Loading...
Agenda 04/10/2018 Item # 2B04/10/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 2.B Item Summary: March 13, 2018 - BCC Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: 04/10/2018 Prepared by: Title: Executive Secretary to County Manager – County Manager's Office Name: MaryJo Brock 03/29/2018 12:15 PM Submitted by: Title: County Manager – County Manager's Office Name: Leo E. Ochs 03/29/2018 12:15 PM Approved By: Review: County Manager's Office MaryJo Brock County Manager Review Completed 03/29/2018 12:15 PM Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 04/10/2018 9:00 AM 2.B Packet Pg. 14 March 13, 2018 Page 1 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, March 13, 2018 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Andy Solis VICE-CHAIRMAN: William L. McDaniel, Jr. Donna Fiala Burt L. Saunders (via phone) Penny Taylor ALSO PRESENT: Leo Ochs, County Manager Nick Casalanguida, Deputy County Manager Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Crystal Kinzel, Director of Finance & Accounting Michael Sheffield, Director Comm. & Customer Relations March 13, 2018 Page 2 MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats. Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Well, thank you, sir. Good morning, everybody. I'm going to call our meeting to order. I didn't mean to interrupt. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'm sorry. This is very serious, but it's fine. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL : Yes, it is. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We're glad Commissioner Fiala's here. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes. And Commissioner Fiala's not been feeling well. She's doing okay now, but -- and we've all been discussing it. I didn't mean to interrupt. COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's all right. You're running the meeting. We're fine. Item #1 INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – INVOCATION GIVEN BY BABBI AMMOS CHORNY OF BETH TIKVAH SYNAGOGUE VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: With that, I'd like to call upon Rabbi Ammos Chorny with Beth Tikvah Synagogue to have our prayer this morning. If you'd all rise. RABBI CHORNY: Good morning. Our God and God of our ancestors, we ask your blessings upon our country for its government, for its leaders and advisors, and for all who access has just and rightful authority. Teach them insights of your law; that they may administer all the affairs of state fairly; that peace March 13, 2018 Page 3 and security, happiness and prosperity, justice and freedom may forever abide in our midst. Creator of all flesh, bless all the inhabitants of our country with your spirit. May citizens of all races and creeds forge a common bond in true harmony to vanish hatred and bigotry, and to safeguard the ideals and free institutions that are the pride and glory of our country. May this land, under your providence, be an influence for good throughout the world uniting all people in peace and freedom, helping them to fulfill the vision of your prophet. Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they experience war anymore. And let us say amen. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Commissioner Taylor, will you lead us in the Pledge, please. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Thank you, Rabbi. Well, good morning, everybody. As you can see, we're minus a couple of our members this morning. And before we go on, Commissioner Solis is on his way, so if you'll please indulge me while I muddle through trying to manage this meeting. I'll endeavor to fill some pretty big shoes. I would like to first start by having -- and, County Attorney, I know we have a -- Commissioner Saunders is on the phone today; is that correct? Is he here with us? MR. KLATZKOW: Are you there, Commissioner? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes. Can you hear me? VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Well, in the advent that he does arrive by phone, I would like to call upon my colleagues to vote to accept his -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, I'm here. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. There he is. Is it okay with my colleagues -- I'd like to accept his attendance by telephone March 13, 2018 Page 4 today. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'd like to make a motion Commissioner Saunders -- MR. KLATZKOW: And could we make a finding -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to participate in our meeting by phone. MR. KLATZKOW: And can we make a finding it's extraordinary circumstances? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, and find that these are under extraordinary circumstances. MR. KLATZKOW: Thank you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do we have a second? VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Do we have a second? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll second. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved and -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I just didn't know what the extraordinary circumstances were. That's why I was hesitating. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: We don't have to go there. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: You can ask. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: You can ask. But it's been moved and seconded that we accept Commissioner Saunders' attendance by telephone today. All in favor? Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Opposed, same sign, same sound. (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN MCDANIEL: So moved. March 13, 2018 Page 5 COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Oh, you're welcome, Commissioner Saunders. We hope you're doing well. The second, I would like to make a suggestion for and until Commissioner Solis does get here -- and I've been getting traffic reports that he is moving in our direction -- I would like to suggest that we move the consent and summary agenda items to a later period in our meeting to allow for his arrival and ex parte to be done in a proper manner, if that's okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's okay with me. How about -- County Attorney, is that okay? MR. KLATZKOW: It's fine, yes, ma'am. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. With that, that's the way we'll manage today's agenda. And, County Manager, you want to pick a number or just announce it when he gets here, we can move right into the consent and summary. MR. OCHS: I think that would be appropriate, sir. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Okay. So with that, we'll move onto Item 2A, and that's approval of today's regular consent -- well, we're not going to do that -- the minutes from our February 13th meeting. MR. OCHS: Mr. Chair, if we may, I think it's okay to deal with the regular agenda, because I do have a couple of agenda changes with respect to the regular agenda, if we might. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Yes, sir. I apologize for that. Item #2A APPROVAL OF TODAY’S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE DISCLOSURE March 13, 2018 Page 6 PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.) – MOTION TO APPROVE TODAY’S REGULAR AGENDA – APPROVED MR. OCHS: No problem, sir. Thank you, and good morning, Commissioners. These are your Proposed Agenda Changes for the Board of County Commissioners Meeting of March 13, 2018. The first proposed change is to move Item 16F3 from your consent agenda. That will become Item 11G on the regular agenda this morning. That move is made at Commissioner Taylor's request. And the final change that I have has to do with a time-certain request for Item 11C. This was a time-certain request from Commissioner Fiala to hear that item. I would suggest 10 o'clock, Commissioners. I think Commissioner Solis will certainly be back by then, and that might be an appropriate time to hear Item 11C, if that pleases the Board. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: If you think that's time, yes. MR. OCHS: Yes, I think that would be appropriate. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you very much. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. Those are all the changes that I have today, Mr. Chair. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: County Attorney? MR. KLATZKOW: No changes, sir. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All right. With that, then I'll call for a motion for the acceptance of the adjustments to the agenda. MR. OCHS: Regular agenda. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Regular agenda. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved and seconded. March 13, 2018 Page 7 All in favor? Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed, same sign, same sound. (No response.) March 13, 2018 Page 8 Item #2B BCC MEETING MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 13, 2018, AND THE BCC MEETING MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 27, 2018 MEETING – APPROVED AS PRESENTED VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: So now we'll do the minutes from our February 13th Meeting. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve the minutes from the February 13th BCC meeting and motion to approve the February 27th minutes from the BCC meeting. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: It's been moved and seconded that we approve the minutes from both our February 13th and February 27th meeting. Any discussion? (No response.) VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: All in favor? Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Opposed, same sign, same sound. (No response.) Item #4 PROCLAMATIONS – ONE MOTION TAKEN TO ADOPT ALL PROCLAMATIONS – ADOPTED March 13, 2018 Page 9 Item #4A PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 11 - 18, 2018 AS SUNSHINE WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY AND DECLARING OUR COMMITMENT TO OPEN AND ACCESSIBLE GOVERNMENT. ACCEPTED BY MARIA DEJESUS, REPRESENTING THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; MARNI SCUDERI REPRESENTING THE COLLIER COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS; CHRISTINA FARLOW-FORD REPRESENTING THE COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE; VICKIE DOWNS REPRESENTING THE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER; ROB STONEBURNER REPRESENTING THE COLLIER COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR; AND TRISH ROBERTSON REPRESENTING THE COLLIER COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that takes us to today's proclamations. MR. OCHS: Item 4A is a proclamation designating March 11 through March 18, 2018, as Sunshine Week in Collier County and declaring our commitment to open an accessible government. (Chairman Solis is now present in the boardroom.) MR. OCHS: To be accepted by Maria DeJesus representing the Collier County Board of County Commissioners; Marni Scuderi representing the Collier County Clerk of Courts; Christina Farlow-Ford representing Collier County Sheriff's Office; Patty Hessler representing the Collier County Property Appraiser; Rob Stoneburner representing Collier County Tax Collector; and Trish Robertson representing Collier County Supervisor of Elections. Would you please step forward. March 13, 2018 Page 10 (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Someone reach back there and grab the proclamation from the Chair. VICE-CHAIRMAN McDANIEL: Would you mind passing them out. Do we want to -- did you read the proclamation? MR. OCHS: No, sir. We normally don't read them unless the Board wants to. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for all your service. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I'm ready to go. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I do want to let you know that I neglected to announce the artist of the month, so that needs to be done before we move off into the agenda. And I'll just keep these down here until -- well, if you don't mind, I'll just go ahead and finish that up. The featured artist of the month is full-time Collier County resident Sara Spartin. Sara's work is displayed in the back. Sara's work has been exhibited in many shows and won numerous awards. Sara's currently creating abstract paintings because she believes that abstract art stimulates an individual's thoughts, beliefs, ideas, and imaginations. And when you have a moment, please enjoy her work in the back. There you go. And we're glad to have you back, Commissioner Solis. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Good morning. And I apologize for being late, but -- MR. OCHS: Sir, just so you know, Commissioner Saunders is joining us by phone. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Very good. Item #4B March 13, 2018 Page 11 PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 17, 2018 AS SAVE THE FLORIDA PANTHER DAY IN COLLIER COUNTY. ACCEPTED BY AMBER CROOKS AND MAC HATCHER FROM FRIENDS OF THE FLORIDA PANTHER REFUGE AND KEVIN GODSEA FROM FLORIDA PANTHER NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: That moves us to Item 4B this morning. That is a proclamation designating March 17, 2018, as Save the Florida Panther Day in Collier County. To be accepted by Amber Crooks and Mac Hatcher from Friends of the Florida Panther Refuge and Ben Nottingham from Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge. Good morning. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good to see you back. (Applause.) MS. CROOKS: I'm Amber Crooks. I'm here behalf of the Friends of Florida Panther Refuge. And I just want to say thank you for recognizing Save the Florida Panther Day. The State of Florida, as well as the county, have been recognizing every third Saturday in March to highlight this species as part of our Florida Ecosystem and our State's Official Mammal. The day is celebrated at the approximately 27,000-acre Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge here in Collier County at State Road 29 and I-75 with an open house, which this year for the first time, instead of just a one-day event, is a week-long event concluding in the main event on Saturday, March 17th from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. This week the refuge will host free events from Orchid Wet Walks, Swamp Buggy Tours, and other educational lectures, food, fun, and activities in Florida Panther Habitat. Thank you for recognizing Save the Florida Panther Day, and we March 13, 2018 Page 12 hope to see you all out at the refuge this week. Thank you. (Applause.) Item #4C PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING MARCH 15 - 25, 2018 AS THE 42ND ANNIVERSARY OF THE COLLIER COUNTY FAIR. ACCEPTED BY TJ SNOPKOWSKI, MARKETING & SPONSORSHIP DIRECTOR, COLLIER COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Item 4C is a proclamation recognizing March 15th through the 25th, 2018, as the 42nd anniversary of the Collier County Fair. To be accepted by T.J. Snopkowski, Marketing and Sponsorship Director, and Pat Cookson, Board Secretary. Good morning. (Applause.) MR. SNOPKOWSKI: I want to thank you all for this tremendous honor today. And I just want to let you all know the Collier County Fair is coming. It's March 15th through 25th, if you hadn't heard. A lot of people don't realize we're a local private not-for-profit, and so we try to give back to the community as much as we get in. And so, therefore, we implore all of you to come out, all of you guys who support our tremendous initiatives, and also we invite all of you to join us for our ribbon cutting, which is this Thursday at 5:30 p.m. So thank you all so much. You-all have a great day. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a fast note. I hope everybody can make it. I went to the very first one back in '76, and I entered a cake in their contest, and I won the prize. I had the best cake. Of course, there were only about 12 of us in there. March 13, 2018 Page 13 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was going to say, how many cakes were there? COMMISSIONER FIALA: And it was all held under one tent at the time. So it's amazing to see how far they've come, and I congratulate all of you for all of the work you've done. Thank you. MR. SNOPKOWSKI: We had over 75,000 people last year so, yeah. Thank you. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And if I may add something. Every year it gets better. MR. SNOPKOWSKI: Thank you. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Every year -- you know, you always hear about these fairs that have been around for a long time, and you kind of cringe, and -- not this one. It's -- you know, just the caliber of the people working there and the friendliness of everyone, you feel safe, it's so much fun, and there's so much to see. So congratulations on a well-run fair. MR. SNOPKOWSKI: Thank you very much. We appreciate that. Item #4D PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MARCH 21, 2018 AS ROSIE THE RIVETER DAY IN COLLIER COUNTY, AS PART OF A COLLECTIVE NATIONAL EFFORT TO RAISE AWARENESS OF THE 16 MILLION WORKING WOMEN WHO CONTRIBUTED ON THE HOME FRONT DURING WORLD WAR II. ACCEPTED BY JAMES MOON, LOIS BOLIN, AND JOHN MCGOWAN – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Item 4D is a proclamation designating March 21st, 2018, as Rosie the Riveter Day in Collier County as part of a collective March 13, 2018 Page 14 national effort to raise awareness of the 16 million working women who contributed on the home-front during World War II. To be accepted this morning by John McGowan, Dusty Holmes, Dr. James Holmes, James Moon, and Lois Bolin. (Applause.) UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Hey, Burt. I got one of these for you, too. MS. BOLIN: Oh, they did put that up there. Good. God bless them. (Applause.) MS. BOLIN: Hi, I'm Lois Bolin, Florida Chair for Spirit of 45. And thank you so much for this Rosie the Riveter Day. This is really part of a national initiative. I will send you the link where you can link to see where all the memorial gardens are being dedicated. In 2017 the Congress passed a resolution making March the 21st the day to remember our home-front workers and our Rosie the Riveters. And everywhere from Oregon to D.C., now, and Florida, were the first garden to dedicate this, and we hope by 2020 we have all the counties. And there is actually a national link set up where people can click to go and travel to see these gardens. So thank you very much for having Collier County make history for our wonderful World War II veterans and our home-front workers and especially our Rosie the Riveters who has a special rose that has been, not built, but whatever, designed. What was it? Propagated for Rosie. It's a Rosie the Riveter rose. Thank you. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if you would indulge us for a moment. Do we have any World War II vets here? (No response.) COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Do we have any World War II March 13, 2018 Page 15 widows here? Would you please stand up? (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, if I could get a motion to approve today's proclamations, please. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So moved. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: There's a motion and second. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Motion carries. Thank you. MR. OCHS: It's a 5-0. Item #2A – Continued from earlier in the meeting APPROVAL OF TODAY’S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.) - MOTION TO APPROVE TODAY’S CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDAS – APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, at this time it would be appropriate to move back to Item 2A. We waited until your arrival for the approval of the consent and summary agenda this morning including any ex parte disclosure to be provided by commission members for the March 13, 2018 Page 16 consent agenda or the summary agenda. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner McDaniel? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Good morning, sir. I have no disclosures for either the consent or summary. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. No corrections, no additions, no disclosures, other than on the summary agenda -- excuse me -- on the summary agenda I have the staff report from both 17A and 17B, but I've spoken with no one. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Taylor? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No disclosures on the consent agenda or the summary agenda. MR. OCHS: Commissioner Saunders, sir. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Saunders? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes. I have no changes and no disclosure. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And I have no disclosures and no changes as well, although I do have a conflict with 16C and will abstain from voting on that. MR. KLATZKOW: And that would be 16C1, correct? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: 16C1, yes, sir. And we've a public speaker? MR. SHEFFIELD: Yes. We have one speaker on the consent agenda for 16F5. Suzanne (sic) O'Brien. MS. O'BRIEN: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Susan O'Brien. I live in Pelican Bay, and I serve on the Pelican Bay Services Division Board. Before you consider approving agenda Item 16F5, which is a request to transfer a million dollars from one PBSD account to another, I would just like to share three things: Number one, this million-dollar transfer of funds has not been approved by the PBSD Board. March 13, 2018 Page 17 Mr. Dorrill only mentioned it during last week's Board Meeting when he was asked a question about another $300,000 that had previously been transferred from one fund to another to accommodate Irma-related expenses. This million-dollar transfer could have been on the agenda, but it wasn't. Second, two days after the board meeting, Mr. Dorrill wrote an email to Dr. Joseph Doyle. I believe you received a copy of that. Mr. Dorrill said in the email that the PBSD Board was provided information about five projects and their estimated cost at last week's meeting. This is not accurate. I attended the meeting and have listened to the audiotape of it. The only costs Mr. Dorrill mentioned during the meeting were $150,000 and $39,000, and that's for work along the 41 berm. PBSD Board was provided no additional information where the million-dollar number came from. Third, in the email Mr. Dorrill estimated the cost of repairing and replacing street signs in Pelican Bay at half a million dollars. Two hundred seventy-five signs need work, which is about $1,818 per sign. He estimated the cost of streetlight repairs primarily to straighten poles at $200,000. One hundred nine poles need work, which would be $1,835 per pole. It appears that these estimates need to be fine-tuned before the appropriate amount for a budget transfer is established and approved by the PBSD Board; therefore, I respectfully request that you delay action on this request until the PBSD Board has approved it. It appears that there's adequate time to do so prior to your summer recess. Thank you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Is Mr. Dorrill here? (No response.) MR. OCHS: Mr. Isackson is here -- March 13, 2018 Page 18 CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Mr. Isackson's here? MR. OCHS: -- if you want to get an explanation from him. MR. ISACKSON: Good morning, Commissioners. Mark Isackson with the Office of Management and Budget. We had received -- in my office, we received a request a couple weeks ago for additional monies connected with the hurricane. We had already budgeted budget amendments of about $290,000 moved within Fund 322, which is the Pelican Bay Services Division Capital Fund. Those dollars have already been appropriated into the proper Hurricane Irma funded program within the Capital Fund. Now, this particular request is obviously a large amount of money. I understood that there was going to be some advisory board review the Wednesday that the agenda was printed. At that point in time I just decided to put it on the agenda for Board consideration. We've done 78 budget amendments over the last six months totaling $170 million covering this hurricane. Now, it's up to the Board whether or not they want to actually approve the BA or not. That's why it's, obviously, before you. So it's your call policy-wise. I don't think there's any risk of a delay in terms of getting reimbursed from FEMA or something like that. It's just a matter of the timing of the work that has to be prosecuted. And I wouldn't have any idea what that would be. Mr. Dorrill would probably know better than I about that, so... CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Well, I'd like to suggest that we pull this item and we see if Mr. Dorrill can come and join us and give us a brief explanation so that we're all clear. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And/or continue it. I mean, that's an alternative there. If we could continue this item if there isn't an issue with the delay just to clarify the point that it's gone through the -- MR. ISACKSON: We would continue it to the next meeting if March 13, 2018 Page 19 you wanted to. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I mean, that -- MR. ISACKSON: Two weeks. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I mean, that would maybe save him a trip down from the offices. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Well, I think we're still going to need an explanation if -- I mean, I certainly would just like to hear what the process was for Mr. Dorrill if he's available. But why don't we do this: Why don't we just pull it and if -- maybe we can have anybody call and see if he can join us sometime later today, and if he can't then maybe we can continue it or we can continue it if we're not -- if we don't feel comfortable with what Mr. Dorrill presents. How's that? MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that would move this item, then, to 11H on your regular agenda, and we'll contact him and get him over here. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: With that, I'll move for approval of the consent and summary agenda items. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: There's a motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Motion carries. MR. OCHS: Thank you. March 13, 2018 Page 20 Item #5A PRESENTATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BUSINESS OF THE MONTH FOR MARCH 2018 TO CABLE USA, LLC., ACCEPTED BY RICHARD WOODMAN, VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE. ALSO PRESENT IS BETHANY SAWYER OF THE GREATER NAPLES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE - PRESENTED MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that now takes us to Item 5A. This is a presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for March 2018 to Cable USA, LLC. To be accepted by Richard Woodman, Vice-President of Finance, and Bethany Sawyer from the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce. If you'd please step forward. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Simon says little steps to your left. MR. WOODMAN: I'd like to thank the Commission and the Chamber of Commerce for this honor. MR. OCHS: Sir, if you can give your name for the record. MR. WOODMAN: My name's Richard Woodman, VP of Finance, Cable USA. Cable USA is a Berkshire Hathaway Company. We've been in existence in Naples since 1984, and we provide high-performance wire and cable to the industrial and military markets. We employee 70 employees in the region. And I speak for them; they'll be delighted that you have acknowledged Cable USA as the Business of the Month. We encourage community involvement, and some of the groups that we support or we volunteer work with are the Sunshine Kids. They're -- they have a regional office in Naples, and that's for children that have cancer. It allows for them to have normal types of environments like go to ballgames and Disney World and Busch March 13, 2018 Page 21 Gardens. We have one of -- our employees is well involved with the Friends of the Collier Museum, and we've involvement in Naples Winter Wine Festival. And less provincial, we've supplied or donated materials to the University of Florida for projects. So we are -- our General Manager is Jeremy Shaffer, and he's been charted with growth and profitability. As such, I think you'll probably see that there's more employment opportunities for local residents in our community. Thank you, again. (Applause.) Item #7 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA CHAIRMAN SOLIS: That takes us to Item 7 this morning, public comments on general topics not on the current or future agenda. MR. SHEFFIELD: We have three public comments. First today is Graham Ginsberg. MR. GINSBERG: Good morning, Commissioners. Graham Ginsberg, lived in Naples since '93, raised three children in this community, and we're still here. As long as I'm here, I'm going to speak publicly on issues that concern me and all for the public good. So three topics I want to speak about today is code, beaches, and the ATV park. What comes to mind? ATV park. It was promised 20 years ago, approximately, that the county would provide the public an ATV park, 600 acres, and there was a gift of $3 million attached to it. Today, 20 years later, $3 million is not going to cut it. So instead of employing people to do research on the ATV park, I March 13, 2018 Page 22 suggest you get the money first, because $3 million is not going to cut it. You need more funds. And because it's a park and it's going to be a public park and people -- tourists from all around Florida are going to come to it, I suggest you use TDC funds to accommodate the expense. The beaches -- it's been a year, and I raised the topic of an open beach access ordinance which allows the public to use the beach without fear of being kicked off by code or the police on our Collier County beaches. It's not fair the way it is structured right now for tourists to use our beaches. So please work on that. I know Senator Saunders has had an interest in that. The third item I want to speak about is code. And one particular concern is lighting. Lights today are more powerful than they have ever been. There's no ordinance to protect the interests of the general public in residential areas when it comes to lighting. Three thousand-watt lights, say, 10 of them directed at the neighbor's bedroom, is not acceptable. There is an ordinance for noise. So noise intrusion is an issue and can be done (sic) something about it. But there is none with lighting, and lighting is extremely powerful these days. So please work on an ordinance that will help the residents fight the lighting issues in residential communities. As far as managing code goes and the running of code, I have my concerns. I voiced those concerns to the managers at code, and hopefully something will be done to improve code and the management of the public in Collier County. Thanks for your time. I appreciate it. MR. SHEFFIELD: Mr. Ginsberg, will Mia and Ethan be speaking, or did you speak? MR. GINSBERG: I spoke for them. MR. SHEFFIELD: Okay. There are no further public comments. MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us into Item 11 this morning, County Manager's report. March 13, 2018 Page 23 Item #11A REVIEW THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS STUDY AND AFFIRM STAFF'S FINDINGS IN RESPONSE TO A PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST HEARD ON FEBRUARY 13, 2018, UNDER AGENDA ITEM 6A., REQUESTING THAT A WALL OR GUARDRAIL BE INSTALLED ON A SECTION OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD (JUST EAST OF US41 ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROADWAY) TO PREVENT CARS FROM LEAVING THE ROAD. (PUBLIC PETITION - HETZNER) – MOTION TO ACCEPT REPORT – APPROVED MR. OCHS: Item 11A is a recommendation to review the traffic analysis study and affirm the staff's findings in response to a public petition request heard on February 13th, 2018, requesting that a wall or guardrail be installed on a section of Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Ms. Marlene Messam, your Principal Project Manager with Transportation Engineering Division, will make the presentation. MS. MESSAM: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Marlene Messam, Principal Project Manager, Growth Management Division. I'm here this morning to present the engineering findings of the petition that you heard on February 13th. This was a public petition, as the County Manager said, requesting a wall or guardrail along a section of Rattlesnake Hammock Road. This property exists on the north side, and I'd just like to go through this brief presentation and entertain any questions that you may have. The property in question, if you watch the screen, is located here. This is the Biscayne Bay Condos or condominium property. And there is, or was, a fence along the property line. One of the -- there were March 13, 2018 Page 24 several crashes dating from 2012 to 2017, a total of actually seven crashes. Four of the seven crashes occurred in 2017. We received a request from the petitioner, Mr. Hetzner. He actually contacted us four separate times asking that some protection be afforded the property. And we looked each time at the engineering request; we look at the response to this. And as you can see, we visited the site on March 13th, 2017; April 13th, 2017; August 31st, 2017; and February 26 of this year. We also, at each time, responded to Mr. Hetzner through the Agency Incident Management System, and they're documented here. We have also documented our engineering findings in an engineering report, and it has been signed and sealed by three professional engineers. The first engineering analysis we looked at where the crashes -- of course, I mentioned that before, that all the crashes -- we usually look at a five-year period of crashes, 2012 to 2017. Based on the reports from the Sheriff's Office, the police reports, most of these crashes can be attributed to driver error. We looked at the roadway features and the roadway alignment to see if that played a factor in the amount of crashes that occurred, and we did not find any such. The next thing we look at is whether a guardrail or some type of roadside barrier would be appropriate in this situation. We looked at -- we evaluated the drop-off conditions. We also looked at what the manuals, the Florida Department of Transportation manuals say in regards to warrants for a guardrail. The conclusion is that the site did not meet the requirements for a guardrail. And I can take you through -- we did a topographical survey. At each hundred feet we looked at the elevations and the setbacks from the curb as to whether or not this particular area met that drop-off criteria. What the standards say is that within an area of 22 feet, a lateral March 13, 2018 Page 25 distance of 22 feet from the face of curb, if you have a drop-off or a slope that is greater than 3-to-1 and also that that elevation, the slope causes an elevation greater than six feet, then you should consider doing some type of mitigation for the drop-off. This was not the case. As you can see, if you want to take a look at this bottom chart here, we labeled the cross-sections that we took along that property, A, B, C, D. The results of our evaluation show that the length, the first section, which is this first section here, we got a lateral offset of 18.5 feet. The slope there is 1-to-5, much flatter than 1-to-3, and also the height, the drop-off height from the top of curb down where the slope ends, it was only two feet. And on and on it goes. Section B we had a lateral distance of 22 feet. We also had a slope of 1-to-5 and a height of 3.2 feet. Section C, the third section here, we had a lateral distance of 19.4. Now we have a slope of 1-to-3 but only a height of 3.3 feet. Section D, the last cross-section we evaluated, is actually off the property. It's outside of the property boundary. We measured a lateral slope (sic) of 19.8, a slope of 1-to-3, and a height of 4 feet. So in each of these instances -- because, again, we took cross-sections at every hundred feet along this property line, and these are the results that we received when we did our topographic survey. Again, these are the criteria for an urban section. They have a posted speed of 35 miles an hour in this section, and the urban means that it is curb and gutter along the edge of the roadway. Next we looked at another request that Mr. Hetzner made. He asked for, perhaps, a noise or perimeter wall. In Collier County we follow the standard of the Florida Department of Transportation and the federal standards when we look at abating noise. Chapter 23, part 772 of the code, the federal code for procedures for abatement of highway traffic noise and construction noise, we also follow the National Environment Policy Act of 1969 and, according to the FDOT, March 13, 2018 Page 26 Chapter 32, Plans Preparation Manual, Volume I, perimeter walls are not designed for vehicle impacts. So, in conclusion -- in conclusion, what we did is we posted or installed chevron signs along the curve in this area of roadway and posted an advisory speed of 35 miles an hour so we can bring driver awareness to the fact that they're entering a change in the roadway alignment. But, again, just to repeat, none of the crashes that occurred between 2012 and 2017 were as a result of the roadway alignment or any roadway features. Any questions? COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have some questions. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Marlene. I realize what all the figures say, and I can tell you a good story. But just taking a step aside and using a little bit of Donna Fiala common sense -- I don't know that anybody else would agree with me -- but this road has changed a lot over the years because it used to just be a two-lane road and now it's I don't know how many lanes across there right now. And but -- in that area, as you well know, there's a lot of walkers and a lot of bicyclists. I'm wondering, as we look at all of this, what can we do to assist -- this is low-income housing right there, too, so I don't think they have much money that we can, you know, perform an MSTU for. Is there something rather inexpensive but effective that we could do to help, like planting bushes or something, that might just be like a little protection wall or something? Maybe not expensive, but at least to give them a little added protection there. Is that something we can do? MS. MESSAM: Planting, Commissioner, as you can see from the very last slide that you're looking at there, there are plenty of March 13, 2018 Page 27 landscaping already there. And also what Mr. Hetzner's concern is is to prevent errant vehicles from leaving the roadway and coming onto the Biscayne Condominium properties. Bushes would not be effective in stopping an errant vehicle from -- you know, it will slow it down some, but it certainly won't prevent a car. The slopes that we found in the area, actually, they do meet the requirements for recovery, vehicle to recover. Just so you know, the accidents -- two of the accidents that caused damage to the existing fence line, one was caused when the driver tried to avoid an animal that was crossing the roadway, and he left the roadway and crashed into the property. The second one was caused when a driver fell asleep and lost control of his vehicle and so left the roadway. So in terms of -- I understand what you're saying, and I'm very empathetic to Mr. Hetzner's concerns, but in terms of spending public funds for a situation that really is not an engineering solution -- if the condo would like to plant trees or put a wall up, they only have to apply to our Development Services for the proper permit to do anything that they so desire on their property. But from a public standpoint, I don't know that there is anything we can do. We can always certainly go back and, you know, think some other ways. COMMISSIONER FIALA: My last question. If it were you now and you didn't want to spend, you know, any public funds, is there something that you can suggest to these people that they can do to somehow protect them somewhat? I don't even know what to say other than bushes. MS. MESSAM: Well, again, bushes is only an aesthetic separation of the property from the roadway, but I don't think bushes are going to be effective in mitigating any type of vehicle from not coming onto the property. If my colleagues have any suggestions, they're right here, I'd March 13, 2018 Page 28 welcome. MR. AHMAD: Good morning, Commissioner. For the record, Jay Ahmad. We have suggested that they can install a wall if they choose to on their property. They could also install those trees that may help but, certainly, the landscaping along the roadway side, as you can see, is quite extensive. So I'm not sure if more landscaping is the answer. Perhaps they can do stuff on their property like a wall or, you know, or trees. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I was just looking for a solution. MS. MESSAM: Thank you, ma'am. Any further questions, Commissioners? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Taylor. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You can see that -- from this curve you can see the marks of probably fenders and the scraping. So do we have a dangerous curve sign ahead of that and to slow down? And can we put a dangerous curve sign there with some kind of light to attract people? MS. MESSAM: I wouldn't suggest putting a dangerous curve sign. We have not found the curve to be dangerous. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's the drivers? MS. MESSAM: Obviously, people aren't paying attention sometimes to the way they drive, and that is the reason for the chevron signs that we've posted and lowered the speed to 35 miles an hour to give driver -- to let them know, you are entering a change in the lateral feature of the roadway. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: All right. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well -- and on that note, we posted an advisory speed of 35, and we all know speed kills, and it's March 13, 2018 Page 29 the way for us to control traffic the best. Is there a thought process of even further reducing it, or what's the difference between a posted advisory speed and the speed? MS. MESSAM: So the roadways are designed for a certain speed. The design speed of the roadway -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. MS. MESSAM: -- is taken into consideration when we do construct the roadway. What we have here, Commissioner, is an enforcement problem, not an engineering problem. Okay. We have asked people from time to time when they call in, people who are making excessive speed on our roadways, to call the Sheriff's Office, and the Sheriff's Office has worked with us over the years but, of course, they can't be everywhere all at once. So we keep educating people by placing signs, lowering speed limits, but I'm not sure what else we can do. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So did you answer my question? MS. MESSAM: I don't know. Did I? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: What's the difference between a posted speed limit change and an advised speed limit change? MS. MESSAM: There is really no difference, really. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. I saw that it was posted advisory speed, and I -- MS. MESSAM: Still it's enforceable. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. All right. COMMISSIONER FIALA: One last question, if I may. Being that these are rental apartments, they can't really form any kind of a whatever it is to get the money together. Can they somehow petition the owner of the property to do that? MS. MESSAM: That is something they can do, yes. Yes, they can do that. March 13, 2018 Page 30 CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Saunders? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think we, at this point, should accept the report and move on. I don't think there's really anything we can do in terms of expending public money for this. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Is that a motion? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I would make that motion. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Second. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: There's a motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Motion carries. Thank you. MS. MESSAM: Thank you, sir. Board, thank you. Item #11B DIRECT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE AN AMENDMENT TO COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 96-84, AS AMENDED, KNOWN AS THE RADIO ROAD BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT (MSTU), TO AMEND THE BOUNDARIES AND INCORPORATE PROVISIONS TO IMPROVE THE LOOK AND USABILITY OF THE PUBLIC AREAS WITHIN THE MSTU BOUNDARIES - MOTION TO CONTINUE INDEFINITELY UNTIL PUBLIC INPUT IS REACHED – APPROVED March 13, 2018 Page 31 MR. OCHS: Item 11B is a recommendation to direct the County Attorney to advertise an amendment to County Ordinance 96-84, that is the Radio Road Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit Ordinance, in order to amend the boundaries and incorporate provisions to improve the look and usability of the public areas within the boundaries. Ms. Michelle Arnold, your Public Transit and Neighborhood Enhancement Division Director, will present. MS. ARNOLD: Good morning, Commissioners. Michelle Arnold, for the record. I'm here to request that the Board consider a proposal to amend the Radio Road MSTU ordinance. We do this in two steps. We ask permission first, and then if you are inclined to do so, then we move forward bringing that back to the Board. The proposal is being done in response to requests from the advisory committee and also in response to some public inquiry that was forwarded to you all as commissioners. There was some inquiry about the MSTU history and purpose, and we've tried to address those questions in this proposed amendment. One of the requests was to question whether or not we were able to make modifications to the right-of-way and whether the purpose of the MSTU was limited to just medians, and the actual ordinance is being amended to clarify that the MSTU has the ability to make modifications anywhere within the public right-of-way, and that would be consisting of the roadway on Radio Road between Airport and Santa Barbara as well as along Devonshire. The purpose is also being amended to include a number of other things that are similarly done by other MSTUs within the county so that we can avoid having to come back multiple times every time a citizen makes an inquiry about the ability to do some improvements March 13, 2018 Page 32 along the roadway. One of the inquires that came in by the citizen was some traffic calming along Radio Road. Marlene Sherman is the citizen that's been making the inquiries, and she'd inquired about traffic-calming measures on Radio Road, and because the ordinance doesn't provide for that, we weren't able to provide any of those measures. So that's one of the examples that's being included in this proposal. Other things like street-lighting and sidewalks and those types of things are being considered as an amendment to this particular ordinance. The other thing that's being included is improvements along Rich King Greenway. The ordinance was previously amended to provide for improvements at the entrance of the greenway and the committee has been having conversations with our Parks and Rec Department about potential improvements along the greenway itself which would consist of beautifications or exercise stations and that type of thing. The boundary change that's being recommended is to include the entire Greenway. Currently half of the greenway is in the MSTU. The eastern half is not. And so we would be incorporating, I believe, four parcels that would encompass county-owned property that consists of the greenway. And that's the extent of the proposal before you. If you have any questions, I'm here to answer them. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, first maybe -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Oh, actually, we have some speakers. I'm sorry. How many speakers do we have? MR. SHEFFIELD: We have four. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Shall we hear the speakers first? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure. And then maybe Burt Saunders. March 13, 2018 Page 33 MR. SHEFFIELD: Your first speaker is Marlene Sherman, and she's been ceded additional time from Wayne Sherman. Wayne, raise your hand, please, and Rebecca Parotore, for a total of nine minutes. MS. SHERMAN: Good morning. For the record, my name is Marlene Sherman. I live in Countryside. I've been concerned with matters going on outside our gates for a long time and, yes, I have been having meetings with the advisory board for the MSTU. I do correct the statement made that I talked about traffic on Radio Road. I do not remember that, making any requests on that. Okay. I'm here this morning to recommend to you that we sunset the Radio Road MSTU, which is Ordinance 96-84; 22 years later we still stand here with ordinances being thrown at us every time we turn around amending this document that was originally brought before you as an emergency ordinance for the purpose of only landscaping the medians along Radio Road. So -- and that has been accomplished; been finished a long time ago. And the maintenance for that -- for the Radio Road section has been transferred to the district for greater Collier County unincorporated areas, okay. Okay. I believe that the Board has acted in very good faith when they approved two previous add-on ordinances. One in 2002, that was 2002-59, and the other one was 2013-43. Okay. You acted in good faith because you were not provided additional information. It was unknown to you at the time. Okay. What the Board was not informed with that -- that these amendments to these things were not advertised, no neighborhood information meeting was held, and the 6,506 supporting properties were not directly notified as was done with the original ordinance in 96-84 followed up by Resolution 97-184, okay, where they were asked if they actually supported this. So we were not asked that. Additionally, the three largest community bodies within this March 13, 2018 Page 34 MSTU, the governing bodies of these communities, which were Countryside, Foxfire, Glen Eagle -- was Embassy Woods, now Glen Eagle, okay, were never asked to have representation, volunteer representation on an advisory board. The advisory -- the MSTU advisory board was not even noted in the original ordinance that the advisory board should be established, okay. Okay. And I believe that the criteria that the county used was flawed, okay. The advisory -- the only criteria was five-member board and that they be volunteers living within the borders. We have four major communities there that should have been -- each one should have had a representative appointed by their governing boards, okay. Ordinance 96-84, of course, it's ready to be sunset, no longer -- been completed. Maintenance is being handled by another -- by the MSTD, another fund, okay, which we pay taxes for, by the way, because we live in that area, okay. Ordinance 2003, work's been completed. That was Devonshire. The work's been completed, and the 2002 ordinance also added three little very powerful words, "right-of-way." Okay. And to that extent, who got the benefit of that? Berkshire Lakes and the Publix shopping center both got lush landscaping put on there -- right up against their borders. That's the only thing that that had been used for until 2017. Now the MSTU advisory board is using that right-of-way to rebuild 17 bus shelters, which already exist, to make them ADA compliant. I ask, you know, what is going to be happening to the rest of the bus shelters within Collier County? Why is this little MSTU being taxed to redo bus shelters that already exist to make them ADA compliant? Okay. Okay. Ordinance 2013-43 -- and, of course, I've told you that these ordinances were never advertised and never supported by the majority of the community -- asked that they landscape the entrance to March 13, 2018 Page 35 the Rich King Memorial Greenway, which is a bike path, and it also serves as an FP&L easement area. I think this is highly frivolous, and it should be sunset. Okay. So a lot of questions are raised here. For instance, who's the true beneficiary if the MST (sic) passes this additional ordinance and redefines boundaries that were set 22 years ago? Well, we have not asked support of that. So the only beneficiary is the MSTU advisory board. They're looking for ways to spend their $1.2 million they have remaining in their funds. They've completed Devonshire medians, they've completed Radio Road medians, and they're looking for ways to spend that money. That money could be better served by transferring to the MSTD for greater Collier County landscaping issues, which they already take care of Radio Road anyway. And I would recommend that you direct the county to ask the MSTD to handle the maintenance for Devonshire Boulevard. If that was done, then the 2002 ordinance could be sunset, would be ready for sunsetting. Okay. Okay. Let's see. My eyes are not too good. Okay. This is -- I want to make sure I make this point. Okay. The advisory board has designs on landscaping the Rich King Memorial Greenway on Radio Road to Davis Boulevard and beyond, okay, if you read what is being -- what is going to be proposed on this changing the borders. Half of the desired Rich King Memorial Parkway from -- okay. Half of the desired area for landscaping projects is now within the established borders of the 22-year-old ordinance. Next, the MSTU advisory board has designs on asking Radio Road to probably provide a traffic light, I would think with MSTU funds, for Davis Boulevard, because that greenway extends down about three miles and does cross Davis Boulevard, okay. Okay. And this -- the borders, the MSTU should -- nothing should go beyond the Davis Boulevard. I firmly agree -- support that. March 13, 2018 Page 36 One of the SME's (sic) current projects, I told you, is rebuilding the 17 bus stops. I would like to know who will fund all of the other shelters in Collier County to bring them into compliance with the ADA new federal requirement that all of them now be ADA compliant. I assume the county will be seeking grants from federal and state government to take care of this. And why should the MSTU funds be used to enlarge public areas? How many MSTUs whose purpose was designated for median landscaping is now being asked to fund landscaping for public areas? I recommend the Board sunset Ordinance 96-84, Ordinance 2002-59, Ordinance 2013-43, and not approve Recommendation 11B. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. I believe Commissioner Fiala was first. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There's more people. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I'm sorry. There was one more? MR. SHEFFIELD: Your last speaker is Roy Anderson. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I apologize. MR. ANDERSON: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Roy Anderson. I'm a resident of Countryside, and I'm here in my capacity as Chairman of the External Community Relations Committee which is basically formed to keep track of things going on outside the gates of Countryside. So, essentially, I just wanted to report to you that its regular meeting of February 15th of this year, the Master Board of Countryside was not in favor of extending the boundaries of the MSTU. In fact, they unanimously approved a motion to sunset the Radio Road MSTU given, you know, that the original work called for, the original scope of work has been completed, and Devonshire is the only maintenance project left, and that can be transferred to the district, March 13, 2018 Page 37 as Marlene had mentioned. Even though it's a -- it's a collector road and not an arterial, it still has a tremendous community benefit for a pass-through, and it's certainly an asset to the area. The lanes have just been expanded. The turning lanes have been added. So believe that -- we're totally behind -- the club of Countryside is totally behind all the recommendations that -- the recommendations that Marlene has made. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. First of all, I was wondering -- and he kind of answered that for me, and that is, had the MSTU board -- I'm sorry. I'm not feeling too, too hot today, so don't mind me. Did they actually vote on all of these things to approve these things that were in this request? MS. ARNOLD: Yes, they did. The MSTU advisory committee did. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Even though they voted to sunset it? MS. ARNOLD: They did not vote to sunset the Radio Road MSTU. They did not. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There's two -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Two of them? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. There's two opinions. The MSTU board voted to accept staff recommendation. The folks over at Countryside are a part of the MSTU but a different voting organization. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see. Okay. The second question is, I notice that they wanted to get the burial of the power lines. You know, it really, really looks good when you bury the power lines, but I remember all the things that Vanderbilt had to go through -- March 13, 2018 Page 38 CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Still going through. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- and the huge cost that was involved in burying those lines. And I was wondering -- it doesn't say anything here about how much that would cost the people in the MSTU and how long they would have to pay for it. There's no cost here. MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. There is -- there is no plans to do power line burial, but what this ordinance is allowing for is if there is a desire to do it, they would be able to do that. If the Board thinks that that should not be a purpose for this particular MSTU, then you should request that we strike that portion of it. What this is allowing for is if there's a desire to do it within the community, then they could do it. They would have to go through a planning process to identify the costs associated with it and those types of things if it was to move forward. The advisory committee is making a couple different efforts to solicit input from the community which they serve. You know, Mrs. Sherman mentioned that the ordinance is flawed because we don't have representation from the larger communities. All of our advisory committees solicit applications from everybody within the MSTU. The governing ordinance for all advisory committees does not say that it has to come from a particular community, but if that community is interested, they're welcome to apply for and submit an application to participate on the advisory committee. I know that I have personally asked the Shermans to serve, but there's no interest there in serving. They do attend the meetings, but they have not wanted to represent their particular community. I mean, it's a voluntary thing. If the Board wants to, they can require that larger communities have representation, but the way the ordinance is currently -- your overall governing advisory committee ordinance, it does not have that March 13, 2018 Page 39 requirement. It just expects those that are in the district to submit if they have an interest. In terms of -- I think Mrs. Sherman mentioned some ADA improvements. The committee had made recommendation to make some modifications along Radio Road. Those, I believe, were forwarded to the County Attorney's Office to determine whether or not they could do that. Because the ordinance is vague in terms of sidewalk improvements, they did not pursue that particular project, but they have been discussing it. The committee is making -- as I mentioned before, making efforts to reach out through surveys to find out what the interest of the community is. They're also scheduling a community-wide meeting on I believe it's the 27th of this month that we're reaching out to the community to get input from the community to find out what various interests or improvements they're interested in doing. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Which community? MS. ARNOLD: All of the residents within the Radio Road MSTU. COMMISSIONER FIALA: MSTU communities? MS. ARNOLD: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Last question. And I haven't talked to anybody. I'm just asking these. They're kind of like common-sense questions. MS. ARNOLD: Sure. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the last one is, we heard that one community wanted to sunset their part of the MSTU. Can that be done? Can each -- you know, or any communities sunset their section of it? MS. ARNOLD: Well, the issue is is that you've got an ordinance that was created or an MSTU that was created to do improvements along Radio Road and Devonshire. Ms. Sherman is correct that the March 13, 2018 Page 40 maintenance of the Radio Road portion is being done by the MSTD or the Growth Management Section; however, Devonshire does not meet the countywide requirements with regard to their master plan beautification. So this MSTU is going to continually be responsible for the maintenance of Devonshire, which is a part of their responsibility. Similar to Lely, for example, there are several roadways in Lely that they improve and they maintain. They will continue to maintain those roadways because they don't meet the overall county's criteria for your master plan. Golden Gate is another MSTU. There are several that you-all have that fall under the same scenario. Also, if the Radio Road MSTU chooses to help the refurbishment along Radio Road for beautification, they can do that as well. MR. OCHS: Ma'am, to answer your question, I don't believe you can carve out a section of an MSTU unless you modify the boundaries and amend the boundaries. MS. ARNOLD: But they would continue to be benefiting from this MSTU and not paying into it if you were to carve that community out. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Anything else? COMMISSIONER FIALA: No. I didn't hear the answer to how much it would cost to bury the power lines. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: They haven't gotten that far. MS. ARNOLD: Oh, we haven't done that yet. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Taylor. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So what I'm gleaning from this is that there was a -- there is a desire to or an identified need to improve the southern end of the Ricky King Pathway, which my understanding, there are a lot of folks that use that. MS. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. March 13, 2018 Page 41 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And from that point on, the thought was if we're going to change this ordinance to do this and bring it before us and if we're going -- if this is an agreement of the advisory board, then we should probably put a lot more things in there so we don't have to do this every time. Was that the rationale? MS. ARNOLD: That's correct. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. So then we have pushback from neighbors who feel that they were caught unawares by this. They don't feel like they've had buy-ins. Not the Shermans, but certainly Countryside and the Master Association feels -- I may be putting words in their mouth -- but they feel like they haven't gotten buy-ins, which is not your responsibility. It's the responsibility of the advisory board. So if we -- so I guess my question is, was the process followed to inform the neighboring associations of these changes, in your opinion? MS. ARNOLD: This is the process that we're going through now. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well -- but what -- this is part of the process, but doesn't it start on the grassroots level? Doesn't some kind of awareness go out throughout the whole community, all these communities? Is there an identified process by which there's an outreach into each of the neighborhoods so that we -- if someone chooses not to respond to something, that's one thing, but if they're not informed, that's a whole other thing, which is not our responsibility. I would think it would be the advisory board responsibility. MS. ARNOLD: The way the process is set up is we look to the advisory boards as well as community participation at the meetings that we hold monthly to, you know, get the word out to their respective communities. You know, the desire it to have more participation at our monthly meetings so that people are informed. We also try to reach out to, you know, some communities that March 13, 2018 Page 42 have newsletters so that they, you know, put information in their newsletters for us. And as I mentioned before, we also are trying to reach out to the communities for surveys. The difficult part with the surveys is, you know, we don't have the email addresses or whatever for every person within the community. But we do try to do different efforts to try to reach out to the various communities. And that's the only process that we have to get their input. I mean, we have representatives from Countryside that came in and inquired, and we talked to them about the process, and they made a decision as a community to come to you-all and express their desire. That's a part of the process. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. I heard the word "sunset" more than once. I'm not sure on this right now, but what I am sure is, is that we need a better outreach into the community. And, again, I'm not putting this on your shoulders. To me, when you're on an advisory board, it's incumbent of going to everyone to talk to them. If we cannot carve out Countryside, is it too cumbersome to go to some kind of ballot throughout the area to see, number one, whether they want the MSTU to continue in these areas? Understanding that -- and I don't quite understand where the funding would come from. If the MSTU was to sunset, that is your taxing part of the whole picture. Where would the funds come to maintain Devonshire, which has been acknowledged as an important amenity to the entire area? Where would that come from? MS. ARNOLD: You-all would -- someone would have to identify a funding source for it. Currently, the funding source for maintaining it is the MSTU, and that's the way it's been developed. And as I mentioned before, that's how -- your other MSTUs are developed the same way. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Do we have any idea of how many folks use the pathway? Any idea? March 13, 2018 Page 43 MS. ARNOLD: I don't know but, I mean, I could get some information from Parks and Rec maybe. I mean, not today, but maybe I can give you some information. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah. And then are we -- I understand there is not the greatest parking at that end, so folks who are driving to -- wanting to have this walk, it's difficult to park. Is there any plans to create any kind of parking there? And, again, I have not walked it. This is just word of mouth. MS. ARNOLD: I think -- I haven't heard anything about that. I think the intent of that greenway is to be more of a passive -- and for the community -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: For the community. MS. ARNOLD: -- neighboring community. Folks can walk there, they can ride their bikes there, and that's the intent of use of that. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I share Commissioner Taylor and Commissioner Fiala's concerns with regard to the public outreach side. If I'm not mistaken, Michelle, did I hear you say there's 6,000-plus residents that are a part of this MSTU, or did Ms. Sherman -- MS. ARNOLD: I believe Ms. Sherman. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Is that a correct number? MS. ARNOLD: That sounds about accurate. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. I have seen in the past where public outreach hasn't been as -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Robust. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- robust. That's a nice way to say that -- as what it possibly could be. I also think I heard either Ms. Sherman or you say that there hasn't been, other than this -- the beginning of this process, any public meetings held so far with regard March 13, 2018 Page 44 to this other than the one -- or the meeting where the MSTU board voted to accept the proposal that's before us. MS. ARNOLD: All the meetings are public. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I understand that. MS. ARNOLD: And we meet monthly. And there is a -- what I mentioned is that we have a public -- an overall public meeting scheduled for the 27th of this month. But outside of that, I know that -- because I haven't been the director for the division the entire extent of the existence of this MSTU. I know that we've had a couple at-large meetings in my tenure. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm just -- I've got the concern that there -- we're taking action in advance of additional public input and outreach, and I would highly recommend -- I also know that it's expensive, but there is a thing called the U.S. Postal Service. We don't have to have people's emails and phone numbers and the like. We've got their addresses. It's all there in a simple postcard notifying the folks that there's a change coming about. We're adjusting the boundaries of this MSTU as a portion of this, if I'm not mistaken. MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. It consists of this small -- the greenway, and it's four parcels owned by the county. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. That's the only adjustment -- MS. ARNOLD: That's the only adjustment. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- to the boundary? Okay. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Saunders? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I don't really have a whole lot to add. I want to listen to what the other commissioners have to say, if there's anything else. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Before anybody makes a motion, can I ask, how many people come to those meetings? That's my only March 13, 2018 Page 45 question. MS. ARNOLD: Not a lot of people come to the meetings. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Taylor. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Is there a problem if we -- and it seems like we're kicking the can down the road, and I don't intend to, but if we wait for a community meeting? I have a sense that -- MS. ARNOLD: Sure. We can do that. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- the awareness is probably elevated. And, you know, if I have the time, I'm planning on attending that community meeting. But for me it would be very helpful. There's two sides to this coin, and I can see the advantages and disadvantages. But I think a presentation of what we're funding, what would be lost if we couldn't fund this, I think it would be very, very helpful. MS. ARNOLD: Sure. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I've got a couple of questions, and let me start at the beginning. So to create an MSTU -- as briefly as possible, what is the process to create an MSTU? MS. ARNOLD: You-all, as a body, can create an MSTU, or there is a petition process -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Right. MS. ARNOLD: -- that requests favorable petitions from 50 percent plus one of the population. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And how is this one created? Was it by petition, or was it just created by the County Commission? I don't recall. MS. ARNOLD: I don't know. Was it petition? MS. KINZEL: (Nods head.) MS. ARNOLD: She was one of the founding people on it; Crystal. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You were the founding, that's March 13, 2018 Page 46 right. MS. KINZEL: Way back when I was on the committee when it started. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. Well, great. So this was a petition process. So there was residents there petitioned -- MS. ARNOLD: They're shaking their heads no, that it wasn't, and I can find out that answer but -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: It's really -- my question is really not that -- it's not so much about what's the change in the boundary right now. What troubles me is that the purpose of it is changing. And if it was created for a specific purpose by a petition, then the residents in there wanted a certain MSTU to do certain things. And then if that's -- the purpose of it's going to change. And I know we've done this in the past, and I think that I may have raised the same issue. But it just concerns me that then the purpose of it can be completely changed based upon a vote of just the four board members and not some other petition process, because that's what's happening here, right? The MSTU board is -- MR. KLATZKOW: The MSTU board is recommending a change -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Right. MR. KLATZKOW: -- but you're the governing body of the MSTU, and you're the ones who ultimately amend the ordinance. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: But there hasn't been a petition process for that. It's just coming from -- I guess that's what my issue is. I mean, I'm -- likewise, I think the boundary is not much of a change because it's just including these four county pieces, but the fundamental changes into what it does, yeah, it's troubling to me that there hasn't been more outreach. I think we should -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to make that as a March 13, 2018 Page 47 motion? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yeah. I would make a motion to continue this item. Would that present issues of any kind that we need to be aware of? MS. ARNOLD: No. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll second that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Third. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. MS. ARNOLD: Just a clarification. Continue so that you would get more public input? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yeah. And, I mean, what is the plan right now for public input? MS. ARNOLD: Well, there is, as I mentioned, a meeting scheduled on the 27th -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. MS. ARNOLD: -- to get more public input. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And, you know, perhaps one of the questions at that public input would be to ask whether there would be support to issue another petition with the newer verbiage in the ordinance, perhaps. I'm not sure. I mean, this is the neighborhood. The neighborhoods are going to have to make those decisions, but -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're all aware. I mean, I have an MSTU in District 5 in Immokalee as well, and it's difficult to get people's attention on a regular basis. And so making sweeping changes like this with, from what I've been able to understand, as Commissioner Solis said, not as much -- not as robust as the public March 13, 2018 Page 48 outreaches could have been accomplished is, I think, a good way for us to go. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: All right. MS. ARNOLD: All right. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So we'll continue it to the meeting following the 27th meeting? MR. OCHS: Well, let's continue indefinitely until I'm satisfied that there's sufficient outreach made. Fair enough? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Good. Thank you. MR. OCHS: Could we get a motion and -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: There was a motion. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We did. We voted on it. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We voted on it. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: We voted again. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: She was asking for clarification on it. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But we didn't use the word "indefinitely." Is that important in this? MR. OCHS: No, I have your intent. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And I don't think there was anyone opposed, right? No one opposed. MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. It's time for your court reporter break, and then we have our time-certain, 10C. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I set that up for 10 o'clock, just so you know. I had everything on track, but it's 10:30 now. It was supposed to be time certain at 10:00, just so you know. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Oh, okay. I'm sorry. MR. OCHS: How long is the break, sir? Ten minutes? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yes, sir. Ten minutes. March 13, 2018 Page 49 (A brief recess was had.) MR. OCHS: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike. Item #11C STAFF TO INITIATE THE INVITATION TO NEGOTIATE (ITN) PROCESS FOR TWO (2) COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTIES PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED AS SUITABLE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING THAT IS AFFORDABLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMMUNITY HOUSING PLAN - MOTION TO CONTINUE UNTIL STAFF CAN FINALIZE POLICY AND OUTREACH TO THE COMMUNITY – APPROVED MR. OCHS: And this takes us to Item 11C, which was your 10 a.m. time-certain item this morning. This is a recommendation to authorize the staff to initiate an invitation and negotiate process for two county-owned properties that were previously identified by this board as suitable for the development of housing that is affordable in accordance with your accepted Community Housing Plan, and Mr. Cormac Giblin, your Manager of Grants and Housing Development in our Community and Communities Services Division, will begin the presentation. MR. GIBLIN: Good morning, Commissioners. Again, for the record, my name's Cormac Giblin, your Housing and Development Manager. And today I have a few slides to go through, an update on the responses that we received from the request for information process on these two properties. Just for a refresher, the purpose of the request for information was March 13, 2018 Page 50 to collect information and input from the marketplace, to gauge community interest and potential, and the parameters that we gave to the public were housing that is affordable for all income ranges in Collier County, rental or homeownership. We received 10 responses from potential people who are interested in developing on either of these properties, and they had some consistencies. They met with your requirements that they be affordable up to 140 percent of median income. Many of them asked that the land be given to the project unencumbered or use a long-term 99-year lease. Overwhelmingly, they requested relief from impact fees. They suggested several funding mechanisms, including 4 percent or 9 percent tax credits, bonds, grants, General Fund dollars, and they -- each of them also requested utilizing the affordable housing bonus program for both sites. The 10 respondents are listed on this slide down the left and, in addition, they each gave varying ranges of specific detail on what they would envision on each site, ranging from 29 units on the Bembridge site up to nearly 800 units on the Manatee site. For your reference, this is where the two properties are located. The Bembridge PUD off of Santa Barbara. The Manatee site is down off Tamiami Trail East. The Bembridge PUD is 5.11 acres. It's adjacent to the EMS station on Santa Barbara. It fronts Calusa Park Elementary. It can be developed at up to 16 units per acre with a density bonus. New Hopes Ministries is nearby. They were recently approved at 16 units to the acre for 304 units on their 19 acres. And just -- in May 2008, an RFP was issued by this board for similar proposals on this site that the Board declined to moved forward on at that time. The Manatee site is nearly 60 acres. It's behind Manatee Elementary and Manatee Middle schools. Collier County Public March 13, 2018 Page 51 Schools also owns an adjacent 30 acres to this site. There is a potential, due to the size of the site, for carving out sections for housing and other public uses on the site. The Bembridge site was purchased in 2002 for $477,000. 410,000 of that was EMS impact fees which would need to be paid back to the Impact Fee Trust Funds. We had an appraisal done a couple weeks ago, and it is now appraised at $774,000. The Manatee site was acquired by the county in 1973. The price was unknown. The documents are so old they're illegible, and the meeting records from that meeting are not able to be located. But we did get an appraisal done on that site last month as well, and it came in at just over $3 million. Our recommendation is to move forward with an invitation to negotiate on both sites. Some common criteria of the invitation to negotiate would be the development elements, financial information, what the proposal has to do with the land disposition, and the developer's experience and timeline and commitment. And then we further have specific recommendations for each site. On the Bembridge site we would recommend that we look for proposals that are between 30 and 75 units, that they focus on rental, that they do a significant portion of senior housing with one- or two-bedroom mix; another portion of mixed income, low income, and moderate income rental housing for two- to three-bedrooms; and then 10 percent set aside for special-needs populations. The Manatee site specific recommendation we recommend is that it be ranged between 250 and 750 units, 40 percent of it be mixed income rental units targeted to low and moderate income families with one to three bedrooms; 30 percent be owner occupied for purchase units targeted to moderate and gap buyers with two- to three-bedroom unit mix; and that 30 percent of the site be set aside for elderly and special populations, rentals, at one to two bedrooms. We also would March 13, 2018 Page 52 seek inclusion of green space and park amenities to increase the cohesive neighborhood atmosphere. Commissioners, that brings us to the staff recommendation, which is to direct staff to initiate an invitation to negotiate process, which includes both the general and the specific criteria that I just laid out. And that is the end of our presentation. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Any questions before we get to the speakers? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah. Yes, I'm sorry. I didn't press my -- could you please define, by income and also by occupation, what "low" is in Collier County measurements, please. MR. GIBLIN: Low income, based on the recommended definition that you moved forward at your last meeting, is 80 percent of median income, which various by family size. So, for example, a family of four at the 80 percent of median income level would be a yearly income of $55,750 a year. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And occupation? MR. GIBLIN: Occupations would be -- we were looking at something greater than a first-year schoolteacher, which starts around $42,000 a year. You're looking -- would be looking at front-line managerial positions possibly in that $55,000 per year, or a combination of two folks both earning half that. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. And moderate, please. MR. GIBLIN: Moderate income is up to 120 percent of median income. Again, based on family size. And for four people, a typical household of four, would be $83,640 a year. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So one person could be 83-? MR. GIBLIN: One person in moderate is 58,560 a year. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And what is occupations? Could you just briefly -- March 13, 2018 Page 53 MR. GIBLIN: Again, I think we're looking at some of the higher seasoned managerial positions, household of $80,000, or two teachers living together, or a Sheriff's Department -- or a sheriff's deputy and a teacher living together. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay, thank you. Beg your pardon on that one. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. Having no other questions -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I did. I hit my button. Did it not come on? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: It's not on. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's not. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I did. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I had a question with regard to the Bembridge -- where you going -- the Bembridge -- Commissioner Saunders, do you want to go first? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No. I do want to listen to all of the speakers. My only concern is not tying the hands too greatly of potential entities that would enter into negotiations. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think this is definitely moving in the right direction. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sure. My question was the -- I'm assuming that the Bembridge piece was purchased with EMS impact fee money, and a portion of that piece was used to build the EMS station to the south. MR. OCHS: You're correct on the first statement. The second statement, you also used EMS impact fees for that, but... COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, that was, yeah, for the purchase of that land and the construction of that facility. And I'm assuming the math with regard to the payback in the impact fees is March 13, 2018 Page 54 correct on the percentages of size of land in the impact fee loans? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. I did want to mention on that score that because you have made loans from the General Fund over the years to the EMS impact fee far in excess of that amount of money, I would suggest you just take a credit for that against that General Fund support. And I don't think you have to transfer dollars back into the EMS impact fee account from the General Fund because, frankly, the EMS impact fee fund owes your General Fund. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, sure. I just didn't see the calculation. When I saw the site and saw that the EMS was to the south -- and I knew we used impact fees for the purchase and construction, I just -- I never saw the math with the equation of the 400-and-some-odd thousand that's owed back to the EMS impact fee. MR. OCHS: Yeah. That was a straight land purchase for those five acres. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Including the EMS store to the south? MR. OCHS: I don't -- I don't know that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Maybe we can get -- I'd like to see that information sometime just to -- MR. OCHS: Yeah. We'll get it right now for you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was the only questions I had. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Taylor. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Just one. I'm sorry. One more question. Special needs, will you define what special needs are, please. MR. GIBLIN: Special needs is defined in state statute. Off the top of my head, it is people who are permanently disabled, seniors. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So seniors will be considered -- MR. GIBLIN: Correct. March 13, 2018 Page 55 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- special needs. MR. GIBLIN: Correct; elderly. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not all of you, for sure. Okay. So -- but there would have to be a disabling part of that demographic, is that correct, and then you have senior housing? Because you have -- on Bembridge you have senior housing and special-needs housing, and I wondered how you differentiated that. MR. GIBLIN: We would defer to the state statute. But there is a specific definition of special needs, and it's typically disabled, and then elderly housing is another definition. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. Public speakers. MR. SHEFFIELD: There are 12 registered speakers. The first speaker will be Pat Young, and she'll be followed by Elliot Miller. MS. YOUNG: Good morning, Pat Young, 5074 Andros Drive. We've just heard some talk about housing and disabilities and that kind of thing, but I haven't heard anything about schools, and I'm here to talk about schools. And I'd just like to start with a statement by HUD. That's the federal Housing Urban and Development Division. And this was in last week's Wall Street Journal. A ZIP code should not determine a child's future. Many valuable -- many variables can shape a child's outcome in life, like the ZIP code where a child grows up. That's because not all neighborhoods have the same opportunities and resources, such as quality schools. And then skip to the bottom. You can play a vital role in your local community. So that's what I'm here to do, hopefully. I don't think they can be separated. In a large county like this where you've got so many schools and so many low-income affordable housing units have been built in East Naples, it is just not the right thing to do. It's really the dark side of Collier County; the elephant in the room. March 13, 2018 Page 56 The latest literature has shown that the quality of a child's education is very much a part of the type of school they go to and the number of low-income people who are in the school. All the latest research shows the more children are in one building all day long with just low-income people, the less chances are they're going to do well academically. And I'm here to speak as an academic, because I taught in the schools in the Washington D.C. suburbs over 30 years. I was also a school counselor. And we had a school system just like this, very large, with many different types of wealth levels. And I worked in a school where we had -- some of our children were children of senators, of Paul Wolfowitz, for example; his children went to our school, and on back-to-school night, we would have Secret Service people there for him. But other kids, their parents, we've sent a bus around so that they could come to the school, and it worked beautifully. Princeton University even did a study on how are you helping these poor kids? How come we're winding up accepting them into our Ivy League schools? The other thing is the housing. I grew up in an intercity neighborhood in Philadelphia and moved to D.C., and lived in a Pulte home that was built in a community of -- was a smaller version of all the other homes. It was not affordable. Our kids got to go to the best schools, and we got to sell at market value. So I think we need to keep all those things in mind as you make the choices. I know you're not the school board, but you are deciding where these children are going to be living and, therefore, where they are going to school. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. SHEFFIELD: The next speaker is Elliot Miller, and Mr. Miller had been ceded time by several people. So when I call your name, please raise your hand. Joseph Vaccaro, Joseph Mayer, March 13, 2018 Page 57 Shannon Benedetti, Richard Benedetti, Michael Buck. Mr. Miller will receive a total of 18 minutes. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And maybe we can say who is next, and they can be prepared to -- MR. SHEFFIELD: And the speaker following Mr. Miller will be Bill Klug. MR. MILLER: Thank you. Good morning. I am the chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Community Development District No. 2 in Fiddler's Creek. Our property abuts, on the north, the Manatee property on its south. And we are here because we are concerned about 750 housing units overlooking our property. I would add, by the way, that my colleague, Phil Brougham, who is the chairman of CDD1 at Fiddler's, was going to be here today to also oppose this recommendation but, unfortunately, he woke up feeling very ill. His position is based on the park aspect of it; that this has been a park for 45 years, and it's an inappropriate modification of the use of that property to take it out of park status. My position is a little more detailed and a little more specific. But I want to show you why I believe seriously that this entire process is flawed. First, let me say to Commissioner Taylor that under HUD's definition, one is eligible for affordable housing if family income is under 80 percent of the area's median income and that HUD has designated the fiscal 2017 median income for Naples, Marco Island, and Immokalee as $68,300, and 80 percent of that is 50,600. So in answer to your question, that's the response from the point of view of HUD. We do not know if the county has considered as an alternative to making a gift of this property free of cost and without any impact fees to a developer, as an alternative, seeking a grant from HUD's Office of Community Planning and Development, the Office of Affordable March 13, 2018 Page 58 Housing Programs. That office administers the home investment partnership programs which provides grants to local governments to buy -- and I'm many emphasizing "buy" here -- or build affordable housing. I'm not addressing the location of the affordable housing for this moment, but just pointing out that before we give -- before the county gives away a lot of money, we should at least look into getting a grant to buy property wherever it's going to be located. And if the county has not considered this program before giving away the property to a developer, we should know why. Now I want to talk about where the property is located. I'm particularly addressing the Manatee property. And what I'd like to do is quote from three studies on site selection for affordable housing and point out why this process is severely flawed. The first is entitled "Site Selection Criteria and Search Studies by CSH." That lists key criteria for site selection for affordable housing. And among the key ones are community acceptance. Another one is the belief by the community that the process is fair. By the way, we had not seen any of this until this minute. So one important consideration is the belief by the community that the process is fair. Another consideration is the sale -- the scale and impact on the neighborhood. The scale and impact of 750 affordable housing units next to Fiddler's Creek where we have 3,000 units, and in CDD 2, it would be overlooking, essentially, parkland. Another consideration is sensitivity to the neighborhood context, and the neighborhood context here is Fiddler's Creek. There have been no studies done before this recommendation was made on any of these criteria. Another site selection study is entitled "10 Principles for Developing Affordable Housing," and this is by the Urban Land Institute, and it's funded by the Fannie Mae Foundation. So these are March 13, 2018 Page 59 people who know what they're doing. Let me give you two direct quotes. Quote, "Building community support and trust begins with clear and open communication with everyone from the highest elected officials to the neighborhood of the proposed development." That's me and all the people here. There has been no such communication. We didn't see any of this until this minute. We did not get any notice that there was going to be a change in the use of Manatee Park to affordable housing. I want to reference the very strong and appropriate feelings of all of you with regard to the Radio Road MSTU that there should be community involvement, community acceptance, and certainly community notification before the process begins. That communication's been entirely lacking here. Here's another very significant quote. One of the first steps is to explain the benefits of or establish the need for affordable housing in the neighborhood, in the community. That has certainly not been done by the county here. There is already an abundance or more than an abundance of low-cost housing in East Naples. There is no such abundance in North Naples. Arthrex in North Naples complains they can't get workers, yet we're talking about putting 750 housing units in East Naples, not in North Naples. We have to wonder why North Naples has been ignored in this context. Also, there's a plan, as I understand it, for a sports park. Why plan a sports park where -- if you're concerned about affordable housing and not consider that as an appropriate site? Another relevant study is entitled "Site Selection for Affordable Housing Development: An analysis of Housing Element Suitable Sites in Orange County, California." Now, Orange County is very similar to Collier County, and it has pretty much the same median income. And at the end of this article, there was a detailed analysis of public transit serving the area. There's March 13, 2018 Page 60 been no analysis of public transit serving this new area. You're going to put 750 homes in Manatee Park without an analysis of the adequacy of public transit, without an analysis of the adequacy of employment opportunities, without an analysis or study of traffic patterns or schooling or anything else for that matter. So for these, and a wide variety of other reasons -- I don't want to preempt everybody else speaking because there are a lot of people who have similar objections. For these and many other reasons, we feel that this is entirely inappropriate. The process is flawed. We should not come here today and learn for the first time what the site selection's going to look like, what the 750 units is going to be next door to us without knowing whether you can get a grant to buy property anywhere else in Collier County, without any studies being done as to the impact of 750 homes in the Fiddler's Creek neighborhood, on our neighborhood, without compliance with any of the basic criteria that these studies say should be done, thought of, and analyzed before making a decision. We believe this process, as I say, is seriously flawed, and we will oppose it, and we will oppose it seriously. We will not go quietly into the night about this. Thank you. (Applause.) MR. SHEFFIELD: Your next speaker is Bill Klug, and he'll be followed by Ray Sokolowski. MR. OCHS: Mr. Chair, the speakers can use both podiums if they'd like. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yes, please. Can the next speaker come up, please. MR. SHEFFIELD: Ray Sokolowski is the next speaker. MR. KLUG: Good morning. William Klug. You have to excuse my voice. I've got a medical condition that's March 13, 2018 Page 61 causing this, but hopefully you'll be able to hear me. William Klug, full-time resident, Collier County. I serve on the board with Elliot, Fiddler's Creek CDD 2, as a supervisor. My comments and questions relate specifically to Packet Pages 138 and 139 of the Commissioners' meeting packet for today meeting. On Page 138, Mr. Coulson states in his letter, we see additional potential in the parcel located immediately to the north and east by including the approximately 30 acres adjacent to the school. Additional synergies with the Manatee site can be realized. My question is, with respect to what's being considered now, is that 30 acres, which I believe is owned by the school district, going to be included in this process? And, if not, then perhaps this entire matter should be tabled until such time this determination is made as to whether or not that 30 acres is included or not. Because, obviously, the inclusion or exclusion of that 30 acres would have a material bearing on the developer's prepared -- proposed site plan for the development of the entire land area. On Page 139, Mr. Coulson also states, although further due diligence is required, based upon yet-to-be-defined requirements, obviously this is a work in process. And a number of points that I'm raising are really a chicken-and-egg matter as to when they need to be done. But, without question, an environmental impact study needs to be done with respect to balancing the needs of what would be covered by this development as opposed to the shrinking wildlife habitat of western Collier, the western portion of Collier County. We have a number of wildlife creatures within Fiddler's Creek now. Black Bear. I see I'm about to run out of time. In any event, the environmental aspects of this entire matter need to be very closely examined before you move forward. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. March 13, 2018 Page 62 (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Mike, who is our next speaker? MR. SHEFFIELD: The next speaker is Ray Sokolowski. MR. OCHS: Yes. Mr. Sokolowski indicated that he decided not to speak, Commissioners, but he did want you to know that he has an ongoing concern about an adequate place for model airplane enthusiasts to be able to operate their model airplanes and some other motorized type -- model motorized sports, and I told him I would make sure that the Board understands that. Thank you. MR. SHEFFIELD: The next speaker is Jerome Oppenberg, and he'll be followed by Cheryl Soukup. MR. OPPENBERG: Good morning. First of all, let me thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak on this issue. My name is Jerome Oppenberg. I'm a full-time resident of Fiddler's Creek. I also happen to be a realtor. And I, obviously, am concerned about what this affordable housing would do to the value of our homes not only in Fiddler's Creek, but others around the communities. We have many seniors on fixed incomes. Their biggest asset is the equity in their homes. And historically -- you don't have to be a realtor to know, historically, that home values usually diminish around affordable housing units. So that's one concern. My other concern is traffic. I came here in 1989 as a snowbird to get away from traffic. I came here for the weather and all the great assets of Southwest Florida and Collier County. In all the years, I don't think I've seen as much traffic on 951 corridor. I work on -- my office is on Marco Island, and in previous years, around 5 o'clock you'd have some traffic, because all the workers are leaving the island. Right now, I could leave at 2 o'clock, 3 o'clock, 4 o'clock, 5 o'clock, and it's backed up all the way to Hammock Bay. March 13, 2018 Page 63 (Applause.) MR. OPPENBERG: I think a conservative estimate -- and I'm being real conservative -- with 750 units, you could have a minimum of a thousand more automobiles. And then we talk about Manatee school. What about the safety of our children with this extra traffic? I think all these things should be considered. I'm sure you will make the right decision, but I don't think this is the right place. It's going to affect a lot of people and maybe create many, many financial hardships. So thank you for your hearing me. MR. SHEFFIELD: The next speaker is Sheryl Soukup, and she'll be followed by Suzanne Obchill. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Can the next speaker go ahead and come up to the other podium, please. Thank you. MR. SHEFFIELD: And the next speaker is your final speaker. MS. SOUKUP: Hi. My name is Sheryl Soukup, and I'm with Residential Options of Florida. And I'm here today to just talk about affordable housing for people with developmental disabilities. I did want to address your question about special needs. The definition does include not only people with disabilities or disabling conditions and seniors but also victims of domestic violence, homeless individuals, and youth aging out of foster care. So special needs is a pretty broad definition. In our county we have six units set aside for people with developmental disabilities, and we have a very high population of people with developmental disabilities living here with elderly parents. There is a need for housing for people with developmental disabilities in our community. We have some data to back that up that I'd be happy to share with the commissioners. We did conduct some focus groups and a survey to determine the need and preferences of people with developmental disabilities in our March 13, 2018 Page 64 community, and in Collier County there is a need and preference for apartments and single-family homes, primarily for rental, but some for homeownership as well. People with disabilities can live independently if they have the right supports. We do have support services available, but we don't have enough affordable housing that is available at the level that people with developmental disabilities need at the rent level. So many people with developmental disabilities, because of their disability, live on SSI, and that income is $750 in a month. So if affordable housing is no more than 30 percent of your income, then they can afford about $225 per month. So what I'm asking you-all to consider is, if you decide to use these parcels for affordable housing, that you include some units set aside for people that are ELI, extremely low income, and that you consider setting aside some units for people with developmental disabilities perhaps in a natural distribution so that not all of the units need to be for people with developmental disabilities. If you choose to develop housing at a -- for workforce -- you know, Commissioner Taylor, you were asking about workforce housing. You were asking for housing for teachers and sheriff -- people from the Sheriff's Office, and I've heard you-all talk in the past about housing for some of the businesses in the community and the school district, et cetera. If you choose to do that, you could set aside some of the units for people with developmental disabilities. I also just want to quickly say that please consider the -- having non-profit developers be given this land if you decide to move forward, because a non-profit developer will -- if they stay here and own and operate those units, the subsidy -- the subsidy that you put into it will continue to serve those low-income residents and all of the residents of that development versus a for-profit who will likely take your developer fee and take a lot of the money out of the development. March 13, 2018 Page 65 CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. MS. SOUKUP: Also consider a Community Land Trust so that the investment is in perpetuity. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. MR. SHEFFIELD: And your final speaker is Suzanne Obchell (sic). MS. ORCHELL: Orchell. Yes, for the record, my name is Suzanne Orchell. I've lived in Naples since 1960. Current address, 6266 Atkins Avenue. And good morning, Commissioners. I'm speaking today about the county's possible donation of the two parcels of land in the Naples area or East Naples area for housing that is affordable. According to the executive summary, one of the properties being considered is the Manatee site. Upon researching the location, I find that this is a property of about 60 acres located at 1090 Roost Road and is also known as Manatee Park. Manatee Park is a legitimate park listed on the Collier County parks website under community parks. Preliminary design for a community center was done in 2008, and that plan is wonderful. It has a dog park, pavilions along the lake, volleyball, bocce. It's just wonderful. Tennis courts, playground. There's also a proposed floor plan for a community center providing for a fitness center, game room, meeting space, and so forth. Why would we not want this? This is an existing park that belongs to the residents of the planning communities of East Naples, South Naples, and Marco Island. It's a green space that contributes to the well-being of our community. Other districts have beautiful parks and green space. We should as well. I believe that if Manatee Park is given away, it will not be replaced within our district. Its loss would be substantial, especially considering that Journey's End, a new development of 483 units, will March 13, 2018 Page 66 be around the corner at 1216 Manatee Road. Other developments are sure to come. It makes good sense to retain Manatee Park as a safe place for the children Journey's End and other neighborhoods to play, as well as provide a space for adults to relax and enjoy their leisure time. Additionally, I'm not in favor of developing Bembridge PUD, which is currently assessed by the Appraiser's Office at 383,000. This property is next to Calusa Park Elementary School, which has consistently received some of the highest school grades of elementary schools in the East Naples area. Currently, the percentage of economically needy students at Calusa is 69.17 percent compared with 93.27 percent for Manatee Elementary and 96.56 percent for Parkside Elementary. I appreciate your consideration today. Thank you. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: That was our final speaker? MR. SHEFFIELD: Yes. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Mr. McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I just would like to make a couple of comments. The public speakers that we've had here today have done nothing but fortify the notes that I already have when I was reading the staff analysis and the staff report and the executive summary. I think -- my primary note that I want to say is is I think we have the cart in front of the horse here with regard to the utilization of these sites as some sort of housing affordability. We had a rather long discussion at either our last boarding meeting or the one before. I'm still in waiting for another analysis of the supply/demand as to where, in fact, our community needs lie. Commissioner Fiala, you asked about some dispersal data as to where our more affordable units are, in fact, located throughout the March 13, 2018 Page 67 community. I've seen neither of those. And I have a large concern with us, not the -- and I don't want the folks that came here today to misinterpret what it is that I'm saying, because there's a large population here that, you know, gets in the NIMBY process, not in my backyard, and I don't think that that's what these folks are here today to express. They happen to be impacted by these particular choices of our staff, but this information has been going on for quite some time. Staff's -- this isn't the first time that we've seen these sites. There's been a considerable amount of vetting along the way. But I don't think we're prepared as a community. We should not be recommending going forward with anything, especially expending public funds and our staff's time, in going further and doing further exploration until we actually come to a consensus as a board and then ultimately as a community as to what the true supply/demand, in fact, is; what the actual dispersal of the housing and its availability is within our community. And then, in turn, as a board, target, if in fact we choose to target, any particular sect of our population for housing, we as a board have that consensus before our staff goes out and begins to solicit for additional information from developers on any site. So if you can figure out how I'm voting on that then -- (Applause.