the meeting where we first
introduced the amendments. It was not the budget hearing meeting. It
was after we entered -- we came back with all the ordinances and
81
November 18, 2003
introduced them. It was our understanding to go back and change
those figures specifically for the high-impact area to be 150 percent of
the average median income, and that's what we did.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So those slides came from--
MR. SCHMIDT: That is the presentation that was given at the
last -- last hearing by Tammie and Helene Castletine of my staff.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you changed those figures
based upon what you heard in that meeting; is that what basically --
MR. SCHMIDT: That is correct, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But there is the possibility
that the board voted differently?
MR. SCHMIDT: I'd have to go back and look at the minutes.
There was really no vote as far as I understood. There was just
direction --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Direction.
MR. SCHMIDT: -- to come back with these to be relooked at.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just direction.
MR. SCHMIDT: Now, I do have to clarify that in our relooking
at these, we did make adjustments to both the budgeted items, based
on some previous decisions by this board and looked at how these
programs are going to be implemented, which necessitated us to go
back to the advisory board, which we did, in Immokalee, and then we
came back to the CRA, which we did, because we had to adjust --
specifically had to adjust the payback provisions through the TIF
provisions in the CRA, and that's -- we -- those areas have changed
significantly from what we proposed in the September meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, I agree with
Commissioner Coletta. Let's get on with this. We know what we
want to do. Let's do it. Quit playing around with this thing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. With that, if I may --
may I?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You may.
82
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
I'd like to make a motion for approval as written by staff, agenda
items 8(C)--
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: One at a time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: 8(C).
MR. SCHMIDT: Commissioner, I need to read some
amendments or adjustments into the record, some language changes,
not for (C). But for 8(F) and 8(E) and also 8(G), there are language
changes in the paragraphs that have to be made.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll hold my motion until that
point in time.
MR. SCHMIDT: On 8(F) and 8(E), the paragraphs -- this is on
your -- page 10 of your document and page 11 of 8(E) -- this is section
four, I'm reading paragraph two, and there was a change. The date of
adoption of a resolution by the Collier County Community
Development Agency, A, recommending the allocation of 95 percent
of the tax incremental financing, TIF Funds associated with the
qualifying eligible businesses, to partially fund the Property Tax
Stimulus Program, and the board's amendment of the redevelopment
plan to authorize use of TIF Funds as a funding source for certain
Board of County Conunissioners approved programs; and three, the
effective date of ordinances by the Board of County Commissioners
adopting appropriate amendments to modify the Collier County
Community Redevelopment Plan for Immokalee to allow for the use
of TIF Funds for the repayment of property taxes to the eligible
businesses located in Immokalee Enterprise Zone and expanding the
boundaries of the Immokalee redevelopment area to include the
Immokalee Enterprise Zone in its entirety.
So those were basically the same verbiage for those two
paragraphs. And with the -- in regards to the issue on 8(G) -- and this
is on page two of seven of the ordinance, this is paragraph --
subparagraph two, the deferral program-- this is the Impact Fee
83
November 18, 2003
Deferral Program. There was a little bit of change in the wording.
The Deferral Program will be funded by the budgeted and
appropriated funds from general revenue subject to the availability of
funding and from a portion of the tax increment revenue generated by
ad valorem property tax associated to the quality (sic) development.
All repayments to satisfy liens as well as any applicable interest
occurred due to the default from the program shall be paid back to the
general revenue and the community redevelopment are tax -- or
Community Redevelopment Trust Fund as applicable to each
qualifying development.
And then on-- in that same ordinance on paragraph-- page six
there was some rewording. I'll read the entire paragraph. This is
section four, the effective date. Paragraph two, the date of adoption of
the resolution by the Collier County Community Redevelopment
Agency, CRA, recommending the allocation of specified tax
incremental funding -- or tax incremental financing funds associated
to qualifying developments participating in the Immokalee Residential
Impact Fee Deferral Program to be repaid when the home is sold,
transferred, or refinanced, and, B, recommending the board -- the
board's amendment for the redevelopment plan to authorize the use of
TIF Funds as a funding source for certain Board of County
Commissioners approved programs.
And then the effective date of ordinances. It's plural, instead of
an ordinance by the Board of County Commissioners adopting the
appropriate amendments to modify the Collier County Community
Redevelopment Plan. So those just read into the record.
MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman, Assistant County Attorney, Patrick
White. The only change would be that in paragraph two, it was the
word qualifying as opposed to quality development. We certainly
hope there'll be quality developments as well. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I was understanding that the
county manager was asking for separate motions on these items. Am I
84
November 18, 2003
correct on that?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Each one needs to be voted on
separately, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve 8(C), the--
known as the Advanced Broadband Infrastructure Investment
Ordinance as so presented to us.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Halas.
I -- whatever misunderstanding that I had, I'm not going to vote
for, but I am very much in favor of the incentives in Immokalee,
which I will vote for.
So any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just a question. This particular
program is not funded for FY-04?
MR. MUDD: Right, Commissioners, because when the
ordinance finally gets put out there, they have to apply, then they have
to pay their -- they have to pay their taxes, which will be next year.
And then once they pay their taxes, then they get a rebate --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: -- so that's why it doesn't have dollars this year.
MR. SCHMIDT: The two on the list that are unfunded, we don't
expect anybody to even be coming in till '05, maybe even '06, because
the broadband certainly is something they have to install first, and
then they'll apply for the refund. The other programs are funded.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, just one comment, and it
relates to Commissioner Fiala's earlier request about sunsetting. I
think that's an important principle, but we accomplish the same thing
by annual budget reviews of these things, and -- MR. SCHMIDT: That's correct.
85
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- if we don't see the kind of
progress that we expect to see, we can make modifications, or if we
see it is not producing the desired results and we're putting too much
money into this thing, we can make adjustments every year. So it's
not as if these things will just go on forever and ever without review.
MR. SCHMIDT: And, Commissioner, between staff and the
EDC, I think it's our obligation to come back to you periodically to
report on this program, and we will do that. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does anybody want to make that a
part of the motion, or is that just a statement?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think it's part of the budget
review process. That's understood.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good, good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I just would want to make sure
that it isn't hidden within the budget, that it's something that we can
see every year and review.
MR. SCHMIDT: Oh, it would be -- it's clearly identified, and
under economic development, it will be in my budget.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's a line item, each one.
MR. SCHMIDT: It would be a line item --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. SCHMIDT: -- both for the -- as it was last year, or this
fiscal year, both to identify the cost for personnel cost as well as the
cost associated with the programs, and also budgeted in that is the
funds that the county provides to the EDC and the public/private
partnership. That's all part of that same -- same budget line item.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
86
November 18, 2003
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
Aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? Aye.
Next item, entertain a motion on 8(D), approve an ordinance, job
creation investment ordinance, approving associated budget
amendment of $400,000.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So move.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Opposed? Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just have to say, I'm doing this
because I want to make sure that I give everybody in East Naples, the
people in East Naples an opportunity to have a higher wage, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Even though it's not something I --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 4-1, Commissioner
Henning descending (sic).
Item 8(E), approved ordinance known as impact fee assistance
ordinance, establish a fee assistance program allocating --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So move.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- $950,000.
Motion by Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
87
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Second by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? Aye.
Motion carries 4-1, Commissioner Henning descending (sic).
Item 8(F), approve an ordinance known -- the property tax
stimulus ordinance to establish a property tax stimulus program
available to eligible businesses to mitigate economic effect increased
(sic) relocation and expense (sic) cost.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So moved.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? Aye.
Commissioner Henning descending (sic). Motion carries, 4-1.
Item -- adopt an ordinance amending chapter 74, Collier County
codes and law (sic) and ordinances by amending ordinance number
two thousand and thirteen (sic) of Collier County consolidated impact
fee as amended, establish a deferral program for the Irmnokalee area,
reducing-- reduce the economic effects of increased impact fees.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Be my pleasure to make that
motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Fiala-- or
88
November 18, 2003
I'm sorry -- Coletta, 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 HENN1NG: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just -- I just want to express
my sincere gratitude to this commission for moving these items
forward, not only for Immokalee, which will benefit tremendously
from this, but all of Collier County. Thank you from the -- sincerely
from the bottom of my heart.
MR. SCHMIDT: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're going to take a lunch break.
Thank you. One-hour lunch break. (A recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Would everybody take their seats,
please.
Next item is --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, can I clarify that motion piece
from the last discussion that we had about the motion that we talked
about for CRA's and the economic incentives? We've gone back and
taken a look--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can you hear me now?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
Commissioner, what we did is we went back and we took a look
in September 9th to take a look at the minutes of what was done. And
this particular item went for some 70 pages or thereabouts, okay, and
this was the -- at least the fourth time that we had discussed this.
89
November 18, 2003
We had a workshop in May. Then we had another workshop the
beginning of June. We had a discussion about it during the budget
workshop. We had it on an agenda item on the 29th of July. Then we
had it down in September on the 9th and 10th as we tried to get this
right.
The previous pages talk about -- Commissioner Coyle was rather
vocal about going to 150 percent prior to this. And it went on for
about four or five pages. I have Commissioner Halas talking about
wanting it, then Commissioner Fiala talked about supporting the
process. And then this is the final resolution at the end.
Commissioner Henning basically states the easiest way to do it is
we are creating an economic zone east of 951. If there are any CRA's
inside the zone, they need to participate. Anyone outside, they are not
to participate until the Board changes that on a case-by-case basis.
Then it went through some comments by the Commissioners and it
went 4-1.
If we -- if the staff did anything different than what the Board
wanted, based on our proposals today, my apologies for that particular
issue. I think on a case-by-case basis what the staff basically did is
said hey, we don't want to have the staff making the decisions about
who qualifies for the economic incentives in any case, and they want
all of them to come back to the Board to approve them, either on a
consent agenda or on a regular agenda. And that's the way the
ordinances read.
So Commissioners, Mr. Chairman, my apologies for staff if we
didn't get it right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, at this point it doesn't
matter. But let me -- let me just say that there was a motion, there was
a second, there was plenty of discussion, there was clarification, and it
doesn't reflect what was brought before us. MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anything else?
90
November 18, 2003
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The whole thing was Commissioner
Coletta made the motion and changed it to motion to be east of 951,
the center line, by the way, so that nobody does -- get smart on the
edge of the road. And Commissioner Coyle seconded it.
Now, after a lot of discussion about the CRA's, I stated the
easiest way to do this is we're going to create an economic zone east
of 951, if there are any CRA's outside the zone, they need to
participate, anybody outside this zone. And what I'm saying is the
CRA's outside the zone can-- we can decide it by a case-by-case
basis.
Commissioner Coletta said that's excellent, I'd like to make that
part of my motion. It wasn't just everything east of 951 -- west of 951.
So at this point it really doesn't matter again because what we
discussed today on the dais, the majority of the Commissioners
wanted to do it all over Collier County. So any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're going to back up to 8(A), and
that was the Nicaea Academy the Board of Commissioners deferred to
until we get some things straightened out.
Item #8B -Continued from earlier in the meeting
MR. MUDD: That was PUDZ-2003-AR-3607, and Mr.
Davidson was presenting at the time. As he went up and did register as
a lobbyist; is that correct, Mr. Mitchell?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Murray?
MR. MURRAY: Actually, it's Don Murray, for the record. And
I did register. I am a lobbyist. So thank you, I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Oh, we knew that.
MS. STUDENT: Mr. Chairman, that item was tabled and I
believe we need a motion to take it off the table and put it back on the
91
November 18, 2003
agenda.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
So moved.
Second.
Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion to take it off the table, throw
it on the floor by Commissioner Coyle, second by Commissioner
Fiala.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Mr. Murray?
MR. MURRAY: Good afternoon. As I was stating earlier, I
presented you with a hand-out that had some proposed changes to the
PUD document. Some of the changes in that were based on some of
the negotiations on items trying to make this development work. One
was a phasing plan. But now with talking with the county
transportation staff I think we've come up with a solution and that is
that based on the contract purchaser who's going to purchase this PUD
is working out an agreement to purchase Tree Farm Road. Therefore,
he would dedicate -- excuse me, reserve and dedicate that road at the
time the county needed it to -- and also construct a full opening access
to county standards so that that would accommodate the PUD as well
as furore development in the area as well.
We reviewed this. I'm sorry, I came in late on this, but I looked
at it. I think the density does work there. It's a large parcel. With the
improvements to County Road 951, there shouldn't be a problem if we
have access with Tree Farm Road.
92
November 18, 2003
The only thing that I would ask is that the county would consider
-- continue to work with us to place this on the five-year plan so that
my clients could recover some of the cost with impact fees later down
the road. This is reasonable, it's a win/win for the county, as well as
for the developer. And we're prepared to go that way. And we're
asking for the 580 units with that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Murray -- excuse me,
Commissioner Fiala.
The property in question, on the back side of it, does it abut Tree
Farm Road presently?
MR. MURRAY: The property on the back side?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Correct.
MR. MURRAY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So that could be your access right
there instead of the county giving impact fee credits?
MR. MURRAY: I'm sorry, are we talking about the property on
the south side of Tree Farm or the --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The Nicaea property.
MR. MURRAY: The Nicaea? Okay. Just a second.
Okay. Are you -- you're talking about the -- is this up here?
Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let me say it again. The question
was, does your property, your client's property, abut Tree Farm Road?
MR. MURRAY: Yes, it does.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. The question is, can't you
access it now? Couldn't that be your access instead of 951 ?
MR. MURRAY: The -- it -- that's what we're asking for today is
that Tree Farm Road would be the primary access for this
development.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
MR. MURRAY: The only thing is that the contract purchaser is
still negotiating with the owners of Tree Farm Road to acquire that
93
November 18, 2003
road to provide the access. So what we're asking is that we would
hope that you would approve this today contingent upon that
agreement being in place, that contract being in place for acquiring
Tree Farm Road.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you want us to approve a
development contingent upon an agreement between two different
parties that the county's not a privy (sic) to?
MR. MURRAY: That's correct. If that agreement doesn't fall in
place, then nothing will happen anyway.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I had a couple of questions.
First of all, let me tell you that the density really bothers me a lot. I
have a tremendous problem with that density. That area is already so
overloaded and the road capacity is so constrained.
The second thing I have to say to you is you've talked in the
backup pages here about residential units that were -- residential units
that had attached garages and detached garages. Then you talked
about a nursing home, or rather assisted living facility. Then you
talked about a school and a day care. What all is it?
MR. MURRAY: Okay, let me -- I thought you understood what
was being requested.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
MR. MURRAY: The original PUD that's existing had a school,
an assisted living facility and 10 residential units. What they're
proposing today is to amend that to delete the school and the ALF and
do all residential units.
What you get with this is, one, a decrease of traffic in the a.m.
peak hour, significant, like 351 trips per peak hour. That's a
significant reduction in trip when you consider the p.m. peak hour is
very important for traffic movement.
Two, if we provide Tree Farm Road access, then we eliminate
any need for additional traffic facilities improvements like a queue
94
November 18, 2003
lane on the center median of Collier Boulevard to allow U-tums from
the northbound traffic onto the southbound lane and additional throat
length on the access to the subdivision itself. Okay? Did I answer your question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, you did. I don't know why this
backup material talked about the other thing as though it were
something that were still considered. But that's fine. I just will go on
record here as telling you that 580 is just way more than I think this
area can accommodate.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, then
Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. Let me make
sure I understand. What you're saying is that you will not have this
development happen unless you have access to Tree Farm Road, and
Tree Farm Road will be your only access to 951 ?
MR. MURRAY: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And also, now, the Tree
Line (sic) Road, who would be paying for the improvements to that?
MR. MURRAY: Our clients would pay for the improvements to
Tree Farm Road.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not in lieu of impact fees, but
they'd be paying for them; that's correct?
MR. MURRAY: No, we're just asking for consideration on the
back end that it-- that -- what, that it be put on the five-year plan?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no, no. If you want to do
this, I think the thing to do would be to be building Tree Farm Road at
your own expense and then recovering half or part of it from another
development that would go in, share something in common with the
other people that would be coming later.
I don't see why we should have to be taking on the load of
another road that's not in our plans, that's something we really don't
need at this point in time when we have such a demand out there. I --
95
November 18, 2003
we're -- everyone else that's coming before us now, they're building
these roads, they're dedicating the land, they're putting everything in
place and it's not coming out of impact fees, it's not coming back on
the county. I think that we really need to have you.do something a
little bit more than say that the county is going to be responsible for
building this road in the five-year plan or taking it over.
MR. MURRAY: No, no, no. Excuse me, let me interject. We're
just asking that -- we're going to do the road improvements, full
opening, access, everything to county standards, reserve the
right-of-way that the county needs, and then later down the road when
they want to extend the road and take it over, we just want to be
considered for a fair share of impact fees by putting this on the
network.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'm not particularly fond of
that idea. This thing here has got to be able to come clean now, not
five years down the road or something else. The future impact fees
that are coming in, we're going to hold those people's feet to the fire,
too.
I think it's wonderful you got Tree Line (sic) Road. It was one of
the things I never would agree to if you didn't have it. But I'll be
darned if I'm going to pay for it. Not now, not sometime in the future,
not with somebody else's tax money.
I think it's something you'll be able to work out with other people
that come along, some sort of a co-op arrangement when they want to
develop the land next to you or past the other side of it or coming into
it. You can have that written into it where there'll be some
cooperative arrangement where over and above impact fees, they'll
pay you separately. But that's something that I'm not going to try to
draw on up here, some future agreement between you and whoever.
MR. MURRAY: Okay. And that's exactly -- Mr. Davidson
stated the same thing. That's what we want. We just want to make
sure that, you know, there's a fair share somewhere down the road.
96
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And can you give me an idea on
the density? How does that compare to such things as Vanderbilt
Country Club?
MR. MURRAY: I'm sorry, compared with Vanderbilt Country
Club?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, which is a neighbor of
yours not too far from there. 580 sounded like quite a bit within that
small area.
MR. MURRAY: Well, I don't remember the exact density for
Vanderbilt Country Club, but across the road, the subdivision across
the road, I believe, is at like 8.7 or 8.9 units per acre. The subdivision
to the north, which is scattered, has a large lake and was developed
some years ago for RV's is around a little short of three units per acre.
The -- there are some other subdivisions in the area as well. I'm sorry
I don't have the exact number in front of me, but maybe staff could
answer that, or Jeff.
MR. DAVIDSON: We're thinking two to three units per acre --
staff thinks two to three units per acre for Vanderbilt Country Club.
MR. MURRAY: So they believe it's two to three units per acre
for--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And here we're talking about
what, 4.87?
MR. MURRAY: We're talking about-- right, 4.87.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why would we want to approve
such a high density in an area that's greatly impacted, and even with
the six-laning will be greatly impacted? Why would we want to do
this when we have the other developments that have been coming in at
a lesser rate?
MR. MURRAY: Well, that's -- that's a decision that you have to
make. But based on density alone, I think the issue was traffic related.
That's what I understood was density generates traffic, therefore,
there are impacts to be dealt with. By providing the Tree Farm Road
97
November 18, 2003
and all the other things that we've agreed to, that should be minimized.
And it's -- right, it's in the density band as well, the
Immokalee/Collier Boulevard density band.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand that. We're trying
to find justification to grant this to you. And I hear Commissioner
Fiala has serious concerns about density, and I have to be honest with
you, I do, too. I mean, I -- there's nothing wrong with trying to get the
highest density you can get. But the truth of the matter is we expect
everyone to come in with a little bit less than the highest amount they
can get.
