BCC Minutes 01/24/2006 R
January 24,2006
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, January 24, 2006
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such
special district as has been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
Frank Halas
Jim Coletta
Fred W. Coyle
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
tI'
,
,
-.",. '.
--'~~-^,:;:''';:,
AGENDA
January 24, 2006
9:00 AM
Frank Halas, Chairman, District 2
Jim Coletta, Vice-Chairman, District 5
Donna Fiala, Commissioner, District 1
Tom Henning, Commissioner, District 3
Fred W. Coyle, Commissioner, District 4
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENT A TION OF THE
AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2004-05, AS AMENDED REQUIRES
THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING
ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO
THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON
THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION
TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS."
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
Page 1
January 24, 2006
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO FIVE (5)
MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMP AIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Major Timothy Roberts, Salvation Army
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
B. November 15, 2005 - BCC/Regular Meeting
C. November 16,2005 - BCC/Continuation Regular Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating February 5 through 10,2006, as Scout Week.
B. Proclamation designating January through December 2006, as the Year of
Economic Diversification. To be accepted by Tammie Nemececk, President,
Economic Development Council of Collier County; and Todd Gates,
President and CEO, Gates McVey.
Page 2
January 24, 2006
C. Proclamation recognizing South Florida Water Management District for
their efforts to preserve and protect our water resources. To be accepted by
Clarence Tears, Director, Big Cypress Basin.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Recommendation to recognize Mary Beck, Executive Secretary,
Administrative Services Division, as "Employee of the Month" for January
2006.
B. South Florida Water Management District in Collier County Year End
Review. Twenty-Minute Presentation by Clarence Tears, Director, Big
Cypress Basin and Carol Wehle, Executive Director, SFWMD.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request by Jean Benefico to discuss Vanderbilt Beach
parking garage fees.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m.. unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. CUE- 2005-AR-8568,
Golden Gate Seventh Day Adventist Church, represented by Blair Foley,
P.E., requesting a one year Conditional Use Extension as allowed per LDC
Section 1O.08.00.E.3. Conditional Use 2002AR-1943 was approved by the
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) on October 22, 2002 (Resolution No. 02-
435) of the Agricultural- Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) for churches and
places of worship. The subject property, consisting of 4.56 acres, is located
on the east comer of Immokalee Road and Rivers Road, in Section 30,
Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida.
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. PUDZ-A-2005-AR-
7403 Grand Inn of Naples, Inc., represented by Michael Fernandez of
Planning Development Incorporated requesting a rezone from the PUD
Page 3
January 24, 2006
zoning district to the PUD Mixed Use zoning district by revising the existing
Pine Ridge Medical Center PUD Document and PUD Master Plan to reduce
the commercial use to 10,000 square feet, renovate the existing hotel into a
condominium building with 56 residential units and change the name of the
PUD. The property to be considered for this rezone is located in Section 15,
Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Lot 51, Collier County, Florida. This
property consists of 4.02 acres and is located at 1100 Pine Ridge Road.
B. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUDEX-2005-AR-
8382: Cleveland Clinic Florida, represented by Jeffrey Nunner, P.E., of
Nunner Group LLC, is requesting the second 2-year extension of the Astron
Plaza PUD in accordance with LDC Section 10.02. I 3.D.5(a). The subject
property, consisting of 8.56 acres, is located on the south side of Pine Ridge
Road and the north side of 10th Street S.W. in Section 17, Township 49
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
C. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUDEX-2005-AR-
8478: Rookery Bay Business Park, LLC, represented by Wayne Arnold, of
Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. and R. Bruce Anderson, of Roetzel &
Andress, is requesting a 2-year extension to the ASGM Business Center of
Naples PUD. The PUD was originally approved on October 8, 2002 as
Ordinance 02-47, and sunset on October 8, 2005. The subject property,
consisting of 40.88 acres, is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard,
approximately ofa mile south of Manatee Road, in Section 10, Township 51
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Collier County Code Enforcement Board.
B. Appointment of member to the Golden Gate Community Center Advisory
Committee.
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. Recommendation to consider the
Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committees recommendation to explore
the feasibility of a multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan. (Joseph K.
Page 4
January 24, 2006
Schmitt, Community Development and Environmental Services
Administrator)
B. Report to the Board of County Commissioners in response to a Public
Petition by Mr. Thomas E. Selck regarding the issuing of Building Permit
No. 2005080737 for the construction of a single family home located at
3560 21st Avenue SW, Golden Gate Estates. (Joseph K. Schmitt,
Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator)
C. Recommendation to approve the Courthouse renovations for additional
courtrooms, Judges Chambers and additional Judges parking with Kraft
Construction under contract number 04-3576, Construction Manager at Risk
Services for Courthouse Annex and Parking Garage. Project budget is
$3,034,000.00 (Len Price, Administrator, Administrative Services)
D. Recommendation to award Annual Contract for Instrumentation, Control,
Telemetry and SCADA Integration Services pursuant to RFP 06-3916, in the
estimated annual amount of $1 ,200,000. (Jim DeLony, Administrator, Public
Utilities)
E. Recommendation to award Bid Number 06-3898 for the purchase of
chemicals for use by the Water and Water Reclamation Departments in the
estimated annual amount of $2,000,000. (Jim DeLony, Administrator, Public
Utilities)
F. Recommendation to approve Amendment No. I to Contract 05-3854 Collier
County Beach Re-nourishment (Project 90527) with Great Lakes Dredge &
Dock Company, LLC which documents contract negotiations leading up to a
final contract and increases the sand quantity due to post design erosion for
an additional $1,045,825. (Gary McAlpin, Principal Project Manager,
Tourism)
G. Recommendation to approve specific glitch language to the 2005 Growth
Management Bill that addresses Collier County's concerns with concurrency
and proportionate share that will be presented to state legislators for
inclusion in 2006 legislation. The materials for this item will be provided to
the Board of County Commissioners before January 23,2006. (Debbie
Wight, Assistant to the County Manager)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
Page 5
January 24, 2006
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a
Resolution Superseding Resolution No. 94-136, and providing guidelines for
consideration of applicants for appointment to Advisory Boards.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Classics
Plantation Estates, Phase Three, approval of the standard form
Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount
of the performance security.
2) Recommendation to grant final approval of the roadway (private) and
drainage improvements for the final plat ofIndigo Lakes Unit Five.
The roadway and drainage improvements will be privately
maintained.
3) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Ave Maria
Phase One, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
4) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase
with Luis Santos, Jr., and Maria Leonor Santos for 5.7 acres under the
Page 6
January 24, 2006
Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program, at a cost not to
exceed $194,750.
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
resolution amending Resolution 05-409, which established procedures
and a regulatory process program for expediting the development
review process for qualified Economic Development Council Fast
Track projects, in order to correct timeframes for two of the
development review processes.
6) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of water and sewer
utility facilities for Forest Park, Phase 2.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve the Transportation Disadvantaged
Service Plan Update FY 2006.
2) Recommendation to award Bid #06-3927 Goodlette Frank Road (Pine
Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road) Landscape Maintenance
Annual Contract to Advanced Lawn and Landscaping Services, Inc. in
the amount of $151,793.40 (Project #601345).
3) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager or his designee to
execute the attached Federal Transit Administration Section 5310
grant application and applicable document, and to accept the grant if
awarded.
4) Recommendation to award Bid #06-3928 Livingston Road
(Vanderbilt Beach Road to Immokalee Road) Annual Landscape
Maintenance Contract to Commercial Land Maintenance in the
amount of $ 1 89,398.40 (Project #620717).
5) Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to approve
a budget amendment to recognize additional revenue for the Collier
County Transportation Pathways Program in the amount of
$112,834.14 and recognize Carry Forward in the amount of
$162,934.00 for Project No(s). 690821, 600331, 690811, 690822,
600321 and 600501 for a total amount of$275,768.14.
Page 7
January 24, 2006
6) Recommendation to award Bid #06-3926 Golden Gate Parkway
(Livingston Road to 66th Street) & (60th Street to Santa Barbara
Blvd.) Annual Landscape Maintenance Contract to Advanced Lawn &
Landscaping, Inc. in the amount of $117,887.90 (Project 600277).
7) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager or his designee to
execute the attached Federal Transit Administration Section 5311
grant application and applicable document, and to accept the grant if
awarded.
8) Recommendation to reject the bid for construction of Collier
Boulevard Six-Lane Improvements (Golden Gate Boulevard to
Immokalee Road), Bid No. 05-3881, (Project No. 65061, CIE No. 37)
submitted by Better Roads, Inc.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfactions of
Lien for Solid Waste residential accounts wherein the County has
received payment and said Liens are satisfied in full for the 1995
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments.
Fiscal impact is $60.00 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
2) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfactions of
Lien for Solid Waste residential accounts wherein the County has
received payment and said Liens are satisfied in full for the 1996
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments.
Fiscal impact is $170.00 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommend approval and execution of the attached Utility Easement
Agreement to Caribbean Venture of Naples, LLC.
2) Recommendation to approve an entertainment contract with CDB,
Inc. for $35,000 for a performance by The Charlie Daniels Band at the
8th Annual Country Jam.
3) Recommendation to approve the Summer Food Service Program
Grant in the amount of$588,400 for FY2006.
Page 8
January 24, 2006
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Approve a budget amendment in the amount of$153,600 for upgrades
to the Immokalee Government Center to accommodate the Clerk's
back-up computer system.
2) Recommendation to approve and execute the attached Lease
Agreement with George Vega, Tom Brown, Larry Martin and Jack
Stanley, AKA Palm Lake Investments, for temporary office space to
house the Office of the Public Defender during construction of the
new Courthouse Annex building at a first year's annual rent of
$173,785.68 and relocation expenses of $63,000, Project 52004-1.
3) Recommendation to ratify additions to, modifications to and deletions
from the 2006 Fiscal Year Pay and Classification Plan made from
September 18,2005 through December 30, 2005.
4) Recommendation to approve a General Release on behalf of Collier
County Government in the matter of the State of New York versus
Willis Group Holdings Ltd., Willis North America Inc. and Willis of
New York Inc. (collectively Willis) in exchange for consideration in
the amount of$2,852.43.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Recommendation to approve Sovereign Medical, LLC as the sole
source vendor for the purchase of EZ-IO adult intraosseous infusion
systems by the Emergency Medical Department at a cost of
$29,700.00.
2) Recommend Approval of Work Order HM-FT-3271-06-03 under
contract 3271 with Humiston & Moore Engineers to provide
engineering services and construction engineering inspection (CEI)
for maintenance dredging of Clam Pass for a not-to-exceed, Time and
Material price of $59,820.00 and approve a revised project budget
(90028) totaling $265,000 which includes $205,180 for construction
dredging and approve all necessary budget amendments.
3) Recommendation to approve Grant Agreement #06-DS-3W-09-2l-0l
between the Florida Department of Community Affairs and Collier
Page 9
January 24, 2006
County accepting $52,957 to fund Homeland Security and Emergency
Preparedness Initiatives and approve a Budget Amendment to
recognize and appropriate the grant funds.
4) Recommendation to award RFP# 05-3864 in the amount of$12l,775
to Vision Internet for the redesign of the Collier County government
web site.
5) Recommendation to reject Bid #05-3891 for the purchase of
Emergency Medications.
6) Recommendation to approve budget amendments.
7) Recommendation to approve a Florida Emergency Medical Services
County Grant Application, Grant Distribution Form and Resolution
for Training and Medical/Rescue Equipment and Supplies in the
amount of$137,829.00.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement to
attend a function serving a valid public purpose. To attend the EDC's
30th Anniversary Kickoff Celebration on January 30, 2006 at the
Naples Beach Hotel and Golf Club; $60.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
2) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the Los Tres Reyes Mangos Celebration
sponsored by The Naples Hispanic Chamber of Commerce on January
6,2006 and is requesting reimbursement in the amount of$35.00, to
be paid from his travel budget.
3) Commissioner Coletta requests approval for reimbursement to attend
a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner prepaid to
attend "Candidates Night 2006" on February 3,2006 and is requesting
Page 10
January 24,2006
reimbursement in the amount of $40.00, to be paid from his travel
budget.
4) Commissioner Halas requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the Economic Development Council's
breakfast event to be held on January 25,2006 at LaPlaya Beach
Resort. Reimbursement of$39.00 to be paid from Commissioner
Halas' travel budget.
5) Commissioner Halas requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
paid in advance to attend the Economic Development Council's
Anniversary Kickoff Celebration at Naples Beach Hotel to be held on
January 30, 2006. Reimbursement of $60.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Halas' travel budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous correspondence to file for record with action as
directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
Public Utilities Engineering Department Staff and the Office of the
County Attorney to pursue all legal remedies to recover lost revenue
caused by Focus Engineering, Inc.
2) Board approval of amendment to Memorandum of Agreement/Letter
of Understanding for the Board of County Commissioners and for the
County Manager with the Pelican Bay Services Division Board
pursuant to Collier County Ordinance No. 2002-27, as amended.
3) An Ordinance amending Collier County Ordinance No. 2002-27
creating the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit;
providing for: modification of purpose relating to the mangrove forest
preserve; change of name of advisory committee to the Pelican Bay
Page 11
January 24, 2006
Services Division Board; revision of appointment procedures upon
vacancy; revision of duties of the advisory committee (Pelican Bay
Services Division Board) and the County Manager; multiple vice
chairs; providing for conflict and severability; providing for inclusion
in Code of Laws and Ordinances; and providing an effective date.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. RZ-2005-AR-7825:
Mandalay Place LLC, represented by Gary Butler, of Butler Engineering,
Inc., requesting a rezone from the Estates (E) zoning district to the
Residential Single-Family (RSF 5[3]) zoning district which allows 3
dwelling units per acre. The subject property, consisting of 2.31 acres, is
located at 31 II Bailey Lane, in Section 23, Township 49 South, Range 25
East, Collier County, Florida.
B. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex
partedisclosure be provided by Commission members. SE-2005-AR-
8626: Barron Collier Companies, represented by Bruce E. Tyson, RLA,
AICP, of Wilson Miller, is requesting a Scrivener's Error on the Winding
Cypress DR!. The subject property is located in Section 26, Township 50
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
C. Recommendation that the Board adopt the attached Ordinance to authorize
airport-type searches of individuals who enter the W. Harmon Turner
Building (Administration Building) at the main Government Complex.
Page 12
January 24, 2006
D. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Chapter 22, Article IV,
of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, commonly referred to
as the Excavation Ordinance.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
Page 13
January 24, 2006
January 24,2006
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
The Board of Collier County Commissioners is now in session.
And would the -- this morning we have the invocation by Major
Timothy Roberts of the Salvation Army, then to be followed by the
Pledge of Allegiance.
Would you all please rise.
MR. ROBERTS: Let us pray. Dear Heavenly Father, we thank
you for this day and for this time together. We ask, Lord, that you
would be with this county commission meeting as these county
commissioners deliberate what's best for this county. We ask, Lord,
that you would bless this county and bless these county
commissioners. We ask this in Jesus's name. Amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Please take your seats.
Is there any updates from the county manager?
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Agenda changes, Board of County
Commissioners' meeting January 24,2006.
The first item is item lOA. In the executive summary under
consideration, it should have been stated that the vote of the Habitat
Conservation Plan Advisory Committee was 6-1 with the advisory
committee member Mike Delate in opposition, rather than a
unanimous vote, and that correction's at staffs request.
The next item is 10E. It's a note in the executive summary, under
Page 2
January 24, 2006
considerations, the primary vender for potassium permanganate should
be F2 Industries rather than FS Industries, and that's at staffs request,
and a good correction by Commissioner Coyle.
The next item is continue item 10F to the February l4, 2006,
BCC meeting. It's a recommendation to approve amendment number
one to contract 05-3854, Collier County beach renourishment, project
90527, with the Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company, LLC, which
documents contract negotiations leading up to a final contract and
increases the sand quantity due to post-design erosion for an additional
$1,045,825, and that's at staffs request.
The next item is item l6A5. The county attorney suggests that
the board adopt a new resolution replacing, in brackets, superseding
resolution number 05-409, rather than amending resolution number
05-409, and that correction is at the county attorney's request.
Next item is to withdraw item 16H4, and that's Commissioner
Halas's requesting the board approval for reimbursement for attending
a function serving a valid public purpose.
The next is item 16K2. Note that this is a companion item to
17E, which was originally l6K3. Board approval of amendment to
memorandum of agreement/letter of understanding for the Board of
County Commissioners and for the county manager with the Pelican
Bay Services Division Board pursuant to Collier County ordinance
number 2002-27 as amended, and that's at staffs request.
The next item is to move item l6K3 to 17E. This is a companion
to item l6K2, as I mentioned above. An ordinance amending Collier
County ordinance number 2002-27 creating the Pelican Bay
Municipal Services Taxing and Benefit Unit;
Providing for: Modification and purpose relating to the
mangrove forest preserve, change of the name of the advisory
committee to the Pelican Bay Services Division Board, revision of the
appointment procedures upon vacancy, revision of duties of the
advisory committee, in brackets, now the Pelican Bay Services
Page 3
January 24, 2006
Division Board, and the county manager;
Multiple vice chairs; providing for conflict and severability;
providing for inclusion in the code of laws and ordinances; and
providing an effective date.
Also the following sentence is to be added to section eight. In
the event that there are no prior unsuccessful candidates available for
appointment to the Pelican Bay Services Division Board as provided
herein, the vacant position shall be filled pursuant to the procedures of
Collier County ordinance number 20041-55 -- excuse me, including as
may be amended or its successor ordinance, and that's at staffs
request.
Note, on November 1, 2005, the Board of County Commissioners
approved the minutes of the value adjustment board, special
magistrate hearing, from the -- September 23,2005. The name of the
property appraiser needs to be corrected. Guy Carlton's name was
inadvertently placed in the minutes rather than Skinner's. I know both
of them interchange every once in a while, but we need to make that
correction.
Then there are two -- there are two -- there are some items that
we need to know about.
Item 4C should be presented immediately following item 5B, and
that's a proclamation recognizing the South Florida Water
Management District for their efforts to preserve and protect our water
resources.
And then last, but not least, item lOA to be heard at 11 a.m., and
it's a recommendation to consider the Habitat Conservation Plan
Advisory Committee's recommendation to explore the feasibility of a
multi-species habitat conservation plan.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, County Manager.
County Attorney, do you have any additions or--
MR. WEIGEL: No, I don't. Jim has covered them all. And as
Page 4
January 24, 2006
Jim has noted on the record, the ordinance relating to the Pelican Bay
Municipal Taxing and Benefit Unit will be making the change for the
word Pelican Bay Services Division Board for committee throughout
the ordinance, and that's it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: At this time I'll ask for ex parte on the
consent and summary agenda, starting with Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I have
correspondence and e-mails concerning item 17 A, the Mandalay Place
PUD, and I also have correspondence concerning 17B, and those
written communications are included in my file.
I have no further changes to the agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have no changes to the agenda,
and on the summary agenda, item A, I have email, and it's in my file
and I discussed it with staff. And item 17B, I had meetings, email,
phone calls, and that concludes what I have had as far as the summary
agenda goes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have nothing to declare on
17 A. But on 17B I do have some emails and just received an 80-page
thing this morning from the county manager. Obviously I haven't had
a chance to read it, but I also have that in my file.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No changes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have public communications
on 17B, along with staff on that item, and also -- or 17 A, excuse me.
17B, I have some correspondence from community development. And
I would like to move 16D, as in David, 1 to the regular agenda, and
that's a --
Page 5
January 24,2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: 16D l, is that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: 16Dl. That's a recommendation
to approve -- execute a utility agreement on the Fleischmann property.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. County Manager, will we put that
on 10E then, or lOF?
MR. MUDD: No, sir, that would be 10H.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: lOH.
Okay. I have no changes to the consent agenda today. And on
the -- my ex parte as far as the summary agenda, I don't have any ex
parte either on 17 A or 17B.