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Did you -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I do but I was -- I think we've got that information, but I may be incorrect. MR. OCHS: What's that? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What we need. MR. OCHS: Well, the housing demand model that's part of your Community Housing Plan attempts to identify the need in terms of what it would require to reduce by 1 percent a year the cost-burdened households. March 13, 2018 Page 68 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I have a huge contention with the cost-burden analysis -- MR. OCHS: I know you do, sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- in that needs -- supply and demand. And we had a discussion at length at one of our board meetings, and we asked staff to bring that information back to us along with Commissioner Fiala's request about the dispersal of the housing units and their location from a commission district standpoint, neither of which has been done. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Do we have information on the dispersal? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Not today. MR. OCHS: Yeah, we've got it. We've had it distributed several times. We'll do it right now again. Cormac, if you'd please. MR. GIBLIN: Yeah. On the visualizer is a map of Collier County listing all of the approved affordable housing developments in the county, and then the chart lists them by commission district. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Was this information part of my package? MR. OCHS: No, sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My point. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But we've had it before. We've seen it. MR. OCHS: It wasn't the subject of the executive summary, but we're happy to provide it. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not this time, but we have it. We've had this. MR. GIBLIN: This was included in the Community Housing Plan. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. MR. OCHS: Do you want to go over this one? March 13, 2018 Page 69 MR. GIBLIN: And then in addition to the approved affordable housing units, we were asked to provide a summary of housing units that might be deemed affordable whether or not they have any official affordable housing restrictions on them. And so this is Property Appraiser data listing all units that are valued by the Property Appraiser at less than $250,000 per unit. And we have the dispersion on where they lie in each commission district. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Less what? I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Slide up to the mike, please. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Do you want some water? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. She has a question. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You said less than how much percent? MR. GIBLIN: This chart lists every unit valued less than $250,000 by the Property Appraiser in Collier County. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that considered affordable? MR. GIBLIN: That was the gap. If you coincide it with the housing plan and the housing needs methodology, that was the gap housing level and less. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Wasn't -- didn't we figure low-income housing was less than 126,000, not 250,000? I don't think I've ever heard that one before. MR. GIBLIN: It was the gap housing goes up to 140 percent of median income -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I know. MR. GIBLIN: -- which would translate to a $250,000 home or less. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was the price point that they picked. Right. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Could you just explain a little bit what we're looking at here. March 13, 2018 Page 70 MR. GIBLIN: Sure. What we've got is listed by commission district. The value -- the property -- these are Property Appraiser numbers based on the market value of residential units. And we have the number that are valued between 50- and 115-, which would be your low-income units; 115- to 200-, which are your moderate-income units; and 200- to 250-, which would translate to gap-income units; and then everything over 250-. And we show the number of total units per commission district, the number of those units that are less than $250,000, and the percentage that those make up of each commission district. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: If I may -- so in my district, 47 percent of the units -- MR. GIBLIN: Of the residential units are valued by the Property Appraiser less than $250,000. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Really? MR. GIBLIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And this is new information as well. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, no. I've seen this before, but I have to -- this came a long time ago. This came a couple -- when the ULI report came in when we discussed it. MR. GIBLIN: This analysis was distributed in December of 2017. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah. MR. OCHS: We'll make sure that you get it again, Commissioners. I apologize if I was lax at getting you that information. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So 2 is the lowest, that would be Commissioner Solis' district, of units less than 250,000. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Let's -- your light is on. Do you have a March 13, 2018 Page 71 question or -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, I do. And I was taking some notes. So help me with this, because I want to -- want some of these folks' questions answered. We had a question about whether or not we are reaching out into home investment. Have we -- have we explored any kind of funding from this -- I believe it's a federal -- I think it was reported as a federal. MR. MILLER: It's a HUD office. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: HUD office. MR. GIBLIN: That was on one of the previous slides that several of the proposers suggested using federal funds, CDBG HOME tax credits. And we would certainly look at using our HOME or CDBG dollars and advancing any plans that the Board of County Commissioners would like. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Could you please go through -- and just so you understand, understanding that, no, we didn't have a community meeting in Fiddler's Creek. We didn't do that, you're correct. Would you please go through the public process that brought us to this date. MR. GIBLIN: Sure. The Urban Land Institute was brought in last February in 2017 to conduct a community housing needs analysis for Collier County assisting us in the development of our Community Housing Plan. One of the recommendations from the ULI was that Collier County do an analysis of all county-owned property to determine if any are suitable for the future development of housing that's affordable, and that's what began last spring through several of your subcommittees. The Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, the Community Housing Stakeholders Group, along with staff, went through the list of all properties owned by Collier County, and looked at their suitability for housing that's affordable based on location, based March 13, 2018 Page 72 on availability of services, based on other restrictions that might be on properties, and that list was whittled down. We brought nine properties to the Board of County Commissioners in June of last year, June 27th. The Board then directed staff to move forward with four of those. And then in December of last year, December 12th, we brought two of the four that had -- that were still on the list, are the Bembridge and the Manatee sites. So it really has been going on a little over a year now; been to the Board at least two or three times. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Going back to the HOME issue, I think I'm going to ask another question here. What would prevent the county from getting the HUD grant and building the housing rather than having outside developers do it? MR. GIBLIN: That would be a Board decision. You could do that. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. And then we have 30 acres that was questioned in one of the proposals, and I believe it's a school site. Is this -- is this something that we think we can add to this, or is this the school board's decision? MR. GIBLIN: That's the school board's decision. We don't have any -- the Board of County Commissioners doesn't have any authority over use of that school board site. The school board has been a member of the housing stakeholder group and has expressed concerns of their own towards housing affordability in Collier County. And there might be some synergy opportunities if they have a site right next door to this that they might want to explore as well. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. And then the gentleman who didn't speak but was concerned about model airplanes, and I assume he flies them in the Manatee Park. This is certainly something that, as we consider going forward, we could include to make sure this March 13, 2018 Page 73 could continue to happen; is that correct? MR. GIBLIN: Our recommendation is to keep significant green space and parklike settings, so -- it is a very large site so any -- we are here -- the Board can direct whatever to be built on that site. That's one of the reasons we're here seeking your direction today. If inclusion of parklike amenities is your direction, we'll include that in the invitation to negotiate. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. And then we have a gentleman -- and I did get your name -- Mr. Oppenberg, who's a realtor. And I've just given you, Mr. Ochs, a couple of pages, and it would be these two pages right there. I gave it to Mr. Casalanguida. And I think your assertion is that values diminish around affordable housing, and I would argue that, perhaps, that's not the case all the time. I'm not saying it doesn't happen. But I think you will see in East Naples that your values in two years have appreciated by 20 percent. And one would argue, or at least my colleague to my right argues, that you have a significant amount of affordable housing. And anybody who would like this, I'm more than happy to get this to you. And if you could please put the map up there that shows the area that is in question here. You can see that my request was to go from 951 in the east all the way to pretty much Bayshore, and in the south is Rattlesnake, and the north is Davis. It does incorporate the Manor; 20 percent increase in two years. My stock portfolio only wishes it could have been that. The other thing I'd like to discuss -- and I did call Dr. Faffer, if anyone knows who she is. She's a very interesting woman, very hard-working woman who has a senior center in the City of Naples between -- well, it's not. It's really the county -- between Goodlette and U.S. 41. And if we could put that -- the chart there that -- they actually -- yes, please; that one. And I'll pass this out to my colleagues so that they have it also. March 13, 2018 Page 74 They can follow along. If you can see the summary of her findings -- now, this wasn't her findings. This was a professor out of FGCU that came down -- about seniors. There are more individuals living in poverty, living alone, and more households receiving SNAP benefits. Individuals report having difficulty accessing information about programs and services that may be of assistance. Sample of individuals age 60-plus report, we feel that they are not part of a population of need. There are concerns about affordable housing among sample groups participating in the focus groups. And then if we could put the second page up, please. This one I'm not going to read through but, again, I can certainly get this to you. I'll just highlight a couple of things. The highest percentage of seniors is 65 to 74, and there's a 29 percent increase in that population in 2016. Thirty-five percent of the seniors in Collier County pay more than 30 percent for (sic) income for their housing. And one of the things that sticks in my mind when I remember my conversations with Dr. Faffer is, yes, you can have a husband and wife living together, and they have Social Security benefits, and those Social Security benefits together would make it very affordable to live here. But so often a spouse dies, and then there's a widow, and she doesn't get Social Security benefits anymore. And this is a -- THE AUDIENCE: She does. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not from the husband. THE AUDIENCE: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, you do. MR. OCHS: You get the highest of the two. You don't get two. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's right, the highest of the two. Okay. So average monthly Social Security benefit for women in Collier County is $1,235. And, again, I'm more than happy to send this to any March 13, 2018 Page 75 of you. You can contact my office. My assistant will be outside this door and give you my card. I'd be glad to get this information to you. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Fiala's next, but I wanted to make sure that Commissioner Saunders didn't have anything that he would like to add. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. I'm -- one of the concerns I have is, obviously, this is one of the most important decisions, policy decisions that we're going to be making, and I want to make sure that we don't rush into something without having all of the facts. And, obviously, we've been studying this for quite some time. And I'm wondering if -- I do believe we have some additional policy decisions to make that staff is going to be bringing forward. And I wonder if we should hold off on this particular issue unless we make all the policy decisions dealing with affordable housing that are going to be coming to us in the next coming months. That's kind of a question for staff. My assumption is we have additional hearings coming up with additional policy decisions; is that correct? MR. OCHS: Commissioner, this is Leo. Yes, you are correct. The Board's going to see additional recommendations out of your community housing plan, I believe, in April, again in -- excuse me -- in June. So, yes, sir, there's a couple more sets of recommendations coming forward. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So one of the things that I might suggest, at least for us to think about as we're deciding how to vote this morning, is developing the rest of those policy decisions and answering the questions that have been raised concerning this particular site by the public speakers and whether or not that's going to have any real negative impact on moving forward with affordable March 13, 2018 Page 76 workforce housing. I don't believe it would -- I don't believe a delay would create a problem. The other thing for us to consider is making a decision like this on a split vote, on a 3-2 vote, for example, I find to be somewhat problematic. And it looks like this morning they're not sufficient -- there will be at least two commissioners that would oppose this, and I think we need to have more agreement on a major policy issue like this. So those are my concerns. I'll look forward to what motion is made ultimately. I just want to raise those two issues as my concern. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And at this point everyone's had their say, and I would just like to add a couple things myself, and then we'll go to Commissioner Fiala, then Commissioner McDaniel, because I think his light was on. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: His light goes on and off. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, unless you're ready for a motion. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I can never tell if yours is on or not. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Well, I would -- okay. I would just like to say that, as I understand it, what staff is asking for is the ability to go and have more discussions with the 10 developers, or whatever the number of the developers were, that responded to the RFI to refine more the potential of what some of these developers are proposing or would propose; we're not agreeing to anything at this point, right? MR. OCHS: Correct. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And so we're not putting the cart in front of the horse, because we're not agreeing to anything. We're, essentially, asking these developers to come forward with more refined plans. And, I mean, we have been talking about this, at least since I've been on the Board, I mean, I don't know how many meetings we've had where we've discussed affordable housing. March 13, 2018 Page 77 You know, we can disagree, agree to disagree about whether or not there's a need, how much there's a need. We adopted the Community Housing Plan. I don't see any detriment to letting the staff get more information, because with more information we may not want to do any of it. But just to say we're not going to discuss it anymore just doesn't make any sense to me, because we're going to have to do this somewhere along the line. And before we know whether or not we want to move forward with this, we have to know what's being proposed and whether or not anybody is going to propose something that everybody will feel comfortable with. So as far as I'm concerned, I don't see any harm in having staff continue to talk to some of these developers, have them refine their plan so we have a better idea of what they want to do. Ultimately, at the end of the day, they will have to come back with zoning applications, Growth Management Amendments, and everybody will have their opportunity to say what they want to say about them. But just to not let staff talk to anybody about this just -- to me it doesn't make any sense because, ultimately, we're going to have several bites at the apple on this. And everybody can come here, and we can have this conversation when the decision needs to be made. And right now we're not making a decision that's going to bind us to anything. And I just hope everybody understands that. So that's what I'd like to add. Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you. First of all, I wish I could have spoken as eloquently as you, Mr. McDaniel, because you were great. A couple things I just would like to put on the record. I'm sorry. I'm not feeling so hot, so if I don't sound so good, pretend you don't notice. March 13, 2018 Page 78 But Cormac Giblin mentioned -- he mentioned a few times approved housing, approved affordable housing, and he showed you where they were, but approved affordable housing is quite different than just plain old affordable housing. And if you knew the difference, what it is is it's HUD saying that if it's guaranteed to stay affordable for 15 years, then it's approved. But as soon as it drops off that 15 years, then it's not approved anymore. And so when you take a look at it, for instance -- like, a Habitat village just dropped off that approval rate. It was -- and it's -- what's -- oh, gosh. Victoria Falls. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Whistler's Cove. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, they just dropped off because they passed their 15 years. I also wanted to mention for the folks in that audience -- and I want you to look at it as people from Pelican Bay or from Naples Square, okay. I want you to think of them as your people as well. I want to tell you that where they live right now they have four Habitat villages, four, right around them, okay. Well, at the far end of the Fiddler's Creek, you've got -- I'm sorry. My head is not right. What is that acres back -- MR. GIBLIN: Trail Acres. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, there's Trail Acres, and then there's -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Charlie's Place. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Charlies Place and -- pardon me? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Regal Acres. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Regal Acres, that's the big one. They're just adding 109 units to that right now, right? And then there's, of course, the other one that we were just talking about. I wanted to tell you that -- plus, by the way, on Manatee Road itself, if you turn down Manatee Road, you've got five different March 13, 2018 Page 79 affordable housing mobile home parks, mobile home parks, and you have huge condo -- well, they're apartment buildings back there that hold the workforce right there. So all the way in that's all you have and that's -- I mean, speaking of being a lot of affordable housing -- nobody complains about it. They're fine, and they're supporting it. They even go out to the schools and help their children and so forth. It's fine. But what they're saying is, you know, we've really done our share. It's about time to share it with other parts of the county is what I think I'm hearing them say. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER FIALA: I heard Commissioner Taylor saying -- she stressed it very carefully -- in my district I have 47 percent of all the affordable housing. She didn't mention that -- oh, what did you say? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Under 250,000. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, okay. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not of the district, but within my district, 47 percent of it is under 250,000. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And, by the way, four -- in her district, she has the City of Naples, but she also has a huge amount of housing in East Naples. She has all of the Triangle, she has Bayshore, she has Thomasson, and so she's got a huge amount of the affordable housing that she doesn't live with. They live here in East Naples. And I just wanted to mention that as well. Let's see. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think right now I can't say any more. I'm sorry I'm so ill. I don't mean to be. But I just wanted to show you that, you know, a picture isn't always what you hear. You have to take a little bit of a deeper look and see what's really going on March 13, 2018 Page 80 in that picture. And I totally agree with Commissioner McDaniel and also the well-spoken Burt Saunders. So that's it for me. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Taylor. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My light's been on. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think -- first of all, I think as we reach out to these developers, how is the 750 units established? Where did that come from? And then the 75; is that just available zoning? MR. GIBLIN: Correct. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. My thoughts for Manatee have always been 60 acres is a huge park. It's kind of -- I don't even know how big the City of Naples is, but it's a huge park. And I've always thought about Manatee when I've looked at it is that it could have housing plus an extraordinary beautiful passive park. So I would not agree to that high density within that park, I can tell you that right now. And in response to my colleague, Commissioner Fiala, I live in a neighborhood that has Habitat for Humanity homes. So, you know, I don't know -- everyone thinks the City of Naples is -- everybody thinks the City of Naples is this -- you know, the beach folks and the Port Royal, but I assure you there's pockets. And I live in the first working-class neighborhood in the history of Collier County. That's where I live. And a lot of the homes are as people moved in. I live across from two widows. One has got a reverse mortgage on her house because she can't afford to live there. The reality of life is there. It's part of where we live. I don't live in a gated community. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Just as -- moving right along. I'd like to make a motion to continue this item until further March 13, 2018 Page 81 studies have been done with regard to our housing-needs analysis, a supply-and-demand analysis that we've all got questions on. And, Commissioner Solis, just to address a comment that you made and it's -- you made a comment that you saw no harm in moving this forward because we weren't really deciding anything. I think it would -- just as an aside, I don't concur with that just because in order to make a prudent decision, non-emotional, nonpolitical decision, we have to have data and analysis to enable us to make more pragmatic decisions and not be operating on politics and emotion. Until we actually have a true, viable needs analysis, supply-and-demand dispersal of the housing it's difficult for -- I think it would be a waste of our staff's time -- the staff's already talking to developers. They've already reached out in this original process. So I think it's a waste of our staff's time to take it to the next step until we, as a board, have come to a consensus on the supply/demand and the dispersal thereof. So I'd like to make a motion to continue this item. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I second the motion. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Just as a point of discussion -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yes, Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: On the motion, I have no difficulty in agreeing to continue this item. I want to continue it for slightly different reasons. I want to make sure that we've adopted all of our policies, which we're going to adopt in the next month or two or three and also have an opportunity to have sufficient outreach in the areas surrounding the Manatee Park to make sure that the public is aware of what we're looking at doing, that the questions that have been raised are answered. And so I'm going to support the motion, but I want this item to come back relatively quickly for final resolution in terms of when we March 13, 2018 Page 82 move forward. So I'm looking for a continuance to give us the time to complete our development of our policies, which will happen soon, and then also, in addition, to direct staff to continue to have outreach into the surrounding community to make sure that we've answered a lot of those questions that were raised this morning. So I'm going to support the motion with that understanding. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. And just as a point of discussion. And I appreciate what you're saying about -- that you don't feel that we have had enough analysis on the needs for affordable housing in the community. Let me finish. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, you misspoke. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Well, you just said that -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I didn't say not enough. We just haven't come to a conclusion. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Well, I think we adopted the Community Housing Plan. We've adopted that. I mean, I know -- I think you -- you voted against adoption, but I think the majority of the Commission did approve it. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did we, or did we accept it? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We just accepted it. It was very specific. MR. OCHS: No. Let's -- we brought a subset of the total recommendations to you at the last meeting. MR. GIBLIN: Last meeting -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Last meeting. MR. OCHS: -- and one of those included acceptance of the demand model, and I believe the majority of the Board accepted that model. MR. GIBLIN: Correct. MR. OCHS: Commissioner McDaniel did, in fact, ask for additional information. He wanted to know what it looked like without March 13, 2018 Page 83 the cost-burdened elements in it, and we do owe you that information, Commissioner. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So my only point is that, I mean, it would be wonderful to have a unanimous vote on all these issues. I don't think we'll ever have that. I just, again, don't see any reason not to at least let staff refine these proposals because, at the end of the day, we may not want any of them, and we may not approve the rezoning for the property, and we may not approve the Growth Management Plan Amendments that they're going to require. I would assume that they're going to require those. And each one of those is going to require neighborhood information meetings, public hearings before the Planning Commission and the County Commission. And I just -- we just keep kind of treading water here and not making any decisions, and we continue to put off these decisions, and we've been doing it for so long. I just don't see why we can't at least start making some headway on something. And that's all I'm going to say. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wanted to say one more thing, but it's not my words. I got an email from a guy named Phil Brougham, who was taken ill before he could stay, and so he sent me an email, which my assistant passed on. And it says -- it says, ask her to question why staff ratings on the Manatee site changed so drastically between ratings in December 2017 and June 2017 (sic). Ratings for impact and restrictions and suitability changed dramatically. Why was that? And I don't -- I haven't looked at what those ratings were, and so I can't even compare them. But that's another thing that maybe we can have them check into in this time. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So there's a motion and a second on the floor to -- and the motion is to continue this item indefinitely or to a specific -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, I mean, it's ultimately March 13, 2018 Page 84 going to be to a specific point. It's indefinitely for a period of time until, as Commissioner Saunders said -- and for the reason that I said, until we go through that analysis and have further vetting and come to a consensus as to what the supply and demand is and the locational dispersity. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. On that particular motion, I'm going to vote against that motion because I think we've come to a conclusion on the supply/demand issue. My concern, as was stated, is making sure we've adopted all of our policies and we have some more community involvement in this decision. So I'm going to vote against this motion and make a motion to continue for those other reasons. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Will the motion maker amend the motion? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm okay with that. I mean, I don't disagree with your reasonings either, Commissioner Saunders. They are part and parcel to why I suggested this continuance. I don't recall us coming to a consensus on the supply/demand side, but I'm not going to debate that today. I think this should be brought before us as a specific item. Again, I don't recall -- and I'll go back and watch the tape. I don't recall voting on the housing plan as has been -- and maybe I voted against it which is why I'm not thinking we passed it. So that's a possibility. I have serious issues with this, with the nebulous definitions that are given with regard to the need. So I'm okay with amending the motion if that will make you happy, or if you want to cancel mine and make another one, I'll second yours. I don't care. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Do you want to withdraw? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Then, Mr. Chairman, the motion that I would make -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll withdraw my motion then. March 13, 2018 Page 85 CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And second? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, if it's withdrawn I don't have a second. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. The motion that I would make is that this item be continued so that staff can finalize and bring to us our final policy that we're going to be adopting over the next month or two and then, at the same time, staff be directed to conduct some community involvement, try to get answers to the questions that were raised this morning, and bring this back to us as quickly as they can once we get those answers. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: There's a motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Any opposed? Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Motion carries. Item #11H AUTHORIZE ONE ADDITIONAL FY 2018 BUDGET AMENDMENT COVERING POST HURRICANE IRMA CLEAN UP AND RECOVERY PROVIDING AN ADDITIONAL $1,000,000 APPROPRIATION TO FUND WATERWAY DEBRIS CLEANUP AND REPAIRS IN THE PELICAN BAY COMMUNITY – APPROVED March 13, 2018 Page 86 MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, before you break for lunch, if we could go back to Item 16F5 that was moved from the consent agenda to the regular agenda. It's now Item 11H. That was the recommendation to authorize one additional budget amendment covering Hurricane Irma cleanup and recovery for the Pelican Bay Community. I believe Mr. Dorrill is here. MR. DORRILL: Good morning, Commissioners. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Good morning. And I'll apologize for you in advance. I know this is the first time ever you've appeared without a coat and tie. MR. DORRILL: First time in 40 years. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Forty years. I apologize for making you do that. MR. DORRILL: We were contacted by your budget office a week ago Friday as part of a routine item and, I believe, cash flow projection that was being conducted until the end of the year related to FEMA funds. And, associated with that, we were asked to identify and then set aside funds that could be spent before the end of the year for capital recovery efforts or maintenance and in recognition of the Board's upcoming summer recess, and so we did that, and met their deadline. And we have five different categories of potential capital projects. Because we're a separate taxing and benefit unit, we suggested that we move some excess funds from an operating account into our capital account, and then we would true up those numbers once we have bids in hands and then reflect those. We coordinated with the chairman of our advisory board, we coordinated with the chairman of our Budget and Finance Committee, and then we had a brief discussion of this after the submittal of the March 13, 2018 Page 87 executive summary that occurred at our full board meeting that was last Wednesday. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So this was discussed and presented at the board meeting, the PBSD Board meeting? MR. DORRILL: And coordinated in advance with both the chairman and the budget chair. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me just ask. That's for the million dollars, right? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yes. MR. DORRILL: Yes, ma'am. We, very shortly, will be out to bids on our two largest categories to repair or replace community architectural street signs and streetlights, and we're trying to coordinate that effort not only with your FEMA consultant, CD McGuire, but have completed all the initial inventory and assessment of signs that need to be repaired or replaced. I believe there's several hundred in that category. And then we have streetlights. We also have two drainage remediation projects that are identified in Bay Colony, and the relandscaping of the U.S. 41 landscape buffer and berm. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So is it -- I don't want to characterize it improperly, but this was more of kind of a cash planning exercise, is that -- MR. DORRILL: I'd let Mr. Isackson speak for himself. But, yes, this, my understanding, is a cash-flow analysis to force us, as a separate district, to identify both the source and the use of the funds and in recognition that you may not be here this summer. And so we've been asked to sort of set this money aside and then as individual bids are awarded or projects authorized, then we will establish what I would call cost centers, capital cost centers for each one of the five categories that I just mentioned. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. Mr. Isackson, is there anything? MR. ISACKSON: No. I think what might help the Board also -- March 13, 2018 Page 88 Mark Isackson, for the record, Office of Management and Budget. What might help the Board also is the fact that when you identify areas in the budget -- and we have over 200 funds -- we look at families of funds. Pelican Bay is no different than water/sewer is no different than our general governmental side. While we have authorization, or may have authorization to do a budget amendment, we generally are judicious in how we may do that. We may hold back some of that money knowing that we already have dollars sitting in -- and funds don't mean much to the Board -- but Fund 322 is a capital -- one of the capital funds in Pelican Bay where we will establish budget to perform the work that Mr. Dorrill is suggesting. We may not move all that money right away knowing that I've got money sitting there. So as Mr. Dorrill says, this is just an ability for our office to make that budget amendment when and if it's necessary based on the work flows and the execution patterns that Pelican Bay will identify as we go through this process. I don't know if that helps, but just thought I'd add that. MR. DORRILL: In essence, this is the first step in what will be a two-step process. And once we have bids in hand, then we'll go back and we will create these, I call them, individual capital cost centers so that we can track our costs as they are incurred amongst the five different categories that we have. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And those costs are going to go through the regular bid process for those kinds of items? MR. DORRILL: In fact, in two instances, we're trying to seek some FEMA mitigation grants to upgrade certain infrastructure in the hope that we will not incur this type of damage going forward, and I will tell you it is a very difficult process, but we're going to see that through to the end for both street signs as well as streetlight poles and anchors. March 13, 2018 Page 89 CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. Thank you. The public speaker light is on. We've got a new public speaker? MR. SHEFFIELD: We have one registered public speaker. She's the citizen who spoke earlier today. Susan O'Brien. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: She's already spoken. I don't know that, if she's already spoken on the item, that she gets another three minutes. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's going to be up to you. I'd like to hear, but that's entirely up to you. MS. O'BRIEN: I don't need three minutes. May I? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Go ahead. MS. O'BRIEN: Okay. Thank you. Susan O'Brien. I want to thank you, Commissioners, for moving this agenda item. And my interest is in good governance. And I just want to repeat what I said earlier in my comments that this item was not -- this million-dollar transfer, the five projects and their costs, was not presented to our board at our meeting last week. Mr. Dorrill only mentioned it because a question came up at our meeting relative to another transfer, and then he said a few things. He said he had -- he was going to transfer a million dollars. And I just believe that an item like this should be thoroughly discussed with our board so we understand. I learned a little bit this morning about it. I think good governance is that that be presented to our board; our board be able to take action on it prior to its coming to you. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. Okay. No other speakers. I mean, I'll make a motion that we approve the recommendation from staff. This is a planning function trying to be proactive, looking at our calendars, and what needs to be done, so I'll make the motion. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I've got a motion and a second. All in March 13, 2018 Page 90 favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Any opposed? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Opposed. And the reason being -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You don't have to. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- we've heard it a lot this morning. We're not -- there's not communication, and folks feel that they're not involved in a process, and I think on that -- only on that reason, I -- as simple as it is, a million dollars is a million dollars, and it's a pretty serious movement, and I think people wanted to be involved in it. So I would deny. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. Thank you. Motion carries. Break for lunch? MR. OCHS: Well, decision of the Board, sir. We have two companion items, 11D and E, having to do with the medical marijuana issue. You have one registered speaker under 11D. I think all the -- I'm sorry. We have -- MR. SHEFFIELD: We now have four for 11D. MR. OCHS: Well, I was going to try to move if, but if you have four -- you can still move it if you want, then have lunch and come back and handle your budget policy after lunch if you prefer to do that. You've got people here that are prepared to -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Is our court reporter okay? We can continue? Item #11E March 13, 2018 Page 91 AFFIRMING A ZONING VERIFICATION LETTER REGARDING A PROPOSED MEDICAL MARIJUANA TREATMENT CENTER AND DIRECT STAFF TO ISSUE A LETTER OF NO OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED LOCATION – MOTION TO APPROVE – APPROVED COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have a suggestion, if you want to, just as a thought. I mean, 11E is almost perfunctory. It's something that we kind of -- my understanding is is we have to go -- we have to go along with it. It's an allowable use. 11D is a little more contentious of an item. We could, I'd -- if you want to go out of order, I know we've already voted on the agenda, but I'd make a motion to approve 11E, if it so pleases you. I don't want to -- I don't want to jump -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: 11E is the -- MR. OCHS: Let me read it, if I can, sir, just for the audience and the public's consumption. This item requires ex parte disclosure be provided by commission members. Participants are required to be sworn in. This is a recommendation to affirm a zoning verification letter regarding a proposed medical marijuana treatment center and direct staff to issue a letter of no objection to the proposed location. Mr. County Attorney, is it appropriate to do ex parte and swear speakers at this point or -- MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. MR. OCHS: Ex parte, sir? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay with changing the order? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just so I understand, does that mean you're splitting D and E? You vote on one now, but the same subject you wait after lunch for the other part of the subject. March 13, 2018 Page 92 CHAIRMAN SOLIS: They're really not the same subject. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: They're not the same. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. They're separate items because they are independent of each other. So 11E requires ex parte. MR. OCHS: Ex parte for 11E, sir. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yes, sir. Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I do have ex parte with regard to this item. Met with the property owner's legal counsel and the like; both emails, meetings, correspondence. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I don't. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Taylor. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, I do. I met with the owners and the legal representative. We've had some -- there's been a couple of meetings for that. I also have had a lot of correspondence with interested parties in this, and it's all been -- for you (indicating), right here. So it's all been Xeroxed and sits here. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes. On the ex parte, I have spoken with the representatives of the property owners and have received some correspondence and emails. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And I've had also some meetings. And I'm -- rather than try to distinguish them, I've met with representatives from the property owners, and I've also met with Dr. Weiss, Fiora Little, Bill Barton, Lieutenant Polling in regards to opposition to anything related to medical marijuana. So I'm just going to disclose those. Also I've had a phone call with Brent Batten. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And may I -- I didn't give -- I'm sorry. I do have something to declare. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. March 13, 2018 Page 93 COMMISSIONER FIALA: I spoke with Bill Barton, I spoke with Pat Barton, and I don't know which one it is, but on the subject of medical marijuana. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I also received plenty of emails, so... MR. OCHS: Swear the speakers, please. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. OCHS: Mr. Bosi? MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director. The zoning department was presented a zoning verification letter from Barron Collier Companies for property that sits right on the border of Hendry County and Collier County just west of State Road 929 as to whether we would issue a letter of no objection to a proposed medical marijuana cultivation center. The state statute basically prohibits local governments, counties, from regulating the placement of cultivation centers with an exception that they can't be located within 500 feet of a school. The location that was the property in question is not within 500 feet of a school; therefore, the response from the zoning department from Collier County Government would be that there is no objections to the location based upon the state preemption of the sitting of these facilities. MR. OCHS: Thank you. MR. BOSI: And we're asking the Board -- and normally we would issue that, but we were asking the Board, in an abundance of caution, just for a concurrence of that position. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Which is why I made my motion. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And Commissioner McDaniel has made a motion to approve. March 13, 2018 Page 94 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll second. MR. OCHS: Speakers. MR. SHEFFIELD: There's one registered speaker, Bill Barton. MR. BARTON: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, my name is Bill Barton. I reside at 106 Mooring Park Drive in Naples. Just for the record, many of you know that I've spent a good portion of my professional career dealing in the zoning issues in Collier County. And I just thought it would be worthwhile to let you know that I concur in your staff's finding on this issue, and I see no -- nothing that would preclude that use in the agricultural properties provided it meets the other criteria of the state legislation. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thus we are preempted. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was why my perception was it was rather not too awfully contentious. We're preempted. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So there is a motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: All right. Motion carries. MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So we'll -- Mr. Manager, we'll break for lunch and come back, or -- I think our court reporter may be in need of a break. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean because she looks like March 13, 2018 Page 95 she's drooping close to the ground already? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Do we have any speakers on the next item, the -- MR. SHEFFIELD: On Item 11D you have four registered speakers. There's no other speakers registered for any other items at this time. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: What's the Board's pleasure? Move forward. The court reporter's okay. Let's keep going. Item #11D DIRECT STAFF TO EITHER 1) PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO BAN MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSING FACILITIES FROM LOCATING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF COLLIER COUNTY, OR 2) TO CONTINUE TO PUBLICLY VET A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT TO PERMIT MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICTS AS PHARMACIES - MOTION TO APPROVE OPTION #2 – APPROVED MR. OCHS: Item 11D is a recommendation to direct staff to either prepare an ordinance to ban medical marijuana dispensing facilities from locating within the boundaries of Collier County or to continue to publicly vet a Land Development Code Amendment to permit medical marijuana dispensaries in the same zoning districts as pharmacies. Mr. Bosi, again, will present or respond to questions from the Board, whatever the pleasure of the Board. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: County Manager, could you drop that down so I could see what the titles are above. Okay, great. Thank you. March 13, 2018 Page 96 MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Director. What I have put on the visualizer is staff's query into how the local governments within the Southwest Florida region have responded to the options that are provided in terms of how localities can treat dispensary facilities for medical marijuana. When this issue came up in 2017, we discussed the regulation of medical marijuana dispensaries with the Board of County Commissioners who expressed a dissatisfaction with the State's limiting options that were provided to the localities, meaning that you can prohibit them, ban them, or that you can treat them like a pharmacy with an additional location criteria that it could not be within 500 feet of a school. The Board had expressed a desire to place further locational restrictions upon these facilities, and the hope was that the 2018 legislative session from the State was going to provide that leeway that has -- the State's legislative session has concluded. There were no bills that affected the local government's ability to further regulate medical marijuana dispensaries. Ultimately, we have a moratorium that has placed a temporary stop upon the development of these facilities till June of this year. Recognizing the time that it takes to shepherd an LDC amendment through the process, staff's concerned that we would not make the time frame of the moratorium, the moratorium expires, and we will have not addressed the issue. So we're back to the Board with two options: Either to ban them or to accept them as pharmacies with the 500-foot limitation towards schools, and seeking the Board's direction on this. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Hear from the speakers. MR. SHEFFIELD: The first registered speaker is Graham Ginsberg, and he'll be followed by Chris Halaschak. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Mr. Ginsberg is not here. March 13, 2018 Page 97 MR. SHEFFIELD: Chris Halaschak, and he'll be followed by Yvette Jones. MR. HALASCHAK: Hello. Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Chris Halaschak. I'm in favor of the medical marijuana. I feel that it would be a benefit to the county directly and indirectly and also feel that -- down the road that the growing trend is going towards more states opting for this medical benefit for people. I guess I also wanted to -- I kind of wanted to speak on 11E, but -- I was going to do that prior, but you went to 11E first. I own a property that is agricultural and also qualifies for the area to be a medical marijuana treatment center. And I was just wondering if the Barron Collier, having the affirmative zoning verification, is that any significance to other people doing it in the future? And that's, I guess, part of my question, and were they, like, invited to do that, or do we need to apply for that? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: It's something you have to apply to -- apply for. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's part of the -- for the -- to have the dispensary, we call them the gold tickets, but that's -- in order to have the approval, it's -- a portion of the approval process is your zoning verification letter. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: For any kind of development. MR. HALASCHAK: As far as I know, Barron Collier is not listed as one of the golden ticket people yet. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: No, no. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: This is your application for it. MR. HALASCHAK: And what is my process? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I mean, any time you're going to do any kind of development -- and maybe the Deputy Manager can clarify this so I don't misspeak. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, some of them are by right, and March 13, 2018 Page 98 staff understands it. But usually an applicant, before they expend funds developing, they'll apply for a ZVL to get that surety. And whether they apply for a state license, they're just basically saying, does this property qualify. They get that, and if they move forward with a state license, they have that in their hand already. MR. HALASCHAK: So the mission's going to be going forth -- everybody that applies for this, the Commission's going to be approving or disapproving everyone such as Barron Collier in the future? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I think we're getting outside of the issue. This is just a standard permitting issue that -- the only difference is that it came to the Board. A property owner that wants to do something with their property usually asks for a zoning verification from the county for the county to, yes, you can do what you're planning to do there. They can opt not to, but then they're at risk. And so it's just the normal process that we're talking about. And, certainly, I think if you touch base with Development Services, they can clarify that for you. MR. HALASCHAK: Okay. So the Board is in the process of approving such as Barron Collier? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: That's not what we -- right. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What -- MR. HALASCHAK: Why is it that they had to approve them? MR. CASALANGUIDA: I think for this item it came in front of us, and we wanted to let you know in parallel with the item that you're hearing now, this item, you've got a request in for a ZVL. Staff is basically saying it's an allowable use, and we're going to have the Board look at it and, County Attorney, put it on the record and affirm what we did. March 13, 2018 Page 99 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It is my understanding that, as a portion of the application, you have to have a ZVL. MR. HALASCHAK: I understand. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's -- in order to apply for one of those facilities, you have to have a ZVL. And our staff, in an abundance of caution as opposed to just issuing it, came to the Board for that physical approval. MR. HALASCHAK: Okay. I understand. I didn't know if there was something put out to somebody saying if you're interested in doing this, you need to do that and that they're going to be limited to this one corporation. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: This is just a process. MR. HALASCHAK: I understand. Thank you. COMMISSIONER FIALA: What's a DVL (sic)? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: ZVL, Zoning -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Verification Letter. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Verification. Thank you, Mr. -- Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I may misspeak, but I believe that the limitation is on the state level because they only allow 10 throughout the state of Florida. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Seventeen. I think it's 17. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Seventeen. So you're up on that. Thank you. MR. SHEFFIELD: The next speaker is Bill Barton. He will be followed by Yvette Jones. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: If the next speaker can go ahead and go to the microphone, that would be great. MR. BARTON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record again, my name is Bill Barton. I reside at 106 Mooring Park Drive, City of Naples. March 13, 2018 Page 100 A couple of thoughts for you today that you might consider. The first, your staff has basically asked for your direction in their moving forward with a draft of or the other ordinances that would either ban or allow dispensaries in Collier County. I might suggest to you that you instead ask your staff to prepare both of those draft ordinances. Neither of them are very complicated. They're not going to take much of your staff time. But you'll then have both of them available to you at the point in time that you want to adopt an ordinance on this issue. Why am I suggesting that? We -- I know for a fact that there are currently deliveries being made in Collier County of medical marijuana products. I know that for a fact because I called one of the dispensaries in Broward County and asked them if they were delivering in Collier County. They told me, yes, we have a regular delivery schedule in Collier County. We've recently learned that dispensaries in Lee County are also delivering in Collier County. I would suggest it might be worthwhile for you as a commission to have a better understanding of whether or not delivery is a better option for these citizens of Collier County that are going to be registered in the state to use these products rather than dispensaries. We look at the world today -- frankly, I get my medication delivered to my home, as do many, many people. I might also point out that marijuana -- those that are on medical marijuana, in many cases they themselves are too ill to go to a dispensary, so they're going to be -- they're going to have to have delivery made to them either by family members or by a commercial delivery. You look at the number of folks that we expect to be registered in Collier County, and statistics would tell us that's going to be about 4,400. Think about that; if half of them are being delivered anyway and we only got roughly 2,000, is it even worthy of us to have dispensaries, or would it be better for us to just rely on a dependable March 13, 2018 Page 101 and reliable delivery system that will be cost effective because the drugs that are delivered to me -- prescription drugs delivered to me, there's no charge for that. The marketplace will get rid of the expense of delivery. So I would suggest you have both of them drafted, ask your staff to study the delivery process to see if it's working well and, if it is, it gives you more information when you make this decision ultimately. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you. MR. SHEFFIELD: The next speaker is Yvette Jones, and she'll be followed by Jeff Field. MS. JONES: Hi. My name's Yvette Jones, and I am CEO of Crone's Charity Service Foundation. Dispensaries, delivering is not as easy as we speak on it. I have patients who go to the doctor, get their recommendation, they're able to -- they get a pamphlet saying you can get from here, here, here, here. You can order online, and we will -- not online. You can -- yes, you can. You order online or over the phone, and you can get your product delivered to you. The problem is some of the deliveries don't get to the person or when they get the delivery it's not what they want, and once they accept it they paid for it, and it's, like, $30 or something for the delivery. And I got patients that have product, and going back and getting more product, instead of doing that, now they're on the road. And if it's raining and they run out of product, they're on the road going to Lee County or Charlotte County, depending on if they're going through True Leaf or Satori or -- it's a mess. I really want to focus on my Collier County people, and most of them, the age is, like, from 65 to 77, and they're doing whatever it takes to be able to have that quality of live without pain. So -- I wrote a lot of stuff here, and he opened up a door, you know, that it's not as easy as you guys can think. March 13, 2018 Page 102 We do need a dispensary here. Delivery is not all what it's up to. And it's a demand. We don't even have a supply to handle the people now. So it's really crazy. I'm very happy about the Collier industry having a dispensary, or whatever you just processed a few seconds ago. It's a greenlight for me. It's very -- and even if they deliver to the people, maybe they can deliver cheaper to our people. And if they don't like what they have, maybe they'll be more, you know, kind to change up and refund them back. There's no refund. When you buy it, you buy it. That's it. So sorry I went off-line here on what I wanted to say, but if the commissioners could consider, it would benefit our people, our seniors and get them off the road. And it's helping a lot of people. And the opioids addiction is just out of hand. And they're already high off of Zoloft. Do you want them to go on the highway and run to Fort Myers? I'm just -- that's it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. MR. SHEFFIELD: The final speaker is Jeff Field. MR. FIELD: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, my name is Jeff Field. I represent the cannabis industry, and I work with cannabis businesses across the country and here in Southwest Florida. I also work with a number of physicians and researchers who use medical cannabis to treat patients with diseases ranging from cancer and epilepsy to Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. I'd like to share a couple statistics with the Commission. As of today, approximately 1 percent of Collier County residents suffer from epilepsy and about one-third of those patients are deemed intractable meaning typical prescription seizure medications do not work for them. One in 10 Collier County residents age 65 or older will develop dementia or Alzheimer's; one in 10. March 13, 2018 Page 103 Back in 2016, in November, 64 percent of Collier County voters, the same voters that elected many of the commissioners sitting up there today, voted in favor of medical cannabis. If we took a poll today in Collier County, that number would exceed 70 percent. We understand the Commission's concerns regarding the number of dispensaries and how many could open up based upon the state's all-or-nothing platform that they've put into place. To my knowledge, as of right now the county does not have any limits on the number of pharmacies or liquor stores that are open in Collier County. And certainly understand the fear of having too many dispensaries would potentially promote underperforming dispensaries to divert product into the black market. Based on that rationale, does the commission have the same concern with CVS or Walgreens diverting opioids to the black market? This is not a concern because these pharmacies do need-based viability studies in order to invest millions of dollars into the communities they operate. Based upon the vertical integration model that the state has put into place, businesses such as ours will be investing the same type of dollars/research into infrastructure in the communities that we service, and certainly I can promise you, with the value of these businesses, we would have no motivation to divert and risk that business and the patients we serve by diverting to the black market. A few other statistics from the other medical cannabis programs that I've worked in. Juvenile cannabis use in those markets are down because companies like ours pay for education to educate young people about the dangers of using medical cannabis that is not prescribed to them. Opioid overdose deaths in those markets is down 25 percent. In Collier County alone, that would be at least 16 people that would be alive today based upon 2016 opioid overdose rates here in the county. March 13, 2018 Page 104 Finally, like I said, the propagation stigma and fear associated with medical cannabis is propagated by the same companies that have put those opioids here on the streets of Florida where at one point 95 percent of all opioid prescriptions were coming from. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. MR. FIELD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Your time's up. Thanks. MR. SHEFFIELD: There are no further speakers. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. I don't have any lights on. Commissioner Saunders, do you have anything you'd like to add? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think we've done what we could do in terms of delaying the opening of these dispensaries waiting for the legislature. That didn't happen. And I'm ready to move forward with an ordinance approving medical marijuana dispensaries as outlined in the Florida Statutes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: All opposed. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Motion carries 3-2. Did I miss that? What happened? MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, the Planning and Zoning director. Just letting the Board know that for this LDC amendment to ban medical March 13, 2018 Page 105 marijuana dispensary we need four votes. So I think -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We didn't ban them. MR. OCHS: Not to ban. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: To approve. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We just approved -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Four votes, because it's an LDC. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: It's an LDC amendment. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My understanding is -- Commissioner Saunders, you're the motion maker, but my understanding was you were recommending that No. 2 of today's -- staff's direction is to continue to publicly vet the Land Development Code amendment to permit the -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. At some point we have to make a decision whether to move forward with these dispensaries or to ban them. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think the appropriate motion at this point is to move forward with them in light of the fact that that we've not been able to get any clarification from the legislature. So the motion I would have made, or did make, was to move forward with the option to advertise an ordinance to permit the opening of marijuana dispensaries. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Why don't I -- I'll make a motion to reconsider this item since we already voted. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Whoever's in the affirmative has to second that. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That would be you, sir. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll second that. I'm not even sure what we voted on. March 13, 2018 Page 106 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second that, third that. I mean -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- if you want to have further discussion on it. I thought we were pretty clear on what we were doing. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Well, it's just that we took a vote. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We need four votes. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: It's a Land Development Code amendment. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, no. It's not a land -- it's going to require a Land Development Code revision which will require 4-1 vote to revise our LDC. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: When we get the ordinance. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: No, you're right. Correct. So we're just directing staff to bring an ordinance forward for us to consider. MR. KLATZKOW: You're directing staff to bring an LDC amendment forward to you, at which time you will vote. If the LDC amendment does not have sufficient votes for it, you have, from a de facto standpoint, said no to these units. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Right. So for purposes of today, we didn't need four votes. We just needed a majority. MR. KLATZKOW: You need three. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. So then I withdraw my motion. And, Commissioner Saunders? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. If the -- I'm getting very confused here. Are we still withdrawing a motion that was already approved; is that -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: No. I was withdrawing my motion to reconsider. We only needed a majority vote to direct staff to bring March 13, 2018 Page 107 forward an LDC amendment to allow the dispensaries. Once that comes forward, then it will require a supermajority vote for approval. MR. KLATZKOW: That's correct. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. I agree with the withdrawal of the motion to reconsider then. MR. KLATZKOW: Do you have time to get this done, or do we need an extension of the moratorium? MR. BOSI: No. Staff believes we can have this -- the amendment to the Board by the June date. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I ask a question? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: We have some lights. We have lights. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There's lights ahead of me. I'll hit my light. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Taylor, I think, was first. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you very much. And, Commissioner Saunders, thank you for your agreement. I think you said your agreement for the withdrawal. At this point -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Of his second to my motion to reconsider. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Of the second -- he agreed with that -- okay. So point of clarification. I guess you need to -- I need to understand. Are you agreeing with the reconsideration, or are you agreeing that the original motion stands? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, my understanding of the original motion was to direct staff to move forward with the LDC amendments to permit the development of marijuana dispensaries in Collier County. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Correct. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: If that's what we voted on, then I don't see any need to reconsider that. So I would withdraw any second to a motion to reconsider, if that's what we were reconsidering. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Correct, and that's what my motion to March 13, 2018 Page 108 reconsider was, and I've withdrawn that as well. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. So then there's a motion on the floor and a second, and it passed. We don't need four votes, we need three, so I have nothing to say. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Very good. Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I agree. I have nothing more to say, but I will throw in -- even though I have nothing to say, how come I'm saying something? I fear that -- they say once you approve, then you can have as many dispensaries as you have pharmacies, and we have them on every street corner, so I have a great concern for that. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: This is just a point -- an informational point. So we have approved to prepare an ordinance to allow these dispensaries. It's going to require an LDC amendment for that. And if we don't have a 4-1 approval on that, then what transpires? Are they allowed or not? MR. KLATZKOW: They're not allowed. It's one of the curiosities of your procedure here where it's three votes for most things but four votes for a land-use item. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Right. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman, could I ask a question on that particular point? If the state statute requires us to permit marijuana dispensaries in the same locations that permit the development of pharmacies, other than the school distance restriction, why do we even need a Land Development Code amendment? MR. KLATZKOW: Because your Land Development Code is structured so that unless a use is allowed, it's prohibited. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And the land-use code did not anticipate marijuana -- MR. KLATZKOW: Marijuana -- March 13, 2018 Page 109 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- dispensaries, okay. MR. KLATZKOW: -- no. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So it's the opinion of our County Attorney that we need a land development amendment. MR. KLATZKOW: That's been the opinion of -- well, quite frankly, it's been the opinion of zoning staff ever since I've been here, and we've consistently upheld that. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: May I make a comment? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: No. Sorry. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We've actually had that where the code's been silent on particular uses and, therefore, then, they weren't allowed, if it's not specified in the code that it is an allowable use. We've actually had that since I've been here. I found that rather curious. MR. KLATZKOW: I found it curious as well. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: The only thing, I mean, I'm going to add is consistent with what I've been saying before, I just don't know how we can possibly ban something that's provided for in the Constitution as a right. I mean, I think it -- and, yes, the legislature passed it, but the legislature has, in the past, passed many statutes that don't, you know, pass constitutional muster. And, you know, I don't think this is even a matter of whether or not I'm in favor of dispensaries or not. It's in the Constitution, and we don't have that option. So that's just where I'm at. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have a question with that. If that's the case and it's in the Constitution and so forth, how come all of those cities over here banned it? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Because -- in my opinion? They don't care what the Constitution says. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, no, no. The legislature is the one that set us up for this. If I may speak for a moment. March 13, 2018 Page 110 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Set us up. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, they did. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, no. It's accurate. I'm just smiling because I think your words are accurate. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, ma'am. I went and spoke with Ray Rodriguez, our legislator, last year in regard to this. When this question was asked of our electorate, there was nothing talking about dispensaries, per se. And they specifically -- John Morgan, we all know John Morgan was one of the promoters of this Constitutional amendment, and during his public TV announcements said, local municipalities would be able to opt out. And he get a lot of pressure from those local municipalities that didn't want dispensaries, per se. So the legislature abided by his public speaking to allow local municipalities to opt out with the ban. And then the legislature put in the provisions in preempting local municipalities, if you're going to allow them, you've got to allow them per the pharmacies with the statutes -- the state's preemptive language as to where and when and how many you can have. And that's where I believe we were misled. I was let down by the legislature in their not bringing this issue back up just for further clarification. I would have liked for us to be able, as a local municipality, to abide by the constitutional amendment that was elected -- or voted on and put forth by the electorate and maybe put provisions that were, like we oftentimes do in our environmental land-use regulations, more stringent than what the state, in fact, has. We would have been able to come to a consensus on maybe how many of these were going to be allowed in our community based upon a population of need and such, but we're not. It's yes or no. And the electorate wasn't asked that. And it's put -- as you know, I've voted consistently along to allow these dispensaries, and I feel, as Commissioner Solis does, this is a constitutional amendment, and I'm March 13, 2018 Page 111 put in a precarious position because it wasn't what the electorate was asked. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. The only other thing I would just point out is, and -- I don't know if the County Attorney knows this, but there have been challenges to the bans in Florida, and -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, really? I didn't know that. MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioner, I don't necessarily disagree with you. Having said that, all laws, whether they're statutes or ordinances, are deemed to be legal until a court declares otherwise, and that's just -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Well, this is my point is that there are challenges to this, to the bans pending in the state of Florida, and I was wondering if you knew off the top of your head how many of the ones that were banned on there that there's pending litigation. I think there's at least three or four. MR. KLATZKOW: There's a bunch of them, yes. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So, anyway, I think we're belaboring the point, and we've already taken a vote. And our court reporter needs a break. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: That's right. MR. KLATZKOW: Her fingers are smoking. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So we will adjourn till 1:40. COMMISSIONER FIALA: How about 1:45? Give us a whole extra five minutes. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: A whole extra five minutes. Okay. 1:45. She's not feeling well. (A luncheon recess was had.) MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, you have a live mike. Is Commissioner Saunders back on the line? MR. SHEFFIELD: I believe he is. March 13, 2018 Page 112 COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes. This is Commissioner Saunders. MR. OCHS: Thank you, sir. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. Item #11G TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX FUNDING, A WAIVER OF COMPETITION AND A ONE YEAR CONTRACT FOR WEBSITE SERVICES WITH MILES PARTNERSHIP, LLLP, IN THE ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $300,000, AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT, AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS EXPENDITURE PROMOTES TOURISM – APPROVED MR. OCHS: We're moving on to Item 11G, which was previously Item 16F3. This was moved to the regular agenda at Commissioner Taylor's request. It's a recommendation to approve tourist development tax funding, a waiver of competition, and a one-year contract for website services with Miles Partnership in the amount of $300,000, and to make a finding that the expenditure promotes tourism. Mr. Wert will present or respond to questions. MR. WERT: Thank you, County Manager. For the record, Jack Wert, tourism director. The essence, Commissioners, of this request is that we're looking for a one-year agreement with our current website company, and in this year period of time we will do an RFP solicitation for these services. That process takes about six months to do. If a new vendor is identified during that RFP process -- there's certainly a good deal of startup time and so forth. We feel that we would need to run a parallel March 13, 2018 Page 113 website with both companies for several months to be sure everything's up and running. So that's the primary reason we're asking for this one-year contract. Presently, the contract with Miles has expired. It expired February the 24th, so we really, at this point in time, don't have any maintenance backup for our website. So that -- a couple of other just little items that I think are important. This company we have done business with for a number of years. Just this past year Miles garnered 155 different awards for the websites that they manage. Twenty-five of our 50 states, the tourism organizations, use Miles Media for their websites. The State of Florida is one of those. Also, 44 cities and counties also use this company, including ourselves. So I just thought maybe we should put that into perspective. Commissioner Taylor, you had asked some questions, and I do have answers for those, if you'd like me to go through those. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes, please. Thank you very much. MR. WERT: The first question was this contract is for design and maintenance of the website. Are there any other areas in tourist development that we contract with Miles? Currently no current contracts. The website services contract we've had, and we've gone through several RFP processes with them, and they've won that bid each time. We did have a previous contract with Miles to also produce our visitor guide, and two years ago in the RFP process, another vendor was chosen. Interesting to note the web and the visitor guide database are really the same thing. So right now we still have to use Miles to develop all of our listings for that visitor guide even though the visitor guide's produced by another company. That website development the last couple of years has been about March 13, 2018 Page 114 $175,000. And that contract that we had for our visitor guide ranged between 25,000 and 40,000. So that, I hope, answers that first question. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It does, thank you. MR. WERT: The second question was, do we have in-house capabilities for website design and so forth, and the answer is no, we do not. We do some work on our own to update listings and that type of thing, but it is not of a technical nature. Anything that gets into design of a new page, a landing page, new designs so that our website looks like our advertising, we definitely do need Miles to do all that. And that's pretty sophisticated technical work, and we want to out-source that and have for years and years to a company with the qualifications that Miles does have. That is regular staff only. We don't have a specific amount of money in the tourism budget to specifically say this is for web -- in-house website maintenance. Most everything is done out-sourced because it's most always of a technical nature. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But do you have folks that are digitally -- MR. WERT: Yes, we do. We have one staff member, Buzzy Ford, who was our digital and social media person, and he does some of that work. He's also posting on social media. He's also really over -- in fact, his job in the last 18 months was really overseeing the complete resign and relaunch of our new website, which we actually launched February the 15th of this year. If you go to paradisecoast.com, you'll really see a whole new design and look, and it was built from mobile up. In other words, you start with what does it look like on a mobile phone, and then you build it out from there. So it has all the most up-to-date bells and whistles you could have. The third question was -- March 13, 2018 Page 115 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You answered that. MR. WERT: Did I answer that? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah. That was good. You started off with that. That's exactly what I thought; let's not get ourselves into it. MR. WERT: Sure. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And I wasn't presuming that you were, but I needed -- MR. WERT: Understood. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- reassurance that there's -- the process is in tandem. MR. WERT: They are in tandem, and we manage what Miles does, but we don't do beyond the really day-to-day updating listing for a partner, that type of thing. We do that. We can put new photographs on the website. But if it's a new landing page, something like that, we actually work with both the ad agency and Miles to make sure that everything looks the same. You see it in an ad; it looks the same when it gets to the website. So that's the work that we out-source to Miles. The third question, would it be possible to not do a contract and simply do a month-to-month arrangement with Miles? And I guess the answer is yes, you could, but most all of the services that we have for analytics, for search engine optimization are all also out-sourced to -- Miles out-sources those to other providers. Our analytics, for instance, is through Google Analytics. That's an annual contract that -- if we don't have a contract with Miles, I can't use those services. I'd have to go get them on my own, and I think that would be more expensive because they buy, for a lot of their different clients, that same analytic process. The other thing that I think might happen is that if we go month-to-month, then some of those services we'd have to do purchase orders every month, and that process is -- it takes some time. I'm afraid March 13, 2018 Page 116 we couldn't stay current if we had to do that every month. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: As I say -- I'm sorry. I miss -- I think I interrupted you -- MR. WERT: No problem. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: When you said that we're going to go out for an RFP now, we're going to have a six-month search, and we're going to know in six months who's got it, if it's someone different. You've got that six months built in there to make that transition -- MR. WERT: That is correct. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- because it has to be transferred. MR. WERT: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'm very comfortable with that. Thank you very much. MR. WERT: You're quite welcome, thank you. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I move approval of Agenda Item 16F3. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And no speakers? MR. SHEFFIELD: No speakers. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My button was on. Did I not -- did my light not go on? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: No. It's not on. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You have to keep hitting it. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: It turns on, and then it turns off. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: You're going to have to just do this. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Hold your finger on it all the time. March 13, 2018 Page 117 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. I hit the button earlier, and I would have seconded. It's for discussion purposes. And, Commissioner Taylor, I want to thank you for bringing this forward. I had some questions on this amount yesterday when I met with staff. Have procedures been put in place to guard against the expiration of a contract past facto like we're doing right now? MR. WERT: The answer is yes, and we did start last fall, but things just got bogged down, and we didn't get it done in time. That's why we try to build six months -- starting in November wasn't enough time, so we ran out of the time to do that. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It was a late -- MR. WERT: But, yes. The answer is absolutely yes. And, in fact, we're working with procurement right now to really put a much more fail-safe program in that we are getting way longer lead time to do this, because the process does take, as I said, about six months to do. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Obviously. MR. OCHS: When did it expire? MR. WERT: February the 24th is when the contract expired, and you recall we were on the last agenda. We thought we were going to get it done but, unfortunately, we had to come back with some additional information. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, that was my main concern. I just want to -- and maybe -- and if you are discussing having longer-term contracts and/or fail-safes that procedurally catch it in a timely manner so that we're not put into positions such as what we are, then I'm okay. MR. WERT: Believe me, I want those, too, sir. I don't like being up here asking last minute for this any more than you like approving it. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Anything else? March 13, 2018 Page 118 (No response.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: So there's a motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Any opposed? (No response.) MR. WERT: Thank you, Commissioners. Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Motion carries. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Jack. Item #11F RESOLUTION 2018-53: ADOPTING THE FY 2019 BUDGET POLICY – ADOPTED MR. OCHS: Mr. Chairman, that takes us to Item 11F, and this is a recommendation to adopt the Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Policies. Mr. Isackson will make the presentation. MR. ISACKSON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Mark Isackson with the Office of Management and Budget. Give them a second. I'll pull this baby up. Commissioners, each year we're before you seeking your guidance and wisdom as we begin the budget process. This year for FY '19 it's a pretty challenging environment as we've had a chance to talk individually about the factors that are influencing budget policy for FY '19. March 13, 2018 Page 119 There are some action items connected with this, obviously, first and foremost being the enactment of the policy document and/or changes that the Board might have as it goes through possibly on an exception basis. The second item is to establish submittal dates for budgets for the Clerk of the Circuit Courts, the police -- the Sheriff's Office, and the Supervisor of Elections. These are calendar issues that we'll go through. As we go through the PowerPoint, we can pick up on those. We've also established some dates for the final -- the preliminary and final budget hearings and also for the workshop dates, which are scheduled in June. Some of you may wonder, looking at the volumes of information that were provided in the packet, why we do that. And it's obviously for those consumers of financial information, and there are many out there, not necessarily internal to the agency, although that's important, but external to the agency; rating agencies, bondholders, things of that nature that like to see what we're planning for, what our philosophies are as we pull together the budget document. So that gives you a sense for why we just sit here and scribe out pages and pages and pages of information. It does have a purpose. I will tell you that this year's planning environment has been challenging. We think taxable value will not go up as much as it has in the past. I'm working on it right here. I'm technologically challenged. MR. OCHS: Can't take him anywhere. MR. ISACKSON: The highlights of the budget, obviously, when I reference pages -- policy document pages, Commissioners, on the bottom of the document, there are page numbering, and that's where I reference policy document pages. I don't think I'll get to that during the course of our discussion, but there may be a point where I would reference a particular page in the policy document. So we have key policies for consideration and Board direction, March 13, 2018 Page 120 continuing policies to be endorsed by the Board and, obviously, we do annually a three-year projection of the General Fund and the unincorporated General Fund, which I often refer to as the general governmental aspect of our budget document. Again, the suggested guidance action, after due consideration, that the Board approve all recommended budget policies with any changes dealt with on an exception basis. First and foremost, policy decision that the Board makes in any given year is where your millage rates are going to be. As I mentioned in some of my opening remarks, Hurricane Irma has provided what we might term an uncertain environment from a revenue standpoint and has forced what I would call a very different cautionary expense-planning environment. I think the term I used in the budget -- or in the narrative was we need to think as if we're in a recessionary environment going forward until we actually begin to receive reimbursement revenue in. The budget's going to be planned around a 6 percent taxable value increase. Last year, or the current fiscal year that we're in, that taxable value increase was 8.4 percent. The year before that was about 10 and a half-ish. We're suggesting a General Fund millage rate of 3.5645, which is your current millage rate, and I've listed some reasons below as to why we think that's prudent for the Board to provide us. Chief among those is my continued discussion about our heavy reliance on property tax revenue, which averages about 70 percent of our general governmental revenue sources. Of a $413 million General Fund budget, 297 million of that is funded through property taxes. Growth and reserves is important to ensure sufficient year-ending cash, provides a buffer against unexpected expenses, such as the hurricane, and Board policy shifts. Each year the Board has debate and discussion. This gets into the flexibility of the budget document. March 13, 2018 Page 121 And flexibility is important because it's one of the key financial mechanisms that the rating agencies has lauded our financial planning model as being a flexible enough document to react to many changes and nuances that occur in county budgets or municipal budgets throughout the course of any particular fiscal year, and it's capable of surviving recessionary environments should they creep up on you in an unexpected nature. We ensure that dollars are available to cash flow and other natural disaster. We don't want to think about it, but three months from now, you're going to be into another hurricane season. We have a fiduciary responsibility to make sure, from a public, health, safety, and welfare standpoint, that we can cash flow another event. We need to make continued investments in our public safety operations, continued investments in our general governmental capital infrastructure, operate and maintain new capital facilities and, oh, by the way, there's an additional homestead exemption looming out there which will provide a built-in circuit breaker for those taxpayers of the community. The Unincorporated Area General Fund is suggested to maintain the millage rate at .8069. That will allow for continued prosecution of the median landscape program. That's in the form of an equivalent transfer from Fund 111 to Fund 112, the Capital Fund, and then the maintenance costs for all of our landscaping operations except those few that are paid for in MSTUs are all out of Fund 111, the Unincorporated Area General Fund. And the existing millage rate for what I might term the operative millage rate of .7161 is used to fund operations and capital transfers. We had a little discussion about MSTUs this morning. We've got a few MSTUs out there; 12 have had millage-neutral rates going into '18, three were at rolled-back rate, and four were at other rates, depending on their particular ordinances and the advisory board March 13, 2018 Page 122 recommendations. So we're suggesting that those with advisory board oversight have tax-neutral rates, which was rolled-back rate, the same revenue as last year, to millage neutral, and no advisory board, we generally try and hold that to the rolled-back rate or something less. Let's talk a little bit about the hurricane. I think there's some, I don't want to say misunderstanding, but I think cash-flowing the hurricane is something that we do as part of our normal business, but I think those folks in the community, I don't think, understand or appreciate the level of expenditure that's required to go through and clean up after one of these events happens in the community. We've set up budget, and setting up budget is completely different, obviously, than what we expend, but if you don't have sufficient budget, you can't very well expend the money. So we want $170 million in budget setup. We spent about 76 million to date, and we expect to expend anywhere between 110- and 125 million, and there's a -- there will be a local share of that which will be in the probably the 20- to $25 million range depending on how it all shakes out. Of importance to me, in my office, and the County Manager's, obviously, is when we think we're going to get reimbursement revenue in. I don't expect that a significant amount of money will be received until after October of 2018, which is the beginning of our FY 2019 fiscal year. We've told the Board before, and every board meeting you receive a report from my office that talks about the budget amendments that have been processed to restore and repair the community going forward. We've done 78 to this point in your report, and there were three specific techniques utilized. First of all, we identified funds where there is sufficient cash. There are families of funds that we deal with. Public utilities has a March 13, 2018 Page 123 family of funds, our general governmental side with the General Fund, and the Unincorporated General Fund, that's their family of funds. We talked a little bit about Pelican Bay this morning. They have a family of funds. So when we identify how we're going to prosecute this thing and what monies are going to be made available to combat the hurricane, we first look at where the cash is, and where there is sufficient cash we identified that we would recognize FEMA revenue. Or as I always say, nothing behind FEMA revenue until it comes. So we must make sure that we've sufficient cash there. The second technique that we utilized was where there isn't sufficient cash within those family of operating and capital funds, we defer capital projects and move those dollars into the appropriate accounting system so that we could pay for certain expenses connected with the hurricane. And the third was the use of reserves, and we have used reserves. We've used about $22 million of General Fund reserves, and we've used some reserves in the public utilities family of funds. So when you coddle all that together, you come up with a strategy to pay for hurricane expenses. I will tell you, Commissioners, in this particular slide the takeaway is that debris removal is about, while we say 62.3 -- I don't like to be that precise -- I think we're going to the 70 percent range when it's all said and done, when you factor in debris removal from canals and things of that nature. So 70 percent of 100- to $125 million, you know, you're looking at a substantial amount of money: $70 million plus for removal of debris in the right-of-ways and out of canals. I will tell you that we will continually monitor, from a budget management standpoint, all of our reimbursement proceeds. And once those proceeds come in, we will redirect those proceeds to the March 13, 2018 Page 124 appropriate donor funds, and then we'll make decisions about reserve replenishment and capital project replenishment once those dollars are deposited back to the affected funds. One other point on that, Commissioners, is that I'm not going to keep $170 million out there from a budget standpoint unless I have to. I'm waiting for the first tranche of FEMA reimbursement revenue that comes in before we make decisions on reducing budget allocations back to a point and redirecting those budgeted dollars back to, again, the donor funds. Commissioners, I thought this slide might be helpful. You know, we have a billion -- we have a budget of a billion 700 million dollars. That's a gross budget. And I wanted to give you some sense of scale when it comes to were those dollars are actually allocated. We have some over 200 funds. We have, obviously, the general governmental funds that I've talked about, and you see the big pie chart there where about 24 percent of our dollars are allocated, what we call General Fund. Within that General Fund there are various transfers that go out to constitutional officers, and that slice comprises about 13 percent. Because you've got to remember, when you talk about gross, you're also talking about all these intergovernmental for transfers and reserve dollars, and that's to the tune of about $500 million. Those are what we call double counts. So this takes into account some of those double counts. On the special revenue side, you've got your Unincorporated Area General Fund. This is some of the highlights you can see in the slide. Your TDC funds, et cetera, et cetera. On the enterprise side, that comprises another big slice. A lot of these funds are fenced off. Now, we have used interfund loans in the past. That's certainly permissible, but there's payback periods and things like that. March 13, 2018 Page 125 You know, we talk about money being fungible. In this particular case, people say, well, you've got -- your budget's a billion seven; you ought to be able to do this and that. You have some limitations connected to it, and that's what this slide's attempting to portray. Here is a General Fund slide, Commissioners, and it gives you a little sense of how the breakdown occurs in the General Fund. We might classify expenses in terms of health, safety, and welfare, debt service mandates. And on the left there, on the general governmental slide, those might be considered discretionary. You also have some substantial capital transfers out that are contained in that discretionary side, like roads and like the facilities. You have a substantial EMS component over on the right-hand side under health, safety, and welfare. So that just gives you a breakdown of the -- what a pie might like look broken down by some categories. Commissioners, this slide is interesting. Information just jumps out at you. This is a slide that depicts our planning pro forma for 2019. That is on the left-hand column. The right-hand column was last year's planning pro forma between '17 and '18, and '18 and '19. A couple of takeaways here: Your ad valorem tax is your increase from '18 to '19 on the levy is 17.9 million; that's under a 6 percent planning scenario. Last year it was a little over 23 million, which is the -- obviously, the vast majority of revenue that comes into the General Fund. On the expense side, what's interesting to note from a public, health, safety standpoint, that the Sheriff's transfer last year at 11.4 million, for FY '19 we're replanning about the same amount of money under a different and lower taxable value planning scenario. Obviously, then you have County Manager operations. But look at your reserve column. Now, how do I get my reserves up by $5 million, which is necessary in order for me to hit that beginning cash-flow mark that we're constantly talking about? If you look up on March 13, 2018 Page 126 top under revenue under carry forward, you see that last year I increased my budgeted carryforward by $5.4 million. Due to the hurricane and other circumstances, that carryforward balance is actually down by 2-and-a-half million dollars. So what does that mean? That means something has to suffer for me to get my reserves up, and what suffers are your capital transfers out right now. That's what's suffering at this point. If you look at the capital transfer line on the bottom, it was up 5.6 million dollars. Now it's down 1.7. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And we're talking about deferred maintenance? MR. ISACKSON: Well, yeah. And those are items that -- Commissioner, that account for normal transfers from the General Fund to roads, transfers to parks, things of that nature. Those are capital -- particular capital transfers that are intended to maintain and provide some new capital to some of our areas. So that's the -- I think those are the takeaways from that particular slide and the nuances as we sit around the table and plan for what we think's going to happen in '19. Then we have agency allocations, and we wonder why that's important. There's a pie chart in the narrative that talks about what percentage of the budget is constitutional officers, what percentages are the County Manager's agency. And when we say increases or decreases, should revenues fluctuate? We would expect and hold all of the agencies to a somewhat proportionate share of reductions should they occur. And I say reductions because we've been pretty in-depth over the years -- I think I've been doing this 10 years now, at least in this position -- where our estimate for property tax increases are generally lower than what actually happens, and then we have an ability to prop up certain other areas as we go to the Board with the June budget March 13, 2018 Page 127 document, which you take a look at. Just a moment on revenue centric. We have a lot of operations that are supported strictly by revenue, whether it's your fee-based operations in growth management, whether it's your fee-based operations in public utilities, or whether it's your tourist tax development operations in our tourist areas. Commissioners, agency positions, similar to '18, which we had about 40 expanded requests, your requests for '19 are going to be limited to what we call mission-critical functions. They'll be fully vetted with the Board, and that detail was in the budget document as far as operating costs and any off-setting revenue. County Manager will be recommending a 2 percent general wage adjustment as part of FY '19 budget planning. And just to give you a sense of scope, that general wage adjustment is about $2.6 million. In FY '18, the package was 2-point -- or 3.5 percent, 2.9 of which was a general wage adjustment, which totaled 3.6 million. And then we had a pay plan maintenance component of roughly 727K this year. Health care, the takeaway here is there will be no increase in our healthcare costs to carve out for the employees. Retirement rates, essentially we monitor the state, what's going on at the state level, and we establish those rates based upon state guidance. Stormwater funding, Commissioners, now that we are -- the path is on its way to potentially having a separate stormwater utility, I will tell you a couple things. One is there's a very minimal amount of money sitting in the General Fund for stormwater operations as planned, and that's intended primarily to support any grant match that we might have coming forward for those projects that might have a -- what we call a greater watershed benefit to the community. In 111 there is a substantially greater amount of money that's currently planned, because we really don't know the final disposition of March 13, 2018 Page 128 the stormwater utility. We will adjust that going forward as we -- as the Board makes its decisions, ultimately, in connection with the stormwater utility. But, you know, those $4.5 million, if, in fact, they're redirected, there's many needs for those dollars, and I just listed a few there that you can see on the bottom of the page. Use of gas taxes. Just a couple of takeaways here. We're getting in about $21.8 million in gas tax revenue. We have a debt service that's in the range of $13 million. We have gas tax bonds where the pledged replacement source is gas taxes. It's the only bond out there that has a specific pledge right now. Those bonds expire in '23 and '25. At that time the Board will have to make decisions about whether you're going to re-up the tax and whether you're going to issue new debt for what I would guess to be a plethora of projects at that time that will be necessary to fund up. Commissioners, this is something we've used consistently over the years. We set aside a pot of money for our General Fund capital, our debt service obligations, and our debt management. That number this year is roughly $36 million that will be transferred out of the General Fund; however, that's about, as I said before, about 2-and-a-half million dollars less than what it was in '18. Our reserve policies, one of the more important aspects of the policy, we're suggesting in '19 that we continue in the General Fund with a floor of 8 percent and a ceiling of 16 percent. That, in our current planning reserve, is roughly 45.5 million, which is above the floor of 31.1 but well short of the 62.1 million that -- if we actually push the 16 percent ceiling. And you can see, Commissioners, the other funds and those particular targets. I will say that in the water/sewer district we're recommending the establishment of a restricted reserve in the solid waste area, trying to get that reserve built up over a 3-to-5 period (sic) March 13, 2018 Page 129 of 5 to $6 million to help offset the impacts of debris removal from the hurricane and give us some initial cash flow breathing room. This is a slide, Commissioners, that talks about financing capital infrastructure. We haven't issued new debt since 2008. Finance Committee meets regularly, and we consider all appropriate debt issuance mechanisms, and we constantly evaluate our portfolio, which includes the issuance of any new debt that might be necessary, and that's obviously tied to Board policy initiatives, and the specific one that's on the horizon right now is the local option infrastructure sales tax. Budget for '19 does not incorporate, does not program new debt; never does. We will react to that and amend the budget accordingly when decisions are made regarding the issuance of debt. Finally, Commissioners, the schedule -- as I mentioned earlier, the Sheriff, Supervisor of Elections, and the Clerk were asking that their budgets be submitted on or before May 1. We're suggesting budget workshop dates of Thursday, June 21st and, if necessary, the 22nd, adopt the tentative millage rates -- the maximum millage rates, excuse me, on July 10th, the Board receives the tentative document on Friday, July 13th, and then the first budget hearing on the 6th and final budget hearing on the 20th of September, respectively. Commissioners, that concludes my remarks, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have a couple. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Does the landscaping plan cover the Radio Road MSTU? I remember at one time we talked about that MSTU would be just folded right into the landscape plan. MR. OCHS: It is, ma'am, for that; maintenance is folded into the landscape plan. March 13, 2018 Page 130 COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Okay, good. That's what I remembered, but I wanted to make sure. With all of the hurricane things that we've got in place but knowing that we have a lack of some of the funds right now until we replace them, if, for some crazy reason, we got hit with a hurricane again, would we have something to fall back on? MR. ISACKSON: Yes, ma'am. Commissioner, the -- we'd be remiss in our fiduciary responsibility on a staff level if we didn't build our reserves back up; get that pot back up. We haven't -- you've got -- there are funds out there, frankly, Commissioners, that you haven't touched right now. I mean, you have $32 million sitting in your Conservation Collier Maintenance Fund that hasn't been touched. If need be -- and I say that -- we would go after on a loan basis, an advance basis, those dollars to help fight any event that might happen. That just gives you one example. And I can't stress enough the budget flexibility issue that we have. We built budget flexibility into this document for that very reason. During the recession, we never came to you for rate increases. We always made sure that we lived within our means, obviously, and we cut substantially, mostly on the backs of your capital projects, thinking that those capital projects can be deferred, picked up again when times become well. So that gives you a sense for the importance of the flexibility. And, yes, we will have sufficient resources to combat another storm should one come our way. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I have a -- from a procedural standpoint, this presentation today is what staff then develops, the written budget initiatives that go out to all of the departments that everybody utilizes to develop their budgets from, correct? March 13, 2018 Page 131 MR. ISACKSON: Yes, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So one of my questions, and it's for us to have a discussion about, is -- my colleagues and I -- and I applaud staff for the conservative approach for these budget initiatives, but I'm wondering if we are conservative enough. There is a proposed 2 percent increase in expenditures this year over last year, and I like the idea of a global cost-controlling effort that's put forth by the Board of County Commissioners that sets the ultimate millage rate and, departmentally, we make a suggestion that we stay expense neutral this year over last year. And I have several points, Mark. How long do you want me to ramble on? It was one of my -- MR. ISACKSON: I can just sit down, sir, and let you -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sir? MR. ISACKSON: I said, I can just sit down. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, no, no, I won't be that long. I won't be that long. It was a suggestion that I was thinking about. You brought up the Hurricane Irma expenses and very adeptly showed that $170-some-odd million in expenses, 20- of which we're not going to get back, minimally. We are still -- and as I might remind you, for those of us -- and I think we were all there when we met with the Governor right shortly after Irma visited us, that we're still shy 6, $8 million -- CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Seven. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- $7 million from Wilma in reimbursements that we have yet to receive. So my thoughts were -- 7 million. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners, we've come to an agreement with the State on it, and we're probably going to get about $4 million out of that 7.8. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: To that end, the discussion March 13, 2018 Page 132 about what we're going to be reimbursed and when is yet to be decided. So that was one of the -- that was one suggestion that I wanted to throw out there as a topic of discussion for us to maybe float out and -- the other side is, I noticed in the three-year plan there was no provision for the inevitable additional $25,000 homestead exemption that's coming up on a referendum this fall that's going to equate to another 8-and-a-half million dollars belt tightening that we're going to have to -- we're going to have to plan for, and the sooner we start to plan for those things, I think it's more prudent from us to do so. Now, I'm okay with this. I mean -- and I know we're going to have budget workshops and that sort of thing, but if we give direction to staff today to adopt these policies as are currently written, that's what goes out, everybody adapts to whatever the suggestions, in fact, are, and we have a difficult time sometimes in bringing them back. So I just -- that's one statement that I'd like to float out there. Number 2, I'm utilizing the document that you prepared. I've got notes on both. I read that whole 48-page -- my goodness, my goodness. Talk about a lot of information in the No. 2 of this agenda item. But on Page 13 I wanted to talk a little bit about the reimbursableS that come out of the Enterprise Fund for fees and that sort of thing, and I'd like for us to have a discussion sometime, because we just went through an indexing process in our permitting fees and bequeathed a, going forward, reduction in rates of $1.6 million, which is kind of sort of rewarding -- in my mind's eye rewarding those that are coming in the future, not those that have already paid more in fees necessarily than what we could have been charging. And I'd like for us to explore a reimbursement back during that index processing as opposed to going forward. She looks at me and doesn't say anything. So I couldn't tell if that was a happy look or not, Commissioner Taylor. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'm just listening. March 13, 2018 Page 133 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. On Page 14, there was some discussion about the stipulations on new hires and having it being vetted pretty seriously. I'd like to make a suggestion that we don't have any new hires and that we put the same stipulations on replacement employees as attrition comes along just to, again, assist us in controlling our costs. I also like the suggestion about the 80/20 split across the board countywide from an insurance standpoint. And if an analysis has been done to the value of that, from an expense standpoint -- because I know -- I know in the private sector when you assist an employee with their expense reduction in lieu of an increase in pay, you have expenses that travel along, FICA, MICA (sic), federal withholdings and things that go up as an employer when you offer pay increases in lieu of expense reductions. And I'm sure -- and I just haven't seen it, Mark. I'd like maybe to have a discussion with you about that and the value of that to us. MR. ISACKSON: It might help -- Commissioners, I don't know what -- I'm going off of a couple different page numberings. It's the Policy Document Page 22. It's your Packet Page 197 where we list on there the health insurance contributions by agency. It gives you a sense of, if everybody was at 80/20, including the constitutionals, how much savings you'd have to the agency, essentially, and it's -- I don't know -- it's gets in part, I think, Commissioner, to your question. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was where I was referring as well. I like the -- I like that thought process of having some continuity if, in fact, there's validity to it. I don't want to be dictating policy to other agencies based upon -- based upon what our thought processes are unless there's some -- was that a sneeze, Leo? MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: God bless you. God bless you. MR. OCHS: Thank you. March 13, 2018 Page 134 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I like the idea of continuity across the board. Then the only other thing, well, on this particular page, I had, was reserves in Growth Management Department were held out there at 18 and 24 months, which seemed to be considerably higher than our other policies. And I see Jamie standing up there in the back. MR. ISACKSON: He's sneaking up behind me, sir? Well, then I'll let him -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was my peripheral vision moving over there, so... MR. ISACKSON: He can talk much more eloquently about the fee-based operations in GMD than I can. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. MR. FRENCH: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Jamie French. I'm your deputy department head for Growth Management. Commissioner, I appreciate you bringing up the $1.6 million reduction that we implemented as we do go back and adjust our fees. And the goal of Growth Management, so you know, as well as the direction of the County Manager, has been to capture every efficiency that we possibly can and the fact that this board just currently retained almost a quality-insurance/quality check agency that we employed using those Enterprise Funds to determine where yet we have not saved our client money. So we will continue to do that. Since 2013, I've appeared a number of times before this board -- maybe not this board, but boards in the past -- where we've taken no less than a 3.5 percent decrease since Nick and I took over in 2010, and now with Thaddeus and I, we've never proposed, nor do we intend to propose, any type of fee increase whatsoever, and we'll continue to index and capture those efficiencies. However, where we are today -- so close of business -- let me just March 13, 2018 Page 135 catch you up. Close of business last Friday we had -- currently, we are averaging about 5,000 permits now per month issued. It's about a 38 percent increase. We had 900 in the queue that it could not process. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We've been hearing. MR. FRENCH: We've -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I've been hearing. MR. FRENCH: We've -- to date, through 12 pay periods, the County Manager's worked with us, we've allowed, just in building, close to 3,800 hours of overtime just in our inspectors, plan reviewers, and those that process those permits. Quite honestly, Commissioners, the epidemic that we see as far as hiring quality staff or licensed staff affects us as well. We've easily got anywhere from probably two to three years of Irma-related work, and currently, just to be able to get a permit processed -- we've had to suspend since the hurricane our five-day guarantee. So we're averaging somewhere between eight and nine days, business days. Still much faster than most other communities and much further ahead than the State of Florida recommends, but yet we've still not been able to get to that five-day guarantee on single-family home permits. So I apologize for that, but I can assure you that your staff down at Growth Management, we are working diligently to get caught up. But currently, as I said, we've gone from about 3,700 permits per month to about 5,100 permits per month, and we will be coming back to you asking for additional staffing very conservatively. We've not come back to you in the last two years and asked you for staff. And as I said -- I'm trying to go through my notes here. I apologize. But we're going to approach this as conservative as possible. We're currently running just at 79 job bank associates on top of our approved 290 FTEs. Of those 79, we have 61 of those job bankers March 13, 2018 Page 136 filled; 18 are still vacant. We've either lost them because of attrition, we can't replace them because there may be licensing involved or they get recruited by the private agency but, for the most part, we have 79; 18 that we're currently seeking. We also have five -- four plus one coming -- contract employees through Nova, which is the county's contractor. We've requested up to five more. I just can't get them. And they come in at about 75 to $100 an hour just to be able to get that staff member -- those staff members. Significantly higher, of course, as you can imagine, than what we pay our current staff. So that was the reason for the request is that we just truly envision we're probably -- if business shut off today, it would take us a year to 18 months just to get the 113 side of our house cleaned up, and probably a 131, we're easily 18 to 24 months. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I ask him a question? Because I asked two questions that he didn't address. MR. FRENCH: I'm sorry? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There's no sorries my friend. I covered a lot of information, and so did you. Is it okay, Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Sure. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. The first question was the 18 to 24 months estimated reserve calculation. MR. FRENCH: Sure. So we're guided by a resolution that this board adopts through our fee schedule that basically says that we can't exceed 50 percent of our total budget anyway. We're not asking to change that resolution. But what that says -- it didn't guarantee a refund. What it says is that we'll go back and we'll look. And so if we need to continue to index -- and we constantly have those conversations. In fact, just this morning I had a conversation with the CBIA president, Kathy Curatolo, about this and it came up in DSAC. So we're constantly talking about the fees. We're constantly looking at this. We don't believe that this is a long-term budget March 13, 2018 Page 137 guidance item. But there's going to be a time that we're going to be at a budget guidance. There's no doubt. Because we collect that revenue, we issue that permit up front, and that permit stays alive all the way through CO. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. And maybe I didn't phrase the question but, you know, the recommendation of the 18 to 24 months in reserves, do you feel that's -- that's significantly higher in reserve count than what we hold in other departments, and that's just -- do you feel comfortable with that? MR. FRENCH: Length of time that it takes to complete the work, sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sir? MR. FRENCH: Length of time that it takes to complete the work. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. And then the second question, or the other question that I asked, and I complimented you when you did it and with the 1.6 million reduction in fees that you proposed last year. How do you feel about a rebate back to those that have already paid or a reduction in fees that are already paid as opposed to going forward? MR. FRENCH: Sir, we're constantly indexing our fees. If we find that -- if we find that we've overcharged -- MR. CASALANGUIDA: Jamie, let me help you out. Commissioner, think of the person who pays the fees and who you rebate it to. If Pulte comes in and does a subdivision for a buildout of a road and pays it to 131, and then the road's done -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. MR. CASALANGUIDA: -- when you're saying go back, who would you pay it back to? Some of these get transferred to the new homeowner, the HOA. And then even if it was $1.6 million, and you went across what we collected across the county, it would probably -- March 13, 2018 Page 138 half of that money would be spent trying to figure out how to give it back to them and actually process the refund because they're very small incremental numbers. So you might be giving a homeowner, like, a $15 refund, you know what I'm saying? MR. FRENCH: Well, an example of that would be because of a -- let's say an inspection. An inspection's about $38. We went from $40 recently to $38. Our cost -- and we work very closely with Crystal's office. Typically, we use that $5 scale. If it's not more than $5, we've got much more staff time than that invested in it. So then, therefore, there is no savings to the county; it costs the county more money just to be able to process that refund. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I understand. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I think Commissioner Taylor was next. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And, Commissioner Saunders -- and I say this not to alarm. But I really want to discuss this just briefly and would welcome your input. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Sure. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Given the situation that we have with our reserves and the fact that we're not sure when FEMA is going to reimburse us and the fact that we're facing another hurricane season and I'm wondering -- and I value your opinion, sir, so I'm coming to you really pointedly with this. I'm wondering if we should certainly approve the ranking of the Conservation Collier lands, which I believe is coming to us in the next couple of meetings, but not purchase them, and the reason being is that it seems to me, just this commissioner, is it would just be very prudent to hold onto that money till we get through the hurricane season and then address it, and then we're also going to be a lot clearer about the effort for the renewal of a Conservation Collier amendment and re-opening that millage rate from our voters, March 13, 2018 Page 139 which I think we should know by the end of next year -- or this year. So I welcome your comments on this. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, obviously, we're going to have a hurricane season every year, and so I don't think we need to make any kind of knee-jerk reactions to, like, Conservation Collier. I think we should move forward with it. But that, obviously, is a decision that the Board will make in April. But I think my view would be, if there are environmentally sensitive lands on a list that's sent to us, I'd like to see us continue to acquire those with the $17 million that we set aside almost a year ago and not be too concerned about how we're going to deal with the hurricane in terms of this particular program. But that's just on -- you know, that's just my view on that particular program. I do have some comments concerning the proposals from staff this afternoon that, when it's appropriate, I'd like to go ahead and make those comments. But I think we should go forward with Conservation Collier acquisitions because that's a policy decision that we've made, and I think it's the right one. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you. That was my comment. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Two questions, and I might need Jamie again. It looks like we've been pretty successful -- I'm sorry. I've got a throat-ful. We've created so many jobs, which we've been working to do, as well as the state has been working to, and the feds, creating more jobs that we can, you know, keep our people employed and out there working, but it looks like we've created more jobs than we have produced new employees. And people aren't having their babies fast enough, and they're not growing up fast enough. March 13, 2018 Page 140 I was just wondering how that actually is affecting you, Jamie. Is that why you have so many vacancies and you can't fill them? MR. FRENCH: A couple things, ma'am. Thank you. Again, Jamie French, for the record. First and foremost -- and I don't want to break any HR laws, but the average age of our inspector is about 58 years old. And in order to -- as we start to look at a five-year plan, with them attritting, and they're beginning to attrit now, the state has made it terribly difficult for these licenses to be acquired, and not only that, we compete. So when you look at a payroll, for example, if you take someone with five years of experience as a general contractor in the private market if they own their own firm, clearly they're probably in a 100- to $200,000 tax bracket. I'm now trying to get them to take a $65,000 job as a building plans reviewer. Hard to compete in that market. And as young people come out of school, unless you have a Construction Management Degree and at least one year of experience, you can't even sit for the test. So you need at least five years in the trade. So it has made things terribly difficult. But we're all competing from the same -- when I say that we have people taken from us, Lee County thanks us for training such great people, that they have the -- you know, that may live in Bonita or where not -- or whatnot. And, of course, it's just tough to get those licensed staff. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you're kind of leading right into my second question which was, with the President's tax credits -- tax cuts and people are now paying their employees more, and we're kind of hamstrung at the county government level because we can't raise taxes like an individual business can, is that also hampering us in hiring people? MR. FRENCH: Not in the Enterprise Fund so much, not in what we -- because of -- we have a little bit more flexibility. Nick and Leo March 13, 2018 Page 141 have done a great job in working with us challenging us to look outside of our community as well as the industry where they're pulling from the same resources. And we'll continue to do that with the County Manager and Thaddeus and Nick. And we'll let you know as we look at those payroll -- but the Enterprise Fund we self-sustain, so the tax basis doesn't affect us much. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Does it affect the rest of our hiring process? MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I would say, generally, yes, it puts pressure on our labor market. As you know -- as we all know, when the economy is strong and the unemployment rate is very low, almost historically low, it ramps up competition for talent. And in the private sector, you know, they typically can pay more than we can. Our benefits, at some level, offset some of that but not entirely. So, yes, we're watching our attrition rates carefully. We're -- I actually had a recommendation from our HR department to adjust our pay scales for next year, and I told them I'm not going to do it because I can't afford it, not because it's not necessarily merited. So we, instead, back down to the CPI increase of 2 percent. COMMISSIONER FIALA: So if we find that it's actually hampering our way of doing business by no increases but other people are then hiring our people away, do we get another bite at that apple if we find that, you know, we're losing money by not spending money -- MR. OCHS: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- which is so often the case? MR. OCHS: And what we do -- we've run into that from time to time. We've done it, obviously, as Jamie mentioned, in our Enterprise Funds both in Utilities and in our Building Department where we come to you at midyear or at whatever point in the year we're faced with those kind of difficulties, and we'll ask for permission to hire additional people or, if we have to adjust certain pay ranges in specific jobs where March 13, 2018 Page 142 we're having very difficult recruiting problems, we'll ask you to do that, and we'll find a recommendation to fund those things. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good. I remember you've done that a few times. MR. OCHS: Yeah. It's easier to do, obviously, in the Enterprise Funds where you have fee for service so you can -- if you have to, you can go to reserves or even modify your fees with endorsements from your advisory committees. And in your General Fund and your Unincorporated Area General Fund, those tax-supported operations, it's obviously more difficult to do. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Good. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Saunders, you had something else you'd like to say? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. I just wanted to say a couple things. In terms of today's direction to staff, I think we should keep our options open because we have the second bite at the apple in July and the final bite at the apple in September. So I'm inclined to accept the staff's recommendation of this afternoon with the understanding that we may whittle things back a little bit as we go through the budget process. I believe that staff has done an excellent job in laying this out for us. Back in 2017, we adopted a budget -- a millage-neutral position during our second budget hearing. That was after Hurricane Irma, and I'm convinced that had we not done that, we would have been -- we would be in a very, very difficult budget situation. And if you add on top of that the potential for an additional $25,000 -- $25,000 value homestead exemption, if we're not careful, we could put ourselves in a very, very significant, very, very serious problem in terms of where our millage has to go. March 13, 2018 Page 143 So I think that the staff recommendation for today's hearing is the right way to go with the understanding that we can make changes as we go along. So that would be my position on this. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Public speakers? MR. SHEFFIELD: Yes. Dr. Joseph Doyle, and he's been ceded additional time by Sandy Doyle for a total of six minutes. DR. DOYLE: Okay. Good afternoon, Commissioners, Dr. Joseph Doyle, Naples. I want to start off by first thanking Commissioner Taylor for trying to stay with the process for the Pelican Bay Services Division this morning. I think it's very important. A lot of those fees related -- supposedly related to Irma. We could debate whether landscaping -- Irma (sic) doesn't usually reimburse for damaged landscaping -- you're going to be reimbursed. Although, I would like Crystal to have the Clerk monitor that million dollars and make sure it's spent correctly and that we get whatever should be reimbursed from Irma and it's put back into that 778 Lighting Fund. Thank you. I do agree with Commissioner McDaniel's comments today: Are we being conservative enough here with this budget policy presentation? I'd like to point out on Page 2, second to the last paragraph, essentially county financial management is functioning as if a recessionary environment exists until most of the expected reimbursement revenue is received. You'll recall that I came to you September 28th, the final budget hearing, pleading that you go to the rollback rates for the taxpayers. Now, I know Commissioner Saunders just said that, you know, he was glad we stayed with the millage-neutral rate. Well, I know plenty of small business owners, and even some large ones, who are still having problems, all right. March 13, 2018 Page 144 For every week that they were out of work, that's 2 percent permanent reduction in their income. There are many people who were out a minimum of two weeks, three weeks; waiters and waitresses out six weeks; small businesses that still haven't totally recouped. We have restaurants that have closed in North Naples: Ruby Tuesdays in the Marketplace, Stonewood over on Airport. So we -- you know, there are restaurants going out of business. I know it looks great right now. The roads are clogged to get down here, but that's only March, you know. We know what it's like here in the summer. It's slow. So what I'm trying to say is I want to put this whole presentation into the economic context of what's really going on here. We're still, in my opinion, suffering, and it even says here, from a recessionary environment caused by Irma. But what else do we have going on here? Yeah, we have the Trump tax cut. Well, believe it or not, I was standing in line at the post office yesterday, and one of my wealthy neighbors in Pelican Bay is telling me that we have the $10,000 property tax cap. Well, her taxes here are about that in Pelican Bay, but she has $40,000 in property taxes in Long Island that she can't get -- that she can't claim on her income tax anymore. So you're going to be hearing from the other end of the spectrum. Naples has a lot of wealthy people who are going to be watching you for this millage. And don't forget, you're still competing with the school district for that property tax deduction that they're taking. And, you know, they have a billion dollar budget over there. So, you know, it's not just about what you do here. It's all the global -- you have to look at the context of what's going on here. Also, the Fire District. Mosquito Control doubled their millage last year. So I think we have to look at the global, not just what's March 13, 2018 Page 145 happening here with the county budget. Now let's talk about Social Security. As you know, Social Security increased last year; it was 2 percent. But little old ladies like my mother, that 2 percent was eaten all up with her Medicare premium increase. So her net was zero. Now, I'm looking here on Page 20 of the policy document, and it shows here what we've done for the county employees. And I know that they -- you had during 2009, 2010, 2011 we had flat wages. But if you look at '15, '16, '17, and '18, they've had wage and benefit increase higher than what the Social Security recipients have experienced. And, Commissioner Taylor, you were even talking about the Social Security widows this morning. So I think we have to look at this budget document in the context of them, too. So that's why, you know, when we look at the -- for instance, the stormwater utility, and that's, I believe -- Leo, that's on Slide 18. If we're going to raise $20 million with the stormwater utility, I think that the 4.5 million that you already have in -- they traditionally had in the budget those years, 4.5 from the taxpayers and then another 1 million you've been getting from Southwest Florida Management District. But the point is is that 4.5 million should not be going to other projects. That 4.5 million should be going to a millage reduction to the taxpayers so that we would go from 3.5645 millage down to a 3.4745 millage. It's little things like that. And I think it's kind of scare tactics, on Page 3, to say that reducing property taxes in exchange for limited use and statutorily restricted special revenue sources such as stormwater utilities considered by all professional accounts risky revenue policy. Well, that's baloney, because you're telling me right now that we're at a 70 percent reliance on property taxes. Well, if you're going to increase the stormwater utility, you need to reduce the property tax a little bit. March 13, 2018 Page 146 So I think there's a couple points here that we need to consider in this budget policy. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: The only comments I would have would be that I would echo what Commissioner Saunders has said. You know, I would be in favor of approving what the staff has recommended. I think we've got a lot of uncertainty that we need to be very careful with, and I think that staff has done a very good job in setting the increase in property values that -- I think it was 6 percent, right, as opposed to 8.4 or something? MR. OCHS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I mean, I think that's a very conservative way to do it, and we can live within that. And so I would be in favor of moving forward. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Is that a motion? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I could make it a motion. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Any discussion? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Briefly. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: We've got to get your button fixed. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. I think Leo broke it just so he doesn't have to listen to me anymore. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yeah. It doesn't stay on. So if I'm looking that way, I don't know that -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm sure he did. MR. OCHS: Just for this item. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Just for this. No, no. It was on the housing thing, too. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sir, it's been deferred. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's been deferred? MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'll get staff looking into it. March 13, 2018 Page 147 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I just -- I wanted to -- you know, I concur with what you said, Commissioner Saunders and Commissioner Solis. The suggestions that I had were my notes, my thoughts along the way. And when I proposed the expense neutral or maintenance process, I didn't say that we take the increase, whatever it is, 6 percent, 8.4 that they're budgeting for, and apply those excesses or those increases in revenues to debt reduction and reserves. I didn't say that portion of it. I just said that we stay expense neutral this year over last. So that was the one provision that I wanted to add in there. And, Commissioner Saunders, you adeptly said it. We have budget workshops and more things -- as Commissioner Taylor likes to say, more bites at this apple as we go forward. I just wanted to make sure that I said those things in advance because this is what gets printed. These policies are what gets printed by our staff and goes out to all of the departments for them to develop their budgets. And once it hits print, it's just there. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. And I would just like to say one other thing. I spent a couple of days listening to economists this weekend about what's going on in the economy both domestically and worldwide, and it would appear that things are tapering off in terms of industrial production and things like that. So I would assume -- I mean, I'm hoping that we've taken all that into consideration, that all the charts are going like this (indicated), and maybe next year, 2019, 2020, things might not be cooking with gas as they are now. Everybody's nodding their heads yes? MR. ISACKSON: We have you covered, sir. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. Very good. Thank you. That's all I wanted to know. So any other discussion? Commissioner Saunders, nothing else? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No. I believe, if this is correct, there was a motion and a second to adopt the staff recommendations March 13, 2018 Page 148 for this point in time, and then we will have our opportunity to re-evaluate in June, July, and again in September. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yes, sir. That's the motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Motion carries unanimously. MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, Commissioners. Item #15 STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS MR. OCHS: Commissioners, that moves us to Item 15 on today's agenda, staff and commission general communications. Commissioners, just, again, a reminder of your upcoming workshops, dates and times. If I can ever get that visualizer. There it is. We have both CRAs are here for a workshop in April on the 3rd at 1 p.m., on May 1st we have our Blue Zone workshop at 9 a.m., and then on June 5th, mental health workshop beginning at 9 a.m. as well. So if you'd make sure your calendars are marked for those, I'd appreciate it. The only other comment I have -- and I sent this to you earlier in the week -- but I wanted to again congratulate our staff, Trinity Scott in particular, and Tim Durham and his liaison with our federal lobbyist March 13, 2018 Page 149 and, of course, Commissioner McDaniel and Congressman Diaz-Balart and everyone else who had a hand in the award of the $13 million TIGER grant, 16-, actually, when we roll in the three local. It's other reason we needed some flexibility. We've got to come up with 3 million bucks in local match, but -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sorry about that. MR. OCHS: That aside, a great accomplishment, and perseverance pays off. You know, we've been applicants in the past unsuccessfully for that, but instead of worrying about it, the staff found out, you know, how to do a better job each time in working with the commissioner and with the congressman. I think we're going to have a great project out there in Immokalee as a result of that. So, again, congratulations to the staff for great staff work. That's all I have, sir. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Mr. County Attorney? MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing, sir. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Madam Clerk? MS. KINZEL: Nothing. Thank you so much. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, the County Manager kind of stole my thunder, just for the record. That's all right. That's all right. And as a point I just wanted to congratulate and thank you, sir. It was a team effort. Our staff did an amazing job. We got to hear it last week at the MPO about the TIGER grant and the success of that. And I did, while we were here today, receive a communique from the congressman, and there is an event coming up in the latter part of March to be announced formally acknowledging that. So when I get that date firmed up with the congressman, I'll be sure and let you know. MR. OCHS: Great. March 13, 2018 Page 150 CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Fiala. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Just fine. Just hoarse. Feeling better than when I walked in this morning, I want to tell you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're glad about that. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Huh? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I said we're glad about that. COMMISSIONER FIALA: So I was just wondering, Leo -- I didn't have a chance to prepare, so I'm just asking you right now in public. MR. OCHS: Sure. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I received an email from the Civil Air Patrol. They had their airplane hangar demolished from Irma, and they know that there's a space right now available. They were wondering if they could use it at the Marco Island airport until their Quonset hut gets rebuilt or at such time as you need it for something else. MR. OCHS: I will look into that as soon as we leave here. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry I couldn't follow it up with an email or anything. MR. OCHS: No. My pleasure. We'll follow up with you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Taylor. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Just a couple of things. First of all, there's -- on Livingston Road there's a wall that I understand is the county's wall that separates Livingston Road from Briarwood, and there are a couple of panels out on it about a third of the mile in from Radio Road. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There are a couple of what? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Panels. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Panels. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Panels. It sounds like you said camels. March 13, 2018 Page 151 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No. Panels. So -- and then I just want to publicly congratulate the County Manager and the museum division of our community for their extraordinary event on Saturday. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, yes. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: The cattle drive. MR. OCHS: Great event. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: And real cows and real cowboys, and they actually did a demonstration where the dogs circled around the cows and held them in the middle of the street on 29. It was extraordinary. So well done. So -- the property just sparkled. And everybody was demonstrating different things that -- I mean, I've never seen a cracker crack his whip. I mean, they did that and swamp cabbage and all the wonderful things there. It was really -- and the stories and the cowboy poet, you know that, and the music. My goodness. Well, well done, and I hope there are many, many more. And I think it was very well attended. I don't know what any numbers were, but... COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't think they have numbers yet. But it was; it was well attended. Although there was a little question on the 200 head of cows. He was claiming 200. I'm not sure. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yeah. I was counting those cows. I wasn't thinking there was 200. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't think there was, but it was close. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: But, you know, that's okay. They were there, and it was wonderful. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Then we attended the Southwest Economic Alliance on Thursday and were handed in part of the report -- it appears that -- and this is my pencil marks on this -- that they are March 13, 2018 Page 152 actually determining climate risk scores with site selection for economic people coming in here, companies coming in. It's nationwide. It's not just here. There's a little story on it. But I just find it all kind of absolutely wonderful that we have two scientists who are studying Collier County to such a degree they can determine within a block what's going to flood and what's not going to flood. So I just wanted to bring that to your attention. And then, finally -- and, Commissioner Fiala, you and I are attending the CRA meetings, and it's very, very exciting what's going on there. And they are developing standards and trying to put their arms around putting art in public places, but having experience with events, public events on streets that are owned by a municipality, especially within the CRA, there's a significant amount of cost involved to the taxpayer: Security, trash pickup, just -- even traffic diversion sometimes. They have to get folks in there. So I'm wondering if we -- the County Manager, if you could maybe do some research on this and bring this back to us where -- what the fees are involved, because when there's fees involved, you know, it helps offset the cost to the taxpayers for these events. And I think -- I think going forward it would be a great idea to establish a base. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you mean, like, for instance -- trash pickup? So if you have volunteers doing that, then you give them some kind of credit for $10 an hour for picking up trash or something? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: No, ma'am. Mary Smith -- excuse me. Let's just say a lady or a man wants to have a event. They want to have an art fair, let's just say that, and they want to do it within the streets of Bayshore. They don't want to do it on an empty lot. They want to use the streets. They want to have parking. They're going to need extra security, for sure. And, aftermath, there will be trash pickup. There's a cost involved. March 13, 2018 Page 153 So there's basic fee structures that are involved in this, and I'd like to see if we could develop those structures. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Don't we charge for those now for private entities that apply for an event permit? I mean, if we're providing them, I would think we would be charging for them, or is it the requisite of the applicant that applies for the event to pay for those things? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Well, normally -- and I'm only going back to what I know from my experience in the City of Naples, and they upped their fees several times, because everybody wanted to be around Cambier Park, there's -- what kind of event are you planning? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: What are your requirements? It's a whole form to fill out. And then a fee is applied which helps offset the cost to the taxpayers, the general taxpayers, for this event, that would never take place except it is in a specific place. They might have an art show in Immokalee -- in the fields going to Immokalee. They wouldn't do it. They want to do it where there is an attraction of people, where they can bring attention to it, because that helps have the show successful. So there's a cost involved in that. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You could find out how much they charged in Immokalee for this rodeo or whatever this was -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't think they charged anything for that. I'm just -- I just know -- and where I was going is I know in Hendry County they have a fee that you charge -- that they charge for -- that is appropriated if -- in the event there is trash requisite that is needed to be cleaned or additional security. There is a fee that's charged. But that's all -- I thought we already had that. MR. CASALANGUIDA: You do, sir. If someone like the HITS Triathlon that was in District 2, they pay for the police officers, March 13, 2018 Page 154 cleanup. Through the right-of-way permit, they establish all that and cover it. If it's a park site, they have park rental fees, and then the park places additional requirements on them to do so. If it's a special event, they pull the special-event permit, and they have to go down a list of fire safety, things like that. And I think you're talking specifically about the CRAs and -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Within the CRA district using the streets, specifically, because there are wonderful, energetic people that want to have different events coming up. And I think before we even permit these events to go forward, not that they're not worthy events, I think we need to incorporate that fee structure and address what it means and costs to have an event, for instance, on Bayshore, or it could be around Naples Opera, which is not Bayshore, but it's within the CRA, and to address this before we go forward with these events. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I mean, the CRAs, they don't pay those kind of fees? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: It's my understanding no fees are being applied within the CRA to individuals -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: When they do an event. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: -- who want to hold an event, yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. I understand. MR. OCHS: How about if I do some research and meet with the advisory board and we just put a little stay on anything until I can do that quickly and get back to you -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think that -- MR. OCHS: -- and either confirm we have a policy or come back with some recommendations on a policy that would cover those -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I think that's very wise. MR. OCHS: -- general expenses. Is that -- does that sound reasonable? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: That sounds good. And I would just add a March 13, 2018 Page 155 couple things, if I may. Because I know I've spent a lot of time talking to Lieutenant Hamilton up at the Sheriff's substation in Pelican Bay. I'm not so sure -- we really need to look, I think, at the cost and -- not only the cost but, for example, the HITS Triathlon. A lot of these events want to have their event, or these organizations want to have their events, for example, on Gulf Shore and close down Gulf Shore in the season. And, you know, there's -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's a lot. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Yeah, I mean, it's -- and this season's been full of them, and it's very difficult, as it is, with all the construction going on in Naples Park and Vanderbilt Drive being closed. And so I hope we can revisit -- you know, maybe come up with some standards. You know, the triathlon -- you know there's a big peloton and then a running group, you know, and it's -- I know the Sheriff -- it's a real challenge to keep everybody safe and keep the traffic moving while there's 150 runners and cyclists going. So this is something I think we really need to take a look at and maybe come up with some standards and things for how we grant -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: -- permission to do them, because I think sometimes there are situations where we may just have to say, no, it's too overwhelming, it's too much of a draw on the Sheriff's Department or EMS or whatever. And we need to look at that, so... COMMISSIONER FIALA: And would that now include -- because it's the CRA, it would be the Immokalee, Bayshore CRA? MR. OCHS: Well, yes, ma'am, originally, but what I'm hearing Commissioner Solis say is let's take a countywide look at this issue, you know, beyond the borders of either of the CRAs. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Something's coming up on the May 5th Cinco de Mayo, so I'm just wondering -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: I know in the city there are March 13, 2018 Page 156 certain events that are traditional that we didn't charge a fee, and one of them was the Swamp Buggy Parade. COMMISSIONER FIALA: You could look into that, all of that, sure. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: We've got a template. Now the other thing, Commissioner Fiala -- and help me with this -- is this issue of painting on the -- mural painting on buildings and not following the code and things like that. And I know that there's talk about, you know, researching and doing -- you know, going to other communities where this is going on and using this, but there's a couple things I'd like this board to consider. I'm thinking that that research should be done on our side. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Rather than theirs? COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Yes. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, because right now they're pretty divided, and so some like it and some don't. And I would think it would be good to hear what the people like on the street that they live on before we tell them -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Not the specific murals that were done out of code. That's a whole other issue. I'm thinking specifically going forward. If this catches on, how are we going to arbitrate this? And, again, I'm going back to my experience, and it seems like the proverbial buck stops right here with us as CRA, not necessarily commissioners, and that I think that -- going forward, I think that -- I would feel more comfortable, given the debate going on and the values of what is art and what is not, that we ask Leo, County Manager Ochs, to do the research to bring forth the standards, going to other communities such as Sarasota, I'm understanding, is a very successful mural painting, and I know they do it up in Immokalee. So it could apply to Immokalee. March 13, 2018 Page 157 But that you would -- sir, your staff would go and look at these standards, and then we would vet them, of course, but that any kind of art coming forward, it could be initially vetted with the community advisory boards, of course, but then the final decision would be here as CRA. Are you in agreement with that? COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's fine. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Commissioner Saunders? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah, just a real quick comment. We've, correctly so, thanked staff for some great presentations and some great guidance that they've given us and, of course, with the grant that the county -- the TIGER grant and all, staff's doing a great job. I want to spend just a few seconds kind of congratulating the County Commission. We had some difficult issues today. The affordable housing issue we didn't all agree. The budget issues we ultimately all agreed, but these are difficult issues. And the thing that impresses me the most about this commission is that we're able to have these difficult conversations. We're able to disagree, but we're able to do it very agreeably. And I think that makes for better policy, I think it makes for better communications, and I just want to congratulate the County Commission on keeping it civil and keeping it to the policy issues and to the facts and not making any of this personal, and that, to me, is one of the great achievements of this County Commission. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Thank you. I'll say thank you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Well said. And I would echo that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Just let me interrupt one second -- COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Uh-oh. March 13, 2018 Page 158 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- since Commissioner Saunders is speaking. And on a personal note, Commissioner Saunders, I got called to go to the Golden Gate City or the Golden Gate Civic Association last night by Ron Jefferson, president, in your stead. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And when the folks in District 3 heard I was coming instead of you, 110 -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: They ran. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, they didn't run. One hundred and ten showed up, and I heard when you were there last month there was only 70 some. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Ah, there we have it. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, that's not correct. There were 101 there. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, so I still beat you. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Are you going to take that back now, Commissioner Saunders? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No, no. You won that one. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you for attending that meeting. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It was certainly my pleasure. I enjoyed it. And just so my colleagues know, there was -- you know, there's a rather contentious item in that particular area called Golden Gate Golf Course, so those folks were there. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have a great idea for that golf course. Do you want to hear it? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Those folks were there in force. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can I tell them? March 13, 2018 Page 159 MR. OCHS: I think you've told them, but you can tell them again. COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I didn't tell them about the other thing that I just told you guys about. Being that -- you know, if we ever bought that golf course, right, as a county, sitting on that golf course is a rundown hotel and a rundown bar, and what if we -- what would we love to do in this county that we've lost an ability to do, at least for the first crack, and that is building a VA hospital. And that would be -- the VA didn't want to do anything along that line because our last entrance into that field was it was not located in easy range of everybody to get there. Golden Gate Golf Course is right there in the middle of everything; secondly, it wasn't close to a hospital. It's right there, right down the street; and, thirdly, it's located in the precipice, I would guess you would have to say, of all the convergence of all the roads together. Easy access for anything. And I said to Leo and Nick, I said, you know, to me that would be the piece de resistance to get that piece of property and then dangle this in front of the VA, in front of the feds and say, we've got the perfect piece of land. Let's just bring it here. And let's face it, we have so many veterans here that could really use a VA hospital. That's just my idea. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Okay. I've just got a couple quick things. There was an email that I think we all got today from John Mullins about reaching out to the Governor in regards to his support for a bill that's just been passed regarding infrastructure, and I was hoping that I could get authorization to write a letter on behalf of the Commission urging him to support it. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: You certainly have my permission, and that deals with the funding of the EMS facility out on March 13, 2018 Page 160 Alligator Alley. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Right. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Station 63. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Station 63 on Alligator Alley. We went to Tallahassee to make sure that the funding for that wasn't diverted somewhere else, and so we hope that stays that way. The other thing is, I would like to announce that Vanderbilt Drive is open to the public. COMMISSIONER FIALA: What did it take, 12 years, 13 years? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: And not only that, it was open two to three months early. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I received an email that said monkeys could have done this better than we did, and I beg to differ. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ouch. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: I think the staff did a great job, in spite of a hurricane, to get it done three months early. It is fantastic. I'm hoping that it's going to alleviate the traffic on Wiggins Pass and a lot of other things. So that's open. I would like to commend staff. Again, I was at -- this weekend listening to economists about what's going on in the economy, in the world economy, and companies talking about their insurance cost increases, which were staggering, and the fact that we've been able to keep ours flat is amazing to me. That, plus no new debt in 10 years. That's -- I think that's -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Very good. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: -- an amazing job. So congratulations to the County Manager and staff. MR. OCHS: Thank you. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, if you could, you said staff, and I'd also like to -- the vendor, who's an outstanding -- Thomas March 13, 2018 Page 161 Marine did an awesome job, they stayed on top, and also give them a plug as well. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Correct. I am remiss. Yeah, we didn't do the work. This is another thing I'd like to clarify, that we actually don't do the bridge building; that we had -- we did have a great contractor who, I think, has bent over backwards to get it open absolutely as soon as possible even though there's still some punch list things going on. It is quite a feat. So thank you for all of that. I'm really happy that that was done as fast as it could be done. COMMISSIONER FIALA: And what was the name of the vendor? CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thomas Marine. Thomas Marine. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Group. MR. OCHS: Commissioner, I think what's lost there a little bit is, you know, everyone sees the bridge, but what they don't see is that there's a brand new distribution system for your water system, your wastewater system, your irrigation quality water system, your stormwater management throughout that corridor, and a new eight-foot-wide pathway that's going to service that whole area up there, so that's the reason it took the time that it did, in addition to, you know, two bridges. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Not just bridges. MR. OCHS: It's not just bridges. You also have your underground electric cable buried. So there were a lot of moving parts on that project. And, again, thank you for your comments, and well deserved by our Transportation staff. Jay Ahmad and his team did a fantastic job. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Absolutely. Congratulations. Anything else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Motion to adjourn? March 13, 2018 Page 162 COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: So moved. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: All in favor? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN SOLIS: Thank you. We're adjourned. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioner Saunders. ***** **** Commissioner McDaniel moved, seconded by Commissioner Fiala and carried that the following items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted (Commissioner Solis abstained from voting on Item #16C1) **** Item #16A1 THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE SOVEREIGNTY SUBMERGED LANDS EASEMENT MODIFICATION AS REQUIRED TO ADD THE PERMIT FOR DOCTOR’S PASS AND MOORINGS BAY – LOCATED IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST Item #16A2 THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $61,880 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER PL20150000182, (EXCAVATION PERMIT NO. 60.123) FOR March 13, 2018 Page 163 WORK ASSOCIATED WITH TUSCANY POINTE PHASE TWO – THE AS-BUILT LAKE CROSS SECTION HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND THE LAKES HAVE BEEN INSPECTED BY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Item #16A3 THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,073.15 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, PL20140000858 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH FIFTH THIRD BANK WITHIN THE SABAL BAY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT – LOCATED AT 4570 THOMASSON LANE Item #16A4 THE RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF MAPLE RIDGE PHASE 6A PPL, (APPLICATION NUMBER PL20170002650) APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY – STAFF TO DELAY RECORDING THE PLAT UNTIL SUITABLE SECURITY AND THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CAO Item #16A5 THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE UTILITY FACILITIES QUIT- CLAIM DEED AND BILL OF SALE BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND AVALON OF NAPLES, LLC, IN ORDER TO RECONVEY TO AVALON OF NAPLES, LLC, A PORTION OF March 13, 2018 Page 164 THE POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AT AVALON OF NAPLES, PL 20160002356, WHICH WERE PREVIOUSLY ERRONEOUSLY CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY Item #16A6 AWARD INVITATION TO BID #18-7252, "ROADWAY SIGNS REPAIR," TO HIGHWAY SAFETY DEVICES, INC. FOR REPAIR AND INSTALLATION OF ROADWAY SIGNS DAMAGED BY HURRICANE IRMA (PROJECT NO. 50154) – FOR AN ESTIMATED 14,000 ROADWAY SIGNS Item #16A7 THE RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN ACCRUED VALUE OF $504,081.72 FOR PAYMENT OF $531.72 IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. ERICK DORESTIL AND ELVITA PIERRE. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE NO. CEPM20100019476 RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3661 12TH AVENUE NE, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA – FOR CODE VIOLATIONS THAT CONSISTED OF NO PROTECTIVE BARRIER SECURING THE SWIMMING POOL AND AN EXPIRED SWIMMING POOL PERMIT WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION THAT WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON JANUARY 11, 2018 Item #16A8 THE RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN March 13, 2018 Page 165 ACCRUED VALUE OF $49,614.88 FOR PAYMENT OF $614.88 IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ENTITLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. ANA ELIAS, CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASE NO. CEPM20150001679 RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2707 IMMOKALEE DRIVE, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA – FOR A VIOLATION THAT CONSISTED OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO DECAYED/DETERIORATED/POORLY MAINTAINED CEILINGS, EXTERIOR WALLS, INTERIOR WALLS, WINDOWS, INTERIOR FLOORS AND EXTERIOR DOORS ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, THAT WAS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE ON MAY 20, 2016 Item #16C1 (Commissioner Solis abstained from voting) AWARD BID #17-7217, “FIRE ALARM, SPRINKLERS AND EXTINGUISHERS INSPECTIONS AND REPAIRS,” TO CINTAS CORPORATION, FOR COUNTY-WIDE FIRE ALARM, SPRINKLERS AND EXTINGUISHERS INSPECTIONS AND REPAIRS IN A BASE CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $607,000 Item #16D1 RESOLUTION 2018-44: A RESOLUTION REPEALING ALL PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS ESTABLISHING AND AMENDING PARTS OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION FACILITIES AND OUTDOOR AREAS LICENSE AND FEE POLICY AND ESTABLISH STANDARD RATES FOR RECREATIONAL AND COMMERCIAL BOAT DOCK RENTAL FEES, INCREASE PICKLEBALL MEMBERSHIP FEES, AND MODIFY FEES FOR THE GOLDEN March 13, 2018 Page 166 GATE COMMUNITY CENTER Item #16D2 AN AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH TYLER THURSTON, FOR 1.14 ACRES UNDER THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $7,100 – LOCATED WITHIN THE RED MAPLE SWAMP PRESERVE MULTI-PARCEL PROJECT FOR FOLIO #39491680000 Item #16D3 AN AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH JANET L. WALLACE, KEVIN L. KONKLER, AND LINDA K. FRAUENDORFER FORMERLY KNOWN AS LINDA K. BLAKE, ALL AS TENANTS IN COMMON, FOR 1.14 ACRES UNDER THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $14,800 – LOCATED WITHIN THE WINCHESTER HEAD MULTI-PARCEL PROJECT FOR FOLIO #39959720004 Item #16D4 A REVISED FY17 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA) 5307 GRANT APPLICATION TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL EXPANSION VEHICLES THROUGH THE TRANSIT AWARD MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (TRAMS) – AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Item #16E1 March 13, 2018 Page 167 AWARD RFP #18-7262 FULL SERVICE AUCTIONEER TO ROYAL AUCTION GROUP, INC. – FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD AND TWO ADDITIONAL ONE YEAR PERIODS Item #16E2 THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS PREPARED BY THE PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR CHANGE ORDERS AND OTHER CONTRACTUAL MODIFICATIONS REQUIRING BOARD APPROVAL – FROM EITHER CONTRACTS OR PURCHASE ORDERS Item #16F1 TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX MARKETING FUNDING TO REPLACE THE MARCO ISLAND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE VISITOR INFORMATION SIGN DAMAGED BY HURRICANE IRMA AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS EXPENDITURE PROMOTES TOURISM – LOCATED AT 1102 NORTH COLLIER BLVD, MARCO ISLAND Item #16F2 TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX PROMOTION FUNDING TO SUPPORT THE SIX UPCOMING APRIL 2018 SPORTS EVENTS UP TO $33,500 AND MAKE A FINDING THAT THESE REIMBURSABLE EXPENDITURES PROMOTE TOURISM – APRIL 5-8, THE USTA ADULT WHEELCHAIR TENNIS EVENT AT THE NAPLES BATH & TENNIS CLUB; APRIL 6-8, THE AZZURI STORM SPRING SHOOTOUT AT THE NORTH March 13, 2018 Page 168 COLLIER REGIONAL PARK; APRIL 9-14, THE USTA CLAY COURT CHAMPIONSHIP AT THE NAPLES BATH & TENNIS CLUB; APRIL 20-22, THE ALLIGATOR ALLEY CHALLENGE AT THE NORTH COLLIER REGIONAL PARK; APRIL 20-21, THE NTRP CLAY COURT EVENT AT THE NAPLES BATH & TENNIS CLUB AND APRIL 28-30, THE ADIDAS SPRING CLASSIC AT THE NORTH COLLIER REGIONAL PARK Item #16F3 – Moved to #11G (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item #16F4 RESOLUTION 2018-45: A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2017-18 ADOPTED BUDGET Item #16F5 – Moved to #11H (During Agenda Changes) Item #16F6 THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE A PROPOSED ORDINANCE, WHICH WOULD AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 2002-27, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD, BY ELIMINATING THE REQUIREMENT OF THE ROTATION OF THE CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR, WHICH WAS IMPLEMENTED BY ORDINANCE NO. 2013-19, AND RETURN TO THE ORIGINAL SELECTION PROCESS OF THE CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR AS SET FORTH IN ORDINANCE 2002-27, AS AMENDED March 13, 2018 Page 169 Item #16G1 THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY STANDARD FORM LEASE AGREEMENT WITH BRIGHTEST ANTARES, LLC (DBA SILSBY AVIATION) FOR OFFICE SPACE AT THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT – BY GENERATING REVENUE LEASING A VACANT OFFICE SPACE Item #16G2 AMENDMENT #1 TO CONTRACT NO. 16-6561 “DESIGN SERVICES FOR MARCO EXECUTIVE TERMINAL” WITH ATKINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $919,674 FOR ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION SERVICES DURING CONSTRUCTION AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE AMENDMENT – FOR THE TERMINAL/LANDSIDE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE SECURED VIA A SHORT-TERM LOAN FROM DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & GROWTH MANAGEMENT Item #16J1 RESOLUTION 2018-46: A RESOLUTION CHANGING THE BOUNDARIES OF CERTAIN VOTING PRECINCTS – FOR THE FOLLOWING PRECIENTS: 202, 203, 222, 223, 551 AND 552 Item #16J2 THE FY2017 SCAAP LETTER DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO SHERIFF KEVIN RAMBOSK TO BE THE OFFICIAL GRANT APPLICANT AND CONTACT PERSON, OR HIS DESIGNEE, March 13, 2018 Page 170 AND TO RECEIVE, EXPENDS THE PAYMENT AND MAKE ANY NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS OF THE FY2017 OF THE STATE CRIMINAL ALIEN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (SCAAP) GRANT FUNDS Item #16J3 TO RECORD IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE CHECK NUMBER (OR OTHER PAYMENT METHOD), AMOUNT, PAYEE, AND PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE REFERENCED DISBURSEMENTS WERE DRAWN FOR THE PERIODS BETWEEN FEBRUARY 15 AND FEBRUARY 28, 2018 PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06 Item #16J4 REQUEST THAT THE BOARD APPROVE AND DETERMINE VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND PURCHASING CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF MARCH 7, 2018 Item #16K1 RESOLUTION 2018-47: APPOINT A MEMBER TO THE OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE – APPOINTING TIMOTHY JON SMITH, SR. W/TERM EXPIRING ON DECEMBER 31, 2018 Item #16K2 RESOLUTION 2018-48: APPOINT A MEMBER TO THE March 13, 2018 Page 171 HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY – APPOINTING DAVID J. WOLFF W/TERM EXPIRING ON MARCH 13, 2022 Item #16K3 RESOLUTION 2018-49: APPOINT FOUR MEMBERS TO THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD – APPOINTING NICOLAS FABREGAS W/TERM EXPIRING ON MARCH 31, 2022; APPOINTING RICHARD SIDER AND REAPPOINT SUSAN O’BRIEN BOTH W/TERMS EXPIRING ON MARCH 31, 2022 AND APPOINT PETER GRIFFITH W/TERM EXPIRING ON MARCH 31, 2019 Item #16K4 RESOLUTION 2018-50: REAPPOINT TWO MEMBERS TO THE HALDEMAN CREEK DREDGING MAINTENANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE – REAPPOINTING ROY A. WILSON AND JOSEPH ADAMS BOTH W/TERMS EXPIRING ON MARCH 13, 2022 Item #16K5 RESOLUTION 2018-51: REAPPOINT TWO MEMBERS TO THE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AUTHORITY – REAPPOINTING BARBARA MINCH ROSENBERG AND ALICE J. CARLSON BOTH W/TERMS EXPIRING ON MARCH 23, 2023 Item #16K6 A STIPULATED ORDER SETTLING ALL STATUTORY March 13, 2018 Page 172 ATTORNEY AND EXPERT FEES AND COSTS TO GULF COAST DONUTS, LLC, INCURRED IN THE TAKING OF PARCELS IN THE CASE STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. LOWE’S HOME CENTER INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 13-CA-0142, FOR THE US 41/C.R. 951 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PROJECT NO. 60116 (FISCAL IMPACT: $37,000) Item #16K7 THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE A RELEASE OF PROPERTY DAMAGE CLAIM IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. JAMES JOHNSON, FILED IN THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (CASE NO. 16-CC- 770), FOR THE TOTAL SUM OF $4,767.10 – FOR A VEHICLE ACCIDENT THAT OCCURRED ON MARCH 28, 2015 Item #17A ORDINANCE 2018-08: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 40,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR A PROJECT TO March 13, 2018 Page 173 BE KNOWN AS 15501 OLD US 41 CPUD; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF OLD US 41, APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE NORTH OF THE US 41 AND OLD US 41 INTERSECTION, IN SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA [PL20170001083] Item #17B ORDINANCE 2018-09: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 96- 79, THE EAGLE CREEK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BY EXPANDING THE GOLF COURSE BY REMOVING ONE ACRE FROM RESIDENTIAL TRACTS AND ADDING THE ONE ACRE TO GOLF COURSE TRACT H-1; BY SUPERSEDING AND REPEALING PRIOR ORDINANCE NOS. 81-4, 81-114, 82-53 AND 85-8; BY AMENDING THE MASTER PLAN; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF 298+/- ACRES, IS LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF US 41 AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTIONS 3 AND 4, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA [PL20170001320] Item #17C RESOLUTION 2018-52: A RESOLUTION RENAMING A PORTION OF ESPLANADE BOULEVARD TO MONTELANICO LOOP. THE SUBJECT STREET IS APPROXIMATELY ONE THIRD OF A MILE IN LENGTH, LOCATED WITHIN THE ESPLANADE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES, APPROXIMATELY ONE AND A QUARTER MILE NORTH OF March 13, 2018 Page 174 IMMOKALEE ROAD, IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA [SNR- PL20170002424] Item #17D ORDINANCE 2018-10: AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 2017-53, WHICH RE- ESTABLISHED THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT PRODUCTIVITY COMMITTEE, TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT FOR STAGGERED TERMS March 13, 2018 Page 175 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:24 p.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL ________________________________________ ANDY SOLIS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK __________________________ These minutes approved by the Board on _______________________, as presented ______________ or as corrected _____________. TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.