MR. MURRAY: Well, it's -- this was -- we estimated that we
could ask for actually 5.03 units per acre, but we're only asking for
4.87. That's a significant reduction. I mean, you have to take a few
units off to get it to move down a little bit.
The density -- you know, there are different reasons for density
impacts, and I'm assuming, based on the conversations and
information that, like I say, it's traffic related. If there were other--
there are other reasons for density problems, too, but they don't appear
to be a problem here. Staff has recommended approval of this. They
didn't appear to have a problem with the density. The residential
density band allows additional -- in this case another three units per
acre above the four base units, you know, so we're not asking for
anything unreasonable. And we've worked hard with the county staff
to try to come to this point with something that the county and
everybody could walk away with as a win/win for everyone.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, yeah, we're looking for
the win/win. The only thing we gain is more people and more tax
money. I grant you, there's probably some benefit to the remainder of
taxpayers to be able to have more people share the burden. So we
have a certain responsibility to make sure we do this that's going to fit
into what's taking place out there right now, and that what's going to
happen is going to happen in such a manner that it's not going to
98
November 18, 2003
severely impact the citizens that are already living there.
Also, too, when is it we get to see a plan for the actual
development? Will that be coming?
MR. MURRAY: That -- well, that will come during the site
development plan process, where the full-blown plan would be
presented.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: At that point in time I'm really
going to be looking hard at what you're going to be offering for
amenities for the people there. MR. MURRAY: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah, I'm -- I feel strongly the
same way the -- my other two fellow Commissioners feel,
Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Coletta. I'm looking at the
density there, and granted, we're going to widen 951 to six lanes, we're
going to widen Immokalee Road to six lanes. We've got a tremendous
amount of growth that's going to be coming in from the east with the
advent of the college and all this other stuff and all the other PUDs
that are along Immokalee Road and 951. And you're in here asking us
to come up with an approval for 850 units; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: 580.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Five hundred and eighty, excuse
me, 580 units.
The way I look at this is that we also have a commitment to the
people here in Collier County that in case of an emergency that we
can make sure that we can obtain an evacuation in a reasonable
manner, in a reasonable time frame. And unless you're willing to build
a hardened structure and to elevate it so that it will retain a 25-year
flood and to have all the necessary infrastructure to build a hardened--
and when I say infrastructure, I'm talking like auxiliary power and
everything else, so that you can house your people there, then I can't
approve anything of any magnitude of this nature.
99
November 18, 2003
MR. MURRAY: I'd like to remind you, this is an existing PUD.
The intensive use of the school and the ALF is -- would put significant
traffic onto the road network as well. This is approved. It's not one
that's two, three, four years down the road.
I understand the position. Being a planner, I agree with you, you
have to look at the future and make plans to minimize impacts, so I
agree with you.
This development is an amendment to one that was already on
record that could be developed, making similar impacts as it is now.
But one thing, like I mentioned, you reduce the a.m. peak hour trips on
it, okay. Any other additional traffic is spread out during the day.
Therefore, your impact on the road network is going to be less than if
you had a school in there making an impact mostly during the a.m.
peak hours. So you've already got a reduction in traffic intensity,
which is an improvement.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm talking about not only your
development but I'm talking about the other developments that are
also coming on line. We had one here not too long ago, and I think
that we ended up getting them down to around two or three units per
acre, and this is basically where I'm going. I feel that -- I'm looking at
somewhere around maybe 2.51, somewhere in that area of density. So
we're looking at what, 250 homes?
MR. MURRAY: Yeah. This is a large tract, 119 acres. And
more than half of it is preservation. It's not like a smaller tract like
some of the ones to the south next to it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But it still has the density even in
that tract with a lot of stuff that's put in the preservation. We're still
talking about an impact in traffic in the future and what we've got to
contend with as far as development goes along 951 and Immokalee
Road. We're looking at what that whole section is going to look like
in another 10 years from now. And I'm hoping that maybe
transportation can guide us in regards to what they feel the future
100
November 18, 2003
traffic count may be at that location.
MR. KANT: Edward Kant, Transportation Operations Director.
I don't know if I can tell you what it's going to be in 10 years, but
I do know that the projections that the petitioner provided to us, based
on historical traffic for the expected year of opening, which would be
2007/2008, in that time flame, were 23,600, 24,000, in that range.
And again, understand those are estimates. That's two-way traffic.
We're talking at that time the street would be six-lane& So you're not
talking about what's out there today.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly. And you're talking this is
what we're looking at 2007?
MR. KANT: Plus or minus, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And then too bad we can't
project out just a little bit farther but --
MR. KANT: Oh, we can project out, but once you get out more
than four or five years, when you're doing these type of projections
they're-- it's--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And the other thing that we have to
look at is, once we get those roads out to six lanes, that's it. That's the
maximum we're going to widen those roads. So that's why I'm
looking at not only what's going on in this particular area, but what is
happening in the rest of the eastern section of Collier County where
Immokalee Road and 951 are going to have a great effect on how we
move traffic out in that location into the urban area here.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Murray -- before I go to
Commissioner Coyle then Commissioner Coletta -- Mr. Murray, you
have an existing PUD, correct? MR. MURRAY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You understand a request of the
Board on a PUD amendment or rezone of a PUD is a negotiated item?
MR. MURRAY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: It's not an entitlement.
101
November 18, 2003
MR. MURRAY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And your client is willing to have his
exit and entrance off of Tree Farm Road?
MR. MURRAY: He agrees, this is an improvement. It will
accommodate the residents.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you answered my question, thank
yOU.
It's not going to be impact fee credible (sic).
MR. MURRAY: Yes, I understand.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do you know that within the density
band, the density bonus is not an entitlement?
MR. MURRAY: I do. I do understand that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. You realize that by changing
your entrance that you're changing the trips generated on 951 further
away from the commercial area, therefore, allowing you density
bonuses.
MR. MURRAY: The -- I'm sorry, the -- by dedicating this to the
county, if they're going to use it and extend this road through, that
provides an alternate access alleving traffic on County Road 951 in the
future. I thought that was the reason why Tree Farm Road was an
issue.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, it was hopefully to get Tree
Farm Road to Immokalee Road, and it's not being provided here
today. So whether that's going to happen in the future or not, I don't
know.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think what I hear the other
Commissioners saying is that we've had a real problem with
infrastructure in the past and we've overloaded it by approving rapid
growth. We've done a pretty good job of trying to dig ourselves out of
that hole so far. And I detect that there's some concern that we not put
ourselves back in that hole by approving densities that might appear to
102
November 18, 2003
be excessive.
Recognizing that your development and your property is not the
only property that's going to be asking for development rights over the
next decade or two decades. And, you know, we might have to
consider some of the issues about how much of the property really can
be utilized for density calculations. For example, preservation area
and/or environmentally sensitive land, we might want to at some point
in time decide that that can't be used in the density calculation process.
But that wouldn't be appropriate here, I don't think.
But nevertheless, the sentiment I hear on the Board today is that
we have to be careful about how rapidly we permit developments to
grow in the future; otherwise, we're going to find ourselves behind the
power curve again and be struggling to catch up with infrastructure.
So I would have to agree that the concern over density is a valid one
and we need to try to address it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's something that enters
into this equation, and I don't know if my fellow Commissioners are
going to appreciate hearing this again or not. But in order for this to
be able to work, and we did hear about hurricane evacuation, we've
heard about how this network goes, the fact that we're limited to six
lanes, we're not going to be able to increase, we are going to have
Vanderbilt going in down farther, but that's not really going to answer
all the answers to this.
I wouldn't mind seeing something like this come along if it was
phased in. And the last phase of it possibly, as much as 25 percent of
it or more, would be tied into the point where 951 extension going to
the north is approved. And at that point in time we got a mechanism in
place to be able to take care of the traffic and keep it moving.
But right now I -- my reservations are is we got roads coming in
that we fought very hard for to get them in there to try to meet present
growth and some of the future growth. Then we find that there's a
103
November 18, 2003
tremendous amount of future growth all coming down on us at once, a
lot sooner than we ever thought it would be. Heritage Bay, Ave Maria,
Orange Tree. The Estates is one-third capacity right now, they're
going to have build-out in the next 20 years. This is all going to
impact these roads. So we're looking at this and we're trying to figure
the long-range on it.
I wouldn't be opposed to approving this if we came up with some
sort of step by step. In other words, we know when 95 l's going to be
improved. I wouldn't permit -- I don't think we should expect
anything to start until that point in time the construction on 951 in
front of you gets finished, the six lanes, or have it come at about the
same time. And that would be about the biggest part of the whole
thing.
The next big part would to come five, six, seven years later when
we have it down on the books that the 951 extension is going to keep
the traffic moving to the north so we can be able to disperse it. Now something like that I could be very amenable to.
MR. MURRAY: We were originally coming to you to propose a
phasing plan. That plan was -- the idea was to allow a certain number
of building permits to be issued. And of course you know it takes a
while to get those, to do the construction, to actually sell the units and
people move in. So it's a number of two or three years down the road
before you get the impact. The -- we were trying to tie it in, the
phasing, with the improvements to the road to minimize the impacts.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Why don't you tell me what you
were thinking about.
MR. MURRAY: We were talking -- what we were proposing
originally in the hand-out was 400 units within two years of the
approval of this ordinance. After that, half of the remainder, which is
like 90 units over the next year and 90 over the year after that. So it
tapers off. It will take a while. The 400 would not be unreasonable.
And then the remainder could be issued out, like I said, over the last
104
November 18, 2003
two years.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, 200 units could
be built before 951 was six-laned? MR. MURRAY: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think that would be -- that
would be fairly generous. I mean, when is it going to be we're
six-laning it, again? It's what, a year and a half we start, two years? I
can't remember.
MR. KANT: Edward Kant. Our current schedule calls for
construction to begin in 2005 -- fiscal year 2005 and to be completed
approximately fiscal year 2007.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So 2007 would be the
point that the road would be completed. And you were looking to
start in 2004?
MR. MURRAY: We were looking to receive building permits,
400 building permits by -- that would be 2000 -- by the end of 2005.
And then the year after that an additional 90 and the year after that an
additional 90. So it would be 2007 before all --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think those numbers are pretty
generous, to be honest with you. I'm still concerned about where
we're going to take all the traffic when it reaches Immokalee Road.
And this is going to contribute to it. It's got to go someplace. I would
like to tie in the factor about 951 expansion to Lee County and some
way work that into the equation.
MR. MURRAY: Could I have just a second, please?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You sure may.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You know, Commissioners, it's
permitted now for 10 residential units. If we go to 20 residential units,
that's doubling what they had before. And if we go to 60, that's tripling
it, so--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, you put it right,
Commissioner Henning, when you said this isn't an entitlement, it's
105
November 18, 2003
something to be negotiated. I think we're in agreement to the fact that,
two things. One, that the density we're talking about is too high. And,
two, the schedule that they want to go with is a little too aggressive.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I'm in agreement there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We might get 951 built by
default pretty soon as it is.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I still feel the density should be
about two and a half units per acre.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: How much does it equate to?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: About 250 units.
MR. MURRAY: Sorry, just needed to discuss that a little bit.
Would something like 200 or 250 the first year, 200 the second
year and then split the remainder over the next two years after that
work?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: How about 250 total units?
MR. MURRAY: That makes it not feasible to even bother, I
mean, to develop, is the way I understand it.
But what do you want other than 250? I mean, there's --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 250.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Myself?. 250 and you are going to
improve Tree Farm Road to go to Vanderbilt Beach Road, and there's
not going to be impact fee credible (sic) on that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There could be a suggestion
made here.
MR. KANT: Excuse me, Commissioner, ifI may. I think I need
to clear something up. Tree Farm Road is an east-west road that goes
back to -- currently to Massey Road. Massey Road is another private
road which goes north-south, which then goes down south to
Vanderbilt Beach Road.
There are also a few little finger streets, if you want to call them
that. I mean, they're little more than trails back in that area. There is
some development activity, but we're also looking at the potential for
106
November 18, 2003
expanding Vanderbilt Beach Road to the east out to Wilson
Boulevard, and then this particular complex, if you will, if we can
eventually get Massey Road and Tree Farm Road and some of those
other smaller roads in, will help perform a secondary network. But
right now we don't have anything in the long-range plan, and until we
finish our long-range plan, which is currently under development -- I
should say not under development, under revision -- we won't be able
to give you anything definitive on a time frame for them. Obviously,
any improvements to Tree Farm Road or any of those roads would
help in that long-range effort.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So Mr. Kant, what do you want us to
do?
MR. KANT: I was just providing information, Commissioners.
We would-- if you choose to approve this development, we do
believe that it has to be contingent upon, or as a stipulation of approval
that Tree Farm Road is the access to this development and that the
petitioner or the developer or his successor is responsible for whatever
improvements are necessary, and that would include any
improvements in crossing the canal, the road itself, any extraordinary
improvements that we would have to make to County Road 951.
We are also discussing this intersection with several other
interested parties. If I may, Mr. Manager, could I have the computer
for just a second, please? MR. MUDD: Sure.
MR. KANT: Am I supposed to do something up here?
MR. MUDD: You should have laptop.
MR. KANT: It's not on a laptop, it's on this whatever you call it
here. Ah, there. It's magic.
What I've got shown up here is a drawing. This is 951 going
north and south, this is Tree Farm Road going east and west. I kind of
blew up that intersection, and we've superimposed on that the
six-laning plan for County Road 951.
107
November 18, 2003
This project here, Brittany Bay, and then south of that where it
says Diesel Mechanic, that property is going to become a school
property, a parochial school property, and south of that is Golden Gate
Nursery. South of that is -- I can't remember what the name of that is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Summit.
MR. KANT: Summit Place, I believe.
But the school, the parochial school has agreed that if we can
configure this into a four-way intersection, that they will position their
driveway to take advantage of it. And apparently they're negotiating
with the Brittany Bay people, so that the Brittany Bay people, which
currently in our plans would have just a northbound right in, right out
on southbound and a northbound left in, would also be able to come
out and use that same driveway, which would help take some of the
stress off of that section of the roadway.
So we've been dealing with a number of the surrounding
properties in trying to make this Tree Farm Road happen. And as I
said, we think that any improvements to Tree Farm, Massey, any of
these other smaller side streets, unimproved private roads, can only
help the network.
MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, Transportation
Administrator.
Commissioner, you asked what we're looking for. We'll let you
work through the issue on the density item.
But specifically for the transportation system, we're looking,
based on your establishment of 951 as a controlled access facility, to
develop that half-mile spacing of full median openings which
eventually will be signalized. Tree Farm Road is basically the half-
mile from Wolf, which is a half-mile north of Vanderbilt Beach Road.
We're trying to develop, as was pointed out to you, a collector road
system both east and west of 951, based on those half-mile spacings.
What you have, at least in front of you today, that you didn't have
previously on this issue of Nicaea that I've heard so far is the offer to
108
November 18, 2003
align their access specifically off of Tree Farm Road. That would be
our desire and basically our recommendation to this Board, that only if
they are going to make that commitment for access to 951 should we
proceed.
They are to provide, based on a prior presentation to you, 40 feet
of right-of-way off their southern boundary line for the length of it for
Tree Farm. And also, through their process of acquisition, that 30 feet
that exists today. Therefore, that 70 feet becoming Tree Farm Road's
access to 951. No impact fee credits. If those items are addressed,
then the last of the issue is your issue with density.
I will relate to you that while I understand this discussion and
appreciate it with all the development we have going in the area, we
do still, when they come in with their final site plan, do need to
address the concurrency and the issues that we're dealing with there.
So there will be another opportunity, depending on what has grown
out there and what's happening, to address the overall demands.
But the key is making sure that we get the beginnings of an
unusual thing in this county, a grid system developing where we have
the opportunity to do that. So I applaud your efforts here today, and
the developer's willingness to start discussing that actively relative to
Tree Farm Road.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle had his hand up
earlier, then Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm a little confused about what's
going to be happening with Tree Farm Road over its entire length until
it reaches a main thoroughfare.
MR. FEDER: First of all, the simplistic answer is we have this
development. We know that fairly soon we're going to get another
development just to the south of here coming forward. And we've got
development, as Ed mentioned, over on the west side as well.
The simplistic answer is we're trying to get all of those access
points pulled together at a single spot, which happens to be a half mile
109
November 18, 2003
spacing, which is ideal for full median opening and signalization to
control access along 951.
The further answer to that is, on the development on the west
side, we've already established to the south of there Wolf Road, the
first half-mile spacing, that they come over and establish, like Naples
Park, a roadway that goes down to Vanderbilt, obviously to the west
of 951. Tree Farm, if it can be extended down also to hook up to this
Wolf Road and maybe even go onto further radial road, that would be
great to set up some sort of grid.
On this side, as was pointed out to you, if we get that 40 feet of
right-of-way, as well as the 30, then we've got 70 feet of right-of-way.
If we can get that extended all the way over, and this property goes
over to Massey on the 400 -- on the 40 feet -- I'm not sure on the 30,
that will have to be discussed -- but at least getting it over to Massey,
that gives us the option. Again, Massey's private, but it is on the
section line. As that property may get developed on the other side of
that section line, we've got opportunity of working with I believe it's --
the country club is abutting on what would be the west side of that
property line, the west side of Massey. Maybe we've got some options
there to set up that other radial road and to start developing some sort
of grid. And as the Chairman mentioned, the idea would be to try to
find a way to also move that to the north, if we can find that
opportunity to access back up into Immokalee and establish an
alternate --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, but my concern is that if we
approve this particular development, we will not necessarily have Tree
Farm Road improved for its full length out to 951.
MR. FEDER: You will have it from 951 to a length back to their
entrance, if you will. Whether or not you request further is an issue.
You would have, as I understand it, the right-of-way, at least the 40
feet on this other boundary all the way over to Massey.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, will that right-of-way be
110
November 18, 2003
sufficient to accommodate the volume of traffic which we anticipate
from future development in that area?
MR. FEDER: The 70 feet, you can get a good two-lane
boulevard in there. And if it's serving as a collector road it will help
us. Obviously the bigger, the better, but in many respects 70 feet of
right-of-way will address a lot of what our need is. I'd rather have 100
feet if I had my druthers, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, two lanes isn't really a lot if
you've got that much development going in back there.
MR. FEDER: I appreciate that, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Before you leave, Norm, what
I was just going to ask was, you've mentioned all of these street
names, Massey, and Tree Lane (sic), going up to Massey and then it
connecting or something correcting to Vanderbilt. Could you show
me where they are on a map so I can visually see what we're talking
about?
MR. FEDER: Okay. Ed, will you play Vannah for me?
I'm going to start on what is the east side. Ed's pointing out to
you the southern boundary of this property in question. If they
provide us 40, feet as well as the 30, that would establish 70 feet all
the way back. At the end of their property is the section line, which is
basically one mile from 951, or east of 951.
Going down south there is a private roadway now at the end of
Vanderbilt Country Club called Massey, and it's on the section line, so
therefore, typically we can try and work with the development as it
comes on the other side. Even though there is something, it's going to
be tight. The question is, what can we do there. We'd have to look at
that in the future as we consider our planning.
But again, there's a twofold reason for the issue we've got here in
front of you today. The very first is to establish the access connection
111
November 18, 2003
points of 951 in a reasonable spacing that allows 951 to operate well.
The second part, which I don't have all the answers to, other than
the fact that if you don't get those access points as the beginning of
this issue, you're not going to address it. And that is developing the
opportunity as more development comes in for a grid pattern in the
area so we don't put all the pressure on 951, Vanderbilt and
Immokalee, as we've done in other places around the county.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's why I asked, where does
Massey join Vanderbilt?