I would entertain a motion for approval of to day's agenda.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So moved as amended.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I got a motion to approve today's agenda
with the addition of the agenda item that was moved, and I have a
second.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those -- yes?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just need to ask a question. Did
you expect us to read this 80-page document before we vote on this
agenda or -- that we just got?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I have no idea what 80-page
document you received.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Really? Okay. I just -- before we
approve an agenda, I'd just like to understand the implications of this
-- of this thing.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It came through the mail at 8:16.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Mudd, it was the email you sent, and I
believe it was correspondence with Kay saying that there is a change
Page 6
January 24,2006
in the ordinance only in the dwelling units.
MR. MUDD: Okay.
MS. FILSON: For Winding --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Winding Cypress?
MS. FILSON: Winding Cypress.
MR. MUDD: It was a question that at least one commissioner
had yesterday that talked about, do commissioners approve DOs, and
Ms. Deselem basically said that that DO was the original one that was
there with the strike-out, and it didn't have any bearing on that
particular item.
No. There's nothing new in that -- in that particular item. It was
just a clarification, and it was in the first part of the email. I'm sorry. I
didn't know the attachment was there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. The whole PUD document
was transmitted to us, and it's a little confusing.
MR. MUDD: No, sir. That was not the intent.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good. So it has no real
relevance other than the scrivener's error?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, that's it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'll just restate the motion. We
have a motion and a second for today's approval of the amended
agenda.
All those signifY by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, sir. Okay. We've got one
gentleman that's opposing today's agenda. It passes 4-1.
Page 7
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
Januarv 24. 2006
Item 10A: In the Executive Summary under Consideration, it should have been stated that the vote of the
Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee was 6:1, with Advisory Committee member Mike Delate in
opposition (rather than a unanimous vote.) (Staff's request.)
Item 10E: Note that in the Executive Summary under Considerations, the primary vendor for Potassium
Permanganate should be "F2 Industries", rather than "FS" Industries. (Staff's request.)
Continue Item 10F to the Februarv 14. 2006 BCC meetinQ: Recommendation to approve Amendment No.1
to Contract 05-3854 Collier County Beach renourishment (Project 90527) with Great Lakes Dredge & Dock
Company, LLC which documents contract negotiations leading up to a final contract and increases the
sand quality due to post design erosion for an additional $1,045,825. (Staff's request.)
Item 16A5: The County Attorney suggests that the Board adopt a new resolution replacing (superceding)
Resolution No. 05-409 rather than amending Resolution No. 05-409. (County Attorney's request.)
Withdraw Item 16H4: Commissioner Halas requests Board approval for reimbursement for attending a
function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner paid in advance to attend the Economic
Development Council's breakfast event to be held on January 25, 2006 at LaPlaya Beach Resort.
Reimbursement of $39.00 to be paid from Commissioner Halas' travel budget. (Commissioner Halas'
request.)
Item 16K2: (Note that this is a companion item to 17E, originally 16K3.) Board approval of amendment to
Memorandum of Agreement/Letter of Understanding for the Board of County Commissioners and for the
County Manager with the Pelican Bay Services Division Board pursuant to Collier County Ordinance No.
2002-27, as amended. (Staff's request.)
Move Item 16K3 to 17E: (This is a companion to Item 16K2). An ordinance amending Collier County
Ordinance No. 2002-27 creating the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit; providing for:
modification of purpose relating to the mangrove forest preserve; change of name of advisory committee to
the Pelican Bay Services Division Board; revision of appointment procedures upon vacancy; revision of
duties of the advisory committee (Pelican Bay Services Division Board) and the County Manager; multiple
vice chairs; providing for conflict and severability; providing for inclusion in Code of Laws and Ordinances;
and providing an effective date. Also, the following sentence is to be added to Section Eight: "In the event
that there are no prior unsuccessful candidates available for appointment to the PBSD Board as provided
herein, the vacant position shall be filled pursuant to the procedures of Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-
55 including as may be amended or its successor ordinance." (Staff's request.)
NOTE: On November 1, 2005, the BCC approved the minutes of the Value Adjustment Board-Special
Magistrate hearings from the September 23, 2005. The name of the Property Appraiser needs to be
corrected. Guy Carlton's name was inadvertently placed in the minutes rather than Abe Skinner.
Time Certain Items:
Item 4C to be Dresented immediatelv followinQ Item 5B. Proclamation recognizing South Florida Water
Management District for their efforts to preserve and protect our water resources.
Item 10A to be heard at 11 :00 a.m.: Recommendation to consider the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory
Committee's recommendation to explore the feasibility of a multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan.
January 24, 2006
Item #2B and #2C
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 15, 2005 BCC/REGULAR MEETING
AND NOVEMBER 16, 2006 BCC/CONTINUATION REGULAR
MEETING - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Approval for the meeting on November
15,2005, BCC, regular meeting, and the November 16,2005, BCC
continuation regular meeting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion to approve by
Commissioner Coyle, second by Commissioner Coletta.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Okay. The next item on the agenda is the service awards. And
were you going to read that?
MR. MUDD: No, sir. There are no service awards today.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION TO DESIGNATE FEBRUARY 5 THROUGH
10, 2006, AS SCOUT WEEK - ADOPTED
Page 8
January 24, 2006
MR. MUDD: It goes to proclamations. The first proclamation is
4A. It's a proclamation designating February 5th through the 10th,
2006 as Scout Week.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I think I have the privilege
of reading that proclamation. I'm going to ask for Mel Morrow, Ron
Barber, and Bill Poteet to please come up front, and any other people
that are with this delegation of scouts.
It's a pleasure, gentlemen, to have you here today. This is one of
the reasons why our scouting system in Collier County works so well.
Whereas, February 5th -- please, come right up here please and
face the audience. I'm sure they would love to see your faces rather
than you having to look at us.
Whereas, February 5th through February 10th, 2006,
commemorates the 96th anniversary of scouting in the United States
of America; and,
Whereas, 110 million young men and women have participated
nationwide in scouting programs, a number of which live -- a number
of them which live in the Collier County area; and,
Whereas, the Boy Scouts of America is officially chartered by
the United States Congress; and,
Whereas, the charter provides for an educational program for
boys and young adults to build character, citizenship, and personal
fitness; and,
Whereas, the mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare
young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetime by
instilling in them the values of the scout oath and law; and,
Whereas, the Boy Scouts of America is the largest youth training
organization in the world, developing leadership skills among boys
and girls participating in the program; and,
Whereas, almost 200 -- 2,300 youths are actively participating in
scouting programs within the geographic boundaries of Collier
County; and,
Page 9
January 24, 2006
Whereas, almost 700 adults volunteer in Collier County, serve as
leaders, mentors and trainers for the youth participating in Cub Scouts,
Boy Scouts, Ventures, Explorers, and Learning for Life; and,
Whereas, during the week of February 5th through 10th, local
scouting units will be hosting numerous events throughout our
community in celebration of the founding of the Boy Scouts of
America, including Scouts Sunday services, open house at their
meeting places, community service projects, and sponsoring a booth at
the family living tent at the Collier County fair and agricultural
exposition.
Therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that February 5th through
February 10th, 2006, be designated as Scout Week. Done and ordered
this, the 24th day of January, Frank Halas, chairperson, and I make a
motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And it's an absolute privilege, as
a former Eagle Scout -- well, no. You're never a former Eagle Scout.
You're always an Eagle Scout, and a Scoutmaster, former
Scoutmaster; that you are former. And don't try to draft me. It's an
absolute privilege to have you today, and it might even be one of the
-- make the motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion for approval. Do I hear a
second? We have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 10
January 24,2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I was once a Scout myself.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mr. Chairman, Bill Poteet just said
something I thought was so stirring, and I was wondering if he could
just say that at the microphone. It's very simple.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Why don't we get a picture here first.
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Coletta, give him the
proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Jim, give him the -- Jim?
MS. FILSON: They need the proclamation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Give him the proclamation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Take the note off.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Here we go.
MR. POTEET: Commissioner Fiala, thank you for the
opportunity to speak.
On behalf of the scouting community in Collier County, the
2,300 plus Scouts that we have, the almost 700 adult volunteers, we
thank Collier County for their continued support, because without it
we can't have a program.
As I told Commissioner Fiala before we met here, that one of the
beauties of scouting is it gives the opportunities for parents to actively
participate with their children in a program that actually develops
leadership in training for these youth. And it's such a powerful force,
and we're just so happy to be part of it. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for that.
Item #4B
Page 11
January 24, 2006
PROCLAMATION TO DESIGNATE JANUARY THROUGH
DECEMBER 2006, AS THE YEAR OF ECONOMIC
DIVERSIFICATION - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The next proclamation will be read by
me, and this is in regards to the EDC leadership, Year of Economic
Diversification, and I'd like to call Tom Conrecode, who is
vice-president of Collier Enterprises, and Tammie Nemecek, president
of Economic Development Council, to please come forward. And if
there's anyone else in the audience that -- from EDC, we'd love to
have them up here.
Whereas, over the past 30 years, the Economic Development
Council has played an essential role in Collier County's growth and
economic health; and,
Whereas, Collier County leadership has focused on creating a
substantial and diversified economy; and,
Whereas, the Economic Development Council of Collier County
has played -- has helped to create and retain high-wage jobs and
expand existing industries, as well as assisting new industries to
relocate to the community; and,
Whereas, the Economic Development Council of Collier County
has assisted our community to obtain upward mobility and an
improved quality of life through economic diversification; and,
Whereas, during the period of January 6th through December--
January 2006 through December 2006, the Economic Development
Council of Collier County will continue to strive for increased wealth,
prosperity for our community and citizens by ensuring job
opportunities through economic diversification.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that January 2006 through
December 2006 be designated as the Year of Economic
Page 12
January 24, 2006
Diversification.
Done and ordered this 24th day of January, 2006, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas, Chair.
And I move for approval of this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I've been seeing you up here a lot.
Didn't I see you last night at the dinner?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for giving your time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Did you want to say a few words?
MR. MUDD: You need to get a picture first.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I guess we better stand, right?
Uh-oh. I've got to get close to you again.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Did you want to say a few words, Tom?
MR. CONRECODE: Yeah. Commissioners, for the record,
thank you for recognizing 2006 as a Year of Economic
Diversification. I think many of you and I think many in our
community would say we have too much economic development here,
as they're stuck in traffic and moving around, but it's important to
Page 13
January 24, 2006
distinguish between economic generally and economic diversification
with a goal of making our economy stronger and providing
opportunity for the citizens of Collier County to grow in their
professional skills and their employment opportunities throughout the
county.
So thank you for recognizing this as a Year of Economic
Diversification. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you for all your hard work.
Appreciate it very much.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to -- well, we're
going to do 4C after 5B.
Item #5A
RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE MARY BECK,
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
DIVISION, AS "EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH" FOR JANUARY
2006 - PRESENTED
That brings us to our first presentation under paragraph 5, and
that's SA, and that's a recommendation to recognize Mary Beck, the
executive secretary, administrative services division, as the Employee
of the Month for January 2006. If Mary Beck could come forward,
please.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: There are certain employees who consistently
perform with the highest degree of professionalism, integrity and
dedication to service that they actually raise the bar on expectations.
Mary Beck, executive secretary to the administrative services division,
is such an employee.
Her good judgment, intuitiveness and the high-quality
Page 14
January 24, 2006
performance alone is cause for recognition; however, recently Mary
moved the bar once again.
While the administrator was away at a conference, the EOC was
called to activate in response to Hurricane Wilma. Without having to
be asked, Mary took it upon herself to ensure the emergency
information hot line was staffed and proper supervision assigned, a
responsibility held by the administrator. This task took countless
hours and a great deal of coordination to accomplish.
She determined and handled all necessary steps to activate the
phone bank, followed up on every shift to ensure it ran smoothly,
obtained and shared up-to-date information and generally accepted
full responsibility for the program, which ran without a hitch.
It is customary for an executive secretary to hold down the fort
during an administrator's absence, however, handling a monumental
task such as this goes way above expectations.
Mary's leadership under these circumstances ensured that the
public had access to much-needed information during a high-stress
situation without delay.
During its activation for Hurricane Wilma, the phone bank
answered well over 20,000 calls for information and assistance.
For her remarkable performance during this emergency situation,
it is strongly recommended that Mary Beck be recognized as
employee for the month of January, 2006.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Mary Beck, let me start offwith a letter
of congratulations from my office and also a check for you and a
plaque. And it's a pleasure to have employees like you working for
the county. You're a real asset to this community. Thank you so
much for your service.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's hard to find self-starters.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yep.
Turn around here so we can get a picture.
Page 15
January 24,2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good work.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY JEAN BENEFICO TO
DISCUSS V ANDERBIL T BEACH PARKING GARAGE FEES -
PRESENTED AND TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE
FEBRUARY 14,2006 BCC MEETING WITH ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION IN REGARDS TO OPTIONAL FEES
MR. MUDD: With the board's indulgence, sir, I'd like to ask a
question if I could, and maybe we can get a lot of these people that are
here to listen to a particular item, and they can be gone without having
to listen to a 30-minute presentation, and that's --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Fantastic.
MR. MUDD: -- and that's the next one.
If I could just have a show of hands real quick. How many
people are here for the public petition request by Jean Benefico to
discuss the Vanderbilt Beach parking garage fees?
Okay. Commissioner, I think it would--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yep.
MR. MUDD: It would behoove us all if we heard this particular
item.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Jean, would you like to step forward for
your --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But then we won't have anybody
left in the audience.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, that's it. Then our whole
day's shot because there won't be anybody left.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, they're welcome to stay here with
Page 16
January 24, 2006
us.
MS. BENEFICO: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning.
MS. BENEFICO: My name is Jean Benefico. I'm an 18-year
full-time resident of Naples. Today I'm here to represent the people for
a fair and modest garage parking fee, or better still, no parking fee at
all.
I would like to submit our signed petitions requesting removal --
removal of the $5 daily parking garage fee previously approved by the
board. I have these petitions, and if I may bring them forward.
CHAIRMAN HALAS : You can just put them on the desk with
the court reporter. Thank you very much.
MS. BENEFICO: Okay. We strongly oppose this fee. It will
cause a tremendous hardship on our retirees living on fixed income, on
our working class residents who look forward to going to the beach
and enjoying Naples' greatest asset, its magnificent coastline.
As stated in the Naples Daily News, July 22, 2005, beach fee
causes stir with groups. It places a burden on those who can least
afford it. This is a quote of Bill Poteet, that I've seen and met this
morning with the Boy Scouts. He is president of the Golden Gate
Civic Association.
Commissioner Coletta, opposing a $20 two-year sticker fee
stated, and I quote, the issue of access, be it to beaches, wild (sic) and
-- medical or educational facilities, has been a longtime passion of
mine. I firmly believe that if a fee is approved, a number of our inland
residents will give up on using the public beaches and lose the right to
enjoy the main amenity that so many of us moved here for.
The issue becomes even more contentious in that residents in the
City of Naples and the City of Marco Island would be exempt from
the new few unless their city officials choose to follow suit and charge
their residents for beach parking, end of quote.
Commissioner Henning said he favors the fee but only if it results
Page 17
January 24, 2006
in a tax rebate to Collier County citizens of more than $20 per
property. With over 200,000 taxable parcels within the county, a $20
rebate would amount to four million. Within two short years, the
commercial paper loan funding the 8.6 million cost of erecting the
garage would be satisfied.
So then why? Why, I ask you, did you decide to impose this $5
daily fee? With a 61.2 billion taxable real estate base doubling since
2001, tripling since 1998, and quadrupling since 1996, why is a fee
even necessary?
Only 1.9 billion of the countywide 10.2 billion jump is due to
new construction. The rest is from reappraisals of our existing
properties amid a red-hot market that continues past the December 31
deadline of Collier County Property Appraiser Abe Skinner's report.
These figures were quoted in the Naples Daily News, May 29,
2005. Jeff Lytle's article titled, Think Property Values are Slowing
Down in Collier County? Think Again. Park and recreation
department records show the following: 57,875 beach parking passes
were issued, of which 25,880, a little less than one half of the total,
were issued at Veterans Park and North Naples. This is a very strong
indicator that these residents are using Vanderbilt Beach.
The Chamber of Commerce registered approximately 180,000
visitors, 135,000 or 70 percent were here during high season. These
numbers are on the low side mainly due to misplaced files during the
chamber's move from the original site to new headquarters. We also
know that many visitors do not even register.
As you can see, beach parking to accommodate the taxpayers and
the visitors really is not a privilege; it's an absolute necessity. Our
suggestions to the commission would be to rescind the $5 daily
parking garage fee, and upon further review, impose a modest fee, or
better still, no fee at all.
If no fee is your decision, then no further action is necessary to --
and present beach stickers will suffice; however, if the commission's
Page 18
January 24,2006
decision is a very modest fee, then a special sticker should be issued.
This sticker should be placed on the inside front windshield. Continue
issuing free beach passes for all our residents to use at all the other
areas.
Tourists using the garage can absorb a daily rate, an amount you
deem adequate. Most vacationers will be more than happy to pay for
a day at our beautiful beach.
We further request that the new garage parking stickers be
available and in place before the garage is open for uses. If this is
impossible, continue then as it stands today, free for resident beach
pass holders. All others to pay a daily fee.
On behalf of the hundreds of Vanderbilt Beach-goers, I sincerely
thank you for your kind attention and consideration. We look forward
to a quick resolve and a most favorable decision. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
Commissioners, I think we need to address this. Could we have
Marla Ramsey step forward and give us some insight into this? And
then I think we need to do is direct staff to look into this and see what
our options here are.
MS. RAMSEY: Commissioner, Marla Ramsey, administrator for
public services. If you have any specific questions that I can address,
I would be willing to do that right now.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The only question I have is that,
what are we going to do as far as the security of the garage? My
understanding is we're having facilities inside the garage; is that
correct?
MS. RAMSEY: We do have a gatekeeper, or attendant who will
be at the gate at all times the garage is open.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. What about bathroom security?
MS. RAMSEY: There is a rest room facility in the garage itself
on the second floor, and we have cameras placed throughout the
Page 19
January 24, 2006
parking garage.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So what's your thought about the
additional burden put onto parks and rec.? Do you feel that we can
have you look at several options, anything being from a minimal
charge to a zero charge for the residents here in Collier County?
MS. RAMSEY: I think there is an unlimited number of
opportunities to look at for the parking garage. Some could be a fee
during our busy time but free after a certain hour of the day; could be
an annual pass is alternative; could be no fee at all for the residents as
we've done in the past. I think there's a variety of different
alternatives.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'm going to ask my Board of
County Commissioners here, Commissioners, do you feel that we
should give staff the nod here to come back with something? And I
believe -- what's the scheduled date that you're going to have the
garage open, that you're looking to have the garage open?
MS. RAMSEY: Yeah. As of the last date that I received, it was
somewhere around mid to late February, so somewhere around the
18th or 20th.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So do we have enough nods here
for -- okay. Would have you enough time to look this over so it could
be brought back on the February 14th meeting?
MS. RAMSEY: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. RAMSEY: Do you want me to look at all alternatives?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All options, right, and then bring that to
the Board of County Commissioners so that we can look at this and
decide what options we need to address.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I think I need a motion and a vote
to bring this particular item back, so if you --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I have -- entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll make a motion to--
Page 20
January 24, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any discussion? Excuse me.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Do we have this
opportunity now to ask questions, or do you want to wait?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think what we ought to do is --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Because I had my light on from
the beginning of the discussion. I had a question for the petitioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Sure, go ahead with your
question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The lady who had the petition,
the question is, you stated that there were so many beach parking
stickers issued in Collier County, and I didn't get that number.
MS. RAMSEY: I can tell you that. It's 57,875.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, is that to residents, right?
That's the criteria.
MS. RAMSEY: Only residents.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fifty seven thousand out of how
many residents?
MS. RAMSEY: Three fifty, I believe.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Three fifty.
MS. RAMSEY: That includes part-time, of course.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I can wait till we bring it back.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If not, all those signifying that we'll
Page 21
January 24,2006
direct staff to bring this back on February the 14th meeting, signifY by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion carries unanimously.
MS. RAMSEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very, very much.
(Applause.)
Item #5B
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT IN
COLLIER COUNTY YEAR END REVIEW - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item -- the next item is
5B, and that is the South Florida Water Management District in
Collier County year-end review. It's a 20-minute presentation by
Clarence Tears, the director of the Big Cypress Basin, and Carol
Wehle, the executive director of the Southwest Florida Water
Management District.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Manager, maybe we'll wait till
everybody vacates, and then --
Okay. I think you can continue, ma'am.
MS. WEHLE: That's great. Well good morning, and thank you
for having us. It's very nice to be back before the County
Commission.
For the record, my name is Carol Wehle, and I'm the executive
Page 22
January 24, 2006
director of the South Florida Management District. We're here today
to give you year-end review. We like to come to county commissions
at the end of the annual year to share all the exciting projects and
programs that we have been engaged in in Collier County and wanted
to then just get some feedback from you all, and so we're very excited
to be here today.
With me is Clarence Tears, the director of the Big Cypress Basin,
and he will be giving most of the technical presentation; Rhonda Haag
is here as the acting service center director in Ft. Myers; Alice
Carlson, our governing board member representing the west coast; and
Pam Mac'kie, the assistant deputy executive director for the CERP
area.
And with that, I will turn it over to Clarence. And at the end I do
have a few closing remarks that I'd like to make, and then we would
love to get feedback from the board and enter into some dialogue. So
it is -- just thank you so much for putting us on the agenda. We're
really happy to be here.
MR. TEARS: Good morning. For the record, Clarence Tears,
director of the Big Cypress Basin, South Florida Water Management
District.
I want to start out by, last year was an extremely challenging year
for us. And if you look at this map, you can see all the crisscrosses of
all the hurricanes that, you know, we had to deal with. And
fortunately the majority ofthem missed the peninsula, but we were
impacted by a few storms and a direct hit by Wilma last year, which is
extremely challenging to all our staffs. And I think Collier County and
the Basin worked well together and got through this last storm event.
This slide's really impressive if you look at all the different--
currently we maintain 169 linear miles of primary canals, and we have
46 water control structures. Collier County, on the other hand, I think
you have over 250 secondary or tertiary drainage channels that you
have to deal with.
Page 23
January 24, 2006
So we just manage the primary system, but together the
importance of the whole system, how it works together, is extremely
important. And we appreciate working with your staff on a regular
basis to try to make sure the system works together as a whole.
Last year we treated about 4,300 acres of floating emerged
aquatic vegetation and about 1,600 acres of terrestrial vegetation.
What's important about this slide is preventative maintenance.
To maintain the flows that we need during the wet season,
preventative maintenance is important. And it's ongoing, year round,
and these guys are out there daily ensuring that those systems will
provide us the flow carrying capacity that we need during those major
storm events.
In addition, we do right-of-way permitting. This year we issued
70 right-of-way applications, so that's things that impact the drainage
system itself over utility crossings, aerial crossings, boat docks. In
addition to that, you have violations and other issues you have to deal
with. But it's an extremely challenging program as we grow.
Hurricane Wilma. This is State Road 29 canal, and the above
photograph depicts all the trees laying over in the channel. And this
channel actually drains all the way up to Immokalee, so it's an
extremely important drainage channel for Immokalee, the rural area of
Collier County.
And the bottom photo depicts after the cleanup. This cost us
roughly $500,000 to remove the trees from this channel, but it was
roughly about 16 miles, and these trees were down throughout that
channel.
Of course you look at the structure at the top, this structure is not
supposed to have a bow in the center. It should be straight across.
Actually, you know, from an engineering standpoint with that bow
you can pass more water over the top because there's more surface, but
that structure's about ready to fail.
And what we did is our engineering department at the district got
Page 24
January 24,2006
together with Basin staff, and we came up with the design at the
bottom. And this structure works when everybody's sleeping at night.
In the past we would have to go out, open the gates manually.
But this is an automated structure. It protects the city wellfield to the
north, and it also prevents over drainage for the wellfield for
everybody that lives in the rural community of Collier County. And
this is one of the projects we completed last year.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Where is it located?
MR. TEARS: This is on the Fakaunion Canal between Southeast
16th and Southeast 18th Avenue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. TEARS: At the bottom I just highlighted some --
Corkscrew Canal. This is a problem area for Collier County, flooding.
We have challenges there because we had some undersized
culverts at various crossings.
The district came in, we replaced all these culverted crossings
with bridges to provide the conveyance, and we actually moved --
relocated the challenge within -- the channel within the drainage
easement. It was actually outside the drainage easement. So we did
some improvements, improved the cross section and made some
modification, added some water control structures to prevent
overdrainage over the dry season. So we have more of a water
management system.
The other thing we worked with Collier County on is flood
control in the stormwater management plan in Immokalee. We came
up with six alternatives. We worked with your staff, your engineering
department. In addition we worked with your maintenance staff up in
Immokalee to identified the localized stormwater issues, and then we
came up with these alternatives.
Now we'll probably work with Collier County and move forward
and go into a construction phase to try to implement this plan.
Another stormwater management plan we're in the process of
Page 25
January 24, 2006
completing is the Belle Meade. Belle Meade will be the next area that
Collier County will probably experience a lot of growth. You're
starting to see changes with your TDR program. This is an area where
your transfer of development rights are moving towards.
And what we want to do is try to be up front, I get the
stormwater, water resources right, so as development moves in, we
can tell them and explain to them our needs, and that way as the
development moves in, you know, we manage the water resources up
front.
This is another one I'm kind of personally proud of, and I thank
Jim Mudd and his staff for having the foresight to work with us on
purchasing this property. And this water quality park will help us
resolve some of the stormwater issues that we have in some of the
older urbanized areas.
And when this park is complete, it provides a beautiful park for
the citizens of this community. In addition, it's like the kidney to filter
some of the nutrients and water quality issues that we have, going in
the Gordon River, and ultimately out to Naples Bay.
So this is a win-win and it really shows partnership between
Collier County, the district, and the state trying to resolve some of the
issues in our community.
This is Naples Bay before and after. This year we completed the
State of the Bay Assessment. Just looking at what are the issues of the
bay, how has it been impacted since the '50s. We did a SWIM plan
reconnaissance study looking at what data is available, what's missing,
what are the gaps, and how do we move forward to improve the bay.
And we did the bathymetric mapping, just taking a look at, you know,
how has the bay changed over the years. And what this mapping will
help us to do is look at the hydrodynamics of the bay, how water
moves through the bay and the nutrient issues and other issues that we
face, so we can improve those issues in the future and try to have a
much healthier bay and long-term sustainability of the bay into the
Page 26
January 24, 2006
future.
So we're moving forward. We're committed to the restoration of
the bay, and we're working with the city and Collier County on this
project.
CERP, Critical Everglades Restoration Project. Picayune Strand
restoration, the PIRs, Project Implementation Report, is completed. If
you look to the right of your screen, northern two miles of Prairie
Canal has been filled in. And this is part of the restoration. We're
trying to disrupt the hydraulics of that canal. And what this does is
spread the water out, and we have more natural sheet flow in Southern
Golden Gate Estates.
We completed the basis of the design report for the bump
stations, and we're in the process of doing the design report for the
levies and road removal and some other parts of this project.
Tamiami Trail flow enhancement. If you look at the bottom
left-hand portion of the screen, we added 16 additional culverts in the
Tamiami Trail and did some resurfacing. And the whole idea of this
project is trying to make the trail a little more invisible and allow the
water to move freely from the upstream side of the Tamiami Trail and
flow evenly through the estuaries.
Lake Trafford is near and dear to my heart. I think this is the
diamond in the rough of our community. This is the largest lake south
of Lake Okeechobee, largest natural lake. These photos show the
dredging project in process.
If you look at the right of your screen, you'll see the dredging site
where we're pumping the material into -- into the containment facility,
and on the left of your screen is the dredge itself. This dredge is
pumping 13,000 gallons per minute of muck. And if you quantify
that, that's like every minute we're filling a pool in Collier County. So
just think about it, every minute a pool of muck is being filled. So I
mean, it's pretty impressive. Twenty-five percent of this project is
complete, and we're moving forward. I think we've removed about 1.5
Page 27
January 24, 2006
million cubic yards of organic material out of the lake at this time.
Water supply projects funding. As you look on this chart -- I
won't go through each project, but $5.9 million ofBCB funds are
focused on water supply projects in Collier County. Collier County
has a large majority of this fund -- of these funds, and you can see it
on this slide.
Senate Bill 444, I'm going to turn this slide over to Carol Wehle.
MS. WEHLE: And this is one of the reasons I did want to come
today to talk about Senate Bill 444, because it's a new initiative that's
been given to all five water management districts in the State of
Florida to partner with local governments in water supply projects
from two aspects.
One is to provide funding for alternative sources of water, and
the other is going to be a brand new relationship they have in the
growth management planning arena where our water supply plans now
have kind of a new standing, if you will.
This summer the South Florida Water Management District will
be adopting its regional water supply plans. And when we do that, we
will forward the regional water supply plans to the local governments.
The local governments are then to use our regional water supply
plans in the adoption of your EARs that you will send to Tallahassee.
When the EARs are adopted and sent to Tallahassee, the
Department of Community Affairs will then send your EARs to the
water management districts, and we will review those for consistency
with the water supply plans as adopted by the water management
district.
So there's a new, stronger linkage between what is in our water
supply plans and what is your comprehensive management plans.
And the whole idea, I believe, behind the legislation is to strengthen
the assurance that whatever is in your growth management plans,
every local government has identified a sufficient source of water for
the projected 20-year development.
Page 28
January 24,2006
The Senate Bill 444 provides funding to the water management
districts. This was the first year of our funding program. Next year
we will receive $18.5 million from the state. That will be married
with $18.5 million of ad valorem from the water management district,
so our grant program next year and our budget will be $37 million,
which will be granted to local governments for the purposes of
developing alternative water supply projects.
In the alternative water supply projects next year that will be
granted are projects that need to appear in our water supply plans.
Though I will say that we've been working very closely with your
staff to ensure all your future projects are identified in our plans so
that they will be eligible for funding.
This year in our grant program, we have $4.2 million of
alternative water supply funding that has been allocated to projects
within Collier County.
I know that an issue came up at a legislative delegation meeting
where there was concern expressed to me through Representative
Davis that the Senate Bill 444 funds for the South Florida Water
Management District may have been diverted to CERP projects. I'm
here to assure you today that 100 percent of the funds in Senate Bill
444 funding from the State of Florida went to alternative water supply
projects in local governments.
The South Florida Water Management District has almost $600
million in its budget this year dedicated to land acquisition and the
construction of the CERP projects.
The revenue that we use for the land acquisition comes from the
State of Florida in the Everglades Trust Fund, and that is the revenue
that we use for land acquisition.
The revenue pretty much that we're using for the construction of
all of our Everglades projects in the next coming years is coming from
certificates of participation, which is a financing mechanism that are
used by local governments, and that is the revenue source that we are
Page 29
January 24, 2006
using for our construction projects.
We do augment that revenue with some ad valorem dollars. But
I wanted to assure you that the South Florida Water Management
District realizes there's more to our mission than Everglades
restoration, and we know that a very important part of our mission is
partnering with local governments on the development of alternative
water supply sources, as well as partnering with our local governments
on local stormwater projects that we do partner with with Collier
County, and that we need to pay attention to flood protection as well.
So we're trying very hard to be the complete package. We don't
want to step away from our non-Everglades responsibilities and
wanted to assure you that 100 percent of the funding that comes to us
from the state is going directly into the hands of local governments for
water supply development. And this year 100 percent of the funds
coming from the state will be matched for a grant program.
You will find in our budget, as we develop it this year, that there
will be other funds identified for the purposes of other water supply
projects that will bring our budget well over the $37 million. But $37
million will be the level of funding for our grant program. So with
that --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have one commissioner that has some
questions here, ma'am.
MS. WEHLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll wait till the end.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. WEHLE: Well, this was it. We look forward to a continued
partnership with Collier County to protect and enhance local water
resources and do want to say we have enjoyed, I feel, a very
productive partnership with Collier County, are very excited about our
opportunity to work with you, especially on your new stormwater
program. It's been very exciting, and I believe the residents are truly
going to benefit from the partnership between the two agencies.
Page 30
January 24, 2006
And with that, we are here to respond to any questions or to take
any constructive comments back to the water management district.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No criticism, trust me.
MS. WEHLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just questions.
MS. WEHLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, actually one of them, I think
that we need to get together and understand the permitting process
through the agency or through the districts. It's somewhat
cumbersome, what I'm understanding, and maybe if we understand it
or maybe there's room for change to speed up some of these public
projects that we're discussing even today.
The next thing, there's a bill in the House and Senate to change
the appointments of members of the district from appointed to elected.
Will that affect the local Basin board?
MS. WEHLE: Maybe.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I guess I need to find out
those details. And are you supportive of having the voters vote on
people who make decisions on their tax dollars?
MS. WEHLE: I will say this -- and I will make sure that
Clarence forwards a copy of this report to you. Whether or not to
have governing board members of water management districts elected
is a 30-year old issue, and there have been several study commissions
appointed by the legislature to look into this issue.
The latest one was back in the late '90s, the Water Management
Review Commission, and they traveled throughout the State of Florida
taking testimony on this particular issue.
I believe a lot of work went, back in the '70s, into the enactment
of the -- of statute 373, which is the statute that created and enabled
water management districts. A lot of deliberation went into that
decision based on looking at different water supply structures
Page 31
January 24, 2006
throughout the United States, some elected, some appointed.
And it was the decision at that point in time in looking at what
happens when water becomes an elected issue as opposed to appointed
issue, the decision was made to have appointed boards as opposed to
elected boards.
What I'd like to share with you is the results of the Water
Management Review Commission back in the late '90s. I remember
there was a tremendous amount of support going into the Water
Management Review Commission on the part of the legislature to
have elected boards. At the end of their fact-finding mission, they
unanimously recommended back to the legislature that they have
appointed boards.
Water is a very interesting issue. You look at it internationally.
Water causes wars. And water is a very important natural resource.
And I believe that part of the rationale was the Department of
Environmental Protection that is invested with the protection of other
natural resources outside of the water, is also just an appointed
agency.
So I would like to share that with you and have you kind of read
the rationale, the testimony that led to the third recommendation to the
legislature not to change that.
I know that there are a lot of issues about elected versus
appointed and the raising of ad valorem tax dollars, but I would,
before you make up your mind about how you feel about it, challenge
you to read the information in this report because I think there's a lot
of very important public policy issues that were deliberated on when
they made their recommendations.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just have one more question --
MS. WEHLE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sorry, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- for Mr. Tears. The spoil area
Page 32
January 24, 2006
for Lake Trafford is to be turned over to the Board of Commissioners
when?
MR. TEARS: Well, my understanding is we had a meeting with
your staff recently, and their recommendation -- I'm not sure if it's
come before the board or not -- is we would turn it over in -- we
wanted to turn it over now but continue the restoration project, but I
think your staff is recommending that we look at it on a yearly basis
with -- for three -- up to three years, and we would turn it over at that
time, when the project is completed and further testing was done on
the containment facility to ensure that there was no issues for public
safety.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That's proposed for the
A TV park; am I correct?
MR. TEARS: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's still in there. Well, I
guess we need to get it on the agenda for the board to discuss it,
because there is a need there.
MR. TEARS: Mr. Mudd may be able to --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. The staffs met as part of the mediation
agreement. There's a certain court case that's being put up against the
county and the South Florida Water Management District and the state
by two homeowners off of Miller Boulevard Extension. I don't need
to mention their names.
The state is trying to buy those particular properties on a
voluntary basis. These homes -- these property owners are basically
saying that we have deprived -- we, the three parties -- have deprived
them of their access to their properties; however, nothing has changed
to those roads since the South Golden Gate Estates have been
purchased by the state at this particular juncture.
So the reason we haven't come back to the board, we're trying to
get those two properties. They, the state, are trying to get those two
properties purchased, at which time we come back to the Board of
Page 33
January 24, 2006
County Commissioners, because that agreement is also a contentious
issue because of the lawsuit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I was talking about the
spoil area around Lake Trafford, not Southern Golden Gate Estates.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It's all tied together in the same
agreement, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yes. I know that you've been
supportive of us, the county working on our LASIP project area, Lely
Area Stormwater Improvement Project, and I was wondering, because
it wasn't mentioned here, just a snippet, I'd like to brag a little bit
about what you've done to help us. So would you just -- you know,
just give us a brief paragraph and tell them?
MR. TEARS: Yeah. Actually we're actually a partner in your
Lely stormwater project. And if you look at our strategic plan for 10
years, we've actually identified funding for the outlying years to
support that project, because we feel parts of the Lely stormwater
project are considered primary and will be systems in the future. So
we've actually worked with Mr. Mudd and his stormwater
management staff, and we are providing funding this year as part of
your design funding. In addition, in the outlying years, we'll be a
major partner in the construction phase.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta -- I mean Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good morning, Carol, Clarence.
Thank you for all your help.
As you probably know, with the purchase of the Fleischmann
property, we're continuing our efforts to improve the quality of
stormwater runoff prior to its entrance into Naples Bay with the
expectation that we will have a positive impact upon the quality of
water in Naples Bay. Can we expect significant funding assistance in
doing this on the Fleischmann property?
Page 34
January 24, 2006
MR. TEARS: Well, I can't speak for the Basin board. But as the
director, I would request and ask the Basin board to be a major partner
in the water quality component of the Fleischmann property.
In addition, as part of the Naples Bay initiative, it's identified,
and the district will be going after state funding, so it will be a major
component of that also. So we should be able to get local funding to
support that project, in addition, get state funding, and also I know the
county's already talking about going after additional grants at the state
level.
And when you tie the park, water quality, alternative water
supply, and you package that, it should be highly -- it will be a highly
ranked project at the state level, and you should be able to get
additional grants.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: On that same note, if the Collier County
land acquisition buys the property, I think we might run into a
problem where -- I think your plan is to dig lakes in there, and I think
that's going to -- there might be a problem with -- in regards to
taxpayers' money going to an area that's supposed to be left pristine,
so I'm not sure how we're going to address all that --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we -- the matter as to
whether or not the Conservation Collier purchases the property is
really up to us. You know, we can make that decision.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Right, okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And it might be that we don't want
them to purchase it, and that's why I raise the issue of other sources of
funding. If we can -- if we have a reasonable expectation that we can
find other sources of funding, it would be, you know, my inclination
not to have -- or ask Collier County or the conservation program to
purchase it because it creates too many obligations that, quite frankly,
in this particular case, doesn't make sense.
MR. TEARS: Based on the request from your utility department
Page 35
January 24, 2006
to look at this site for some future water supply, the opportunity to
filter and clean some of the water going into Naples Bay and some of
the other opportunities and the limitations going through Conservation
Collier, my recom -- well, I -- I think you're moving in the right
direction.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good for you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You see, but an element of our
decision-making process is that we need to find the funding
somewhere. If we -- if we don't look to Conservation Collier to do
this, we need to look to some other source for funding, and that's why
it's very important for your participation here, because there -- there
are good reasons why Conservation Collier doesn't want you to start
modifYing land that they purchase, but there are overwhelming
reasons here why we should modifY this land because the benefits
outweigh the disadvantages.
So if we can depend upon you to give us at least 20, $25 million,
that would be really wonderful. Makes me feel a lot better.
MS. WEHLE: I have my checkbook.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I love the way he thinks.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, leave the check before you
leave.