MR. FEDER: Massey joins Vanderbilt one mile to the east of
951. It's a section line running north and south, as is 951, but it's one
mile to the east of it.
That's not on the photo, but it connects down to Vanderbilt one
mile to the east, on the other side of the Vanderbilt Country Club.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Seems like we got an awful lot of
ifs in this. If this happens, if that happens. And I don't know if we can
really justify the ifs as they are.
The other question I have, and maybe some additional staff
people can kind of enlighten us on what we feel the density is going to
be in some of these other developments that are going to be coming on
line that are going to interface on 951. I think that's part of the whole
issue also. And that's why I think that all of us here feel that we need
to really take a quick hard look at what we're going to approve here as
far as density. So if somebody could enlighten us a little bit.
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, let me try and answer some of
your second one. I'm going to ask maybe Joe Schmitt or somebody
else to answer your first one.
On the second issue, please understand on the ifs, I'm not an
advocate for any development, you know that. I'm an advocate for the
system. And what I am telling you in two parts, one, an establishment
of a coordinated access point, something we've been working on for
112
November 18, 2003
some period with this development in this area to try to make that half
mile situation at Tree Farm come to a reality, I think what I've heard
today, which I hadn't heard previously, is that this developer, rather
than waiting on everybody else in the area and requiring issues there,
is going to take it upon themselves to establish that access point,
which also is issues we can establish on the east side of the roadway.
So the first order of business, which is the first you have to have
to go to the what ifs, hopefully the development of a network both east
and west of the roadway, 951, is an option. So I think that is a
milestone, other issues to be addressed.
And I will defer to Mr. Schmitt relative to density, not only here
but also other projects in the area.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I think we got a number in our mind
for density.
MR. REISCHL: You want me to answer that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to hear.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, thank you, Mr. Reischl.
MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl, Zoning and Land Development
Review.
The main thing for density in this area hinges on the density
band, which is a circle one mile in radius around the intersection of
Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard.
This project has a portion of acreage within that density band, I
believe it's 40 acres, and the rest is outside. So we calculated the 40
within there it's calculated at a maximum of seven dwelling units per
acre. The remaining acreage gets calculated at a maximum of four.
And then we set the maximum number of units and they came in
somewhat less than that.
Any project to the north of this, as you're heading towards
Immokalee Road, because it's a circle, will have a greater percentage
of acreage within the density band, hence will have more within the
eligible seven units per acre maximum.
113
November 18, 2003
So the farther north you go towards Immokalee Road, the more
dense the projects will get, which is the intent of the Growth
Management Plan, to cluster development around the activity centers.
South of this, since this is the one-mile limit, south of this the
projects will be capped at four units per acre, unless there's another
density bonus, such as affordable housing.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But isn't the density bonus
basically hinged on if we have interconnectivity?
MR. REISCHL: That's one bonus, but there is a density band
bonus, too.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And again, the density bonus is not
a given?
MR. REISCHL: It's not entitlement, correct.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
MR. REISCHL: Right. It's based on compatibility with their
uses, and that's why we're here today.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have a question of the
petitioner. This is purely for discussion, 'because this might be way
too generous. Would you be agreeable to settling for a number of four
dwelling units per acre to come on line at 150 for the first year, 150
for the second year, then for the third year and thereafter the balance
of 1767
MR. MURRAY: Okay. What was the total again?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It would be 476 units.
MR. MURRAY: That we would be -- if we reduced it, we would
likely need above 500; 525 to 550 would probably be what--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think we're getting close
to that. I know I'm not anywhere near those numbers. I thought this
was very generous, to be honest with you. I heard numbers that were
like 250, and this is almost twice that, you know.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What kind of a product do you plan
114
November 18, 2003
to sell here?
MR. MURRAY: These are condominiums.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Condominiums? What are you
going to sell these condominiums for in price?
MR. MURRAY: I don't think it's -- between 450 and 500.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, really? Okay. My still -- my
first number still stands at 250 units. I don't know what the rest of my
Board members think.
MR. CAUTERO: Vince Cautero, for the record. I haven't been
sworn, though I'm on the petitioner's team.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, go ahead and swear at us.
(Speaker was duly sworn.)
MR. CAUTERO: Thank you, Commissioner.
Commissioner Coletta, we appreciate that approach very much
and I appreciate the amount of time the staff has taken with us to
discuss some of the issues.
I represent the contract purchasers, and the property owners that
currently own Nicaea Academy have also authorized me to speak. For
the record I just wanted to state that.
I think the phasing plan is a good one, in order to assure that the
Board's confidence that infrastructure demands can be met. And I
appreciate what Commissioner Coyle said. In order to meet the
provisions of the Growth Management Plan and in order for you to be
comfortable with it, and we understand your concerns, the contract
purchaser intends, and he has an agreement in principle but no signed
contract, to purchase Tree Farm Road to the length of the property and
make the improvements that the transportation division is asking for
and make the appropriate cost, a commitment to do so, and we realize
that would be the major access point.
It's our understanding that the existing PUD has its access off
Tree Farm Road as well, although the discussions became more
intense once the amendment came to the table.
115
November 18, 2003
I think a phasing plan of something along the lines where a lower
number of units at the beginning and a higher number at the end when
the road is widened might be more palatable. If the Board believed
that those numbers are acceptable, fine.
We would like to propose something along the lines of perhaps
125, 125 and then the balance or 150, 150 and 200 towards the end of
the project. If the Board could find that -- if the Board can find that
the staff report and the Planning Commission's recommendation that
the infrastructure demands will be met adequately, with the
contingency that we've talked about today, with the construction of
Tree Farm Road to county standards and the dedication that would be
requisite with that, a density of 500 units, I believe, would be
acceptable. And we hope that would meet your test as well. Again,
knowing that the numbers would be lower at the beginning and higher
at the end, once the improvements are made.
And to reiterate what Mr. Feder and Mr. Kant said, if the
improvements are made, or when the improvements are made along
Tree Farm Road, if other things happen in conjunction with other
developers, you might be able to improve your network to the
transportation division's liking and to your liking. And we realize that
as well. Tying it to those improvements in either direction I think at
this point would be amenable.
I've heard you say that, I know where the Board stands on that
issue, and I think the phasing plan is a good one. And we would
through out for your discussion something lower and higher.
Something like 150, 150 and 200.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're not that far off from what
I suggested. I said 176 for the last number.
MR. CAUTERO: And I thought I heard you correctly. You said
176. I didn't write that down, but I didn't know where that calculation
came from.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That would give you a total of
116
November 18, 2003
476 units, a reduction to four per acre.
MR. CAUTERO: Okay, that's where it came -- that was my
question, I would have of you--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How I arrived at those
numbers?
MR. CAUTERO: -- how you arrived at that number, four units
per acre.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: By pure science, sir.
MR. CAUTERO: I understand that, and I appreciate what you're
saying. We would just request -- I didn't do the calculation, but it's
probably 4.1, if you come up with 500, or 4.08 or something like that.
I would have to do that. But I understand that, right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I was aiming for four. Four
times 119, 476.
MR. CAUTERO: Thank you for that clarification.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I would -- but I still
haven't heard-- I mean, I don't know if my fellow Commissioners
would be agreeable to that, but would you --
MR. CAUTERO: Oh, I understand completely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But would you be agreeable? I
mean, obviously they're not going to be looking for a number higher
than that.
MR. CAUTERO: I understand. I understand what you're saying.
We hear you. We're acutely aware of that. We would respectfully
request 500, but of course that final decision is with you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Well, we have to close the
public hearing, if anybody's entertaining a motion. So any further
discussion at this time? Any questions? (No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, for discussion purposes,
I'll make a motion --
117
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to see it down below 476; I
really think so.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Like 250.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Really, 250.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Go ahead and make a motion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that we establish
the density there at 250 units on that property.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Part of your motion, there is some
discussion about some access?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The access would be Tree Farm
Road?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Tree Farm Road, and also the road
in the back there that eventually, if we can get that opened.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Kant?
MR. KANT: I was just going to confirm Commissioner Halas's
request, and that would be that the access be constrained to Tree Farm
Road.
As far as the extension of Tree Farm on back to Massey Road, as
Mr. Feder pointed out, some of that property's not theirs, and so if we
can get what we can get and then in the future we'll just inch it
forward.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is -- on that 250 units, is there any
phasing within the motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll start off with 125, and then after
we get the -- or 951 opened up, that they get the other additional 125.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that also in your motion? It
includes --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's my motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- planning staff's recommendations
118
November 18, 2003
and the Planning Commission's recommendations?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Besides what --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What I stated already, yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But don't conflict with what you
already said.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly, don't conflict with what I
said. That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that included in the second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it is.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any discussion on the motion?
MR. CAUTERO: I just wanted a clarification, if I may. I think I
heard you at 250 total. So what Commissioner Coletta proposed is --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't make the motion.
MR. CAUTERO: Not in the motion?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Commissioner Fiala?
Opposed?
Motion carries 5-0.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Before we move on to the next
one, I'd just like to say that number one, I've spoken to Norm Feder --
this doesn't have anything to do with you guys -- I spoke with Norm
Feder about changing the residential density band around activity
119
November 18, 2003
centers. I think that's been difficult for us to deal with because we're
piling so much traffic and increasing the density in these areas where
we're already overpopulated. And I think it would help us to take
another look at that and maybe -- maybe revise that, that part of the
Land Development Code. And I've spoken a little bit to Norm. I just
wanted you Commissioners to know that I've done that.
And the second thing is, Commissioner Coyle made a comment,
and I totally agree with him, what areas of a PUD should be used to
figure density? And I think that we ought to be looking at that as well.
So with those comments, if it's agreeable with my fellow
Commissioners, I would like to direct the County Manager to have our
planning staff address those issues and get back to us, possibly to
revise the LDC.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You got a nod from me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The only thing is, it might be
advantageous to give bonuses when you have some things like mixed
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Interconnectivity.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- use, interconnection.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Don't forget, the affordability.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Affordability. I mean, there's a lot of
things. So what we have today is it's not an entitlement. We don't
have to approve it. We're just ratcheting it down to -- it might be
something that, you know, we might be able to not do what we want
to do. That's my only concern.
And I think that you want to direct staff to bring back an item on
how much we need to pull from the general fund to make any
amendments to the Growth Management Plan or the Land
Development Code, because we can't pull it out of Fund 313 anymore.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you able to do that?
120
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Very good.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We want to know how much it's
going to cost.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And then just a little bit more
discussion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I like your additions also about
there are certain things that should be allowed in a density band, or at
least for us to consider, even if it isn't an entitlement. So thank you.
Item #9A
IMPACT FEE CREDITS FOR EXISTING BUILDING OR
STRUCTURES (COMMISSIONER HENNING) - DISCUSSED; TO
BF, I:tROI IGHT BACK AT A FI~TI~RF, BCC MF, F, TING
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The next item is 9, if I'm correct,
County Manager Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Correct, 9(A).
CHAIRMAN HENNING: 9(A?
MR. MUDD: And that's an item continued from 28 October,
impact fee credits for existing buildings or structures. And this is your
item, sir.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Okay. Commissioners, once you get
through the executive summary, you'll find on Page 4 a note to the
County Manager. And on the back side of that Page 5, you'll find
some examples of some existing structures that have been redeveloped
for a different use. And what I'm seeing is you have a structure that
was built previously, either paid no impact fees or did pay impact fees.
The Board of Commissioners raised impact fees for a number of
reasons. Most likely the main reason is because the cost of doing
121
November 18, 2003
business, whether acquiring right-of-way for roads, water, sewer, or
enacting a new impact fee such as jail and EMS and how they are
credited for it by -- they are credited by the use, and actually getting a
windfall, if you look at some of the examples.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, they're interesting.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: I think where I'm hoping to be at the
end of the day is recognizing the impact fees that are paid by the
structure on a property, recognizing that there is not an impact fee if
the Board of Commissioners impose an impact fee but don't create a
windfall by giving them a credit of something they did not pay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I agree with that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm afraid I don't, if I understand it.
Let me tell you why. Let's take Town Center, shopping center, and
assume that as an example. If we utilize that particular interpretation,
what we do is have the effect of discouraging the renovation of old
dilapidated buildings because it is in the interest of the owner not to
improve it, not to expand it at all, because if they expand it, they're
going to have to pay impact fees that they weren't legally obligated to
pay when it was originally constructed. So they were in conformance
with the law.
And it seems to me that if what we want to do is encourage
people to renovate old structures and keep them modem and looking
good, then what we don't want to do is to penalize them by forcing
them to go back and pay impact fees that they originally weren't
obligated to do under the law.
It would be the same as a house that was built in accordance with
the code 20 or 30 years ago, and then because you want to put in new
cabinets you have to go through and rip out all the wiring and bring it
up to current code. I think that's punitive.
And I don't know that we need to deal with it that way. If we
need more impact fees, I think we raise impact fees and get the money
122
November 18, 2003
for it.
But these are circumstances, it appears to me, where people are
in conformance with the law. They didn't have to pay impact fees,
because they weren't attainable -- they weren't necessary. They're not
adding any additional load to the infrastructure that isn't already being
accommodated.
So our practice of charging them for their additional impact if
they enlarge is logical. But going back to square one and assuming
that they should have paid when it was originally developed, even
when the law didn't require them to pay it, I think is punitive, and I
think it's going to have the wrong -- wrong effect on what we want for
the community.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I kind of look -- the way I
interpreted this was that we were giving credit for buildings that were
built before 1985 that didn't pay any impact fees, and now that when
somebody decided to redevelop that property, we were actually giving
them a credit towards impact fees that were supposedly paid at that
time but they didn't pay any impact fees. So I don't understand why
we should be giving them that credit if something they didn't even --
that wasn't even paid for, no matter whether that person owned the
land or somebody else came in to redevelop it.
coming from on that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
That's where I'm
If I could --
Sure.
-- let me clarify that.
I think you're
absolutely right under that circumstance. The circumstance I was
talking about is one where you're perhaps renovating an existing
building or adding on to an existing building. I think there is in fact a
different interpretation.
If you tear a place down and start all over again, I understand
that, and I think you're right. But if you're taking an existing structure
123
November 18, 2003
and renovating it or expanding it to some degree, then I feel you
should pay the impact fee, based upon your expanded impact.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I agree with you there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But if there's a way of-- and there
is a way to discriminate between those two. If you come in, you tear
it all down and I'm going to build a 500-unit development and there
used to be a shopping center there, yeah, I don't think you should get
any credit.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Because one example was that it
ended up that the person didn't pay anything, because they were
credited for impact fees that weren't even paid to begin with. And so I
have a hard time with that one.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But they did pay. Let me
explain to you how. No, I'm serious. Think about it for a moment.
When you go back prior to '85 or whatever point in time, or some
point in after '85 when you're paying a lesser amount of impact fees,
these people have been paying into the system and that system has
been paying for all the infrastructure out of general revenue taxes.
They've been paying all those years up to this point in time.
Now if you suddenly shift it and say, okay, you tear down, you're
going to -- you don't get any credit, you've got to pay from zero,
you're going to have some problems. I know in Immokalee we're
going to have problems because there's some buildings, the only way
you can afford to renovate them and tear them down is to be able to
get a credit for what was the use then before.
Now, the way it works is that if it's a more intense use, or if it's
going to be increased in size, if someone puts an addition on their
house, they have to pay an additional impact fee. If somebody adds to
-- if they take a building and they renovate it and they use it for a
much more intense use, they pay a portion of the impact fees. Yeah,
they get credit for what was before there.
124
November 18, 2003
But it doesn't matter who the owner is. The ownership -- I mean,
the impact fees stay with the building, what was paid. You're not
building a new building, you're replacing what was there.
You build a new building, it's a whole different story. Now
you've got new people coming in that are going to add to the demands
for infrastructure, so you got a fee base to do it.
So I have some difficulty, you know, trying to come back and
say, okay, those before '85 who didn't pay are now going to have to
pay, because they have paid. They paid in their general taxes all those
-- all those years.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, if you look at the example on
Page 9 on the very bottom, that will give you kind of some idea as to
where -- where in fact the road impact fees, EMS, and so on, that the
person didn't pay the impact fees, but you end up in the total impact
fee, there's -- it ends up zero in the column because it exceeds the
impact fee that would be required at that point in time.
And if you end up and look down at the bottom, this was in
regards to a whole brand new building where the person tore the
building down and then -- and this building was built way before
1985. And if you look at the economics of the whole thing, we should
have -- the county should have gotten a lot more out of the impact fees
than what the total impact fee charge was here of $26,000.
So I understand. I think this is a very interesting discussion here
that Commissioner Henning brought forth, and I think we need to look
at this more closely.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, we need to bring it back, but let
me -- let me just say that when we collect an impact fee, we need to
spend that impact fee within, what is it, seven years or nine years? If
we don't, we collected an illegal fee. So we should honor that
collecting of that impact fees, but we also should honor on how we
give credit. And the credit, what is paid in the --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
125
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- should be credited for. But
anything above that is a windfall. But let me finish.
Like the jail impact fee. Let's say you have a structure that was
built in '92. Well, there wasn't an impact fee for jails in '92. They
should get a -- my feeling, they should get a credit for that jail impact
fee once it is put in place, the impact fee. But anything after that, see,
we're -- within that equation is the cost of doing business in Collier
County.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And a lot of-- whether it be CPI or
material costs or labor costs, they go up.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I must be real thick. I'm not
picking up the point. I still maintain that you've got to treat impact fee
as an impact fee, and if you don't have a new impact or a future impact
that's greater than it was before, then the taxes that were paid prior to
that made up the difference. But once again, I'm willing to bring it
back for discussion and--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And Commissioner, that's the way a
lot of people view our impact fees today, just like you're saying.
And I'm saying that, you know, experiencing selling a building,
changing the use and the new owner received such a huge credit it
never was paid is not correct in my mind.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Somebody paid the property
taxes all those years.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, you know, 1902 when you
build a property in Collier County, you pay all those taxes back then.
But we're not using that -- those taxes for that use.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Now it's impact fees.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're using impact fees.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The impact fees are supposed to
be to cover development as the result of growth.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Their impact. Their impact.
126
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Their impact.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if the impact never
changed, then how are you going to charge more impact? But in any
case, why not bring it back and we can have all the experts come in
and give us all the numbers and we can look at it. I think you brought
up a good point. It's a very healthy thing to discuss.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I hope what the direction is find
ways that we can assess more impact fees -- not more impact fees but
COMMISSIONER HALAS' We want to address the loopholes.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, what we consider loopholes.
Address the loopholes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can't-- we're given specific
direction to find a way to charge people for what they've already paid,
and I can't agree to that. I don't mind bringing it back for discussion,
but I don't want to give staff direction that they got to find a way to
increase the cost to the consumer when it might not be justified.
I'd like to hear all the facts. If it's presented to us in an open
format, yeah, great, maybe we'll see something we haven't seen
before.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I would agree. This is a
complex process and we need a lot of data.
Just imagine how you're going to separate it from commercial or
residential property. Are you going to really apply this to somebody
who buys a home that was built before 1985 and who didn't pay an
impact fee?
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Well, no, if you change a use,
Commissioner, that's what I'm talking about.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But even then, there are substantial
complex issues that we have to take a look at, because one of our
127
November 18, 2003
objectives is to keep our community upgraded. We want to keep
things looking good. And if we can do something that will encourage
a commercial facility to keep upgrading their facilities, then I think
we've done something good for the community.
But if it becomes financially punitive for them to do that, then
why would they do it at all? And that's the thing.
But this is a good point, I think it needs to be researched and I
think there are -- there are some loopholes that can be closed here and
I think it's a good thing to do.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Mr. Weigel, do you think you
have sufficient direction to bring it back for further discussion?