MR. TEARS: Commissioner Coyle's always looking for the
check.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's correct.
MS. WEHLE: And that was a joke, for the record.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a couple questions. I know that
you're dealing with stormwater issues in the Lely area. Myself, being
in District 2, we also have some severe stormwater issues, and they
seem to be coming more and more to light as we have a reconstruction
process of the older-style homes to the newer, larger, what's called
mega homes, and it's causing a problem in a couple of neighborhoods
that I represent, being Naples Park, Pine Ridge, and also Willoughby
Page 36
January 24, 2006
Acres, and I believe occasionally we have some problems at Palm
River.
So I'm hoping that we can get a partnership in regards to the
Great Cypress Basin to play in our back yard also so that we can
address some of those issues.
MR. TEARS: We're working with your stormwater management
department almost on a daily basis.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good.
MR. TEARS: In addition, the district has a stormwater
management division, and Carla Palmer heads that up, and she's
working with me usually on a weekly basis, and she's here supporting
us, going after state funding for these local projects. And what you
have to realize is, a lot of these older urbanized areas, it's so important
to address those water quality issues in those areas and find ways to
improve the water, because those are the areas that have direct
discharge into the bay.
And the only way to improve the bay -- it's going to be a
culmination of all these little projects, dealing with the stormwater
issues, finding solutions in our toolbox to deal with those issues and
really look at water quality, stormwater, on-site retention, and look at
all the options available to us, and we'll be working with your staff
and continue to work with them and solve those issues.
MS. WEHLE: And I'd like to take this opportunity to commend
the Board of County Commissioners and the staff as well for
establishing a dedicated stormwater program. That gives us, the water
management district, the ability to participate in your long-term
planning and also do long-term fiscal planning as well and plan some
of our dollars in multiple years. A lot of stormwater projects take
more than one year.
And you know, it shows a real dedication to water quality issues
that your county was willing to establish a dedicated stormwater
program. And we do commend that and look forward to a long
Page 37
January 24, 2006
relationship with the county and stormwater projects.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have one other question. This is for
Clarence Tears. At the completion of the dredging project at Lake
Trafford, what's the anticipated depth going to be? You say you're
removing somewheres around six feet of muck?
MR. TEARS: Probably right around a foot or less, because it's
about 97 percent water. So once it dries out, the material will be
compacted. So there won't be that much material when the project's
finished. The challenge right now is to clarifY the water. We have to
put such large volumes into these retention sites, it takes time for the
material to settle out, and that's the reason we have such a large site
for this project.
What you have to realize is we're trying to -- we have a creepy
crawler in the lake, and we're trying to use this retention site as a huge
filter, almost like a pool system. I mean, it's the same concept. It just
takes a lot of time to filter a large volume of water and organic
material.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I just wanted to check
with you. One of the most important things that we're trying to
accomplish here in Collier County right now is our road program. Of
course, to be able to do the road program, we need all sorts of
assistance as we received in the past with the drainage issues.
I just want to commend you for the wonderful job that your
department has done in helping us to come up with funding to resolve
certain issues as far as drainage goes. The truth of the matter is, I'm
looking for a lot more in the future, so keep up the good work and
expect me to be knocking on your door many times in the coming
year.
MS. WEHLE: One of the things I do want you to know, that we
recognize the tremendous growth pressures here in the county, and
Clarence and I talked about it yesterday, and this is a good opportunity
Page 38
January 24, 2006
to announce that we are going to ensure that there's a full-service
service center here in Collier County, and we're going to bring
permitting staff to Collier County full time, so the folks in your area
don't have to drive to Ft. Myers.
And we're working with your county staff. Hopefully we will
have the opportunity to collocate with all the other development
services that you have collocated so you will have full service in
Collier County. And that's something that I know Clarence has
wanted for a very long time.
When I first came to the Ft. Myers service center, it's one of the
first things Clarence kind of said to me. He goes, we really need
permitting down here. And I hope you feel that we are very
responSIve.
You know, as the executive director, I did have my roots with the
South Florida Water Management District on the west coast, and our
assistant executive director is Tom Olliff, who came from Collier
County. And I want you to know that we care very deeply about your
issues. You're on our minds constantly. You're in the forefront of our
priorities. And working with Clarence, we are going to establish a
full-service service center here so that you have permitting as well.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's great news to hear. And I think
you had a follow-up question.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, two things. One, please
don't do any more recruiting. Number two --
MS. WEHLE: Oh, well.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- I have some concerns over the
permitting that -- issues we're going through with 951. I hope you're
going to be working very closely with our transportation department
so we can keep this on-line. If you run into some problems along the
way, I would like to personally know about them, and I'm sure my
fellow commissioners would like to be in the loop rather than at the
far end down.
Page 39
January 24, 2006
Whatever the issues are, they can be resolved. Reasonable
people are willing to come up with reasonable answers.
MS. WEHLE: Well, hopefully you feel that -- I know that
Clarence does an excellent job and has a great relationship with the
Board of County Commissioners. So now when you have a
permitting issue, just call Clarence, and we will ensure that all the
right people from West Palm Beach are here and can work through
your issues, and we're very excited about this opportunity.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ifthere's no other follow -- any other
questions from my fellow commissioners, I'll have Commissioner
Fiala read a proclamation to the South Florida --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Was -- Mr. Chairman, we're not
going to award that proclamation, are we, until we get the check?
MS. WEHLE: And maybe before the proclamation, I'd like to
have Alice Carlson, our governing board member, come to the
podium, because she has a very special invitation to give you.
MS. CARLSON: Good morning, Commissioners and staff.
Thank you very much for the time. You've allotted us a lot of time,
and I hope we answered a lot of your questions, and we look forward
to continuing to come up and update you on the important things that
we're doing together.
I'm sure -- you might have heard about it since you are going to
read a proclamation, but we would like to invite you to our board of
county -- I mean our board of governing board member workshop and
board meeting, which is going to be February 7th and 8th in Lee
County.
On Tuesday afternoon from 1-5, we'll be having our workshop,
which is going to be at the Hyatt Coconut Point in Estero, I believe
that would be -- or Bonita Springs, and we're going to be
workshopping Collier County items, and we've invited staff to
participate with us, and we'd like to personally invite you to attend the
meeting.
Page 40
January 24, 2006
The Collier County issues will be the first thing on the agenda
that will start at one o'clock. And Clarence has put together a great
agenda, and we'd like to have participation back and forth. Some of
the things you've heard today we'll be highlighting so that we can
educate the rest of the board members from the other 16 counties some
of the things that we're doing here on the west coast of Florida and --
but then we're also going to talk about challenges and upcoming things
that we would be -- what we would be working with you in the future.
So that will be on Tuesday afternoon. And then we will be --
Wednesday we'll be workshopping Lee County and Hendry County
issues first thing on Wednesday morning, then we'll have our full
governing meeting in the afternoon, and that will be at Florida Gulf
Coast University at nine o'clock on Wednesday.
And we invite you to come and participate if you can squeeze it
into your calendar. And thanks for the opportunity today.
And Commissioner Fiala.
MS. WEHLE: I want you to know that Alice is a very lovely but
strong proponent for issues on the west coast. And I was told -- this is
my first opportunity let her know your consumptive use permit is on
the February board agenda. Okay.
But she, very nicely, lets us know whenever we need to do
something on the west coast, and how can you turn Alice down?
But, you know, part of the joy of establishing the service center
here is that, you know, Alice really does a very good job of making
sure that we know what is needed over here and that it's not out of
sight, out of mind.
And the amount of growth, the amount of important
environmental issues in both Collier and Lee County definitely
deserve service centers in each of the counties and full service in each
of the counties. And so we want to keep Alice happy. And she's doing
an excellent job for you all. And I encourage you as well to have a
good relationship with Alice, because she's definitely the great
Page 41
January 24, 2006
message bearer on our board for you all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great compliment, wow. Thank
you. Good for us, huh?
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR THEIR EFFORTS TO
PRESERVE AND PROTECT OUR WATER RESOURCES -
ADOPTED
Okay. I'd like to read this proclamation, but who would like to
come up and accept this?
MS. WEHLE: Alice, our governing board member.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MS. WEHLE: Remember, we're -- I'm like Mr. Mudd and she is
you, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Come on up.
Proclamation: Whereas, the South Florida Water Management
District and its local arm -- I better put this down here, speaking of
arms -- the Big Cypress Basin has supported Collier County in its
efforts to enhance the water resources and environmental quality of
region; and,
Whereas, the South Florida Water Management District has
provided funding for numerous water supply projects to effectively
use alternative water supplies to meet future water supply demands of
the county; and,
Whereas, the South Florida Water Management District has
aggressively provided public outreach programs to educate the county
residents on the importance of protecting the vulnerable water
resources of Collier County; and,
Whereas, the South Florida Water Management District and the
Page 42
January 24, 2006
Big Cypress Basin continue to work together with Collier County to
protect local water and environmental resources for the enhancement
of the quality oflife for our community.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that the South Florida
Water Management District be recognized for their efforts to preserve
and protect our water resources ultimately enhancing the quality of
life for all who reside in Collier County.
Done and ordered this 24th day of January, 2006, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas,
Chairman.
And, Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. There's been a motion for
approval and a second.
All those in favor of this proclamation, say aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All--like sign opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Passes unanimously. Thank you so very
much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's good to see Pam back, huh?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Manager, we'll go to.
Item #9 A
Page 43
January 24, 2006
RESOLUTION 2006-19: RE-APPOINTING GEORGE P. PONTE
AND GERALD J. LEFEBVRE AND APPOINTING AS A
REGULAR MEMBER VERSUS AN AL TERNA TE, LARRY DEAN
MIESZCAK TO THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD AND RE-ADVERTISE FOR THE 4TH
POSITION - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to paragraph 9, and 9
alpha's the first one. It's appointment of members to the Collier
County Code Enforcement Board.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is there any nominations here for
people on the county Code Enforcement Board?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I move that we appoint the
members that -- and residents that have applied for it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'll second the motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And that would be Larry Mieszcak,
George Ponte and Gerald Lefebvre?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, there's four appointments,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The question is, have all four
applied for it? You said those who applied for it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta, did you have a --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I can't go along with the
motion. I have a problem with Raymond Bowie missing three
meetings out of the 12 and none excused. I think we need to set the
example. This is something we asked for some time ago to be
included there as far as attendance goes, and this has not been an
example of attendance, you know. I do think that we ought to --
myself I won't approve the motion because I'd like to bring it back as
approving the first three and to readvertise for the fourth position.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any other --
Page 44
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second that motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we've already got a
motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll remove my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then I make a motion that we
approve Larry -- how do you pronounce it --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mieszcak.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mieszcak, George Ponte, Gerald
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Lefebvre.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Lefebvre.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And advertise for the fourth --
readvertise for the fourth position.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The motion has been made that
we're going to approve Larry Dean (sic), George Ponte and Gerald
Lefebvre, that we're going to put the fourth person back out for -- to be
readvertised.
All those in favor of the motion, signifY by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It's passed unanimously.
Item #9B
Page 45
January 24,2006
RESOLUTION 2006-20: APPOINTING VICKI N. CLA VELO TO
THE GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 9B, appointment of a member to the Golden Gate
Community Center Advisory Committee.
MS. FILSON: And, Commissioners, if! can explain something
on this one. Down in the committee recommendations, I have Vicki
Clav --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Clavelo.
MS. FILSON: Clavelo, perfect attendance in 2005. That's
because she was currently on the committee and chose not to be
reappointed, and then I had someone resign. So she put her
application back in, and that's why I have perfect attendance in there.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I hear a motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve Vicki
Clavelo.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those in favor of approving Vicki
Clavelo to be on the Golden Gate Community Center Advisory
Committee, signifY by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries unanimously.
Page 46
January 24, 2006
Item #10B
REPORT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN
RESPONSE TO A PUBLIC PETITION BY MR. THOMAS E.
SELCK REGARDING THE ISSUING OF BUILDING PERMIT NO.
2005080737 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY
HOME LOCATED AT 3560 21sT AVENUE SW, GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES-PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is lOB, and that is a report to the Board of County
Commissioners in response to a public petition by Mr. Thomas E.
Selck regarding the issuing of building permit number 205080737 for
the construction ofa single-family home located at 3560 21st Avenue
Southwest, Golden Gate Estates.
Mr. Joe Schmitt, your Community Development's Environmental
Services Administrator will present.
Ms. Filson, do we have any speakers on this particular item?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. I have three.
MR. MUDD: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Joe Schmitt, Community Development/Environmental Services
Division Administrator.
Before you today is a response from staff regarding a public
petition that was presented to you back in November, and we're here
to answer any questions.
The report I provided in the executive summary is detailed. I can
go through that in detail if you want, or we can just defer to the
petitioner.
The bottom line from this is that all accommodations, at least
from staff, have been met. The house is, as was noted, was moved
from 180 feet to 260 feet from the property line, and that was really a
Page 47
January 24, 2006
-- just an agreement between the builder and the property owner, or at
least the prospective homeowner.
The septic system has been reviewed again by the health
department staff and was permitted. The first septic system certainly
was acceptable, but the second one was reviewed and approved.
The bottom line in all this is, frankly, from staffs perspective, we
feel that the permit was issued correctly, that all the codes and all the
issues involving both the building and land development code and the
Florida Building Code certainly have been followed.
We, as staff, will ensure that the issues with water runoff and the
incremental displacement of water created by the construction of this
house will be properly reviewed, and prior to issuing ofthe final CO,
engineering services department will make sure that the site is
sufficiently graded, at least the grading, and the site itself is
constructed to adequately deal with the water runoff on that site.
So subject to your questions, I can put the maps up. I can show
you basically from the standpoint of what was changed, but I'm open
to your questions.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. I'd like to start offby saying that
this is an issue that's going to gather more attention as we have more
and more infill take place within the county.
I know that in my district that we're already experiencing this
with homes that take up a lot -- a larger portion of the lot sizes, and, of
course, trying to figure out how we're going to retain all of the
stormwater runoff because, of course, buildings that have been there
for a number of years, 20 years or so, or 25 years, the elevation is a lot
different than the elevation that is now being constructed by the
homebuilders.
And so, of course, with the elevation differences, then we have
issues with stormwater running off into adjacent communities -- or
adjacent property owners. And I understand where Mr. Selck is
coming from. I know that this is an issue. And I'm not sure how we
Page 48
January 24, 2006
can fully address it, but I'm just -- that's just my input into this.
Is there any other questions or discussions by the board?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, you go ahead,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, with respect to the
stormwater runoff, Joe, let's suppose we do inspect it and approve it.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Who has the liability if it actually
does result in unnecessary or excessive runoff?
MR. SCHMITT: I'm throwing at -- I'll answer that question,
Commissioner, but I want you to understand the site conditions as
they exist now. Located -- or in front of you is a lidar map, and that
lidar depicts elevation. Blue being the lowest elevation, all the way up
to red being the highest. I put some arrows on there that basically
shows the way we believe the water flows right now.
And certainly we believe that the water right now from Mr.
Selck's property, which is the one outlined in black -- the red is
actually the house, the house pad and the house itself, the structure.
What we deal with in regards to construction of homes in the
Estates, or as Commissioner Halas discussed, when there's a teardown
and a rebuild or in a property -- or an existing development, the homes
basically have to fit in with the existing -- or the water management
system that exists.
And, of course, in the Estates, Commissioner, all we're dealing
with are ditches in front of homes. The only requirement through--
and I have Tom Kuck here and Stan Chrzanowski from engineering
services department. They're the ones responsible for what we call
their 800 series inspections. That's the site approval process.
We only -- the only liability associated with the construction of
the house is to deal with that incremental displacement. So by the
construction of the home you basically take away the pervious soil
that would otherwise have been -- that would have absorbed the water.
Page 49
January 24, 2006
Now we have to deal with the runoff.
It's up to the property owner, the developer, to ensure that only
the incremental displacement, not the entire site itself -- they don't go
in and actually recreate an entire drainage system for that site, so it's
just the incremental displacement.
So in answer to your question, the building code requires
downspouts and -- guttering and downspouts now on the sides of the
homes to ensure that that water captured is moved either to the front of
the property or to the rear of the property.
In most instances in the Estates, we're moving water to the front.
They cannot -- and that's where the issue comes into playas far
as liability. They cannot put that water onto their neighboring
property .
But we do not mandate that they solve all the environmental -- or
all the drainage problems that currently exist out there. The only way
that could be done is if the entire subdivision is redesigned and entire
stormwater management system is put in with retention, detention
ponds, those kind of integrated systems that cover holistically the
entire development.
So to answer your question -- and it was a long-winded answer,
but I want to make sure you understand specifically, all we're dealing
with is the water that is being displaced by the construction of the
home. And they have to move that either to the front or the back of
the property. In most cases it's to the front to the drainage system,
which is nothing more than a ditch system throughout the --
throughout the Estates.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But the -- my question goes further
than just this particular instance. As Commissioner Halas has already
indicated, we're going to be running into this in lots of places, and I
can guarantee you after you -- your most thorough review of each one
of these from the standpoint of runoff, once these lots become
developed, I can guarantee you that the older residents are going to
Page 50
January 24, 2006
say, there's more water now than there used to be on my property.
How do you prove that is not true? How do you determine that
the excess runoff is really being taken care of rather than accumulating
over successive constructions and thereby causing an overall
deterioration in the drainage problem in the Estates?
And it would be interesting if we had a policy developed that
would require that the excess runoff be directed to a particular location
or drainage ditch.
MR. SCHMITT: Well, we do have a policy that requires the
excess that is the result of the construction of the home. That cannot
go onto the neighboring property. That has to go to the front or to the
rear and be conveyed through the existing drainage system.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But you just showed me a
map that showed that the existing drainage system for Mr. Selck's
property is over to the neighboring property.
MR. SCHMITT: Right now --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So ifhe directs his flow from his
home, his downspouts, to the back of his yard, it's going to ultimately
flow out into somebody else's property, right?
MR. SCHMITT: Probably most likely, we figure, here's the
lowest spot, it's going to collect in this gentleman's yard.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. SCHMITT: This is existing throughout the Estates.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I understand that; I
understand the problem. I'm saying, what are we going to do about
that?
MR. SCHMITT: The only way to solve it, Commissioner,
honestly, is a complete water management system for the Estates.
This is one of the significant issues we've discussed with the growth in
the Estates.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let me ask you a different
question. I won't belabor this, because I know we can't solve it today.
Page 51
January 24, 2006
MR. SCHMITT: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But what would happen if you
required that the downspouts from all of the new construction go into,
in this case, the drainage ditch in the front of the lot?
MR. SCHMITT: That is principally where we require it to go.
Stan, do you want to -- go ahead, Stan.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: No, sir. We require it to go either front
or back --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: -- but not to the sides.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right. But it goes to the side
in this case if you put it to the back.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It did before.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Well, sir, it did before.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It always will.
So if you're suggesting that there is -- there is additional runoff
created by building an impervious structure on the property and you're
merely directing that runoff into the traditional runoff pattern, you
aren't really taking care of the incremental amount because it's piling
up more and more in somebody else's yard; is that true or not?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir. The issue you're talking about
is not the riding of runoff. It's called floodplain compensation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, all right.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: And every -- picture a bathtub, and the
bathtub holds water a foot high. You put a bucket of sand in there, the
water bucket rises up. Maybe not noticeably an eighth of an inch.
You put 20 buckets in there, all of a sudden, the water's a lot of inches
higher. That's what you're doing in the Estates very slowly.
And every time you build a lot -- Mr. Selck has a very large pad,
if you notice. He has probably displaced a lot more water than his
neighbor will. Every lot you build out there -- and what you're
looking at is a succession of lots that's two and a half acres. We just
Page 52
January 24, 2006
picked this spot at random because it looked neat.