MR. WEIGEL: I do. I look forward to work with County
Manager staff and then come back for discussion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, great. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thank you for bringing this
forward.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2003-415' APPOINTING ANTOINE L.
WASHINGTON AND ELOY RICARDO TO THE BLACK
AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD- ADOPTF, D
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item is appoint members to the
Black Advisory Board. Appoint two members to two vacant
positions. We have two applicants, Antoine Washington and Eloy
Ricardo.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion we approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas,
second by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
128
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2003-416: REAPPOINTING CAROL WRIGHT
AND APPOINTING WILLIAM LLEWELLYN SCHMIDT TO THE
VANDERBILT BEACH BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY
COMMITTFJE- ADOPTED
Appoint two members to serve four terms expiring November
13th, '07 for the Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU. The
committee recommendation says Carol Wright and William Llewellyn
Schmidt.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that we approve
the committee's recommendation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas,
second by Commissioner Coyle.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
129
November 18, 2003
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2003-417: RECCOMENDATION TO DISSOLVE
THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ADVISORY
COMMITTEE DUE TO MEETING GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
SET FORTH BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AND TO PROVIDE A FINAL REPORT OF ACTIVITIES OF THE
COMMITTF, F,- ADOPTFD
Recommendation to adopt a resolution dissolving the Health and
Human Services Advisory Committee due to meeting goals and
objectives set forth by the Board of County Commissioners and
provided a final report of activities of the committee.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Well, I'd like to make the
motion and I would like to first, of course, have a report given. I
know it's a very brief report, if you would please indulge us.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You have a motion, you said, or you
want to wait for the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I make the motion, but I --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- would like to hear the report.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coletta,
second by Commissioner Fiala.
MR. BRETZMANN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My
name is Emie Bretzmann. I'm the Executive Director of the United
Way of Collier County and the Vice-chairman of the Health and
Human Services Advisory Committee.
130
November 18, 2003
Our chairman, Mr. Joe Paterno, was unable to attend today, so I
was asked to come here and provide a report of progress during the
last two years of the committee's existence, and also recommend to the
Board our disbanding due to the goals being achieved.
I understand that many of the Commissioners and staff have to
leave early today for a conference on the East Coast, so in respect to
that I ask if you'd prefer the short version of my presentation or the
slightly longer PowerPoint. Do we have a unanimous vote on that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
MR. BRETZMANN: A short version? Okay, sir, that would be
great.
The two goals or objectives that were established for our
committee to try to address were the financial crisis at the Lee
Memorial Trauma Center and then providing primary health care for
uninsured, low income or people in Collier County.
The Lee Memorial Trauma Center is a work in progress. We
understand that the Lee Memorial Hospital has developed a task force
to look at the potential of a local taxing district to raise funds for the
trauma center. So that was really out of our hands.
However, the second issue, the primary health care, has really
been resolved successfully with what I think is a really first
class-establishment in Golden Gate Parkway, the Horizons Primary
Healthcare Clinic. And I live out there, I drive by it every day and I
think it's a positive addition to our community.
I do wish to commend the members of the Board of County
Commissioners for possessing the vision and courage to move forward
on a recommendation, and also commend the staff for the great effort
they put forward in preparing their proposals which secured the
funding necessary to establish the Horizons Primary Healthcare Clinic
in Golden Gate.
And I do want to go on record, I cannot over-emphasize the high
level of professionalism of the staff, and it's been a pleasure working
131
November 18, 2003
with all of them.
Two important points I would like to make regarding this project
are: Great accomplishments can be achieved through collaboration
and cooperation when everyone works together toward a common
goal. And with no increase in our local taxes we were able to leverage
back to Collier County a significant amount of state and federal
dollars to address a documented need in our community. I want to
thank you for moving ahead and for your support. And does anyone
have any questions?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any question by the Board members?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may, I just wanted to thank
Ernie and the rest of the committee for the time that they spent and
many hours. We traveled over quite a distance checking out all the
different possibilities. Thank you very much.
MR. BRETZMANN: It was a pleasure and honor to serve.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Item # 10A
APPROVE THE SETTLEMENT IN THE LAWSUIT TITLED
132
November 18, 2003
COLLIER COUNTY V. WCI COMMUNITIES, INC., TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF THE VANDERBILT BEACH PARKING
GARAGF,- APPROVFiD
Next item is 8(A), approve a settlement agreement with WCI and
allow construction of Vanderbilt Beach parking garage.
MR. DUNNUCK: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Good afternoon.
MR. DUNNUCK: For the record, my name is John Dunnuck,
Public Services Administrator.
The agreement you have before you today is a positive
agreement, from my perspective. For one thing, what it does is it gets
us out of a lawsuit. We were currently in the process of suing WCI
Communities over deed restrictions that had been applied to our
property or been interpreted as being applied to our property by WCI
regarding the expansion of a parking garage at this facility.
The agreement you have before you today settles that agreement
by allowing us to build a two-story over-deck parking garage to 350
spaces, allows us to triple the capacity. This is consistent with the
master plan that you all approved back in. May and consistent with the
staffs recommendation for a two-story garage in this neighborhood.
As part of this agreement, there are a couple of stipulations that
go along with it. The county has agreed to build that parking garage to
the level of the Ritz-Carlton's parking garage, which is adjacent to this
property.
I would tell you on the record that that is something that we have
consistently agreed to from a staff recommendation for the last four
years in that respect, recognizing we're going to be building future
parking garages in this area and then throughout the community. We
want to make sure that our parking garage fits the ambiance of the
community, and by agreeing to these terms, A, it's consistent with the
Land Development Code in a lot of respects, and B, we think it will be
133
November 18, 2003
a good benefit for the community and it will be an outstanding facility
once it's completed.
Some of the other perks that go along with this agreement, so to
speak, are that we've negotiated to close the parking garage after
sunset, an hour after sunset, which is consistent with our park policy,
with beach access points that have gated access.
But we are allowing for a few special events when we have
events, like the 4th of July event where we're going to have additional
parking along the beach area to the tune of about six events a year. It
will also allow the Ritz-Carlton, from their perspective, to have special
events after hours. These are special events that they already
presently have and are having to find alternative parking options to get
to their hotel. But it will charg~ them a fee to do so, which is
consistent with how we handle it with the Registry Resort, which is on
the south end of the Pelican Bay PUD.
The other issue I want to get on the record is if you had read the
newspaper today, there was an indication that this is tied to the PUD
amendment that's coming forward in the Pelican Bay area with the
Waterside Shops. I just want to make it perfectly clear that it does
not. We have asked the newspaper to retract that, and I think they
have agreed to do so in their article. But we did want to get on the
record that that is in fact the case.
If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I can't let this one go by, I'm sorry.
But we've had some problems with ethics in Collier County. But I
think we've got a very honest County Commission. And I am
understandably sensitive to comments that tend to impugn our ethics.
And this article essentially says, let's make a deal. WCI okays parking
garage for expansion at Waterside.
Now, you know, LaiTy Hannan is a good reporter, I think, and it's
possible that some miscommunications occurred somewhere and some
134
November 18, 2003
things were misinterpreted. But I think for the public's benefit, they
have to understand that this is practically impossible.
First of all, what we're considering today is only a parking
garage. We have not advertised, nor are we voting on any expansion
at Waterside. The expansion at Waterside has not even come before
us. As far as I know, it hasn't even come before the Planning
Commission. So these are two entirely separate issues that were
determined or will be determined on the basis of their individual
merits.
But these kinds of comments, let's make a deal, of course people
are going to assume that we've done something illegal or unethical.
And we have a hard enough time dealing with these issues, with the
cloud that has been created by past problems, without having to deal
with erroneous reporting. And I take great offense at it. I hope the
newspaper does correct it.
And what I'd like to see is this presumption that we're all a bunch
of crooks be tempered somewhat and start looking at our record and
what we're really doing, rather than what somebody assumes that we
might be doing.
MR. DUNNUCK: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Is there is any other
stipulations within the agreement that you need to tell the public and
the County Commissioners?
MR. DUNNUCK: I think I went over the highlights of the
majority of them. I don't know if Ms. Chadwell from the Attorney's
Office has anything else she needs to get on the record. However,
what I do want to put -- to further your comments on the record,
beyond the PUD, this also will not keep the county from pursuing
additional access to the property within the Pelican Bay area, as we've
discussed in the master plan as well. This is simply an agreement,
settlement agreement, on how they're going to treat the deed
restrictions on that specific piece of property.
135
November 18, 2003
And what we've agreed to is consistent with our master plan, it
triples the capacity in that area, which has been the county staffs
intent all along, and it allows me to move forward with the
construction on a much needed beach access, because we're behind on
the capacity because of the delay of this project.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd just like to say that I'd like to
thank all the people in the Pelican Bay Foundation, Pelican Bay
Property Owners Association, WCI and the Ritz-Carlton for finally
getting together with the county and helping to assist in making sure
that we're encouraging that we need to have more access to the
beaches. And I want to thank all the people that were involved in this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ms. Chadwell?
MS. CHADWELL: I just wanted to add, although it's evident
from the executive summary, that as part of the settlement agreement
that the county would be agreeing and executing an amendment to the
restrictions and covenants that pertain to this property.
And just add to Commissioner Coyl. e's comments that had
anyone looked at the agenda item and reviewed the attached
agreements, they would know exactly what the agreement provided
for. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you. Great.
So what you're asking is no more editorializing within the
articles?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't mind editorializing, as long
as they use facts.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: As long as they put it on the
editorial page, rather than reporting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If we do something illegal, it ought
to be on the front page headlines. I don't have a problem with that, if
we do something illegal. But to allege that we're making deals that we
really are not making I think is very bad. It hurts the community, it
undermines confidence in what I think is an honest government. It
136
November 18, 2003
makes things difficult for us all. And there's no need to do that. What
we need to do is foster good government here, not try to undermine
government.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're here for the citizens of this
conununity, or this county.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'd entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
second by Commissioner Halas. Any further discussion? (No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. DUNNUCK: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're going to take a five-minute
break.
(Brief recess.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Everybody take their seats, please.
Board of Commissioners back in session.
Item # 1 OB
APPROVE A PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR $635,000 AND
137
November 18, 2003
ACCEPT A WARRANTY DEED FOR LAND LOCATED WITHIN
THE AREA KNOWN AS THE GATEWAY TRIANGLE FOR THE
PURPOSE OF STORMWATER RETENTION, CONTINGENT
UPON AN ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT SUGGESTING ONLY
MINIMAL CONCERNS (OR NONE AT ALL) AND GIVE STAFF
DIRECTION AND APPROVAL WITH REGARD TO FUTURE
PURCHASES FOR THIS PROJECT; STAFF TO APPROACH CRA
REGARDING FUTURE PURCHASES ON STORMWATER
PROJECTS AND TO GET HELP WITH FUNDING THROUGH TIF
FIJNDS FORM I.OCAIJ ADVISORY BOARD- APPROVF. D
Next item is 10(B), approve the purchase agreement of $635,000
to accept a warranty deed for land located within the area known as
the Gateway Triangle for the purpose of stormwater retention.
MR. WILEY: Good afternoon. For the record, I'm Robert Wiley
with Collier County Stormwater Management.
We're coming to you today to present to you a purchase
agreement for the parcel that we will be using for a stormwater
retention pond-- or detention pond, I should say. We have a current
site with two and a half acres that we already own it.
· And we're getting some assistance here. Shows you where we
already own. The property we are looking to purchase today is the
parcel adjacent to it in a common comer. It comes all the way down
to U.S. 41. There are actually two parcels here. The southern parcel
is the long one there. There's a small comer parcel up right off of the
very top comer. That's a separate parcel we also have described in the
executive summary. So we have two parcels, we're describing two
ownerships today.
The one today is the southern parcel, the larger of the two, which
is the long, skinny, irregular-shaped parcel which fronts up against
U.S. 41. We brought it to you because we had the appraisals done, we
negotiated a sale price, a purchase price with the owner and the
138
November 18, 2003
purchase price is still greater than the appraisal price is.
Knowing that we have a very serious stormwater problem in the
Gateway Triangle, we're trying to resolve it. We need to have places
to temporarily store water. This is immediately adjacent to a
stormwater outlet which goes underneath U.S. 41 and outfalls. So we
felt it's vacant land, it's for sale, let's acquire it. And that's the
direction we're asking the Board to give us today.
We do have the other parcel we mentioned, the Mendes parcel
adjacent to it, that we also want to get your direction. Do you want us
to pursue it also?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, you go first.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, the -- what's the total objective
here? What are we going to do? Are we acquiring parcels for
stormwater retention within the area, or are we trying to create an
outfall?
MR. WILEY: We are trying to store the water. We do not wish
to create a situation to increase the discharge into Naples Bay unless
we cannot accumulate enough storage capacity and then we would
have to. We're pursuing the retention -- or the detention of the water
so that we can regulate, just have a place and let it release gradually.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think that is -- would probably
be more cost effective. The only concern that I have in this
redevelopment CRA area is we're using general tax dollars to acquire
this property and not TIF funds. And we're trying to work through all
these stormwater issues and what's the appropriate fund to fund
projects.
So I would like to see us use the TIF money in this case, since it
is the CRA. And like other, some MSTU's within the district,
stormwater improvements, people are paying, taxing themselves to
pay for. If we use TIF monies, that's just skimming off the top of the
existing tax dollars, the increments, the increases that stay within this
139
November 18, 2003
area.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that's a great way to go.
Just so long as we haven't already allocated the TIF funds for other
things in that CRA. We have to make sure that those aren't already
requested for. I'm not sure if there is anything requested on those TIF
funds.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Do we have that answer today?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I don't have that -- I don't have that
answer right at the tip of my tongue. I would say that they come up
with a budget and their budget for the year has already been laid out. I
don't think there's any stormwater land buying in their particular
budget for this year. I can tell you that for a fact, there isn't.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can we -- is it possible to change it to
a -- to front this project for the stormwater and have the CRA refund?
Is it possible that we go ahead and purchase this out of general
funds and get the project going along with, as long as the CRA pays
back the general fund?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I don't think you can do that right
now. That's -- the CRA is very separate and distinct and you don't
have an approval by the CRA board. You should have it come
through your advisory board to come back to you wearing a different
hat in order to do that. If you plan to do this $635,000 purchase in the
Menendez (sic) property that Mr. Wiley has been working on that we
basically told him about a year ago, go out there and get it because
you need some 12 acres and as these parcels come open don't miss an
opportunity from a willing seller because it's, again, an opportunity
that you have.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
MR. MUDD: But I will say, Commissioner, in the future we can
have staff bring it up to the advisory board and then bring it up to the
CRA to basically say that any future purchases of stormwater
140
November 18, 2003
retention area type lands, that it be used as TIF, and run that up against
them and bring it back to you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. I'm going to go to
Commissioner Coyle, then Commissioner Coletta, then Commissioner
Fiala.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think that's a good idea, and I
believe you're right, we can't do it right now. And the important thing
is we move ahead.
And as I understand it, Robert, your plan is to accumulate as
much of this property as you can. If you can't get it all in one spot, we
can get it in a couple of different spots and then connect those and still
be able to, to retain water. And I think that's a real good plan.
And I would like to move ahead with the decision to acquire this
property now because it is available now. It's an important purchase.
And quite frankly, if I understand the concept, it's going to affect more
than just the mini-triangle.
But what I would suggest we do is to approve the purchases that
you've recommended now and then have a discussion with the
Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board. It's only fair
that they should be involved in stormwater issues within their
redevelopment area. And see if we can't work out some joint funding
thing for the purchases in the future.
So I would recommend that we proceed with this purchase as it is
now and--
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
Is that a motion?
That would be a motion.
Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then we could even add to that
motion, a request that staff approach the advisory board, CRA
Advisory Board, about future purchases and see what kind of
participation we could get.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion by Commissioner
141
November 18, 2003
Coyle, second by Cormnissioner Fiala, and I will support the motion
because I think we're moving in a right, equitable solution to it.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Henning, you
asked the question I was planning to ask, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a little bit of history. Robert
knows this history, so does the County Manager. But way back when
they were tearing out the bridges, the Gordon River bridges, the
FDOT felt that in their wisdom, rather than take all of the construction
debris out to the landfill where they would have to pay to dump it and
they would have to put extra wear and tear on their vehicles, they
dumped it into the lake that was being used for stormwater retention.
That's what happened to the lake in the first place. And I wonder if
there's any kind of a way that the FDOT could participate in buying
some of this land, being that they filled up the retention pond in the
first place.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Great idea.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's a rumor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's a fact.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what they're going to say.
MR. WILEY: Should I respond?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Why don't we -- why don't we check
into that. If that's factual, maybe that's something that we should bring
up.
MR. WILEY: Well, what we do know is what Commissioner
Fiala stated, in the mini-triangle, the very western tip, there was a
depressed area back in through there, and a lot of the bridge
construction material did go in there. It was all private land. It was
not separated out as any separate easement or anything else. And they
filled in a depressed area. It is now no longer in existence. It's flat.
142
November 18, 2003
And it's being used for commercial purposes by the properties which
that's the rear portion of their properties.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. So the direction--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We have a motion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, you have a motion.
Do you want to bring something back on the regular agenda item
or maybe possibly through the MPO, Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'd love to discuss it a little bit
further, maybe at the MPO level. And we also need to be discussing
with Clarence, I know he has about a million dollars a year that he
wants to be spending on stormwater management because of the roads
in the Southern Golden Gate Estates, and maybe that would help also
in buying this area, but right now --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we're going to talk about that
million dollars when we talk about the Fleischman property during
comment today, because I'm trying to just --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We all want it, right?
MR. MUDD: Everybody wants that million dollars, I'll tell you
what.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Any further discussion on the item
that we have in front of us today? Mr. Wiley?
MR. WILEY: Just a point of clarification, if I could. In our
executive summary, we discussed purchasing the Mendes property
also. Knowing that we'll be coming back to you with a purchase
agreement on a separate executive summary, do you wish us to
consider this TIF funding or some other source of funding for Mendes
or go ahead and pursue the acquisition of it while it is for sale?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're going to have to pursue
it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think we ought to go ahead and
pursue it and then we'll figure out how we're going to pay for it then.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And I think what -- I'm not trying to
143
November 18, 2003
put words in Commissioner Coyle's mouth, is the item here, and we're
giving you direction on the Menendez (sic) property, but go work with
the advisory board on that parcel and future parcels.
MR. WILEY: Thank you for the clarification.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that correct?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it would be my intent that we
give him guidance to proceed with the proposal that he's outlined in
this executive summary. But he's going to need to acquire some more
property in the future. He hasn't identified that yet, as I understand it,
at least not ready to talk about a contract yet. And that's what we
ought to be talking about -- to the advisory board about as far as TIF
participation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And not the Menendez (sic) property?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think it's too late to do that. If we
waited until we went through the advisory board and then the CRA
board --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Can we try? Can we try?
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
to miss the opportunity.
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
No, I wouldn't try. I wouldn't want
Exactly.
Okay. I wouldn't want to miss the
opportunity.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right. And I don't want to miss the
opportunity also, but I think that to be fair to other people --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we could have an emergency
meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We could also have an emergency
meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I wouldn't care.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You got enough direction? Are you
confused enough now?
MR. MUDD: We're going to spend $635,000 and we're going to
144
November 18, 2003
buy that piece of property. We're going to continue to work on the
Menendez (sic) property. If we can get it through the advisory board
to the CRA and get anything different on funding on the Menendez
(sic) property, fine, if not, we'll come back and ask for general funds.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You got it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's right.
MR. MUDD: The other question I've got for the Commissioners
is, you've got -- as this thing starts to develop, we need to talk about
the particular properties maybe holding some of their own water when
they come in for a redevelopment of a particular area or whatnot. And
I would like to get some direction from the Board --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, definitely.
MR. MUDD: -- to change our Land Development Code or
whatever we have to in this particular triangle. So as the new
developments happen, okay, and they change those properties, that
they also have a requirement to hold their water, so to speak, and for --
so that -- so that it will decrease the amount of money that you'll have
to do on TIF or general fund or whatever for those additional acreages,
because when they redevelopment (sic), they'll buy a little bit extra so
that they can put that pond on their property and hold their own
stormwater runoff.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: And probably the proper avenue to
that, again, it's an overlay area, and why not go to the advisory board
on that one and change the overlay, if you want to do that, and it won't
have to be a Land Development Code. MR. MUDD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good suggestion.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right. We beat this one up
enough. Any further discussion? (No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
145
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
Next item is to obtain
MR. MUDD: That one is continued to the second of December,
Commissioner. The other item is 10(D), which is a presentation of the
Collier County 2003-2004 legislative priority program. It will be
presented -- excuse me, let me take it back.
David Weigel asked me a question, if we could go to 12(A). The
attorney that's supposed to present is getting ill and that's Jacqueline
Robinson. She's here, she's a little on the sick side, but she'd like to
present and get herself to wherever she needs to go in order to take
care of how she feels right now. So if we could bump 10(A) up --
12(A) up.
Item # 12A
APPROVAL OF A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND MUTUAL
RELEASE BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY, TEXAS
INDUSTRIES, N.V. AND COLLIER CULTURAL AND
EDUCATIONAL CENTER IN REFERENCE TO CASE NO. 01-
4571-CA-HDH THAT IS NOW PENDING IN THE TWENTIETH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT FOR NAPLES, COLLIER COUNTY,
FIJORIDA - APPROVED W/CHANGES
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yep. You're on deck, Ms. Robinson.
MS. ROBINSON: Thank you very much.
146
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is it something we did?
MS. ROBINSON: No.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. This item is requesting your
approval of a settlement agreement involving a lawsuit with Texas
Industries, the Lely Resort and also the new buyer of the available
land in the Lely Resort.
And I think it's a good settlement for the county. We gain
ownership of the contested land that was set out as the cultural center.
It's about 20 acres of land in the Lely Resort. And all the parties,
including the purchaser, have agreed that they will not contest our
ownership of that parcel.
The other thing about it that's very interesting is that the buyer
made one request and that was that they did not want the county to
agree to have loud outdoor activities on the site because it's a
residential area. And we agreed that we would not. We would have
things such as rallies and things of that nature indoors. And they've
also agreed that after 15 years they will not contest in any way the
county's ownership of the property. So it ends the litigation and it
gives us the property.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala, Commissioner
Coyle.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Might this be a site for our
library instead? I know we were looking at it at one time.
MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am, that is a potential site of your regional
library.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's one of the questions I have.
There's a bit of a complication here. The settlement provides that the
county will not hold any outdoor concerts, outdoor speeches, outdoor
rallies or other similar events, or have any noise-producing events held
outside.
MS. ROBINSON: Loud noise.
147
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Loud noise, okay. Now, that
agreement lasts for 15 years. And I ask the question of County
Attorney about what happens at the end of that 15 years? Can the
county then change the use of that property? And the answer is yes.
Now, that's what bothers me. I would prefer that we agree on the uses
of that property now and make it permanent. You'll recall that those
people did not want to have an amphitheater out there. MS. ROBINSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, what I would hate to do is to
negotiate this agreement, give people the impression that we're going
to have a library there and maybe even build a library there, but 15
years from now we're going to put an amphitheater in. And I would
like to make sure that those restrictions are permanent.
MS. ROBINSON: And I think that you have the option of doing
SO.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Can we -- can we make
those restrictions permanent then, or at least list the uses that are like
-- that are permitted there.
MS. ROBINSON: And bear in mind, Commissioners, that right
now there are very limited uses of that parcel. It was originally set
aside as a cultural center, and any change to the currently existing uses
in the PUD would have to be done by an amendment by the county to
the PUD, and the parties have agreed that they would not contest an
amendment to the PUD for the uses that are set forth in the agreement.
The answer to your question was based upon an assumption that
if the county chose, after the end of 15 years, to change that use to
something else, that the parties could agree to such a change. And I
think, of course, that's always a possibility.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, I guess what I'm saying is, I
don't want anybody to have the ability to change after 15 years unless
the neighbors, the residents, have a very big say in what goes on there.
I think everybody would feel a lot more comfortable if we as the
148
November 18, 2003
county would specify what we intend to do with the property and just
leave it at that. And that's what I would prefer.
MS. ROBINSON: And that's -- that's how the agreement is
currently worded. We have listed the uses that we are agreeing that
we will have at that location.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But you never mentioned library.
You mentioned park sites and stuff.
MS. ROBINSON: We mentioned a -- right. We mentioned an
office building because that was the only one that was at the time we
knew about as a possible use. However, even to put an office building
there, there would have to be an amendment of the PUD. And I would
think that the county would have to engage in some form of
negotiation with the current owner before that would happen.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could-- would the Board agree to
approve this, with the understanding that there -- that the uses that are
currently specified here would be permanent uses, and there would be
no other permitted uses?
MS. ROBINSON: But would you -- I guess the question --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I mean, including library. I mean,
you include a library --
MS. ROBINSON: A library and a business office building are
fairly similar except -- you know, they're both quiet uses.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What I'm trying to do is to remove
the threat for the residents, that they might be faced with an
amphitheater one day.
MS. ROBINSON: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And since the agreement expires in
15 years, it seems to open the door then to just about anything
happening at that point. I would prefer that we close that door, agree
on what we'd like to be permitted there now and just leave it that way.
MS. ROBINSON: I think that's an option that you as
Commissioners have in interpreting the agreement.
149
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why would you want to tie the hands
of the future when we don't know what the future is going to bring?
As we know that, you know, people move historically, you know, five
years is the, I guess, the national average. And hell, maybe a lot of
those residents will be dead by then and we might have new people
move in that might want some different uses.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I want to see a Woodstock.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I mean, you know, flexibility is not
bad in some cases. And I just want to understand where you're
coming from.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I think flexibility is good.
But when you have a community that is largely developed, the people
should have some reasonable expectation as to what is going to be
permitted on their property. And if we can -- if we can remove that
threat of something that would not be beneficial to them, then I think
that would be great.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Why don't we say library or
government offices that basically are quiet environment?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Post office, library. What's the
problem from the stance of--
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Before our County Attorney collapses
from her illnesses, somebody want to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: In order to make a motion, I need
to understand from staff what uses would you think would be
reasonable for that property so we could specify those?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, they're basically listed on the thing
right now. And I would add the library or post office as a use so that
you've got it. And the County Attorney is just talking about, the
county shall not hold any outdoor concerts, outdoor speeches, outdoor
rallies or any other similar events on the property. Any political
rallies or speeches shall be held indoors, probably in this chambers, in
150
November 18, 2003
conformity with state and federal law. The intent of this limitation on
uses is to prohibit special events that are noise-producing from
occurring outdoors. The county will be permitted to use the property
as a community park with such activities as softball and soccer
tournaments, a site for an office or neighborhood park, subject to the
limitations set forth in this paragraph.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could you add library and post
office to that, and then we would just be done with it? Would that do
the job?
MR. MUDD: That's fine, that's fine, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could we do that?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then that would not be subject
to the expiration of the contract -- of the settlement agreement, right?
MR. MUDD: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then if that's the case, then
I'll make a motion that we approve, with those changes, to include a
library and a post office, and not permit the change -- not permit the
uses to change at the expiration of the contract.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You've got my second on that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
151
November 18, 2003
Next item--
MS. ROBINSON' Thank you. We'll make those changes.
Item #1 OD
PRESENTATION OF COLLIER COUNTY'S 2003-2004
LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES PROGRAM (BETH WALSH) ISSUE
#1- APPROVED W/INCLUSION OF SOCIAL SECURITY
NUMBER AND DRIVERS LICENSE NUMBER- ISSUES #2 THRU
11 -APPROVF, D
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Presentation of Collier County's '03,
'04 legislative priorities program. Here today is Beth Walsh.
Commissioners, we had a workshop on these items. I think that
we gave staff direction to bring them forward. Here they are. Any
questions?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I do have a question.
Beth, I would like -- what item is this?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 10(D).
COMMISSIONER COYLE: 10(D). What I would like to do is
add two elements of information that I think should be protected in
that first item, and that's Social Security number and driver's license
number. We haven't really addressed that. I think those are probably
more critical than any other elements of information there. And I
would hope that --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes, that's a friendly amendment.
MS. WALSH: Noted.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any further discussion? Questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Entertain a motion.
MR. MUDD: This is Issue Number One.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Right.
152
November 18, 2003
MR. MUDD: And it's support amending Florida State 119.07 to
allow the confidentiality of personal contact information of private
citizens.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve supporting this
amendment, with the additions of Social Security and driver's license
number.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Does that include all the other
legislation incentives?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just one, Issue One.
MR. MUDD: We'll do one issue at a time, Commissioner. We'll
go down them.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All right.
MR. MUDD: Do you want to do them all at one time?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Sure, we'll get a full presentation, too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, we don't want a full
presentation.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by commissioner Fiala. Was
there a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, second by Commissioner
Coyle. Any discussion? (No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries.
153
November 18, 2003
Next second item, Issue Two.
MS. WALSH: So you do want to go through these, each one a
time?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: No, I don't, but it looks like the way
we're going.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We don't have to.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I only have one question of all
these, and that is -- I don't understand the "livestock at large" issue.
Are we having a livestock problem?
MS. WALSH: Back in 1937, there was a special act that was
passed that allowed -- well, actually, it indicated that livestock needed
to be fenced. Apparently there was a roaming livestock issue.
Since then, I believe it was in the Sixties, legislation was passed
that conflicts with that and the special act was never really revoked.
So what we're doing is asking to have that special act revoked so
that the legislation that was passed during the Sixties can come into
effect.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Wait a minute, are you telling us
that we've got livestock roaming around on the highways now?
MS. WALSH: No, the Warren Act is the legislation that was
passed during the Sixties, and basically does the same thing as the
special act as far as containing livestock and fencing the livestock in.
But the issue is actually the storage that the Domestic Animal Service
is paying has never been updated. I believe it's 25 cents a day to store
a cow that they've picked up on the road someplace. So if we repeal
the special act, then the increased rates come into play with the
Warren Act.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: All right, I'm okay.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, we need a motion on the rest of
the incentives.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve the rest of the
154
November 18, 2003
incentives, or the --
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG:
second by Commissioner Halas.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Second that.
-- issues.
Motion by Commissioner Coyle,
Any discussion?
Seeing none, all in favor of the
motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed.?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries unanimously.
MS. WALSH: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Next item.
MR. MUDD: That brings us to Item -- 10(E) was withdrawn,
10(F) was withdrawn, and that was the Lake Trafford $40 fee. And
that was Item 16(A)(10) that was this morning. Commissioner Coletta
did that.
Item # 10G
APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$3,830,285.95 TO APAC-FLORIDA, INC., TO INCORPORATE
TWO ADDITIONAL TRAVEL LANES TO THE IMMOKALEE
ROAD AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, FROM CR 951
TO 43RD AVF, NI IF, NE~ PROJF, CT NO_ 6001 8- APPROVED
That brings us to 10(G), which is 16(B)(6), and that has to do
155
November 18, 2003
with the Immokalee Road change order. Presenting is Mr. Gregg
Strakaluse, the Director of Engineering for transportation.
MR. STRAKALUSE: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
Currently we have an existing construction project among the
Immokalee Road corridor. It's a significant project. It includes water
and sewer mains, includes stormwater management improvements,
includes traffic signals, sidewalks and street lighting. And it also
includes a four-lane road cross-section within a six-lane footprint.
Again, it's a substantial project. It's a $30 million construction
project that was publicly bid in accordance with Florida Statute and
county purchasing policy.
In planning this project, staff considered development along the
Immokalee Road corridor, such as the Waterways and Valencia Lakes,
those developments that are currently being developed. But what staff
couldn't have anticipated were the approvals of Heritage Bay and Ave
Maria, the stewardship area.
Beyond the approvals that-- these developers have an extremely
aggressive building approach, building and sales approach, so it's
anticipated that there will be significant demand on the infrastructure.
These unanticipated events will cause additional demand much
sooner on the infrastructure than we had anticipated, although we do
long-range planning. Staff's responsibility, however, is to be prepared.
And we are building this infrastructure, the utilities, the sidewalks, the
signals, the four lanes in the six-lane footprint. It's also staff's
responsibility to make recommendations that lead your Board to make
good business decisions. And with that, I'd like to put an overhead on
the screen. Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
What this illustrates are previous county projects that take a
four-lane road to a six-lane road cross-section. For example, Airport
Pulling Road. Also, Pine Ridge Road, taking that from four lanes to
six lanes. Most recently, Golden Gate Parkway, which your Board
recently approved.
156
November 18, 2003
What you see here are the construction cOsts. And more
specifically, what you see are the cost per lane mile comparison.
What this really illustrates is that the cost per lane mile, in taking a
four-lane road cross-section to a six-lane road cross-section, is
increasing each year. It's increased from 2001, 2002, and most
recently with the Golden Gate Parkway project, 2003.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, one thing I'm interested in
finding out is how much more expensive will be this -- will this
process be if you cannot award this change to the contract?
MR. STRAKALUSE: We'll be looking at a cost per lane mile
somewhere in the proximity of what we're paying right now on
Golden Gate Parkway of $1.69 million per lane mile.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And what will you be paying if you
are permitted to make this change?
MR. STRAKALUSE: The cost per lane mile, if we are allowed
to do this specific change order, would be somewhere in the
neighborhood of $342,000 per lane mile.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So there's a difference between
$1.35 million per lane mile by how many lanes -- or how many lane
miles.
MR. STRAKALUSE: That's correct, that's one point. The
second point is that you're talking about additional construction time,
disruption to motorists that you wouldn't have to experience later if
you can get the work done at this point in time in concurrence with the
four-lane project.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, but how many lane miles are
we talking about? Sixteen or eight?
MR. STRAKALUSE: We're looking at 14 lane miles. We're
looking at adding two additional lanes within the project limits. The
entire project limits are approx -- about 8.1 miles. But we're only
talking about adding an additional two lanes for about a seven-mile
157
November 18, 2003
section, for a total of 14 lane miles.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So we're talking about 20
million bucks, roughly. Twenty million dollars additional cost if you
should go out and rebid this whole contract. Not to mention the
problems of being able to hold the existing contractor's feet to the fire
with respect to warranty items for the past construction work that has
been done.
MR. STRAKALUSE: That's correct. It would be a very
difficult, if not impossible, management of construction.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, here's where I'm
going with this, okay? The Clerk has made his determination that he
believes that we -- we cannot have an amendment to a contract that
exceeds a certain amount unless we take it out for rebid. MR. STRAKALUSE: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And it is his belief that it would be
a violation of state law to do that. And he's charged with making
those kinds of determinations.
On the other hand, you're trying to do a project and do it in a
cost-effective manner and do it as quickly as possible. If in fact the
Clerk is right and we cannot proceed with this, it's going to cost the
taxpayers roughly $20 million on this project alone in additional cost,
perhaps. We don't really know that, but perhaps. Now, I see no, no
reason for us to get into a big battle about this.
Now, this has been a question that has been raised, it was raised,
I don't know, what, three, four months ago, and we've disagreed about
it all along. And the Clerk feels he's right, we feel this is the right way
to go and in the interest of the taxpayer.
And I don't see the logic in just having these kinds of debates and
disagreements about stuff like this. We should have gone to the court
weeks or months ago to have the court tell us which one's right. You
know, I don't -- I can't make the right decision here. I don't want to
violate the law. I can't believe the Clerk wants to impose a process
158
November 18, 2003
that's going to cost the taxpayers tens of millions of dollars. I mean,
I'm sure he's interested in saving the taxpayers money, too. But if he
believes that it's a violation of law, somebody has to make that
decision, and we can't make that decision.
And I would suggest what we do is give direction to the staff to
get it to the court immediately and get this thing resolved. Yes, sir?
I'm sorry, that's the Chairman's job.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's part of the -- part of this
process of what we're doing is to get it to that point.
MR. STRAKALUSE: Maybe I can defer to the County
Attorney's Office?
MR. MUDD: Well, if I can help just a little bit. We have to
have an item in contention in order to go to the court and get a
declaratory judgment on the particular item in contention. We have to
create it.
We didn't come -- so we didn't have one that was in contention.
We didn't get the entire design on the six-lane until just recently, about
a week or so ago, and then Gregg has basically built the change order
on that design, on what the quantities based on the change order, and
that's why you're seeing it today.
We've talked to the Clerk and the Clerk is in agreement with us.
We need to get the change order through the Board, we need to get the
contractor to bill us for a small quantity under that change order, in
order to get -- yeah, a small quantity, less than $1,000 in order so he
can reject the payment, so that we can get an issue in controversy in
order to go hand-in-hand to the judge in order to get clarification on
the particular item.
In the Clerk's defense, there's nothing in the Florida Statutes that
talks about change orders. It talks about the original bid, okay? And I
wish that the Florida Statutes were clearer than they are today.
We're not doing anything different than the other counties in the
State of Florida are doing, because we've even surveyed them and
159
November 18, 2003
asked them how they do these change orders on highway things.
So we need to go and get it resolved once and for all. And
whatever the court decides, that's what we'll do. If they tell us we
have to rebid the project, we'll go out and rebid the project. We will
probably wait until the four-lane is done before we go out and rebid.
And you're going to say why. Well, if-- you know, you have
some issues about well, if you rebid and the present contractor bids on
it and somebody else puts a bid in, then they're saying it's a foregone
conclusion that they got it and then you get yourself in a contract in
contention and in appeal. And so we'll talk about that from a legal
aspect later.
So we really need to get to the judge to get this resolved and have
him tell us what they think.
I will tell you, if the judge decides that this needs to be rebid, I
will tell you, there will be 67 counties beating their legislators up to
change the law and get it more clear. Because you will find that every
county in the State of Florida has got the same problem that we do. If
he decides the other way, then we can proceed with this change order.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me give an example, and then
I'm going to tell you where I fall on this issue.
If I agree with the contractor to build a $200,000 home and we're
running along and we're on budget and my wife comes in and says
well, I want all granite countertops and top-of-the-line appliances, and
I tell the contractor okay, how much is that going to cost me, he says,
well, that's going to go up another $50,000, now, under this logic I
would have to cancel that contract with that contractor, throw the
contractor out, rebid the whole house, although he might have finished
50 to 75 percent of it already. I can't hold him liable for anything he's
done so I've got no warranty on anything. And I bring in another
contractor to come in and pick up the work and do the rest of the
house. Now, that's insane. Now, it's almost as insane as this process
wetre asking to go through.
160
November 18, 2003
I will not participate. I simply will not participate in playing
games with some contractor and approve a contract with that
contractor so that the Clerk will not pay that contractor, so that then
we can go to court to decide whether or not the Clerk was right in the
first place.
Now, there's got to be a more sensible solution to this thing. If
we need a disagreement, let's have a disagreement between the Collier
County Commissioners and the Clerk and get this blasted thing done.
But I'm not going to play games with a private contractor who might
not get his money back if the Clerk's right. I'm just not going to do it.