Those are all 75-foot lots. You have -- when those lots go in,
you're going to have a dam formed by all the house pads that are
sitting -- that are sitting -- that are sitting back from the road if they're
all in a line. Over the years we have suggested that those be staggered
to let the water flow between them. We've suggested that they be
raised up on pads or on stilts and on foundations.
There's no easy solution. We're trying to find some way to come
around it. You can't stop people from building on zoned lots in
Golden Gate Estates that we know of, and we're not -- DEP right now
is telling people not to build on the lower land.
One of the suggestions that Mr. Selck has is that these people go
farther back to their property. They're going to be building lower,
their pad is going to be bigger, they're going to be displacing more
than if they built way up front, but they can't built up front because his
drain field or his well is up there near his drain field. It's an extremely
complex issue.
Like you said it's not something we're going to iron out here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I guess in conclusion then,
my preference would be that we not guarantee people that we're taking
care of all of the excess runoff, because it's really going to be
collecting in somebody's yard there, right?
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: And flowing toward the -- generally
toward the southwest.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: And flowing toward the nearest canal
and then out that canal and into Naples Bay. And the faster it flows
out, the worse Naples Bay is going to be.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: So the only way to solve the problem
with Naples Bay is to retain the water faster and we --
Page 53
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: This is an issue, Commissioner, again, that has
come up. Commissioner Coletta knows the kind of growth we're
dealing with out in the Estates.
And this is the horizon study, the east of951. Frankly, this is
going to be one of the critical issues because we may have to face
some tough decisions. Do we -- do the folks out there look at funding
or is the county going to fund some kind of comprehensive drainage
improvement system, retention ponds, or other activities. And the cost
IS enormous.
As you can see here, the blue along the roadway -- which it
shows the lower areas, and that's the area where we're trying to move
the water to, which is the front, and that is the -- along the
right-of-way, and those are the drainage ditches that pretty much are
county responsibility for maintaining. That's the tertiary system
throughout the Estates.
And I agree with you, Commissioner, all we can do is look at the
home and say we're going to move the water that is incrementally
impac -- or by the construction of a home and attempt to move it to the
front or the rear, and we will-- we will inspect that as part of our--
prior to CO.
The neighboring property -- in this case as you're looking at this,
the neighboring property -- here's the property that's being
constructed, the small 75-foot lot. There's a neighbor next door.
There's a swimming pool right here. And that house is a rather old
house as well, and we're going to have some concerns that the water --
trying to prevent the water from moving in that direction as well.
It's -- the only thing we can do is require a stem wall construction
on all activity in the Estates, which is no longer bringing in fill to
create pads. You actually create or force all developers to do stem
wall construction, which is a lot -- you basically build the wall and
you bring the fill in and fill in between the wall to raise it, because
Page 54
January 24, 2006
those homes have to come up above the BFE, the base flood elevation,
or what we anticipate will be the BFE once all our studies are done out
there. Right now it's 18 inches above the crown of the road.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta has a question,
and after that question I'd like to take a 10-minute break for our court
reporter.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I just wanted to comment
that the reason we're here today is because a -- the petitioner came
before us before, questioned if we were following our own land
development codes, and I think for the most part we are.
There's been some parts of this that the commission -- that the
petitioner had that were concerns that have been resolved by the
builder. I think he still has some, but I'm going to have to wait for the
petitioner to speak before I can ask any other questions or make any
other comments.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time we'll take a
10-minute break. Please be back by 10:46, and then we'll take on the
public comments. Thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you. County Commission
meeting is back in session.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, and this is item lOB. It's a
continuation, okay. You broke--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Wait, we haven't finished lOA yet. I got
MR. MUDD: No, it's lOB, sir, is the item that we're doing, and
you have public speakers.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Right.
MS. FILSON: Are you ready for the speakers?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, we are.
Page 55
January 24, 2006
MS. FILSON: The first one is Sharon Thoemke. She'll be
followed by Tom Selck.
MS. THOEMKE: Is it okay to let Mr. Selck go before me?
MS. FILSON: Sure.
MS. THOEMKE: I'd like to do that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And each of the public speakers will
have three minutes, I believe. We've changed that on the speaker slips,
or should have been.
MR. SELCK: Don't start my clock yet.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, we won't.
MR. SELCK: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for allowing me
to speak once again on this. I think that Ms. Wehle's statement that
water causes wars is right on, because that's what it's doing here.
The train wreck that Joe Schmitt accurately forecasts for the
Estates is about to happen, and it's happening next door to where I
live.
I want to briefly recap the events. I bought -- Waterways Homes
bought a now illegal 75-foot lot in between my property and that of
Mrs. Thoemke, who's following me as a speaker, on 21 st Avenue
Southwest.
The building department approved a single-family home on the
property. I complained about it, came before you through a series of
meetings and so forth. The house was moved back on the site so that
now the front of the house is in the -- in my back yard, and it's in Mrs.
Thoemke's back yard, so that whatever privacy I -- we have no
amenities in the Estates except the woods, and so I have none of that.
The photograph that I'm going to leave with you -- can I step to
this? Can you hear me?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's a mike, I think, you can
carry with you.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, there isn't here.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: There's a mike over there, sir, at the
Page 56
January 24, 2006
other podium if you want to step over there, and there's a mike right
on the wall, I believe.
MR. SELCK: Thank you. This is -- thank you. This is the
corner of the house, and this is the top of the floor slab, and this is
where this house is going to be.
Thank you. You'll see that Mrs. Thoemke's house is built at
grade. There's no slope up. My house has got a substantial slope up
of about three and a half feet or better. Her house has got no slope up.
It's built at grade.
This puts the floor level of the new house at her window sill. Her
house is less than eight feet from the property line. Where do you
think the water's going to go from this point here, which is the corner
of the garage, to her house? It's going to put water on her floor.
The building department rightly says that not -- that flooding of
the adjacent properties is probable. They say that it's probably likely.
So when the other corner of the prop -- of the house is here, eight feet
from my property line, where do you think the water that flows across
the site in this direction is going to go? It's going to go on my
property and flood this area down here, which is at grade. I don't
believe they have a right to do that.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Sharon Thoemke.
MR. SELCK: Could I just -- I didn't know I had such a sort time.
Could I just sum up with a couple things, please?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, sir, go ahead.
MR. SELCK: I hope you take the highroad on this. I think that
these small lots should receive additional scrutiny when it comes to
development. Some kind of a site plan review situation so that we can
deal with these things.
We talked about setbacks, staggered setbacks and things like this
to let the water flow around. It's possible to put a small retention area
on anyone of these sites because they're 661 feet deep. And I hope
you do something positive to cure it, and I'd like my letter entered into
Page 57
January 24, 2006
the record, if I could.
MS. FILSON: It was.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Just hand it to the court reporter there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question for Mr. Selck.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, go ahead.
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Sharon Thoemke.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Selck? I see some cypress
trees on the property in the picture. I'm assuming that you have
cypress trees --
MR. SELCK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- on your property?
MR. SELCK: I have a few.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So I mean, cypress trees
grow under wetland, correct?
MR. SELCK: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Looking at your picture, I
wouldn't -- I would surmise that some of your water runoff from what
you filled is going on the neighbor's property now.
MR. SELCK: It's -- the flow from my property is just as he said.
It's diagonally across. It's sheet flow that goes across all the
properties.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. You know, and I have
the same situation as you. I chose to build, or buy a house, in a
wetland. My neighbor's drainage drains onto my land. I am not going
to create a war, and I'm disappointed in -- some residents want to
create a war with their neighbors or future neighbors.
You have either two and a half acres or an acre and a half, a
non-conforming lot. What is the big deal here?
You have plenty of property. You have the means to raise your
property to the elevation that you want to correct a perception of a
problem. When can we be neighbors?
MR. SELCK: It's not a correction of a perception of a problem.
Page 58
January 24, 2006
I'd like the problem to not exist in the first place. Ifthe house were
built on a stem wall and there was a drainage swale down the side --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: When can we be neighbors?
MR. SELCK: I'm talking with the property owner as we speak.
She has -- she does not want the house where it is now being built. So
I don't know how it's going to turn out. But this is not a good
situation, and you'll hear from Mrs. Thoemke how she feels about it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Sharon Thoemke. She'll be
followed by Dalas Disney.
MS. THOEMKE: Hello. I'm Sharon Thoemke. As was already
stated, I am the owner of the property on the opposite side of the
proposed development.
I have a lot of prepared statements. Again, I didn't know I only
had three minutes. But I would first like to answer Mr. Henning's
question with some information, and that is, when my home was built
in 1979, it was the highest elevation home on my street. So I think a
good response to your question is, if all the homes were still at that
same elevation, there would be no problems, but we have to keep
adjusting to newer and newer laws.
And I've been in my home for 27 years. Actually I was also the
owner of that adjacent property. And because of wonderful Florida no
fault divorce law, I had to divide my homestead in order to be able to
stay in my home with my nine-year-old child at the time.
Also I would like to mention that you have said my only recourse
is going to be civil litigation. After spending $30,000 on a divorce in
order to maintain my teacher's retirement from a greedy husband, I
have no money left to pursue legal action if that becomes necessary.
Also, if I'm given the money that my home is worth, I think it has
already been documented in newspaper articles, that there are
probably 10 or less homes available for purchase to teachers within
that price range, and that is because my home has been existing there
Page 59
January 24,2006
for such a long time. That is all that I got out of my 27 years of service
in this county to the Collier County public schools is to own my home.
And now it is being threatened by flooding, and there's nothing I
can do unless that happens.
I have personal family history with the situation of flooding. My
in-laws bought a home in Lake Champagne and the original drainage
was not installed properly on their lot. And again, there was nothing
they could do until after the fact. And as many times as the developer
came back and tried to readdress that drainage issue, it was never
resolved. Their back yard was constantly under water just after a
heavy rain. It had nothing to do with hurricanes or major storms.
It seems to me that rather than having to fight this issue, it would
be easy for the county to adopt a code as was earlier proposed by
some of the speakers and exists in the City of Naples, to my
knowledge, and that these properties be constructed -- the homes on
these properties be constructed with stem walls or staggered when
they're on such narrow lots that don't themselves contain the proper
amount of width for the appropriate runoff. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Dalas Disney.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ask your question after?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure.
MR. DISNEY: Good morning. My name is Dalas Disney. I'm
the Principal of Disney and Associates Architects, and we happen to
have designed the home that's next door.
Now, we designed the house, but we don't, in this particular
instance with this particular client, do any of the site development.
That's done by other design professionals.
The home was moved to the rear of the lot prior to the petitioner
appearing here before you the first time. That had been relocated and
submitted to development services. So that was done by request prior
to anyone showing up here and making an issue out of where it should
Page 60
January 24, 2006
be.
You just heard a request to stagger the homes. If you stagger the
homes, then you get one in the front and one in the rear, and you've
got somebody that's looking in somebody else's back yard, exactly
what you have here.
I don't know -- it seems as though the issue has gotten a little bit
off base. The question that was placed to us from Mr. Selck's attorney
in a rather threatening letter was that we had done all sorts of things
wrong. We didn't do a thing wrong as it turns out, nothing. I've spent
a lot of money and a lot of time for no reason.
It's a validly issued permit. It's in compliance with your land
development code. You may have larger issues out there, but it's not
as a result of this one 75-foot lot.
I don't -- I don't understand how we could spend this amount of
time on an issue. Everybody has their right and their day, I suppose,
to come and lodge their complaint or make a comment about
something, but at what cost? If we're going to entertain this for
everybody, you're going to have to, it seems, increase the budget for
development services because you're going to be dealing with a whole
lot of this long-term.
There is no issue with this, and I'd urge you to not back away
from a validly issued permit in compliance with your land
development code. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Just a question for staff,
actually. As a possible solution, can people in this area -- you've
shown us all of these lidar maps now, and it's quite revealing. A lot
more building to be taking place. Can people in this area be required
to put like a water retention pond on their property and funnel the
water into that, you know, like with a fine or something, as, we do for
the road system?
Page 61
January 24, 2006
MR. SCHMITT: Ma'am, that's a good question. The question
then becomes, how do you want to manage that. Yes, there could be a
retention pond for each home. But normally in a situation like that,
they're going to become dysfunctional, meaning from an ecosystem
standpoint, you'll have stagnant water, you're going to have other type
of problems, then you're going to have health problems, you're going
to have -- who's going to oversee to make sure that they remain to be
viable flood control type of structures and facilities.
When we deal with this in a planned development today, the
lakes you see being built in most developments are all integrated.
They have metered flow. They're permitted by South Florida Water
Management District. They're designed and engineered to do exactly
what you're suggesting, and that is to control the flow and meter the
stormwater.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So in other words, the answer's no,
huh?
MR. SCHMITT: The answer is, yes, it could be, but now we're
going to be creating an entirely different government oversight
problem dealing both with public health/safety/welfare --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner?
MR. SCHMITT: It's feasible, but very problematic.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, homeowners can still dig an area
behind their house in order to get the fill for their pad. That's still --
that's still a viable option, and a lot of times that becomes a bit ofa
stormwater retention area in the back of their particular home. And
you saw on that lidar map, there are a number of blue lakes, and --
MR. SCHMITT: Here's the--
MR. MUDD: -- they're pointing to them right now, that are there
because those were basically the home's fill pit, for lack of a better
word.
MR. SCHMITT: You have to get a DEP permit. That's from the
Page 62
January 24, 2006
state. I have two DEP reviewers that reside in development services.
We actually pay their salary. They're state employees that review all
the permits in the Estates.
And you can get a DEP permit to do exactly that. Once it's built,
then it's done. I mean, I don't go out and inspect to make sure it's a
functioning flood control system anymore.
So if we mandate it, we can certainly look at that. And, frankly,
that's one of the things we may be discussing as part of this east of 951
study when we look at it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just thought it might be a simple
solution for this particular problem and possibly for others.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. In a bigger -- in a bigger picture, you
know, I've talked to staff and I said, you know, think out of the box a
little bit. If everybody put a lake behind their lot and they adjoined
them on the back of that 660 feet, you basically have a stormwater
canal at that particular juncture down the back of the lots out in the
Estates, and with that, you can pretty much solve the stormwater
problems out there. So, you know, I've had this conversation with
them, and yours isn't an idea that's a bad one. It's a really good one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I just wanted to point out a
couple of facts. We're not here today to change any ordinances. We
can't. This is a long process, and we are heading towards some
directions. And I see Brad Cornell out in the audience who probably
would love the opportunity to be able to address this situation because
he brought it up numerous times before.
Mr. Disney is right to the fact that, you know, he has followed
what is required. I mean, if that's the question, is he in violation of
any existing codes or ordinances, the answer's no, he's not.
It is unfortunate. And the truth of the matter is, is while we have
had no flooding in the Estates, I can tell you without any reservations,
Page 63
January 24, 2006
we will sometime in the future under the right conditions.
It's inevitable. I mean, it's just going to take the right type of
storm to come in and hold here long enough. We've been within
inches of it before, of having mass flooding.
And regrettably, those homes that were built back in the '70s at
grade are going to -- the ones that are going to suffer the most, and
that's going to be regardless of what's built out there or not. That's just
a fact of life, and that's why flood insurance exists. You're not going
to be able to do away with it.
There's one thing that I want to cover also is the fact that, there
was mentioned that, you know, they bought out there because of the
wilderness, because of the beautiful trees on each side of them. I hear
this all the time, but ladies and gentlemen, you only own the lot that
you're on. You have no call as far as what your neighbor wants to do
with the property. It's a common, common complaint. You know, I
bought here and I had a beautiful forest on each side of me and now
they're tearing it down. That's called property rights, and they're
allowed to take so many trees out to be able to put a house pad in.
And out in the Estates, by Florida statutes, because it's a plotted
development, they have every right to be able to build on those lots.
Unfortunately they did let a lot of 75-foot lots get by before they were
made illegal for any new ones to be brought aboard. But it's one of
those things that we have to live with and we have to contend with.
Then we hear also the fact that one of the solutions may be to
stagger the lots. Then we hear the complaint, well, now the house is
in my back yard.
So, you know, I'm trying awful hard to find some way to make
the public happy and to come to some direction that will satisfY both
sides, and I'm becoming -- I'm starting to realize very quickly that this
is not going to be possible.
When we get to the point we start to look at joining the properties
together to make large drainage areas, you've got to remember, this is
Page 64
January 24, 2006
also going to offer an attractive nuisance for young kids. I would
think that we're going to have drownings. It's going to be a habitat for
alligators and water moccasins, not to mention, it's going to give
mosquito control all sorts of heartburn with the fact that now they've
got a new enhanced problem to deal with out there.
Somehow we have to get the natural system to function and
function better. And to touch on the edges of what Commissioner
Henning said, we have to learn to be good neighbors and try to make
the system work for everyone that's out there without trying to inhibit
other people's property rights, if we can. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ifwe was to mandate that
people build with stem walls versus the fill pads, you know, I'm told
that that will raise the price of construction.
MR. SCHMITT: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, you know, you fix one
problem, create another problem, or exacerbate a problem that we
have today, and that's the affordability of the last frontier, Golden
Gate Estates. And that's unattainable for most now. So I don't want to
do anything.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you want to make a motion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't think we need a motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, there was no motion. This is just--
staff was coming back basically to address this whole issue. So
actually there's no -- nothing to be addressed here other than the fact
that the report was given. We understand the problems, the magnitude
of the problems out there, not only in Golden Gate Estates, but we
realize that we have problems even out in the urban area here in
Collier County, so --
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioners, I had two recommendations.
One is that you concur with staffs position that building permit
2005080737 was issued properly and done so within the parameters as
Page 65
January 24, 2006
defined in the Florida Building Code and the Collier County Lands
Development Code, and that the board recognize that staff, through its
existing inspections and construction site approval program, will
render certain that the site is properly graded and sloped to ensure that
all incremental stormwater runoff created by the construction of the
single- family home is controlled as mandated by the code to ensure
that no additional runoff is displaced onto adjacent properties, and
those were the two recommendations from staff.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we trust that you did the
right thing. We don't -- I don't think any of us here are planners or
engineers. Commissioner Halas has some degree in that. If it's an
interpretation of the code, then somebody needs to pay a fee and come
back. I don't feel like we have to take any action on this item.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MR. SCHMITT: Thank you.
Item #10A
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER THE HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEES
RECOMMENDATION TO EXPLORE THE FEASIBILITY OF A
MULTI-SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN - MOTION
TO EXPLORE THE FEASIBILITY OF THE HCP ADVISORY
COMMITTEE AND TO ADD MEMBERS TO THE COMMITTEE,
EXPANDING IT TO 13 INDIVIDUALS; COUNTY ATTORNEY
TO BRING BACK A RESOLUTION FOR REVIEW BEFORE
ADVERTISING FOR AVAILABLE POSITIONS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item lOA, which
is your 11 o'clock time certain. This item to be heard at 11 a.m. It's a
recommendation to consider the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory
Page 66
January 24, 2006
Committee's recommendation to explore the feasibility of
multi-species habitat conservation plan.
And Mr. Bill Lorenz, your Director of Environmental
Department and Community Developments, will present.
MR. LORENZ: Yes, thank you. For the record, Bill Lorenz,
Environmental Services Department Director.
The purpose of this item is to have the Habitat Conservation Plan
Advisory Committee present its initial findings and recommendations
to the Board of County Commissioners.
You'll recall that through the latter part of last year, going into
the summer, that the board adopted a resolution to establish the
advisory committee. The primary purpose to be to determine the
feasibility of developing and implementing a county habitat
conservation plan to provide for the protection of Red-cockaded
woodpeckers, RCWs, in Collier County.
As a result of the committee's work in presentations that they
received from a number of parties, and specifically the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the committee has provided you with the attached
report in its recommendations, and essentially to recommend that the
Board of County Commissioners provide direction to the committee to
look at a multi-species HCP as opposed to a single species.
The board specifically directed staff to work with the committee
to look at a single species with RCW s. And, therefore, we thought
that before the committee went forward any more in its deliberations,
that they needed to come back to the board to bring you this
information and then to get -- receive your direction.
I note -- I noted that it was put on the record that the executive
summary was in error about voting unanimously, but it was a 6-1 vote
to present -- for the committee to adopt the report that you have in
your executive summary.
Let me just -- the order here is, I'm going to take about another
minute or so just to frame a couple of the issues. The committee has
Page 67
January 24, 2006
appointed Christian Spilker, a member of the committee, to present the
committee's findings and recommendations to the board and answer
any questions that you may have of him about the committee's work.
We also have representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service here. Paul Susa, who's the department field supervisor, is with
us, and one of his staff members, Spencer Simon, and they would be
here to answer any questions that the board may have as well.
Just the one point, we kind of -- what has crept in some of our
terminology and mind specifically is when we talk about a county or
countywide habitat conservation plan, or county or countywide HCP,
because this bears on a little bit of the issue that you'll hear some of
the information brought forward.
When we speak ofa county HCP, what I'm speaking of is the fact
that Collier County will be the applicant for the HCP. In other words,
the Board of County Commissioners will actually enter into that
agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service subject to their
rules and requirements, if you give us direction to do that, to have an
HCP. The terms and agreements ofthat HCP will be developed as we
move through -- forward in the process.
Sometimes we've been talking about a countywide HCP, and we
don't want to use that in terms of geographical scope.
I know when some of this information was presented to you back
in February oflast year, if you recall that one listed species
stakeholder group recommendations, there was some discussions that,
for instance, because the board has already adopted the rural land
stewardship area, that a lot of this particular effort probably isn't
needed in that area.
And, indeed, I think there's some consensus that we wouldn't be
developing that HCP for that area. So when we were talking about
geographical scope, that's yet to be defined.
And the thing about geographical scope is essentially this, and
this comes to the heart of the matter of whether we're talking about a
Page 68
January 24, 2006
single species or a multi-species HCP.
If we were to -- if we were to identifY an area that there was only
one listed species, just RCW s, let's say, in a particular section of land,
then the HCP is tailored directly for that listed species there, so that
would be a single listed species plan.
As you start looking at geographical scope that gets larger and
larger, if it begins to cover more listed species, then we have to have
an HCP that addresses all of those listed species within that
geographical scope, and so that's kind of the finding that the advisory
committee developed as they were going through the deliberations.
So the advisory committee took the information, presented the
report that you have with you here. And with that as an introduction, I
would like to turn it over to Christian Spilker, who can then go
through some more information for you, speak to the advisory
committee's work. And also as I noted, the Fish and Wildlife Service
staff are available and can answer any questions that you may have.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think Commissioner Coyle has a
question.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Actually, Mr. Chairman, Bill very
specifically covered the issue I was going to raise about the
countywide application, so we'll probably discuss that a little bit later,
but he addressed my question.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I have a question. How is this
going to affect permitting here in the county and getting projects
through, such as road projects and development, in general?
MR. LORENZ: Well, there is an opportunity for the HCP to
provide certainty as to what would be required through the permitting
process for listed species.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So are we looking for the permitting
time to be cut down?
MR. LORENZ: I think so. The -- the process now where an
individual applicant has to go on a project-by-project basis to US.
Page 69
--'...-.-.....---- --_."._,----
January 24,2006
Fish and Wildlife Service, is a negotiated process based upon the
situation, the facts they have, and it takes a long time to go through
that process.
The successful HCP will be determined that if a particular -- if a
particular project has certain impacts, those impacts -- the
compensation or mitigation for those impacts will have been
predetermined. And so then the applicant just simply could come in --
some of these details will be negotiated through the HCP.
But let's say the applicant could come in then to the county, the
county is the holder ofthe HCP, the county approves that particular
project because it conforms to the guidelines of the HCP, and then that
particular applicant doesn't have to go to the US. Fish and Wildlife
Service. So that would -- to me, if we got to that point, then that
becomes a more streamlined permitting process. And as I said, it
provides certainty and it should shrink the time frame.
And the other thing is is that potentially there could be some
opportunities for the -- because we're looking at a more holistic
approach as opposed to project-by-project, the compensation could--
could actually be somewhat less than if you do it on a case-by-case
basis.
And, again, I think that that would be a measure of success of the
HCP, overall founded with the idea that in the big picture the
cumulative effect is we should be able to get better ecological benefit,
better environmental benefit because we're looking at it cumulatively
than if we're looking at it on a project-by-project basis.
So if all those three things come together, then I think we have a
win-win for both the environmental side of the issue and also the
development side of the issue.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Next presentation?
MR. LORENZ: Yes, Christian Spilker, who is a member of your
advisory committee.
MR. SPILKER: Good morning. I think --
Page 70
January 24,2006
MR. MUDD: State your name, please.
MR. SPILKER: Christian Spilker. I am a member of the habitat
advisory committee. And the members asked me to speak to you. I
think Bill has done a fantastic summary here, so I'm going to keep my
message simple.
After 32 hours of meetings, we have made the determination that
the authority you gave us to look at -- to examine the feasibility of an
RCW habitat conservation plan was just that. You gave us the
authority to examine an RCW HCP.
It became apparent through conversations with US. Fish and
Wildlife Service that a single species HCP was not feasible, it would
not pass muster, and it would not cover other species such as panthers
or overlapping species that we deal with with the Fish and Wildlife
Services.
Having said that, the committee came to the decision that we did
not have the authority to look at multiple species until we came back
to you.
In that 6-1 vote we voted to ask you to let us examine the
feasibility of a multi-species HCP. I'm not here to give you answers.
I'm actually here to say, we have more questions, as is usually the way
a committee goes. But if you saw on our summary, we've got six
items that we would explore for a multi-species HCP.
And the primary one, which I know is a question to you guys,
was the geographic scope. What would this -- what would an HCP
cover in terms of geography in the county? The species, what -- if
we're doing multi-species, is it every species in Collier County?
Probably not. What species would we recommend?
The infrastructure needs. What are we really looking at in terms
of how does this tie into the rural land stewardship, how does this tie
into the Estates, Belle Meade.
The financial impacts. We want to -- we have no sense of what
this is going to cost, and I know that's going to be something that you
Page 71
January 24, 2006
guys would really like to hear is what does this mean to the taxpayers?
What does this mean to the individuals? What does this mean to
the county as an applicant as well?
The sense of community support for a habitat conservation plan.
What's the will of the community? Are there other -- you know, and
last -- and that ties into the last item, and that is, are there alternatives
to an HCP? Are there more cost effective or more protective or faster
ways to accomplish a similar goal?
So, again, in summary, it's very simple. We don't -- we didn't
feel that we had the authority to examine that until you gave us that
direction. We're not here with a lot of answers. If anything, we're here
with more questions.
But Fish and Wildlife -- we've got representatives here -- made it
pretty clear that an RCW HCP is not feasible.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MR. SPILKER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is there any questions from
commissioners on this?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm waiting for Fish and
Wildlife.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So am 1. Next presentation,
please.
MR. LORENZ: This is Paul Susa from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. He'll be able to provide some information for you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, thank you.
MR. SUSA: If I could just say hello. I'm very honored to be in
front of you today. I very much appreciate the leadership that you've
shown in asking this question about whether an HCP for RCW s makes
sense.
And I really see my agency's role as providing technical
assistance to you. I think that Christian and Bill summed it up
correctly. We have a lot of questions right now, and I believe that
Page 72
January 24, 2006
there are a number of ways that we could proceed. Whichever way it
is that Collier County chooses to move forward, we will do our best to
provide the best technical assistance to you that we can.
MR. MUDD: For the record, state you name, please.
MR. SUSA: My name is Paul Susa, and I'm the deputy field
supervisor for south Florida for the US. Fish and Wildlife Service.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Could you just wrap up your
presentation.
MR. SUSA: Yeah. I did not have a presentation. I was asked to
come here and answer questions. I guess I would just build on one
point, if! may. And I know the fundamental question here at the
beginning was whether or not it makes sense and is feasible to have an
HCP that focuses on Red-cockaded woodpeckers alone.
And Bill really did a good job of summarizing the issue. It's
important to look at the geographic scope of the question, and where
we have RCWs in Collier County, we also have other threatened
endangered species.
And the purpose of an HCP is for my agency to work with a
permit applicant to find ways to avoid impacts, to find ways to
minimize impacts, and if there are going to be unavoidable impacts, to
find ways to compensate for those impacts.
And so to look at one species alone when there are more species
involved would actually be inefficient. What would happen is you
would go through a process only looking at one part of the picture. At
the end of the process, what is key to the permit applicant is to have
assurances, to know clearly what the expectations are so that it can be
worked into the bottom line, so that it's up-front early assistance, and
there are no 11 th hour concerns.
But if you don't address all issues early on then what would
happen is you would come to the end of a process and find yourselves
without the issue resolved. And as a result, the efficient way of really
on time is to look at all of the issues of concern within the geographic
Page 73
January 24, 2006
scope that Collier County would choose to focus on, address them in
full so that you have that assurance at the end of the process, that all
aspects have been covered.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I call you Paul? Because I
think that we're going to have a long, productive relationship, at least I
hope so.
MR. SUSA: Of course. I would love you to call me Paul.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The reason why, Paul, we were
trying to aim for a single individual species is out of pure fear that if
we open it up and we say listed species, that that list that -- what it
may be today could grow into something of unbelievable proportion in
the future, such things as some far left-wing environmentalists, which
none exist in Collier County at this time, by the way. We've got to be
careful. You don't want to get Nancy Payton mad by any means.
MR. SUSA: I know how that goes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. She's been a true friend to
Collier County. But what the fear was is that somewheres down the
line -- because we have a serious growth problem in Collier County,
especially in the urban area and the Golden Gate Estates area.
The biggest fear that I have is that we might agree to something
that's open-ended, and the next thing, we'll have someone come in
from the left wing of the environmental community, and within a
certain parameter, maybe a quarter of a mile, identifY some unknown
species of algae or mold or whatever and have that declared an
endangered species and high prior -- no, it's possible. I mean, I'm sure
that if you went to any particular sector within this county, you could
identify something that's extremely unique to that one little sector.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Poison mushrooms.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could be. Who knows, you
know. But the whole thing would be that it could be used as a tool to
total stymie our ability to be able to perform as we're supposed to as
Page 74
January 24, 2006
elected officials and provide an infrastructure that our constituents out
there are absolutely screaming for.
Tell me, Paul, how can we be sure that we're not heading down
for that particular path?
MR. SUSA: I think that's a fair question and a very good one.
And I would say this, quite frankly, the county can proceed in
whatever way it chooses. If--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We can't.
MR. SUSA: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We can't, Paul, because you step
in and you say, no, you won't sign off on the permits.
MR. SUSA: I'm talking about on the HCP perspective.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, forgive me. Go ahead.
MR. SUSA: And the geographic scope is really the issue at
hand. We know that this group at the outset wanted to focus on
Red-cockaded woodpeckers. One idea would be to define the
geographic scope of this HCP to where RCW s are found today. But
also when we complete that analysis, take care to focus on the other
issues that are of concern, and that is one way to put a limit on the
amount of species from a federal perspective that would be an issue.
There are other options as well. For example, a county could
have a comprehensive HCP that would attempt to address every
species of concern and all potential projects and all potential permits
within the county. But by definition, the county has its prerogative
here and can define that scope in a finite way. If it is successful and
we find that we are coming to a process that will provide that
streamlining regulatory review that's so critical for the county, then,
perhaps, we could broaden our horizons and bring in other geographic
areas as well.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that becomes a little bit of
a concern because sometimes we're the victim of our own successes.
The Florida panther, for example, whose range seems to be expanding,
Page 75
January 24, 2006
and in some cases it's becoming less than a good neighbor and giving
great concern to our residents in the outlying areas. Not too much for
the animal itself. I think everybody likes the idea of panthers in their
habitat. It's the rules and regulations that follow them as their range
starts to expand. Is there some way we deal with that in reality, or is
this something that's an unknown factor?
MR. SUSA: Well, I think it's important to say the panther is a
very endangered species. It is obviously a very high priority of my
agency.
From my perspective, the key here is to get the information out to
people at the outset of any types of processes for development. Before
anybody makes a commitment of time, resources, and energy, we
want to be sure that people understand what the threatened and
endangered species issues are. This allows them to build into their
projects the means and measures to protect the species and move
forward as well.
The last thing I hate to see, as someone who has to deal with
these programs all of the time, is someone who has spent money, spent
energy, and spent blood, sweat and tears only to find out in the 11th
hour that there's an issue that was unexpected.
That's really how I think we can work together to provide this
information to the people of Collier County early on, make it
pervasive so that it's very clear what the expectations are. Because I
can say this, unequivocally, we will do more for the panther by
working closely than we will by taking separate paths.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. I have other
questions, but I'll let the other commissioners --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have one question before I turn it over
to Commissioner Coyle. As you know, we've been going through a
long and arduous process of trying to expand the Immokalee Airport,
and it befuddles me to understand why we've had this airport out there
since in the mid '40s and it's been fenced, and then when we went out
Page 76
January 24, 2006
to try to entice people to come out to Immokalee Airport, we had to go
through this long and arduous study. Can you enlighten me why that
airport was there, it was fenced, and now we've got to go through this
huge study?
MR. SUSA: Well, the first point that I think is critical to make
is, I believe from my agency's perspective, this issue is now resolved. I
know there was a biological opinion that had been pending that people
were questioning. That biological opinion was signed a couple of
weeks back. So that's a positive statement, I think, that it's behind us.
The reality is, Immokalee Airport is very close to panther habitat,
and the primary zone of the panther is fairly close to that region. And
so it requires very close scrutiny, and it requires careful consideration.
Whenever we have a situation where a project and its indirect
and cumulative effects could impact the panther, we work closely with
people to identifY those concerns and do our best to resolve them.
In the case ofImmokalee Airport, it's my understanding that
those issues have been resolved from my agency's perspective.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. It sure took a long time, and it
was 500 and some acres that was totally fenced off, and we just didn't
think there was any concerns there.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I wish -- wish the
decision-making process were as simple as you say it is. If Collier
County could make the decisions that we wanted to make, we
wouldn't be having this meeting here today, because we're here
because Fish and Wildlife Service said the decision we made would
not be acceptable.
So, you see, we really don't have the right to make the decisions
we think are correct. And I think the record will show that it was our
intent, at least my intent when we began to address this habitat
protection plan, that it include all species that were of interest to
Collier County. And let me briefly explain that.
Page 77
January 24, 2006
We're concerned that the Fish and Wildlife Service might very
well issue a take permit for a bald eagle because the bald eagle,
throughout Florida or throughout the nation, might be faring rather
well, but we don't like to lose the ones that are in Collier County, and
so we'd probably like to have a more strict protocol for determining
what we do with bald eagles in Collier County than the Fish and
Wildlife Service would.
So we wanted it to cover all those that were of concern to Collier
County. But we were, unfortunately, convinced by people who said,
it's a lot easier if you take it one step at a time. Develop a plan for a
single species and then add on to that one and add on to that one, and
that way we would at least get some positive benefit from the plan as
we moved forward, rather than taking, perhaps, years to develop a
comprehensive plan for all of the species of concern.
So here we are now after -- after having a substantial amount of
time and effort invested in trying to devise a plan, being told that
we've got to go right back to the beginning where we were and do it
for all of the species of concern, so -- and I have no problem with that.
I think that's where we should have been in the first place, but
nevertheless, we didn't take that step, but let's make sure that we
understand the parameters of this thing.
What we would expect to do is develop a habitat protection plan
for those species that are of concern to Collier County, okay? That's
not to take in the entire range of protected species for the Fish and
Wildlife Service in the entire United States.
I don't know of any Snail Darters that we've got here that I have
to worry about. So if we -- can we do that? Can we decide what is of
concern to Collier County as far as listed species are concerned?
Would that create some difficulty for your agency?
MR. SUSA: Well, I think this question is broader than a habitat
conservation plan under the Endangered Species Act. Thankfully
there are a suite of conservation tools at all of our disposal to help do
Page 78
January 24, 2006
good things for fish and wildlife and their habitats.
There are a number of local initiatives, for example, that could
address RCW habitat and take steps to restore that habitat and do all
kinds of positive things.
The question that was posed to us was the HCP process. And my
recommendation to you is really the time-efficient one above and
beyond the conservation one. And at the end of the HCP process, the
purpose is to provide an incidental take permit to the permit applicant
so that it's clear what the potential impacts will be, the applicant has
coverage, and the project can proceed.
To do that without focusing on all of the threatened and
endangered species in the geographic area would be inefficient
because, in effect, you wouldn't have the coverage for the other
specIes.
So to give your question a direct answer, I would say if the HCP
route is the route that Collier County chooses, it will be important to
ensure that it focuses on all of the threatened and endangered species
within the geographic scope that is defined. That is up for debate and
discussion.
If it's something outside of the HCP realm, clearly the point that
I've made about the multi-species focus under section 10 is not as
relevant.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we have a single species
protection plan now for gopher tortoises. If we were to draw up
separate species protection plans for bald eagles, Red-cockaded
woodpeckers and others, would we still run afoul of the Fish and
Wildlife Service if we didn't include every listed species in Collier
County?
MR. SUSA: Well, I think what would happen if the process
unfolded that way, my agency would, to the best of our ability,
provide technical assistance to you to ensure that those plans were up
to our standards, basically just good government trying to share
Page 79
January 24, 2006
positive information to make your life easier.
What that process wouldn't do, however, is to address the impacts
from future development that we know are forthcoming. So the
process through section 10 of the ESA or through section 7, which is
federal permitting, for example, of Corps of Engineers permit, would
still have to unfold independently. Yes, it would be able to build upon
and borrow from the work that had been done for the species specific
plans, but it would not take the place of those processes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So if our comprehensive
plan proceeds, I mean -- I'm sorry I'm taking so long, but --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- these grounds rules have to be
established, otherwise we're going to go off on another wild goose
chase.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Ifwe elect to proceed along a
comprehensive path for a habitat conservation plan, will you provide
us with the list of species that we have to address in that plan?
MR. SUSA: Absolutely, yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Ifwe have some
disagreement with you, is there some flexibility to negotiate some of
those out if they're not of great relevance to Collier County?
MR. SUSA: Weare always open to discussion. The key point is,
from our perspective, is the geographic area that is defined should
address the threatened and endangered species that are on that
property.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, okay.
MR. SUSA: And that's really as simple as I can state it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, one final point. We're talking
about -- in the executive summary it talks about a countywide plan,
and I want to make sure there's no confusion about what that means.
Page 80
January 24, 2006
We have a rural land stewardship plan that provides protections,
significant protections at a number of different levels already. It
would not be my intent to go back and have to renegotiate that plan
with all of the landowners and all the environmentalists who
participated in drafting that agreement.
It would be my preference that we devote ourselves to a plan that
covers geographical areas of Collier County that are not already
covered by some protections. Is that acceptable; would that be
reasonable?
MR. SUSA: I think that makes perfect sense. I've heard a lot of
positive information about the stewardship program. I've very much
supported everything I've heard about it. Again, the geographic focus
is solely the discretion of the county.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. SUSA: Once that geographic focus is defined, we just need
to work together to ensure that the federal trust resources are
addressed within the resource area in question.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then I think that's clarified
most of the questions I had. I just want to make sure that we know
where we're going here and that there's some mutual agreement that
we can work together in achieving that goal. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a question before I open this up
for public speakers. My question is, this geographical area, do you --
what's your envision (sic) on this geographic area where this is going
to take place? Is it going to be in the Belle Meade Estates, or is this
going to be out in an area where we're already looking for doing
development?