That is dishonest and I'm simply not going to do it just to trigger some
mechanism so we can get before a judge and decide whether the
Clerk's interpretation of a Florida Statute is right. Our County
Attorney doesn't think it's right. We can't resolve it. I think we've got
a dispute. And I think the dispute is between the Clerk and the County
Commissioners. At least as far as I'm concerned it is.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I really think we need a
strong interpretation of the law.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
That's exactly right.
And I'm not sure how we're going
to get that strong interpretation until we take it to court. And I think
that's where we've got-- where we have to go with this.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, but I think we should be able
to take it to court without putting some contractor on the hook for
having done perhaps millions of dollars worth of work for us just to
trigger a circumstance where we've got a legal --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't think we have to put the
contractor in that precarious position.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I think that's what the County
Manager --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He was talking about $1,000 or
something.
161
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I don't think --
MR. STRAKALUSE: Actually, it would be closer to $100.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A hundred dollars. I mean, I'm
sure a contractor is going to go out on the line for $100 to get this
resolved. Because his life is at stake -- is at hand, too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, wait a minute. You're going
to do what?
MR. STRAKALUSE: What we can do is issue a specific notice
to proceed to the contractor to do a limited amount of work, up to
$100, and request an invoice on that bill, specifically for the six-lane
project, and submit that to the Clerk's office for the issue of
controversy.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But then I understood that we were
going to tell the contractor to keep working on this process.
MR. MUDD: On the four-lane road, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: On the four-lane.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: On the four-lane, not the six-lane.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So the incremental amount
of billing will apply to this other -- I think it's a crazy way to proceed.
I don't understand why we can't just go to the judge and say, hey
judge, we've got a conflict between what the Clerk is telling us and
what our attorney is telling us, how about solving this problem for us.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I think you need the $100
just to trigger the whole mechanism; is that correct? Well, we've got
two attorneys here, so --
MR. PETTIT: For the record, Chief Assistant County Attorney
Mike Pettit.
In discussions with the Clerk over this disagreement, he has
indicated this is the procedure he believes we need to follow to set the
stage for this claim.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What is the procedure we think we
need to follow to settle this problem?
162
November 18, 2003
MR. PETTIT: I believe that we probably could have followed a
procedure short of having a denial of an actual bill. But we would
have to have, I think, something indicating action by this Board
approving a change order and some indication from the Clerk that the
change order was illegal or would not be honored if bills came in. So
I think that the action we're asking -- that staffs asking you to take
today is appropriate.
There also may be other claims, and we haven't finished
investigating that, that we may bring in this lawsuit in addition to a
declaratory judgment request for relief. But that's the key one. And in
a declaratory judgment there has to be what the courts call an actual
case in controversy. And an actual case in controversy over either the
interpretation of a contract or a statute; in this case it would be a
statute.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Please.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Any way that we can possibly
get this thing off dead center and going forward? I'll tell you right
now, we're playing with (sic) a game here, with a road that should
have been built 10 years ago. It hasn't. It's been held up 10 months by
the Department of Environmental Protection. We've finally got
something rolling under way and we're trying to argue amongst
ourselves over $100.
I say let's go ahead and get this thing going forward. Let's go to
the judge, let's get a ruling from him and keep this project on line so it
happens when we promised it will happen. We're talking about
possible delays that are going to happen one right after the another.
And if this has to go the point where they're going to have to
finish the 'whole four lanes, come back and do the.next two lanes, I
can tell you that people out there are going to go out of their minds.
We're going to add years to this process.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So will the taxpayers.
163
November 18, 2003
MR. PETTIT: Let me ask, maybe Mr. Mitchell. Is it the position
of the Clerk that if this change order is approved that the change order
is insufficient or somehow not to be honored under Florida law?
MR. MITCHELL: Mike, the role of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court is to ensure that the taxpayers' dollar, when we're asked to pay
it, is spent in a legal manner. The adoption of a change order is not
asking us to spend a single dollar. At the point in time an invoice is
submitted we will make the determination if the payment we are being
asked to make is legal or not legal. If it is not legal, in our
determination, which that right is reserved to the Clerk, we will refuse
to pay it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So I think what we need to do is
really just find out -- and we're not here to fight with the Clerk, we just
want to find out exactly where our bounds are -- our boundary is in
regards to where the Clerk stands in regards to him administering the
law and where we stand as Commissioners, what authority we have in
regards to change orders.
And I think what we really need to do is get a good clarification.
And as the County Manager Mudd said, that this is not only unique for
Collier County, it's unique for all the counties. And obviously it's time
that we trigger something and figure out who's right and who's wrong
-- or not really say who's right or wrong but to get the correct
interpretation so that it's good for the benefit of all the taxpayers, not
only in Collier County but in this whole State of Florida.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: So you want to make a motion,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that we go on with
this and set this up so that it ends up in litigation and we get a ruling
on this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That it may end up in litigation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, it may end up in litigation, to
get a ruling on this.
164
November 18, 2003
MR. MUDD: You're basically making a recommendation that
you approve the change order to go from four lanes to six lanes for
Immokalee Road?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I second it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion by Commissioner Halas,
second by Commissioner Coletta. Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not going to vote for it because
I think it's crazy. I do not understand why the Board of County
Commissioners and the Collier County government and the Clerk
cannot go to a judge or to somebody and get an official interpretation
of who is right, rather than trying to put one or the other of us into a
position of potentially violating the law so you can have somebody
make a decision. I mean, you don't do that for any other law.
There must be dozens of interpretations of laws that are given
every day in this state. And what I don't understand is why we can't
get those interpretations without going through this charade of vio --
supposedly violating the law so the Clerk can then decline payment,
so that we then can have a court case. I mean, this is really dumb.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You're absolutely right. But the
problem is that there's other people out here in the community that
have the same -- think the same way, that we're maybe in violation or
that maybe the Clerk is too stringent in regards to how he's
administering a law. So it comes down to a point in time when we
need to have a ruling.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I agree. But do you know what it's
going to say? Clerk says Board of County Commissioners violate
state law, okay? And that's exactly where you're going to be. Clerk
says Board of County Commissioners is violating state law. And then
we've got to justify why we violated state law. And all we're trying to
165
November 18, 2003
do is find out whose imerpretation is correct before we do that. And I
guess our attorneys are telling us they --
MR. PETTIT: Commissioner Coyle, let me try to help a little bit.
Just listening to what Mr. Mitchell said, I'm not sure that the Clerk
has made a final determination on legality or illegality.
And in addition, there is a general role of thumb, the declaratory
judgment action is a way to get a court to decide a dispute that's actual
and real where there may not be an alleged breach of contract or
something of that sort. It's where somebody is doubtful as to what the
tree say of the rights are.
But there is also a general role of thumb that courts don't give
what are called advisory opinions. You can't just go in and say, judge,
tell us what the law is. And so that's the difficulty we find ourselves
in, at least with respect to obtaining a declaratory judgment.
Maybe that doesn't address all your concerns, but it's the best I
can do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're really talking about
interpretation here, aren't we? The Clerk interprets it one way and
transportation interprets it another. And we're just trying to get a
judge to tell us which interpretation is correct so we can proceed. And
from what I understand, we have 67 counties watching to see because
they don't really know what the correct interpretation is. It's not that
there's any bad guy here, it's not that there's anybody wrong, it's just
that we're trying to determine which -- which interpretation is correct,
right?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct. That's exactly the
way I look at this.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Am I right or wrong?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah. We don't have to change
Commissioner Coyle's mind either. So we can vote on this item. Any
further discussion?
166
November 18, 2003
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: All in favor of the motion, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coyle opposed. 4-1.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Are you sure on that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, I'm absolutely positive.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Want to reconsider?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The -- thank you. Next item is --
MR. MUDD: Brings us to public comments.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: -- public comments under general
topics.
Item #1 lA
pl IBI,IC COMMF, NTS ON GF, NERAI, TOPICS- JIM KRAMFJR
MS. FILSON: We have one person for public comment, Mr. Jim
Kramer.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. Kramer?
MR. KRAMER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Jim Kramer and I live in District 3. Earlier today I asked to be part of
the public petition process discussing the charter amendment and was
told that public comments were not allowed during that period, so this
goes back to something earlier today.
Listen to what the govemator (sic) had to say yesterday. And I
quote: To you who came here today, I took this oath to serve you. To
167
November 18, 2003
others, democrats, republicans, independents, it makes no difference.
I took this oath to serve you. To those who have no power, to those
who have dropped out, too weary or disappointed with politics as
usual. I took this oath to serve you. I say to everyone here today, I
will not forget my oath and I will not forget you.
Today is a new day. I did not seek this office to do the things the
way they've always been done. What I care about is restoring
confidence, your confidence in your government.
In recent years, the people have lost confidence. They felt that
the actions of their government did not represent the will of the
people.
This election was not about replacing one man, it was not about
replacing one party. It was about changing the entire political climate.
Everywhere I went during this campaign, I could feel the public
hunger for our elected officials to work together, to work openly and
to work for the greater good. The election was the people's veto for
politics as usual.
It's no secret I'm a newcomer to politics. I realize I was elected on
faith and hope. And I feel a great responsibility not to let the people
down. I enter this often -- I enter this office beholding to no one
except you, my fellow citizens. I pledge to your interests, not to
special interests.
Today I ask all of you to join me in a new partnership; one that is
civil and respectful of our diverse population, one that challenges each
and every one of us to serve in a joyful and productive way, unquote.
In light of the action taken on item 10(A), enough said. Thank
yOU.
Item # 12B
A RESOLUTION WHICH AUTHORIZES THE EXPENDITURE
BY THE HISPANIC AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD OF FUNDS IN
168
November 18, 2003
AN AMOUNT LESS THAN $60.00 FOR A RECOGNITION
PLAQUE TO BE AWARDED TO THE "HISPANIC AFFAIRS
ADVISORY BOARD CITIZEN OF THE YEAR"- MOTION TO
DF, NY RF, Q! IF, ST - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Getting back to the agenda,
12(B), approve resolution authorizing the expenditure of Hispanic
Advisory Board for funding in an amount less than $60 to recognize
recognition plaque to be awarded to the Hispanic Advisory Board
citizen of the year.
MR. PETTIT: For the record, Chief Assistant County Attorney
Mike Pettit. I'm the liaison to the Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board.
The board, as part of its mission statement, has wanted to increase
community recognition for people who make contributions to the
Hispanic community within Collier County, and has requested that it
be given authorization, I think it would come from the County
Attorney budget, to make this expenditure for a recognition plaque for
the person they feel is the outstanding citizen of the year in that
regard. And this year they are intending to honor Judge Romero
Manalich, who had served as the liaison for many years to that board.
And I've prepared a resolution to that effect to establish there would
be a public purpose for that expenditure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I can just -- Commissioners, if this is
Hispanic Affairs Board Advisory Board citizen of the year, this is
going to be an ongoing request.
MR. PETTIT: That is correct. This is for -- this is for this year
only, though, I think the way that the resolution reads.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Right. And we have 52 other
advisory boards.
169
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How much is it?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: $60.
MR. PETTIT: Less than $60, actually.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'd like to withdraw my second.
You made a very good point.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: The -- I'd be willing to donate $15, if
somebody else wants to kick in--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I would too, but what I don't
understand is why the members of the Hispanic Affairs Advisory
Board can't do that.
You're absolutely right, if we start allocating money to
everybody to buy things for each board, we're going to have a whole
bunch of these things coming down. But if the Hispanic Affairs
Advisory Board cannot pull together $60 to recognize Judge Romero
Manalich, who's done so much for this community, then I'd be happy
to join Commissioner Henning in contributing some money to do it
out of my own pocket.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I wouldn't mind donating,
but I also want to bring out the fact that these people who are serving
on these boards are donating their time, and some of them have been
doing it for many years. I think this is an unusual request, but still, I
think it's something to give due consideration to. We ask them to
donate their time and it's the simple request for $60. Nothing unusual
by any means.
In that case, if we don't get any second for this, then in that case
I'd be willing to also kick in $15.
COMMISSIONER COYLE:
COMMISSIONER FIALA:
COMMISSIONER HALAS:
CHAIRMAN HENNING:
Then we've got $45.
Jim Mudd raised his hand.
I'll put in 15.
Is there a second to the motion, since
170
November 18, 2003
the second pulled? (No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There isn't. So I'll entertain another
motion then on this item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Jim Mudd pay the 60?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I will -- I'm going to make the motion
to deny the request.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Henning made the
motion, second by Commissioner Coyle.
The -- all right, my checkbook's down in the vehicle. And I've
got $15, and we're going to start collecting $15 and give it to Mike
Pettit?
MR. PETTIT: I'm straggling, as I stand here, about the ethics
ordinance and all those kind of things at this point.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, you think it's a gift.
MR. PETTIT: I'll need to think about it, probably only for 24
hours, but I don't necessarily want to jump off that cliff right now. I
hate to be this way, but you have no idea how many ethics questions
I'm answering every day from your employees that seem innocent, and
then we straggle with them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Better to check the ethics out. We
don't want to do anything --
MR. PETTIT: It may be as simple as that Mr. -- certainly Judge
Manalich is no longer a county employee, he's a judge. He's governed
by his own set of ethics and statutes, and he would have to decide
whether that was appropriate. This -- I will tell you that the Board, the
HAV --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're not giving anything to -- we're
giving the money to the --
MR. PETTIT: To HAV.
171
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yeah, the HAV. We're not giving it
to a judge. This is just for recognition of a plaque.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They could have a party with it if
they want to.
MR. PETTIT: Any thoughts on this?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: There's a motion and second on the
floor. You guys work it out, I'll get the checks in.
All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Thank you.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GF, NFRAIJ COMMI INICATIONS
We are done with today's agenda. Now we're at staff's comments
and Commissioners comments. Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: No, nothing further. I may see a few of you over
at the FAC conference. Look forward to that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
Commiss -- County Manager Jim Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I reviewed the potential agenda
items for the 2nd of December. It's a busy meeting. You've got
several things that are coming before you that could be contentious. I
can pretty much pull that agenda off within, you know, the 9:00 to
172
November 18, 2003
5:00 that we've got, except for one item, and that's Coconilla. I
believe that Coconilla is going to be -- is going to have many people
here, and we will probably need to set some time for that particular
item.
Now, Ms. Filson and I have been looking at your calendars for
the 3rd, and they're not the best things I've ever seen, but there is a
window between 1:00 and 4:00 on the 3rd that we could try to hear
that item, or we could try to do Coconilla at 5:00 on the 2nd in the
evening. Sorry I brought that up, by some of the looks I just got. But
that could get it done and could free up your 3 December meeting
date.
I will tell you that Mr. Bums' petition and the petition today for
charter would then go on the 16th of December. I just don't have --
there's so many things for the 2nd that we already have that are
scheduled that the 16th is a better day for both of those particular
items.
So I wanted to throw that out to you and kind of get an idea of
what you would like to do. Would you like to go half a day on the 3rd
in order to schedule Coconilla by itself in order to get that done, or
would you rather have a time certain for that starting at 5:00 p.m. on
the 2nd in order to get it all done in one day, knowing that the second
is going to be a long evening if Coconilla is there?
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: My perspective, I really don't want to
go out with a bang of a year on the last meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's not the last.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, yeah, December 17th, 16th,
whatever it is, is the last meeting for the year. I'd rather work -- work
my butt off the first meeting and get as much done as possible. But I
don't know what anybody else's schedule is like the next day.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll cancel whatever it is on the
3rd, if it's necessary.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm flexible, too.
173
November 18, 2003
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Coletta, you have RPC advisory
committee meeting that day.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry, the what now?
MS. FILSON: You have an RPC advisory committee. You're on
the subcommittee for RPC.
MR. MUDD: Regional planning.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I have to cancel it because of
a Commission meeting, this will take precedence.
MS. FILSON: Okay. And Commissioner Halas, I believe you're
scheduled to go out of town for the elections class.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's on the 4th, isn't it?
MS. FILSON: It's on the 4th, but you were leaving on the 3rd.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, how long do we anticipate
this to last? What was your time?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if you tell me you want that -- you
want the charter discussion to show up on the 2nd of December, if
that's what Commissioner Henning was saying, and I think that's what
he was alluding to, if he wants that to come, then it's -- it's -- it could
be a two-day meeting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS' Okay. So if we have it on the 3rd,
can we have a time certain from 9:00 in the morning till 3:00 in the
afternoon? And I still have time to drive up to Orlando, I believe it is.
MS. FILSON: Yeah. The -- I think the only problem was with
Commissioner Fiala, the Republican thing is that day and with
Commissioner Coletta with the RPC sub-committee. So you two --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: My Republican thing lasts till what,
1:30, right?
MS. FILSON: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Once again, my commitment's
for the meeting here, and I'm willing to put everything aside, if I have
to.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I'm there. That's two.
174
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll cancel my stuff and see if I can't
get my check back. I've already paid.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The one is for the election
committee, that is a mandatory meeting on the 4th. So if we can set it
up so that we're out of here by 4:00 or something so I can get up to
Orlando, let's do it that way.
MR. MUDD: So my question to the Commissioners, now -- I got
your -- I kind of got your guidance, we're doing the 2nd and we've got
a standby date on the 3rd. My question is, do we want to bring the
charter petition on the 2nd, or do you want that to come on the 16th,
and the 16th is a pretty light meeting?
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Yeah. '03 or '04?
MR. MUDD: This year, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What's wrong with the 16th?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: That's fine.
MR. MUDD: Okay. So we'll go with the two petitions today
that came in front of the Board and we'll schedule those for the 16th of
December and I'll notify those petitioners of that particular item. And
we will --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Then you're only going to do
Coconilla on the 3rd?
MR. MUDD: And we'll do Coconilla time certain starting at
9:00 in the morning on the 3rd.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we're going to have
everything booked for that to take place the day before, for everything
else?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, that's what--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: For ever how long it runs.
MR. MUDD: -- that's what we're going to try to get done, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And with that part, what do we
see for a reasonable meeting time? What I'm trying to do is see if
there's a way to avoid going like to 9:00 at night.
175
November 18, 2003
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I think-- I think if you put Coconilla for
the next day at 9:00, I think in the morning that you'll get your meet --
you will get done with -- by 5:30 on the 2nd of December with the
regular agenda.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what do you -- what do you --
MR. MUDD: Because Coconilla -- Coconilla took seven hours
in front of the Planning Commission. I don't think it's going to be any
shorter for you. It will probably be worse.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Not as long as I'm chairing the
meeting.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
Then I have -- then I have a couple -- then I have a couple other
issues. The -- oh, we received a letter-- Commissioner Henning
received a letter from the City of Naples, from the Mayor, that
basically talked about their dissatisfaction with the decision on the
beach renourishment. And they basic -- and she basically goes on to
say on the second paragraph: During our meeting of November 7th,
the members of the Naples City Council voted to notify you officially
of our unanimous opposition to the actions of the Board of County
Commissioners and reaffirm our support for the policy proposed by
the Coastal Advisory Committee. The Naples city charter mandates
the condition of the beach within the jurisdiction boundaries of the
City of Naples to be the responsibility of the Naples City Council. We
consider the ramifications of your actions to be unmistakable, serious
and significant. We will discuss this issue again during our November
17th workshop and our November 19th City Council meeting, and
have asked the City Manager to prepare the necessary papers to
reinstate the City's beach renourishment committee. In the interim, we
strongly encourage you to reconsider your decisions. Very truly,
Bonnie MacKenzie.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Fiala wants to say
something.
176
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I just interrupt you for a
minute? Thank you, Commissioner Henning.
I've been thinking along these lines for some time. And actually,
I would love to tell you I'm very brilliant, but I'm not. Somebody
gave me a suggestion and they said have we ever thought of-- because
the original bed tax said beach renourishment. Have we ever thought
of adding an additional penny onto the bed tax specifically targeting
beach and boat access, period? If we could do that and if we could
vote that in, we could then bond that for properties that we want to
buy now, because we know we've got a steady stream of money
coming in. And let's face it, the reason the beaches are loaded and
people are trying to find access in the winter is because we have a lot
of visitors here and they ought to pay for it.
That's a suggestion that I would love the Commissioners to
consider.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We could bring it on a future agenda.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
The next item is a letter that Commissioner Henning received
from John Passidomo, and this has to do with the Charles Fleischman,
III property that we talked about last time.
Dear Chairman Henning: Thank you for your November 6th,
2003 correspondence. We have provided a copy of your
correspondence to our clients' landowner and conferred with them
concerning it. Our clients have asked us to inform you that they want
to make every effort to cooperate in good faith with Collier County to
pursue its interest in acquiring the land.
They accordingly agree to allocate a period of 60 days,
commencing on November 18th, 2003 within which they will
entertain an offer from the county to acquire the land and negotiate a
contract for.purchase and sale of the land to the county at a price on
terms and conditions and within time periods for due diligence in
closing mutually agreeable to the parks.
177
November 18, 2003
We calculate that the negotiation period will expire on January
19th, 2004. At that point, if the parties have not entered into a
contract, our clients will resume negotiations for the sale of the land to
third parties. Our clients appreciate the county's interest in acquiring
the land and look forward to the prospect of timely delivery of an
offer, good faith negotiations and execution of an agreement of
purchase and sale on or before January 19th, 2004.
Commissioners, I've talked to everybody that I could imagine
that would be a shareholder in this particular acquiring of the property.
All have interest. No one at this particular moment has told me how
much of an interest they have as far as their ability to contribute
dollars to this particular acquisition.
I believe that about 2.5 million dollars of that acquisition of the
property I can attribute to impact fees for roads, if Mr. Feder is going
to have that right mm bypass that goes in back of the bank.
As you learned last meeting about Conservation Collier, it will
take them some six months to determine if some sub parcel, the
riparian strip that's wetland in this particular 50-acre piece, that they
have some interest to pay for to keep in perpetuity as conservation
easement.
I've asked Ms. Mac'Kie to please tell me what the South Florida
Water Management District -- what interest they have as far as dollars
are concerned in order to help us with the stormwater. We do have
that million dollars from the South Golden Gate Estates on an annual
basis acquiring, and I made sure of that. And I told Mr. Tears, I said,
based on the Board's decision one way or the other -- and I'll bring this
back at the next meeting, okay, and I'll basically say here's what we
have, here's what we think the appraised value is going to be, here's
what the difference is, and this is what we're going to go have to go
out and do some kind of commercial paper borrowing piece with.
I've also talked to Mr. Mitchell. He has basically said he needs
45 days in order to bring the money home if we're going to use
178
November 18, 2003
commercial paper in order to do that. Now, that's a short-term loan,
some five years. And this parcel we think is going to be worth
someplace between 18 to $20 million. They say it's more like 20,
we're saying it's more like 18. Someplace in there.
So we're gong to try, and I'm going to try to lay out as much as I
can where dollars can come from on cost-sharing partners. I've also
talked to the City of Naples, their City Manager, about their interest in
the parcel as far as stormwater retention is concerned also.
And then I'll come back with some way in order to get this
accomplished and determine if you want to take that on. And I'll bring
it to you on the 2nd of December for your -- for your consideration.
But I'm giving you notice right now so that you'll be aware of it
so that we can have a short discussion and we can be very definitive
about what we want to do or what we don't want to do as far as this
parcel is concerned.
The last -- the last particular item that I'd like to talk about is,
remember, Tuesday, November 25th is Collier County State
Legislative Delegation meeting and public hearing. The meeting will
convene at 9:00 a.m. in the conference room in Immokalee
Community Park at 321 First Street North in Immokalee and will last
until 11:00 a.m. And then the afternoon session will convene at 2:00
p.m. in the Collier County Commission chambers, right here on the
same day. I just want to make sure everybody knows that. At that
time the Chairman normally gives the legislative delegation that
particular item -- or those items that you voted on today and gives
them basically your desires to that particular legislative session.
And last but not least, there's two -- there's no more meetings for
the Board of County Commissioners in November as far as BCC is
concerned. You will have two meetings in December; they're on the
2nd of December and looks like we're going to continue on the 3rd
with the Coconilla Item and then the last meeting will be on the 16th
of December. That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
179
November 18, 2003
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have nothing.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to say that I feel that the
taxpayers of Collier County are benefiting greatly. I recently went on
a tour of the wastewater facilities up in North Naples, and I was
astounded at the efficiency of that department. And I think that Jim
DeLony needs to have a lot of credit for this. They have an operation
there where they process pretty close to 20 million gallons of
wastewater a day, and they do this with 12 people on a 24/7 operation.
And I can tell you that, coming from the private sector, that we're
getting the biggest bang for our buck, and I want to say hats off to the
wastewater people and their dedication and their efficiency.
And I think that we'll find that other areas within Collier County
are working just as hard to make sure that they're just as efficient.
And I think that the taxpayers here ought to be proud of the
people that we presently have on our staff, that we're working for the
taxpayer here and we're working to make sure that we're watching out
for their dollar.
And I just want to say thanks to all the staff people and how
diligent they are looking after the taxpayers.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Great. Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, I also agree with
Commissioner Halas, that we have a wonderful staff. And I receive
accolades for them, about them and their actions all the time.
I just want to once more thank everyone on this Commission and
staff for moving forward on the economic incentives. I know it's
going to be a tremendous benefit for all Collier County and especially
Irmnokalee.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Commissioner Coyle?
180
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I met earlier this week with the
Naples City Council, as I do at least once a week in a workshop, and
they have requested that the Commissioners agree to have a joint
workshop where the final report on the overpass at Golden Gate and
Airport will be discussed.
The staff has proceeded with getting information from Parsons
Brinkerhoff, who is a company that had some alternative ideas
concerning the intersection. It's my understanding that that draft
report will be complete soon and that the staff will be presenting the
results of it.
I think it would be an appropriate gesture to invite the City
Council to participate in at least a joint workshop when that -- the
results of that report are presented. So I'm merely calling it to your
attention and asking if you'd be willing to do that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Let me start off my comments.
Letter from the Mayor of the City of Naples with a discussion
with the City Council on the changes on the tourist development bed
tax, I looked at as if you don't change your mind, we are going to do
this. And my perspective of the City of Naples is they don't rule the
county anymore, okay? And I'm very offended by them trying to tell
us what to do instead of trying to be a partner with the decisions that
we make.
Now, I can tell you with the overpass, the city forefathers have a
destination of nixing this flyover by changing their land use within the
City of Naples. They have the most intensive land use in all of Collier
County. They are the one that's attracting the trips at that intersection
because of their land uses. They failed to do something with the mega
houses within the City of Naples. They have -- continue to intensify
the commercial aspects over there. They have not provided affordable
housing within the City of Naples for the residents that -- of Collier
County that goes to the City of Naples to work. And they're not going
there to the beach, that is not what's driving the demand for this
181
November 18, 2003
improvement, it is the land uses within the City of Naples for the
people to go there and clean the toilets in these mega houses or cut the
grass, or work at the Naples Community Hospital or the Naples Daily
News.
And I'm sure -- Larry Hannan, do you live in the City of Naples
or do you have to travel? No. And by the way, a lot of the colleagues
over there I'm sure doesn't live there. And maybe the editorial staff
does.
But I can tell you that most of the city employees, the majority of
them, and I could only identify seven of the paid employees, live
within the City of Naples and those are the elected officials and the
mandate that the county -- or City Manager lives in there.
So the City Council can choose the destination of this and quit
trying to tell us what to do and try to be partners.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, they're not going to be
partners with that attitude, okay?
The City of Naples pays almost 25 percent of all of the costs of--
pays almost 25 percent of all the ad valorem property taxes in Collier
County, and they don't get 25 percent of services from Collier County.
And they have never seriously complained about that. I think it is a
big mistake to want to pick a fight with a municipality that pays most
of our expenses.
I think that none of us are in a position to start dictating to others
about what they should or should not do. The county should not do it
with the municipalities and the municipalities should not try to do it
with the county. We are partners and we should be working together.
To refuse to sit down in a workshop is in essence an invitation to
a fight. And I think it's a fight that none of us really want to have
because the coastal communities contribute a lot of taxes. They are
donor communities.
And just as you and I don't like to see our ad valorem taxes taken
out of Collier County and given to some other county, they don't
182
November 18, 2003
really like having money taken out of their municipalities and having
it used by people who won't sit down and talk with them.
And I really am sorry that this attitude seems to have developed.
I think it's unhealthy. I don't think it is beneficial for us or the City
Council members.
And I merely asked a question, do you want to sit down and have
a workshop with the City Council or do you want to tell them no, we
don't want to talk with you, we don't want to coordinate with you, we
don't want to have anything to do with you, just send us your money?
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Well, Commissioner, I hope I didn't
offend you, but I want to just tell you the action of the City Council of
the wishes to amend their Growth Management Plan to stop the
overpass, so I don't see that as working with the county.
You know, there's benefits on both sides of the issue of the
taxation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, the question is --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: But if, Commissioner Coyle, if you
can relay to the City Council is (sic) if we can have a dialogue instead
of what is perceived by myself and others as the City's trying to direct
what's happening in the county, I'm all in favor of that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I don't know that anybody's
trying to direct anything. I'm not sure that there is any other issue that
the city has tried to get involved with pertaining to county business.
They've been fairly cooperative in most of those. In fact, they're very
cooperative with beach access and parking, until they feel like they're
getting shut out of the process.
Now, when people feel that they're getting shut out of the
process, I can assure you that there are repercussions that are
unfavorable to the county. And we don't want to get involved in that.
I can tell you that there will be no winners, absolutely no winners in
that process.
And so I can't predict what the City Council will or will not do
183
November 18, 2003
with respect to a workshop. All I know is that they have asked me if I
would make the request to schedule a workshop to get updated on this
most recent evaluation.
So we've got a choice. We can tell them no, we don't want to
update you on this because we don't want to include you, or we can
say yeah, let's have a workshop and we'll talk, although we might
disagree.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Commissioner Henning.
First of all, I always believe in the spirit of communication, and I
feel that we would never want to create an adversarial position
between either the City of Naples, City of Marco, City of Everglades
City, Immokalee. I think we need to work in a spirit of harmony and I
think a workshop is good. We can air our concerns at the time. But I
don't think we ought to be playing this out, you know, for people to
interpret through a newspaper or anything. I think we ought to be
sitting down at a table and workshopping it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Why don't we set it for January 5th,
2004? That's a Monday.
MR. MUDD: I will get it scheduled as fast as I can the first part
of January. Is that the direction that I'm getting from the Board of
County Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just one comment. And forgive
me, a lot of the things you said were true, kind of cruel, but true. Is it
possible that they may come to the table with their minds open, too?
As far as this business of carrying the Land Development Code on to
Tallahassee to try to legislate the overpass out, are they willing to
bring their open mind to the table on that, or is this going to be
something where they come and they're just going to make demands
that it does not happen?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me address that part. As far as
I know, that's not happening. It's my understanding that they have
been told, and I think -- and this is consistent with my own belief, that
184
November 18, 2003
the county land development codes pertaining to roads and what
happens on county and state roads is entirely within the jurisdiction of
the county government. And that's a principle that was demonstrated
at the time when the Midpoint Bridge was built between Cape Coral
and Fort Myers. Neither of the municipalities wanted that bridge, they
fought it, they took it to court. The court ruled in favor of the county,
saying that the cities do not have jurisdiction over those kinds of
things.
I don't believe that is a realistic issue. I don't think that's
happening. It was somebody's idea. I think somebody wrote a memo
but I don't think it went any further than that. Unless you have
information that I don't have?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, sir, I don't.
CHAIRMAN HENN1NG: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good meeting.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: You want to still continue this item?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. No. I just want to say happy
80th birthday to Charlie Courtwright (phonetic). That's it.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: I heard some concerns from some of
the Planning Commission members that they're not getting their
materials in enough time to review. Myself, I take their consideration
very seriously, and I look forward to their detailed review of it so they
can make certain recommendations. So if we can make sure that they
get the information on a timely basis, I would appreciate that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Henning, with regard
to that same issue, I'd also heard from the Planning Council that after
their meetings they don't see what is submitted to us as their opinions
or their vote, and they would like to see what we get for our
Commission meeting that just --
CHAIRMAN HENNING: Pretty soon we're going to get that,
you're going to be able to see that. The first of the year we're going to
a paperless agenda and the public can access that, see the same thing
185
November 18, 2003
that we're seeing. That would be -- COMMISSIONER COYLE: Means we won't have anything to
read?
MR. MUDD: Oh, yes, sir. We're going to let you read it
electronically and through paper.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think where Commissioner Fiala
was going on this, and I heard this also, that when a PUD or basically
a PUD, as it goes through the process, whether it's goes through ECA,
whether it goes through DSAC or whether it goes to the Planning
Commission, if we could come up with some kind of a color process
so that we know which each of those advisory groups have put in there
and changed the wording in the documents so that we can see where it
originated from, that, I would think, be very beneficial to us as
Commissioners so that we have an understanding of who changed the
language. And I think that would be -- myself, I think that would be
beneficial.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sort of like a highlighter type
deal?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Highlighted, yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, they just wanted to make sure
that what they thought they said at the meeting found its way to us --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- at our meeting.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And it was highlighted by that
particular group. Blue, green, yellow, whatever. And it's a
standardized -- so that if we look at it we can say, okay, this came
from DSAC or this came from the EAC group.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think we're all in agreement
that we all recognize how important the Planning Commission has
been to this process and why it's been so successful. And ladies and
gentlemen, it has been very successful the past couple of years. And
the reason being is that we have the Planning Commission out there
186
November 18, 2003
doing a tremendous amount of work to be able to form public opinion,
to be able to start bringing things together to make them gel, and then
they present it to us and we can go ahead and put the final touches on
it. But I would hate to lose their services or have their services be
rendered useless or of little value.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We need to have their input
highlighted also.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I wouldn't go with the color
scheme right now. Maybe there's some ways to shade and underline
and things like that, because of-- because of the copying cost. If you
-- the minute I go color, I get into a different realm. I triple the cost of
this stuff.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We'll, whatever, whatever--
MR. MUDD: What we'll do, we'll come up with some kind of a
scheme where we can highlight that, and then when we go paperless it
will be easy to see it in color, electronically. We'll work on that.
CHAIRMAN HENNING: We're adjourned.
*****COMMISSIONER COLETTA MOVED, SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER FIALA AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, THAT
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS UNDER THE CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDAS BE APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED:*****
Item # 16A 1
RESOLUTION 2003-383: REGARDING THE FINAL APPROVAL
OF THE ROADWAY (PRIVATE), DRAINAGE, WATER AND
SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "LINKS
AT THE STRAND". THE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED, THE
WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
MAINTAINED BY COLLIER COUNTY-WITH RELEASE OF the
187
November 18, 2003
MAINTENANCE SECI IRITY
Item # 16A2
AUTHORIZATION FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
STAFF TO APPROVE OFF SITE RELOCATION OF GOPHER
TORTOISES FOR HORSE CREEK ESTATES (FORMALLY
KNOWN AS LITTLE PALM ISLAND) PRIOR TO FINAL PLAT
APPROVAI,
Item #16A3
PARTICIPATING PARTY AGREEMENT (PPA) WITH THE
FLORIDA AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS, INC., TO OCCUPY
THE IMMOKALEE AIRPORT MANUFACTURING FACILITY II
AND COMPLY WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA SMALL
CITIES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) AGREEMENT AND APPROVING BUDGET
AMENDMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $21,000 TO ALLOCATE
FUNDING FOR LEASEHOLD IMPROVEMENTS TO
ACCOMMODATE THF, TENANT NEEDS
Item #16A4
RESOLUTION 2003-384: SUPPORT OF THE CONTINUED
INCLUSION OF LOCAL-SOURCES-FIRST POLICY
CONTAINED IN CHAPTER 373, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND
OPPOSE ANY AMENDMENT TO FLORIDA'S WATER
RESOURCE POLICY WHICH WILL ALLOW, ENCOURAGE OR
PROMOTE WATER TRANSFERS FROM ONE GEOGRAPHIC
AREA INTO OTHER GEOGRAPHIC ARF, AS
188
November 18, 2003
Item # 16A5
THE RECORDING OF THE FINAL PLAT OF "MCCARTY
SUBDIVISION", APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT_OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY- $55,000 PROJECT COST TO BE BORNE BY THE
DEVEI~OPER
Item #16A6
RESOLUTION (S) 2003- 385 THRU 2003-409: ACCEPTING THE
FOLLOWING LIEN RESOLUTIONS-CODE ENFORCEMENT
CASE NUMBERS: 2003051172/BARBARA L. GALLOWAY;
2003050814/NORMAN SNELLINGS; 2003080456/DOMINGUEZ,
ET AL, JOHN R.; 2002120967/LEWIS TR., EVELYN G;
2003080900/HULL, RICHARD AND ROSANA;
2003080900/HULL, RICHARD AND ROSANA;
2003070998/SILVER TRS., STUART; 2003050760/DOMINGUEZ,
ET AL, JOHN R.; 2002120283/GRAY, EST., CHARLIE MAE;
2003010033/RAMIREZ, LICIMACO; 2003050823/BUITRAGO,
ALVARO; 2003070388/PATTON, LORRAINE AND ELLISON,
NICOLE; 2003060309/CASPAIN BUILDERS, LLC;
2003080928/WILKINSON-MEFFERT CONSTRUCTION CO.,
2003070373/WILKINSON-MEFFERT CONSTRUCTION CO;
2003070376/WILKINSON-MEFFERT CONSTRUCTION CO;
2003070375/WILKINSON-MEFFERT CONSTRUCTION CO;
2003070378/WILKINSON-MEFFERT CONSTRUCTION CO;
2003040809/MONTCLAIR FAIRWAY ESTATES BLDG, CORP;
2003060185/FENTON, BONNIE; 2003060304/AVILA,
FILOMENO AND MARIA; 2003070439/WISNIEWSKI,
189
November 18, 2003
LEONARD; 2003070528/SCHUMACHER, HERMANN; AND
2003050827/1~AR11E, CI,AI IDE
Item #16A7
MORTGAGE AND PROMISSORY NOTE GRANTING A TWO
HUNDRED THOUSAND ($200,000) DOLLAR LOAN TO
CREATIVE CHOICE HOMES XIV, LTD., (DUE FOR PAYMENT
11-01-2010) THROUGH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
RENTAl, DEVF, IJOPMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
Item #16A8
AUTHORIZATION BY THE ENGINEERING SERVICES
DEPARTMENT TO PETITION THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT TO DELEGATE A PORTION OF
THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES PERMITTING
PROGRAM
Item #16A9
CARNIVAL PERMIT 2003-06: PETITION CARNY-2003-AR-
5015, PASTOR ETTORE RUBIN, C.S., OUR LADY OF
GUADALUPE CHURCH, TO CONDUCT A CARNIVAL FROM
NOVEMBER 26 THROUGH NOVEMBER 30, 2003, ON THE
CHURCH PROPERTY LOCATED AT 207 SOUTH 9TM STREET
IN IMMOK Al
Item #16Al0- Moved to Item # 10F
Item #16Al 1
190
November 18, 2003
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICABLE TO THE IMMOKALEE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA (CRA) TO
AUTHORIZE THE USE OF THE SPECIFIED TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING FUNDS FOR THE IMMOKALEE RESIDENTIAL
IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL PROGRAM, FEE PAYMENT
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, OR PROPERTY TAX STIMULUS
PROGRAM, AS A PARTIAL FUNDING SOURCE FOR THE
PROGRAMS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE IMMOKALEE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD AND
THE COMMI INITY RFDF, VF, IJOPMF, NT AGF, NCY
Item # 16B 1
RESOLUTION 2003-410: ITEM CONTINUED FROM THE
OCTOBER 28, 2003 BCC MEETING. IMPLEMENTING
CERTAIN PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES TO
STANDARDIZF, TRAFFIC IMPACT STISDIFJS (TIS)
Item # 16B2
RESOLUTION 2003-411: CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
HANDBOOK FOR WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-
WAY, BY (1) PERMITTING ONLY ONE DRIVEWAY ACCESS
FOR LOTS HAV1NG FRONTAGE OF LESS THAN 100 FEET,
SUBJECT TO CASE-BY-CASE REVIEW OF REQUESTS FOR
DEVIATION FROM THIS POLICY, AND (2) ELIMINATING
THE REQUIREMENT FOR SECURING A PERMIT TO
PERFORM TURF MAINTENANCE IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-
WAY
Item #16B3
191
November 18, 2003
RESOLUTION 2003-412' JOINT PROJECT AGREEMENT (JPA)
WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(FDOT) TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF PHASE
TWO OF THE COUNTYWIDE ADVANCED TRAFFIC
MANAGFJMF, NT SYSTFJM BY COIJ~IFR COl JNTY
Item # 16B4 - This item has been deleted.