MR. SUSA: Well, I would say, first of all, I don't have a specific
vision for this process at all.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. SUSA: I think the committee, if you all choose to give of
them this charge to explore it more, will delve into the details. Again,
Page 81
January 24, 2006
it makes sense for one point, as a starting point for the discussion
anyway, to consider where RCWs are found today. Clearly there was
a desire to focus on RCW s. Perhaps it makes sense to look at that
geographic area and just be sure that, in addition to RCW s, we
consider the other threatened and endangered species that are in that
area.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Two fast questions, I hope.
The first one is, if we use your list of species as we prepare this HCP,
will that then allow us to -- to do the permitting ourselves and you
then will not be a part of that anymore, in other words, speeding up
the permitting process?
MR. SUSA: The way I would characterize it with an HCP
process in general is up-front work for a more expedient process later
on.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. So what -- your answer is?
MR. SUSA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. The second thing is, you
provide a list for us for the species that you want to make sure that are
included in the HCP. And Commissioner Coletta had a really good
question. I smiled, but he was right. You know, I wonder if it's
something that's really weird or, you know, it really doesn't pertain to
this area. Is there a way for us to work through that with you to make
sure that we have only species that really are conducive to that area?
MR. SUSA: I would say absolutely yes, it is. There is a
fundamental list of species that are federally designated under the
Endangered Species Act, and that is what I talk about when I talk
about the species that must be addressed in this HCP. For example,
RCW habitat is also panther habitat, so we'd have to consider the
impacts on panthers. But we wouldn't be pulling species out of a hat.
These are defined species based upon the law and based upon
regulations and policy.
Page 82
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Paul, Collier County has
been in the forefront of a whole bunch of different environmental
issues in the past, most recently the environ -- the rural fringe and the
rural lands program where we came up with tremendous amounts of
lands, placed it into permanent conservation easements. It's not easy
being the leading force in this and setting the pace for everyone else to
follow.
In this particular case, is there examples out there of success
stories between Fish and Wildlife and communities throughout the
United States where they have reached agreements that allow
everything to proceed at a normal course with as little friction as
possible?
MR. SUSA: We have a few recent examples in South Florida.
Some are finalized and some are close and some are more in the early
stages of development.
Recently we completed an HCP with Indian River County for sea
turtles. A variety, a multi-species HCP that addressed all of the sea
turtles in question within the geographic area.
We're also relatively close, hopefully within a matter of weeks at
this point, of finalizing an HCP in the Florida Keys, Big Pine Key and
No Name Key. This is also a multi-species plan. It includes Key
Deer, it includes Marsh rabbits, and also addresses indigo snakes.
Weare currently working with Sarasota County on a countywide
HCP to address shrub jays. We're making some real solid progress on
that front. We're also working with Charlotte County on a countywide
HCP, but they've chosen only to focus on the county infrastructure
project, versus Sarasota County, which is focused on more than that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So we do have flexibility?
Because all the examples you give doesn't sound like the example
we're talking for Collier County. The sea turtles, of course, a small
Page 83
January 24, 2006
area of the coast, the Keys have severe restrictions as far as growth
goes. They've got a growth reduction ordinance in place.
So, you know, it's a very specific little area that's not experienced
tremendous growth and doesn't have to put in a lot of roads to be able
to deal with it.
But I'm looking for something more specific to Collier County
with the large geographic area we're talking about, multiple species
that go across a large geographic area. Is there someplace in the
United States? Is doesn't have to be Florida.
MR. SUSA: I've heard positive information about an HCP
completed in San Diego County, California. Personally I'm not very
intimately familiar with it, so I can't offer you specific details.
You make the good point that the HCPs I talked about were
focused on specific subsets of other counties. And I just want to
emphasize the point that if Collier County wanted to, we could do
something similar in this county where we focused on only small
geographic areas.
For example, a good starting point for the discussion might be
where RCW habitat is today and not address anything else at first, but
just ensure that in that narrow geographic scope, we cover all of the
species of concern, from my agency's perspective, so that at the end of
the HCP process, we can truly provide you with a full coverage and
full assurances necessary to move forward.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One of the concerns that comes
forward from what we're talking about right now, of course, is the
time element. And during that time element that we're trying to put
something in place, we can't bring the whole world to a stop. We have
to be able to move forward, and we have to be able to move forward
in good faith to be able to make sure that ongoing projects and roads
that we're planning to put in can be completed and they're not going to
be held up as hostage -- I know that wouldn't happen in the case of
Fish and Wildlife, but wouldn't be held up for the study to be
Page 84
January 24, 2006
completed first.
And also, we have to figure out exactly, not only the time
element, but the cost element. I assume that this is going to run into
the hundreds of thousands of dollars to possibly the millions of dollars
in costs, and who pays for that, and I assume that it would be probably
taxpayers unless there's grants available from Fish and Wildlife for
such ventures.
MR. SUSA: These are all fair questions, and I really think that a
key next step, should you all choose to take it, would be to answer
these questions. I mean, the cost is a function of the geographic scope
that's selected. Obviously the more area of impact, the greater the
compensation. These are all just fundamental questions. Unfortunately
right now we don't have the answers for them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Paul. You've been
most helpful.
MR. SUSA: My pleasure.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ifthere's no further questions from
commissioners -- how many registered public speakers do we have?
MS. FILSON: Commissioner, Chairman, we have eight, and the
first one is Gus Stamatinos, and I'll let you respond to this. He wants
-- he's requesting that his time be used by his wife Mary, but she's also
signed up.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. As long as it cuts down on her
name. I'll give her six minutes if he's the one that's going to speak. Is
that the --
MS. FILSON: Mary Stamatinos, yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So she's relinquishing her time--
or Mr. Stamatinos is relinquishing his time.
MS. FILSON: Yes. And the next speaker after Mary Stamatinos
is Nancy Payton.
MS. STAMATINOS: Good morning. My name is Mary
Stamatinos, and I reside at 4562 Eagle Key Circle in Naples. I'm here
Page 85
January 24, 2006
for myself on behalf of my husband. Thank you.
I would like to urge the commissioner -- the commissioners to
hold up on the approval of the habitat conservancy -- conservation
plan. And I agree with the president of the Conservancy of Southwest
Florida, Mr. McElwain, about exploring the ideas first further, as
mentioned in the article in yesterday's Naples Daily News.
My interest in this matter is my husband and I own a small
parcel, five acres, in North Belle Meade which has been designated as
being sending area pursuant to the transfer of development rights
program, the TDR, because it allegedly is a habitat of the
Red-cockaded woodpecker.
I would like to point -- to say that the reason this matter should
be thoroughly explored before approval is that there have been certain
developments which I believe are very important.
First, for instance, in checking the computer regarding the habitat
of these birds, my daughter found out that they live in old pine trees. I
took a drive out to the land last summer and saw that there was not
even one old tree on our land, only young skinny ones and no birds.
Now, I did not look closely at the surrounding areas because it
was a hot day, but it seemed similar to our parcel. I don't remember
seeing any old trees.
Then recently about two months ago in the Naples Daily News of
November 20,2005, there was an article on page 15B, entitled, legal
firm challenging endangered species designations, in which -- in
which article Attorney Steven Guisler (phonetic), manager of the
Pacific Legal Foundation's Atlantic Branch in Coral Gables said, we
are trying to make sure the species on the list are the ones that should
actually be there. Resources need to be spent on species that need
protection.
The article went on to say that the foundation which won a
settlement in a similar case in California earlier this year contends in
that lawsuit that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has failed to
Page 86
January 24, 2006
conduct status reviews every five years as required under the Federal
Endangered Species Act.
Among those listed under examples of animals or plants on the
federal endangered list in Florida -- or endangered or threatened list
that have never been subject to a required five-year status review by
the US. Fish and Wildlife Service according to a Pacific Legal
Foundation lawsuit was, quote, the Red-cockaded woodpecker listed
as endangered on October 13, 1970, end of quote.
The foregoing, therefore, raises the legitimate question of
whether the designation of these lands in section 30 being sending is
valid or appropriate, all of which requires additional time to explore.
Then delaying the approval of the habitat conservation plan
would also give the commission time to consider the erroneous
designations of the lands being, you know, from sending to--
correcting that matter of the lands being in the sending area and
correcting it to the receiving area. If -- you know, if, in fact, it is
found that it is erroneous, and also -- and even possibly considering
the feasibility of rezoning the area from agricultural to allow housing,
as in affordable housing for the working people, which there is a very
bad shortage in Collier County, as we all know.
So I -- I sincerely request that approval should not be stampeded
and further consideration given to this matter. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Nancy Payton.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hold on just a minute. Commissioner
Henning, did you have a question for -- directed to her?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I'm waiting for after the
speakers.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh, okay.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Nancy Payton. She'll be follow
by Tim Durham.
MS. PAYTON: Good morning. Nancy Payton representing the
Florida Wildlife Federation. Just a clarification for the record, we've
Page 87
January 24, 2006
always supported multi-species HCP, not a single species. And we're
here today to support the committee's request to explore the
feasibility, which is exactly what the previous speaker was calling for,
explore the feasibility of a multi-species habitat conservation plan,
HCP, or look at alternatives. What other opportunities are out there
that achieve similar objectives?
And we recommend that the geographic boundaries or the echard
area be driven by the endangered Red-cockaded woodpecker habitat
and the appropriate listed species that share Red-cockaded
woodpecker habitat.
Lastly, we ask that the very capable existing committee, many of
whom are here today in the audience, continue because they are broad
based, they have spent many months, hours, educating themselves on
habitat conservation plans, Endangered Species Act, local land use
patterns, and local listed species, most notably the Red-cockaded
woodpecker.
I would like to comment that a year ago I joined a group of
people to visit Riverside County, California, which does have one of
the most sophisticated multi-species HCP, habitat conservation plan.
They have over 140 listed species that they're dealing with. And their
pursuit of the HCP was driven by the need for 1,500 miles of new
roads and related infrastructure.
When we visited them last year they extended an offer to come to
Collier County on their dime to discuss with commissioners and staff
and interested individuals how it worked there, and this may be a
possibility, if the committee gets the nod today, to evaluate the HCP.
And I just share that information with you. And I provided testimony
on that a year ago, and I'll be glad to do it at any time.
Thank you, and I hope you approve the committee's request.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Tim Durham. He'll be
Page 88
January 24, 2006
followed by Margaret Emblidge.
MR. DURHAM: Good morning. My name is Tim Durham,
3220 70th Street Southwest. Here primarily to -- as a public citizen. I
have some experience doing listed species permitting through the Fish
and Wildlife Service.
I'm very pleased to hear the geographic concept thrown out here,
because I think it's very important that we all distinguish what's
happened in the rural land stewardship program from what we're
talking about with the habitat conservation plan.
You'll find that the rural land stewardship program really
embraces a lot of the concepts of a habitat conservation plan but with
some county twists and some customizations on top of it. The two
programs could complement each other, but I think any overlap would
create undue complications on us here as a county.
There are -- there's one other topic I did want to mention in this
regard. As we talk about geographic boundaries for the study area, a
question occurs to my mind that, perhaps, Fish and Wildlife Service
could just respond to here. The question is, if we took a smaller subset
of the county, defined a geographic area for it, did a habitat
conservation plan on it, and it turns out that impacts in that area could
be compensated for, may use the term mitigated for, somewhere, does
that mitigation land or the off-city land have to be within the
boundaries of the habitat conservation plan?
And the reason I bring that up is just about any area of the county
you deal with nowadays you get a panther situation. Just about any
habitat conservation plan I could think of is going to need to -- impact
for panther impacts, which, again, makes you wonder, where do you
stop with the boundary for a habitat conservation plan.
So I would just offer that up as maybe a little bit further
discussion we may want to have while we have Fish and Wildlife
Service here with us today, a little more definition on the geographic
scope and how that might work. Thank you.
Page 89
January 24, 2006
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Margaret Emblidge. She'll be
followed by Dick Macken.
MS. EMBLIDGE: Good morning, Commissioners, Margaret
Emblidge with Collier Enterprises. And as a representative of one of
the major property owners in the rural land stewardship area, I'm very
pleased to hear the comments, from the commission and the
committee and also the speakers, that we're reinforcing not including
the rural land stewardship area in this effort, and that was my main
message for you today, and I'll leave it at that. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Dick Macken. He'll be
followed by Brad Cornel.
MR. MACKEN: My name is Dick Macken. I live in Naples and
am a member of the Audubon Society. I have attended recent
meetings of the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee.
The clock is ticking for Collier County. There's not much time
left to protect the natural environment that adds so much to our quality
of life. We need to determine how best to look after our listed species.
The Board of County Commissioners moved in the right
direction when it established the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory
Committee to look into providing protection for Red-cockaded
woodpeckers in the county.
We now know from US. Fish and Wildlife Service that a habitat
conservation plan just for Red-cockaded woodpeckers isn't possible.
It will have to be a multi-species plan.
The county should welcome this broadening of the coverage, for
ultimately it will save all concerned time and money. A multi-species
habitat conservation plan will decrease costs and burdens for
landowners, lessen the regulatory workload, reduce the risk of
third-party legal action, eliminate regulatory surprises, provided clear
expectations and certainty for developers, and ensure regulatory
consistency and timeliness. All of these would be great benefits to the
county.
Page 90
January 24, 2006
I strongly urge the Board of County Commissioners to allow the
Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee to explore the
feasibility of a multi-species habitat conservation plan.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Brad Cornell. He'll be
followed by Dr. Christian Mogelvang.
MR. CORNELL: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Brad
Cornell, and I'm with Collier County Audubon Society and Audubon
of Florida.
And I want to say that the question this morning, as I think we've
heard, even though it's had a lot of discussion and deserves a lot of
discussion, it's a pretty narrow question.
And there are three possible actions in response to the
recommendation from the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory
Committee.
First response you could have would be to continue the RCW
single species HCP exploration with certain permitting difficulties
with Fish and Wildlife Service, and I think you've already heard from
them.
The second option would be to direct the Habitat Conservation
Plan Advisory Committee to explore the feasibility of a multiple
species habitat conservation plan for Collier County, which is the
recommendation.
And the third is to refuse this recommendation, disband the
committee and opt for the status quo on imperilled species permitting
policies in Collier County.
Collier County Audubon Society and Audubon of Florida
strongly recommend that you go with the committee's
recommendation that you explore and authorize them to explore the
feasibility of a multiple species plan.
And it's also important to realize that the status quo that we have
now, the permitting process we have now is not acceptable. It's not
Page 91
January 24, 2006
good for the listed species and their habitat, it's not good for the
landowners, it's not good for the developers, and it's not good for
Collier County that's trying build the infrastructure, the schools, the
roads, et cetera, that the citizens of Collier County need. So our status
quo is not acceptable.
In addition, Audubon believes that there will be a need for
interim action to address immediate permitting and habitat protection
problems that can't wait for a finished habitat conservation plan.
And this is something, for instance, to address the immediate
needs of Red-cockaded woodpeckers. Their habitat is degrading
quickly, as exotics grow, as wildfires take out old trees and as
development occurs in their habitat. We've got to find a way to
protect species like that and other species, perhaps, bald eagles, wood
storks, in an immediate permitting regime that Collier County would
implement right away, quicker than an HCP would come, and use a
memorandum of understanding with the Fish and Wildlife Service,
something like that that can go into effect immediately, and then
codifY it later with the HCP. That's our recommendation. Thank you
very much.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Dr.
Christian Mogelvang.
DR. MOGEL V ANG: Oh, I'm trying to get my tongue out of my
cheek.
The puma, mountain lion, catamount, panther -- I mean, Florida
panther. I was -- I'm a BS in biology before I was a doctor, and I was
taught that the definition of a species is a -- for example, a mule -- a
burrow and a horse can breed and they produce offspring, but the
offspring is sterile.
Mountain lions can breed with Florida panthers and produce
viable reproducing offspring. The whole concept there is, I think, if --
based on that, if a species can be defined by its location, then I think
we'd have to include crackers as part -- one of the endangered species.
Page 92
January 24,2006
Enough said about that.
Let me say the county okayed Golden Gate with its roads and its
canals. Jesse Hardy's ponds were okayed. The cabbage palms were
protected and caused them to cease the swamp cabbage festival in
Bonita Springs, which was an enjoyable thing. I would say maybe
outdoorsmen are also endangered.
All I would like to say is, I am a biologist, a graduate, studied in
ecology all over the State of Florida, would love to see us preserve the
Florida scrub in this county. I've seen so many parts of it that we
studied while I was down here still in college, have disappeared.
So I am in that mode as well, but I would say that it's -- that there
are so many possibilities and new alternatives making it easier to
accommodate conservation of the concerned species and even some of
the other species with the co-existence of Felix domesticus, Canis
domesticus, and Homo sapiens.
Any questions?
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Henning, I believe you're first.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Dr. Mogelvang brought up a
very good point, and maybe we'll get this answer someday. What is a
Florida panther and is there a Florida panther that still exists in
Florida?
I didn't support this measure before because, as it was stated
today, it will speed up the permitting process in development in
Collier County, and I'm not sure that is really what the taxpayers want
us to do, the ones that may help foot this bill.
You know, if we have -- if the federal government has a problem
or a perception of problem of their process, is it our problem or is -- do
we need to fix it? You know, I don't think so.
As far as our projects, we need to get -- it's about speeding up our
projects to anticipate for growth, then we should be talking to our
Page 93
January 24,2006
elected officials in Washington to make that happen instead of
growing local government to solve a federal government's problem.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I got a slightly different
spin on it. I'd love to be able to pass the problem over to someone
else. But willing partner or unwilling partner, I think there's a marriage
being formed here that we can't be left out of.
I'm not totally comfortable with where we're going with it, but I
-- I can see this particular committee possibly exploring the
possibilities of what we're doing under very, very strict guidelines of
what we want to achieve.
I do have a concern in the fact that this committee was put
together under certain requirements and we advertised it as
one-species-only committee. And we got the applicants for it and we
filled this particular committee with those applicants that had an
interest in the RCW, and that's what we advertised.
Now we're going to a multi-species, and the complexity of what
this committee's doing is changing dramatically. It's no longer the
same. I do have a concern over, you know, how would the public feel,
certain elements of the public, where before they might not have felt
this was something they wanted to participate in because it was a
limited scope, they may feel that they've been left out of the selection
of the committee.
My suggestion would be, is that -- one of two things. One is --
would be to disband the committee but keep it going on an even keel
until a new committee takes place -- it would probably be the same
members. I have no problem with just about everyone that's on that
committee as being a good representative for Collier County -- and
then the new committee take over and just take over from that point,
or to expand the committee from nine to 12 people and advertise for
three more to be able to open it up for the public for consideration.
That's the only problem I see with this whole thing at the moment.
Page 94
January 24, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'd just like to jump in and -- before I
turn this over to Commissioner Fiala.
I want to make sure that it's -- whatever we decide to do, and if
we decide to disband the committee that's presently there because it is
special species -- a single species, that when we put it out for
advertising that we have a good selection of people from all the
different areas of concern here in Collier County being developers so
that everybody sits at the table and we can hopefully come up with a
listed -- multiple listed species program.
I think it's very important that everybody is a stakeholder in this
and that it's addressed in that manner.
And at that, I'll turn this over to Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. That's just about what Jim
Mudd said in my office yesterday. I actually liked the suggestion from
Commissioner Coletta, I think to expand the committee to maybe 12
might be good, and that way we have a few new, and then as -- the
reason I don't like disbanding it completely is because it takes so long
to get --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's a real concern.
That's a real concern.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- a committee get going. That's
why, you know, when I first established my little gap committee, that's
the reason I did it then because it would take like four months to get it
going. And then as we have people changing over their positions,
then we can have new entrants, but at least we would have three new
at this point.