Item #16B5
INCREASE COLLIER AREA TRANSIT MONTHLY BUS PASS
FARE AND ESTABLISH AN EXPRESS DAILY FARE AND
MONTHI,Y PRF, MII IM FIIJS PASS
Item #16B6 - Moved to Item # 10G
APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 IN THE AMOUNT OF
3,830,285.95 TO APAC-FLORIDA, INC., TO INCORPORATE
TWO ADDITIONAL TRAVEL LANES TO THE IMMOKALEE
ROAD AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, FROM CR
951-43RD AVF~ NF,~ PROJF, CT NO. 60018 (lalID NO. 02-3419)
Item # 16B7 - This item has been deleted.
Item #16B8
TO UTILIZE TRANSIT ENHANCEMENT FUNDS (313) TO
PURCHASE FOUR NEW TRANSIT BUSES UNDER STATE
CONTRACT NUMBER FVPP-02-MD, TROLLEY DECAL
WRAPS AND NECESSARY EQUIPMENT (IN THE ESTIMATED
AMOIJNT OF $547~248) - FROM TRANSIT PIJI~A. 1NC_
192
November 18, 2003
Item # 16B9
ADOPT-A-ROAD PROGRAM AGREEMENTS AT THE BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ON NOVEMBER 18,
2003
Item # 16C 1
A WORK ORDER AMENDMENT, UNDER CONTRACT #01-
3271, FIXED TERM PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES FOR COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS,
WITH HUMISTON AND MOORE ENGINEERS FOR WORK
ORDER HM-FT-02-07, HIDEAWAY BEACH RENOURISHMENT
DESIGN, PROJECT 90502, FOR AN ADDITIONAL $1,262.50-
AMF, NDMF, NT # 1
Item # 16C2
WORK ORDER AUTHORIZATION TO PROFESSIONAL
SERVICE INDUSTRIES (PSI) UNDER CONTRACT NO. 03-3427
("ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, REMEDIATION AND
RESTORATION SERVICES FOR COLLIER COUNTY") FOR
DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
NAPLES LANDFILL HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE
CENTER, TRUCK SCALES, SCALEHOUSE AND COUNTY
LANDFILL OPERATIONS CENTER IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO
FJXCFJFJD $1 257000 - WORK ORDER #552-G3158
Item # 16C3
AWARD BID #03-3566 TO ATLANTIC TRUCK CENTER AND
APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE PURCHASE
193
November 18, 2003
OF ONE REPLACEMENT ROLL-OFF TRUCK IN THE AMOUNT
OF $98,285.00- TO ENSURE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT
OPERATION OF SOLID WASTER MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT RF, CYCIJNG CENTER OPERATION
Item # 16C4
WAIVE FORMAL COMPETITION FOR THE PURCHASE OF 200
REMOTE TRANSMITTING UNITS AND STANDARDIZE THE
ACQUISITION OF RADIO TELEMETRY FOR WASTEWATER
PUMPING STATIONS ON DATA FLOW SYSTEMS, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $1,333,307 FOR PROJECT 73922 - WITH
DATAFIJOW SYSTEMS
Item #16C5
AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS, INC.
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE REUSE WATER SYSTEM
SERVICE CONNECTIONS, PHASE 2, BID 03-3560, PROJECT
NO. 74020, IN THE AMOIJNT OF $5777000
Item #16C6
PURCHASE OF A 6.66-ACRE SITE ON 9TM STREET SW,
NAPLES, FLORIDA, LOCATED ADJACENT AND
CONTIGUOUS TO THE RAW WATER BOOSTER PUMPING
STATION AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $198,985 (PROJECT
71008)- FROM MARVIN AND BEVERLY MIELKE (TRACT
136_ IINIT NO. 9. GOIiDF, N GATE ESTATF, S~
ITEM # 16C7
194
November 18, 2003
GRANT AGREEMENT FROM THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 FOR
THE MANATEE ROAD FOUR NEW POTABLE WATER
AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR) WELLS_SYSTEM,
PRO.IF, CT 70157 - (SFWMD CONTRACT NO. DG040634)
Item # 16C8
AMENDING WORK ORDER CDM-FT-02-5 WITH CAMP
DRESSER MCKEE FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES FOR THE MANATEE ROAD FOUR NEW POTABLE
WATER AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY WELLS
PROJECT, CONTRACT 00-3119, IN THE AMOUNT OF $383,310,
PROJF. CT NC). 70157 - AMFNDMFJNT #1
Item #16C9
PURSUIT OF LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT FOR WASTEWATER
AND STORM WATER GRANTS UNDER THE FLORIDA WATER
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT AND WATER RESTORATION
GRANT PROGRAM
Item #16D 1- Continue to December 2, 2003 BCC Meeting
AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF BUDGETED
FUNDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF BEST FRIEND PARK-
SOl IRCFJ OF FI JNDS ARF, AD VAI,ORFiM TAXF, S
Item #16D2
AWARD CONTRACT FOR RFP 03-3463 "PARKS AND
RECREATION MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE" TO CLASS
195
November 18, 2003
SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $72,337.50 -
FOR TRACKING SYSTEM SOFTWARE
Item # 16D3
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SFRVICES DEPARTMENT - RENEWAl. FOR THE YEAR 2004
Item #16D4
AGREEMENT WITH THE AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE
ADMINISTRATION THAT WOULD AUTHORIZE THE USE OF
$164,280 FROM THE FY '04 HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT
BUDGET TO BE CONSIDERED PART OF A LOCAL MATCH
REQUIREMENT TO OBTAIN STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDING
TO OPERATE A PRIMARY CARE CLINIC IN THE GREATER
NAPLES COMMUNITY- TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE THE
HORIZON'S PRIMARY CARE CLINIC LOCATED AT 5262
GOI.DF.N GATE PARKWAY
Item #16D5
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT
OF $684 FOR THE HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO
PROVIDE PRESCRIPTION MEDICATIONS TO LOW INCOME
RESIDENTS IN IMMOK AIJEE
Item #16D6
THE PURCHASE OF A TELESTAFF AUTOMATED STAFFING
196
November 18, 2003
SYSTEM FROM PRINCIPAL DECISION SYSTEMS
INTERNATIONAL (PDSI) IN THE AMOUNT OF $38,790 TO BE
PURCHASED WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA 100% GRANT
FI JNDS- TO BE I~SED BY THE EMS DEPARTMENT
Item #16E 1
EXTENSION OF CONTRACT 02-3345 ANNUAL CONTRACT
FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONTRACTING SERVICES-
UNTIL FEBRUARY 29, 2004 OR UNTIL A NEW CONTRACT IS
AWARDED. WHICHEVER IS SOONER
Item #16E2
EXTENSION OF CONTRACT 02-3359 ANNUAL CONTRACT
FOR TELEMETRY SERVICE- UNTIL FEBRUARY 29, 2004 OR
UNTIL A NEW CONTRACT IS AWARDED, WHICHEVER IS
SOONER
Item #16E3
PROVIDING FUNDS FROM OPERATING BUDGETS FOR HIGH
SPEED INTERNET SERVICE FOR SELECT MANAGEMENT
STAFF WHO REQUIRE ACCESS TO COUNTY DATA
RESOIIRCES FROM THEIR HOMES
Item #16E4
AWARD OF BID NO. 04-3574, APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR
RGAC LAND TRUST. (ESTIMATED VALUE NOT TO EXCEED
$57000.00) - TO THE APPRAISAIJ SHOPPE; INC.
197
November 18, 2003
Item #16E5
EXECUTION OF A PARTIAL RELEASE OF EASEMENT FOR A
PORTION OF THAT CERTAiN TEMPORARY BEACH
RESTORATION EASEMENT RECORDED 1N OFFICIAL
RECORDS BOOK 2066, PAGES 917-920. THE TOTAL COST OF
THIS REOI IEST WIIJIJ NOT EXCEED $10.50
Item #16E6
AWARD OF RFP NO. 03-3555, BI-WEEKLY 30-MINUTES NEWS
MAGAZINE TELEVISION SHOW (ESTIMATED VALUE
$607000.00) - TO THE NAPI~ES STI IDIO
Item #16E7
THE AWARD OF BID NO. 03-3563, COMMUNICATIONS
SERVICES. (ESTIMATED VALUE $50,000.00)- TO AZTEK
COMMUNICATIONS AND KENT TECHNOLOGIES AS
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY VENDORS
Item #16E8
APPROVAL OF CIGNA DENTAL PLAN AS THE PROVIDER OF
GROUP DENTAL INSURANCE COVERAGE- DUE TO ITS
COST SAVINGS, THE ABILITY TO MEET OR EXCEED
CURRENT COVERAGE OFFERED, THE ABILITY TO AVOID
THE PROBLEM OF BALANCE BILLING TO EMPLOYEES IF
PARTICIPATiNG DENTISTS ARE USED, AND DUE TO THE
ABILITY TO OFFER AN ORTHODONTIA DISCOUNT NOT
CURRENTLY AVAILABLE; PLAN EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1,
2004
198
November 18, 2003
Item #16E9
DECLARING CERTAIN COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY AS
SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING A SALE OF THE SURPLUS
PROPERTY ON DF, CF, MFIER 13, 2003
Item #1610
REPORT AND RATIFY CHANGE ORDERS AND CHANGES TO
WORK ORDERS TO BOARD APPROVED CONTRACTS - FOR
THE PERIOD BEGINNING ON OR ABOUT OCTOBER 1, 2003
THROI JGH OCTOFtER 31,2003
Item # 16E 11
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $94,893 TO
EXECUTE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 INCREASING CONTRACT
NO. 02-3377 WITH BROOKS AND FREUND, LLC, FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORTH NAPLES GOVERNMENT
SERVICE CENTER- LOCATED ON THE LIBRARY
HFIADQI ~ARTF, RS SITE ON ORANGE IqIJOSSOM DRIVE
Item #16E12
SELECTION COMMITTEE RANKING OF FIRMS FOR
CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS FOR RFP 03-3549,
"CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR DEVELOPING A PUBLIC
LAND SURVEY SECTION (PLSS) BASE LAYER FOR THE
COUNTY'S GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS)."
(ESTIMATED DOLLAR AMOUNT OF CONTRACT IS $250,000.)
- WITH JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC., WILSONMILLER, AND
199
November 18, 2003
COASTAI~ ENGINEERING CONSIIIJTANTS~ INC.
Item # 16F 1
AGREEMENT #04HM-9-09-21-15-001 BETWEEN THE STATE OF
FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND
COLLIER COUNTY IN THE AMOUNT OF $83,640 (75%
STATE/25% LOCAL) TO PROVIDE WIND PROTECTION TO
EIGHT (8) PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES AS SPECIFIED IN
COLLIER COUNTY'S LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY AND
APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE AND
APPROPRIATE REVENUE- FOR 7 FIRE STATIONS AND THE
COl INTY'S HEI.ICOPTER OPERATIONS HANGER
Item # 16H 1
COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR
PAYMENT TO ATTEND THE LAKE TRAFFORD LIVES ON
EVENT - ON SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2003 FROM NOON TO
5 P.M., IN THE AMOUNT OF $25.00 TO INTERACT WITH
CONSTITI JENTS
Item #16H2
COMMISSIONER HALAS' REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR
PAYMENT TO ATTEND THE LAKE TRAFFORD LIVES ON
EVENT - ON SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2003 FROM NOON TO
5 P.M., IN THE AMOUNT OF $25.00 TO SUPPORT PROGRAM
AND INTERACT WITH CONSTITI ~F. NTS
Item #16H3
200
November 18, 2003
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR
PAYMENT TO ATTEND THE LAKE TRAFFORD LIVES_ON
EVENT - ON SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2003 FROM NOON TO
5 P.M., IN THE AMOUNT OF $25.00 TO SUPPORT PROGRAM
AND INTERACT WITH CONSTITI JENTS
Item #1611
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE- FILED AND/OR
REFERRED -
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
201
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
November 18, 2003
FOR BOARD ACTION:
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
mo
Bo
Co
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 September 29, 2003 through October 3, 2003.
2. Disbursements for October 4, 2003 through October 10, 2003.
3. Disbursements for October 11 through October 17, 2003.
Districts:
Golden Gate Fire Control & Rescue District - Schedule of Regular
Meetings
Collier Mosquito Control District - Budget for FY 2004; District Map and
Schedule of Regular Meetings.
Minutes:
1. Productivity Committee
- Minutes for September 17, 2003.
Ochopee Fire Control District- Minutes of May 20, 2003.
H:Data/Format
November 18, 2003
Item # 16J1
BUDGET AMENDMENT APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD
AND EXPENDITURE BUDGETS FOR OPEN PURCHASE
ORDERS FOR NON-PROJECT FUNDS AND FOR UNEXPENDED
BUDGET FOR PROJECT FUNDS AT THE END OF FISCAL
YEAR 2003 - AS DETAIIJED IN THE EXECI ~TIVF, SI JMMARY
Item #16J2
BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR WIRELESS 911 EXPENSE
RELATED TO GIS MAPPING AND 911 DATA BASE IN THE
AMOI INT OF $53,000.
Item #16J3
DETERMINATION THAT THE PURCHASES OF GOODS AND
SERVICES DOCUMENTED IN THE DETAILED REPORT OF
OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS SERVE A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF
COUNTY FUNDS TO SATISFY SAID PURCHASES - FOR THE
PERIOD OF OCTOBER 18, 2003 THROUGH NOVEMBER 14,
2003
Item #16K1
FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE ACQUISITION OF
PARCEL 130 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
DAVID J. FRYE, ET AL, GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY_PROJECT
NO. 60027- AS DETAIIJED IN THE EXF, CI JTIVE SI ~MMARY
Item # 16K2
2O2
November 18, 2003
FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE ACQUISITION OF
PARCEL 132 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
DAVID J. FRYE, ET AL, GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY PROJECT
NO. 60027- AS DFJTAIIJFD IN THE FJXFJCI ITIVF, gl IMMARY
Item # 16K3
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 PARCEL 120 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. CALUSA PINES GOLF CLUB LLC, ET
AL, CASE NO. 02-5140-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD, PROJECT NO.
60018'} - AS DF, TAIIJFD IN THFJ F, XF, CI JTIVE SI IMMARY
Item # 16K4
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 PARCEL 112 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. NORMA E. BANAS, ET AL, CASE NO.
02-5137-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD, PROJECT NO. 60018) - AS
DETAIIJFJD IN THE FJXFiCI ~TIVFJ SI IMMARY
Item #16K5 - This item has been deleted.
Item #16K6
2O3
November 18, 2003
RATIFYING A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IN THE CASE OF
EMERALD LAKES RESIDENTS' ASSOCIATION V. COLLIER
COUNTY, CASE NO. 02-2364-CA- AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECI ITIVE SI IMMARY
Item #16K7
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO A CODE
ENFORCEMENT LIEN IMPOSED ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON
1020 DESOTO BOULEVARD, NAPLES, FLORIDA, AND UPON
TRANSFER OF PROPERTY TO COLLIER COUNTY,
AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND RECORDING OF A
RELEASE OF LIEN- AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SIIMMARY
Item #16K8
MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AS TO PARCEL 125, 702, 703,825A
AND 825B IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
EDITH G. STREET, ET AL, (GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD
PROJECT 60134) WITH A TOTAL COST OF $346,250. IN
ADDITION THE COUNTY WILL INCUR CLOSING COSTS,
INCIJl ~D1NG TITI,E INSI ~RANCF,, NOT TO F, XCF, F,D $3~000.
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2003-413: REGARDING PETITION SNR-2003-
AR-4055, PETER GOODIN, REPRESENTING OAKES ESTATES
ADVISORY, INC., REQUESTING A STREET NAME CHANGE
FROM 12TM AVENUE NORTHWEST TO BUR OAKS LANE,
WHICH STREET IS LOCATED IN UNIT 96, OF THE GOLDEN
GATE ESTATES SUBDIVISION, LOCATED IN SECTION 32,
204
November 18, 2003
TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FI.ORIDA.
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2003-414: REGARDING PETITION SNR-2003-
AR-4058, PETER GOODIN, REPRESENTING OAKES ESTATES
ADVISORY INC., REQUESTING A STREET NAME CHANGE
FROM l0TM AVENUE NORTHWEST TO ENGLISH OAKS LANE,
WHICH STREET IS LOCATED IN UNIT 96, OF THE GOLDEN
GATE ESTATES SUBDIVISION, LOCATED IN SECTION 32,
TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FI.ORIDA.
Item #17C- Continued to December 2, 2003
PETITION CU-2003-AR-3906 ST. PAUL'S ANTIOCHIAN
ORTHODOX CHURCH, REQUESTING CONDITIONAL USES 7,
11 AND 16 IN THE "A" RURAL AGRICULTURAL WITH
MOBILE HOME OVERLAY (A-MHO) ZONING DISTRICT PER
LDC SECTION 2.2.2.3.7, TO ALLOW A CHURCH/PLACE OF
WORSHIP, A CHILD DAY CARE CENTER AND AN ASSISTED
LIVING FACILITY ON 8.3+ ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST
SIDE OF RIVER ROAD, ABUTTING THE SOUTH SIDE OF
IMMOKALEE ROAD IN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,
RANGE 27 EAST, COIJJER COl JNTY, FIJORIDA.
Item #17D
BAR-2003-04: APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE FISCAL
YEAR 2002-03 ADOPTFD lql IDGET
205
November 18, 2003
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:05 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD (S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
ToM~n
ATTEST:'" ,,,' ::;,,., :~
DwiGH,:E[I~BKO~OK; CLERK
Thes[V~k~e~proved by the Board on a-tb- , as
presented / or as co~ected ·
T~NSC~PT p~PA~D ON BEHALF OF G~GORY COURT
~PORT~G SERVICE, ~C. BY TE~ LEWIS AND CHE~E
NOTT~GHAM
206