So right now I'd like to make a motion that we explore the
feasibility of a multi-species habitat conservation plan and advertise
for three additional people to expand this committee to 12.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle for further
Page 95
January 24,2006
discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. I would like to ask if the
motion maker would be willing to provide appropriate guidance that
would specifY that this investigation would not overlap and conflict
with the rural land stewardship area?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Would you put that in your motion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm sorry. I should have put that in
my motion. I will add that to my motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And, of course, my second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry. Your second okay?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, it is. I was just going to
say, I assume that this is coming back to us for another look-see at it
before we -- you know, for the final draft because we addressed a
whole bunch of different things here we mentioned during our
discussions that have to be incorporated in what this committee's
going to do. And I would hate to have to dig the minutes out at this
point in time to start reading them back line item by line item.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did you have something else,
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just wanted to make the
observation that it was not my recollection that we selected people for
the committee purely for their knowledge of red-headed --
Red-cockaded woodpeckers. I think we selected people with fairly
general backgrounds.
But, nevertheless, if you want to add additional people to the
committee, I have no problems with that. I would support it. I would
just like to see an uneven number so it would reduce the possibility of
a tie.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Rather than 12, go with 13 or 11.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, 13. Would that--
Page 96
January 24, 2006
Commissioner Coletta --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- how do you feel about that?
Okay. Let's expand it to 13. Okay. I know, it sounds a little
cumbersome, doesn't it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Lucky 13.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And then if we find in a few months
that it is a little too cumbersome, maybe we could pare it back on
down. But I'd hate to see it disband. So I'd rather see people added on
to it rather than deleted.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think what you're running into
is some superstitious people that have a problem with the number 13.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I love 13.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's my lucky number, too.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Of course, being born on the 13th,
wouldn't I -- wouldn't I love it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I missed it by one day. I was
the 14th.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That explains a lot of things.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I knew I shouldn't have said that
here. Sue?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes?
MS. FILSON: And is it okay if! wait until the county attorney
comes back with a resolution expanding the committee before I
actually advertise?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, please.
MS. FILSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is there any further discussion? And if
not, we're -- the motion has been made on the floor that we're going to
establish --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Explore--
Page 97
January 24, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- retain the present group, that we're
going to expand it to up to 13 individuals.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: To 13.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Up to 13.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, to 13.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: To 13, okay. Well, up to, to 13, to
explore a multi HCP for Collier County. And at that, I'll call the
question.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, let me -- let me get some
clarification real quick. You said HCP, that's -- so it's a multi-species
habitat --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Study group.
MR. MUDD: -- conservation plan. Okay. Is there -- and it's
going to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: With strict geographic.
MR. MUDD: And it's going to exclude the rural-- the rural
lands. Does the board -- did the board want to further confine that to
the Red-cockaded woodpecker areas right now and do multi-species
on that since they've already looked, or do you want them to explore --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'd like to see it brought
back all sorts of selections. I'd--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- have a hard time making that
choice now.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Absolutely. That's what they're
there to do is evaluate and explore.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: They've made that -- they've given
us a list of elements they're going to evaluate, which includes that. So
if we approve the recommendations --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Along with the six items that was in our
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, that covers --
Page 98
January 24, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- executive summary. Did we cover all
the areas there, County Attorney, do you believe?
MR. WEIGEL: I beg your pardon, sir, the question?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: In this motion did we cover all aspects of
this motion to make sure that we've covered the areas of concern?
MR. WEIGEL: The answer is yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: I can restate it, if you'd like, but I think that--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Would you please restate it for the
record here to make sure we've got all areas covered?
MR. WEIGEL: All right, thank you.
The board's direction is to come back with the appropriate
executive summary and resolution where we are expanding the present
committee to a full complement of 13, which will take into account a
multi-species HCP, habitat conservation plan. This will exclude the
rural lands, or those lands noted as a steward -- stewardship lands,
excuse me -- the rural land stewardship lands, and when that comes
back and you approve the alteration of the committee to incorporate
these elements, then Ms. Filson will at that point go forward with a
solicitation for applicants and bring those back to you to fill out the
rest of the committee.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And also this motion is to include the six
items that was in our executive summary in regards to the HCP.
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was it. That's all I wanted to
specifY.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So we have a motion and a
second on this. All those in favor --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- signify by aye.
Page 99
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
All those opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries 4-1.
MS. FILSON: Who made the second, Mr. Chairman?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I did.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner Coletta.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, Coletta did. I thought it was you.
You made the motion. You made the second, okay.
So at that we'll break for lunch and we'll be back here at 1: 13.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You like that 13.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, County Manager.
Collier County Board of Commissioners is back in session from
our lunch break.
Before we start the agenda, I just want to make -- get a
clarification from the commissioners that are present, that in the
motion that was made prior to our break for lunch, that we want to
make sure that the committee that's presently involved in the HCP
continues to work and we'll fill the additional spots as we get this put
out at the -- when the county manager works on this proclamation, and
we'll work on filling those spots, and I just want to make sure that the
commissioners understand that we're going to have that committee
continue to work so we don't have a hold-up on it. So if I can get
some nods from this --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You've got one here.
Page 100
January 24, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Got one here, but I need another one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you're going to have to
ask the motion maker on that, Commissioner, and see what --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I think it was, we just want to
make sure that there was clarification -- I think that was -- somewhat
in the motion it was there but it wasn't really that clear, and I just want
to make sure we got the clarification on it. Where's the other --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You got the majority of the
commissioners present, so I think it's clarified.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'd like to have one more
commissioner, hopefully -- here comes Ms. Fiala.
MS. FILSON: The motion maker.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You didn't even give me that one
extra minute, right?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Nope. I believe you were the -- were
you the motion maker on the last one -- item that we had?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. What we discussed prior to you
joining us here is that we wanted to make sure that there was
clarification in the motion stating that the committee that's presently
there is formed, and as soon as we come up with a resolution by the
county attorney to include up to 13 people, that this group still
continues to work.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Until they've added extra
people, we don't want to stop them from moving forward, right.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Right. So we just want to make sure that
that was the understanding in the motion itself.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh, that they continue on right
now.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
Item #8C
Page 101
January 24, 2006
PUDEX-2005-AR-8478: ROOKERY BAY BUSINESS PARK, LLC,
REPRESENTED BY WAYNE ARNOLD, OF Q. GRADY MINOR
AND ASSOCIATES, P.A. AND R. BRUCE ANDERSON, OF
ROETZEL & ANDRESS, IS REQUESTING A 2- YEAR
EXTENSION TO THE ASGM BUSINESS CENTER OF NAPLES
PUD - CONTINUED TO FEBRUARY 14,2006 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, there is -- I've been notified during
the morning meeting that we have a petitioner on an item that would
like to continue his particular item, and that's item 8C, and that might
be of interest ifhe wants to continue and the board wants to let that
person continue, this board might say, fine, and continue that to
another day, and then we'll get into 7A, if you'd like to address it that
way, or we'll go right into 7 A and we'll let the petitioner on 8C wait.
How would you like to do it, sir?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Why don't we -- why don't we address
that issue now. I can say that I received an email over the lunch hour
in regards to a concerned person, who is the president of the Golden
Gate Estates Area Civic Association, and that they would like to have
this continued, too, so I think there's some issues here that I believe
need to be addressed by both the petitioner and the homeowners'
association.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was --
MR. MUDD: Let's -- this is 8 --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Wait a minute. Hold on.
MR. MUDD: Let's have the petitioner talk first of all and tell the
board why they want a continuance.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: This is item 8C. This item requires that all
Page 102
January 24, 2006
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
commissioner members. It's PUD-EX-2005-AR-8478, Rookery Bay
Business Park, LLC, represented by Wayne Arnold ofQ. Grady
Minor & Associates, P.A., and R. Bruce Anderson of Roetzel and
Andress, is requesting a two-year extension to the ASGM Business
Center of Naples, PUD. The PUD was originally approved in October
8 of 2002, as ordinance 02-47, and sunset on October 8, 2005.
The subject property consisting of 40.88 acres is located on the
east side of Collier Boulevard, approximately a mile south of Manatee
Road in Section 10, Township 51 south, Range 26 east, Collier
County, Florida.
Mr. Anderson, do you want to address the board before -- I don't
think they're going to hear it, but you can tell them why you want a
continuance, because that's what we're going to talk about right now.
MR. ANDERSON: Yes. Mr. Chairman, members of the
commission, my name is Bruce Anderson from the Roetzel and
Andress law firm on behalf of the applicant.
Weare requesting a continuance today in order to present
evidence to your staff and have your staff consider the application of
the following language from the PUD sunset regulations, which says
that if in the event of a moratorium or other action of government that
prevents the approval of any final development order, the duration of
the suspension of the approval shall not be counted towards the
three-year sunset provision. And staff has not -- we did not present it
in a timely fashion for staff to be able to consider it, and we would
request that opportunity.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I make a motion to continue.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle, do you have
something to say on this subject?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I just earlier made a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah, that's right. I seconded it,
excuse me.
Page 103
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And Commissioner Fiala seconded
the motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any more -- any further discussion on
this?
MR. ANDERSON: February 14th we'd come back.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor of approving
this to be continued until February 14th, signifY by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (Absent.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It passes unanimously --
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- with the commissioners presently
here.
Item #7 A
RESOLUTION 2006-21: CUE-2005-AR-8568 GOLDEN GATE
SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH, REPRESENTED BY
BLAIR FOLEY, P.E., REQUESTING A ONE YEAR
CONDITIONAL USE EXTENSION AS ALLOWED PER LDC
SECTION 10.08.00.E.3. CONDITIONAL USE 2002AR-1943 WAS
APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS (BZA) ON
OCTOBER 22, 2002 (RESOLUTION NO. 02-435) OF THE
AGRICULTURAL - MOBILE HOME OVERLAY (A-MHO) FOR
CHURCHES AND PLACES OF WORSHIP. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST CORNER OF
IMMOKALEE ROAD AND RIVERS ROAD - ADOPTED
Page 104
January 24, 2006
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 7 A, the
Board of Zoning Appeals. This item requires that all participants be
sworn in and ex parte be provided by commission members.
CUE-2005-AR-8568, Golden Gate 7th Day Adventist Church
represented by Blair Foley, P.E., requesting a one-year continual use
extension as allowed per LDC section 10.08.00.E.3, conditional use
2002-AR-1943, was approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals on
October 22,2002, resolution number 02-435 of the agricultural mobile
home overlay which is an AMHO, for churches and places of worship.
The subject property consisting of 4.56 acres is located on the
east comer of Immokalee Road and Rivers Road in Section 30,
Township 48 south, Range 27 east, Collier County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Would the commissioners please
have their -- come forth with their disclosures in regards -- oh,
sweanng m, excuse me.
All those that are going to testify here, please stand for the testify
-- to be sworn in.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Would the commissioners please
come forward with their disclosures of ex parte on this particular item
starting with Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have none.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Did we discuss this once
before? It seems to be so familiar. I can't remember. Did we hear
anything about this before? If -- you know, there have been a few
churches that we've heard, so I don't know. I Would use that as a
disclosure if we did. If not, then --
MR. DeRUNTZ: Yes. My name's Mike DeRuntz. I'm a
Principal Planner with Zoning and Land Development Review. And
this is the first time this extension has been before the board.
Page 105
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Then I have no
disclosures. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have no disclosures on this particular
item either.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I have no disclosures, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Would the applicant please give
us his presentation?
MR. FOLEY: Good afternoon, Commissioners, Mr. Chairman.
My name is Blair Foley, P.E., and I'm here to represent the petitioner,
which is the Golden Gate 7th Day Adventist Church.
We currently are operating within an approved site development
plan on the project. And the purpose of our meeting you and
petitioning the board today is for an extension of the conditional use
that is authorized by the land development code.
I'm going to be brief. We did review the staff report in the
executive summary from staff, and we do support that. The reason for
the extension is there have been some funding issues related to the
final construction of the church and its grounds, and there also were
some concerns over which contractor to select to do the work. All
that's been worked out.
Weare currently operational as far as construction goes with the
building and the site, and we are ready to move forward. Weare here
to answer any questions that you may have, and we also have
representatives of the church here. They're also available. And if so,
we could come back up before you after the staff does a brief
overview of the project site.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are there any questions from our
commissioners? Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any -- was there any public
Page 106
January 24,2006
speakers on this?
MS. FILSON: No, sir. So you can close the public hearing.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Public hearing is closed.
We have a motion for approval by Commissioner Henning and a
second by Commissioner Fiala.
I'll call the question. All those in favor of this motion, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (Absent.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And that motion carries unanimous.
Thank you.
MR. FOLEY: Thank you.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2006-06: PUDZ-A-2005-AR-7403 GRAND INN OF
NAPLES, INC., REPRESENTED BY MICHAEL FERNANDEZ OF
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED REQUESTING A
REZONE FROM THE PUD ZONING DISTRICT TO THE PUD
MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT BY REVISING THE EXISTING
PINE RIDGE MEDICAL CENTER PUD DOCUMENT AND PUD
MASTER PLAN TO REDUCE THE COMMERCIAL USE TO
10,000 SQUARE FEET, RENOVATE THE EXISTING HOTEL
INTO A CONDOMINIUM BUILDING WITH 56 RESIDENTIAL
UNITS AND CHANGE THE NAME OF THE PUD. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY CONSISTS OF 4.02 ACRES AND IS LOCATED AT
1100 PINE RIDGE ROAD - ADOPTED WI STIPULATIONS
Page 107
January 24, 2006
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item -- we're now at
paragraph 8, which is advertised public hearings. This item requires
that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
commission members.
It's PUDZ-A-2005-AR-7403, Grand Inn of Naples Inc.,
represented by Michael Fernandez of Planning Development,
Incorporated, requesting a rezone from the PUD zoning district to the
PUD mixed-use zoning district by revising the existing Pine Ridge
Medical Center PUD document and PUD master plan to reduce the
commercial use to 10,000 square feet, renovate the existing hotel into
a condominium building with 56 residential units, and change the
name of the PUD.
The property to be considered for this rezone is located in
Section 15, Township 49 south, Range 25 east, Lot 51, Collier
County, Florida. This property consists of 4.02 acres and is located at
1,100 Pine Ridge Road.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those that are going to be
speaking on behalf of this item that's on the -- on the agenda, please
stand to be sworn in.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much. At this point in
time I'll ask the commissioners to come forth with their ex parte,
starting with Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I have had meetings
with the representatives of the petitioner, I have correspondence and
emails that are -- copies of which are included in the correspondence
folder.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I have -- I've spoken with the
petitioner -- I'm sorry. I've spoken with the petitioner, meetings,
correspondence, emails, and they're all in my file folder.
Page 108
January 24, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I spoke to our staff members
about this besides the additional ex parte communication that we had
when we heard this the last time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The only ex parte that I have to
come forward with is that I've spoken with staff, and, of course, this
has been before us a couple of other times. So at that, would the
applicant please give us his presentation? Hopefully he'll be brief. I
think we've covered this item pretty good.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir. I'll be as brief as possible. Before
I do so, would it be possible -- I'm a little concerned that we don't have
full board to consider the matter. Would it be possible to get a
continuance for the purpose of hearing this with a full commission?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It requires a supermajority.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's the problem, I think.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Does somebody --
MS. FILSON: Yeah. I'm--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is he sleeping?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sir, we'll make that determination if we
can get ahold of his office and have him -- ifhe's here.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if the commission would like--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We can go on the next one.
MR. MUDD: -- we can wait for 10 minutes -- while I think
you're going to have -- well, the time extension you don't need a
supermajority, I don't believe. Does he, supermajority?
MS. STUDENT -STIRLING: Yes, sir, a PUD extension you
need a supermajority.
Item #lOC
Page 109
January 24, 2006
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE COURTHOUSE
RENOVATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL COURTROOMS, mDGES
CHAMBERS AND ADDITIONAL mDGES PARKING WITH
KRAFT CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONTRACT NUMBER 04-
3576, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK SERVICES FOR
COURTHOUSE ANNEX AND PARKING GARAGE - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, let's go to an item under 10 and
then --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: -- and then hopefully we'll have the dais full.
MS. FILSON: He isn't back from lunch yet. She's going to try to
reach him.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Traffic was terrible out there.
MR. MUDD: Okay. The item is 10C. It's a recommendation to
approve the courthouse renovation for additional courtrooms, judges'
chambers and additional judges' parking with Kraft Construction
under contract number 04-3576, Construction Manager at Risk
Services for courthouse annex and parking garage.
The project budget is $3,034,000, and Mr. Peter Hayden, senior
project manager for facilities will present.
MR. HAYDEN: Good afternoon. Peter Hayden, senior project
manager of facilities. I'll get my notes here.
Back in this past December, the Florida legislator passed House
Bill 41 B and Senate Bill 41 B, adding four more judges to the 20th
Judicial Court.
Collier County's going to receive one new circuit court judge and
two new county judges, which will be seated in this courthouse.
With the addition of these new judges, the courtroom, fourth
floor, will require renovation work to provide courtrooms and judges
chambers for the judges.
Facilities management this past December met with a couple of
Page 110
January 24, 2006
general contractors to discuss the project, and at the time they were
very concerned with the existing construction going on with Kraft
Construction.
As you can see on this aerial photograph on the visualizer, the
current courthouse -- the black line shows the limits of construction
for the parking garage and for the new courthouse annex. So
essentially the building is surrounded on more than three sides of the
building with Kraft's current construction.
That being said, we would like to move forward with Kraft
Construction for the renovation work. The work has to be completed
here in a timely manner. We have to complete the work this fall, this
October. There's quite a bit of constraints on it.
So we'd like to -- that the Board of County Commissioners waive
formal competition under section V A3 of the purchasing policy and
section 255.20, Florida Statute, and approve the addition to the
courthouse renovation with Kraft Construction under contract number
043576. Questions?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do you have a question or was that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I do.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I'll second the motion. I just
wanted to know if I could ask, if you could ever let us see a rendering.
You know, we're seeing all of this stuff, and I've never seen what
it's even going to look like or how it's attached or -- I know we're on
the same campus as you guys, but --
MR. HAYDEN: For the courthouse annex project, is that--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. HAYDEN: Yeah. We're -- just so you know, we're in the
Page 111
January 24,2006
proc -- if you've seen the construction wall we've just built out here
that --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what I've seen.
MR. HAYDEN: Okay. What we're working on is some view
ports that people can monitor the construction that's going on, and also
we're working on a rendering with a completion date that we'll have
on that construction call so you can see it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Yeah.
MR. HAYDEN: And also we can provide you one separately.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is there any further discussion?
Okay. We have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Coyle,
seconded by Commissioner Fiala in regards to the addition of
construction on the government site here and to have Kraft
Construction company continue on because of the fact of the
restrictions of being on three sides. If there's no further discussion, I'll
call the question.
All those in favor of extending this to Kraft, please signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: (Absent.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Those opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries unanimously. Thank you
very much for your presentation.
Item #lOD
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR
Page 112
January 24, 2006
INSTRUMENTATION, CONTROL, TELEMETRY AND SCADA
INTEGRATION SERVICES PURSUANT TO RFP 06-3916, IN THE
ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $1,200,000 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 10D. It's
recommendation to award annual contract for instrumentation control,
telemetry and SCADA integration services pursuant to RFP 06-3916
in the estimated annual amount of$1,200,000. Mr. Dennis McGee,
your telemetry expert in public utilities, will present.
MR. McGEE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
I'm Dennis McGee. As mentioned, I'm the instrument and SCADA
project manager for public utilities engineering department.
The presentation that I have here today relates to agenda item
10D out of the executive summary that reads, recommendation to
award annual contract for instrumentation control, telemetry, and
SCADA integration services pursuant to RFP 06-3916 in the estimated
annual amount of $1.2 million.
As the project manager and the chairman of the selection
committee for the RFP, I'm here today asking for your approval of this
maintenance and services contract, specifically solicit your approval
on the award of professional services agreements to the six firms that
were selected under the contract and authorization from the chairman
to sign the professional services agreements thereafter.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is there any --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion was made by
Commissioner Coyle, seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
Is there any further discussion on this item? If not, I'll call the
question.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those in favor, say aye.
Page 113
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Those opposed, signify by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Carried unanimously. Thank you very
much for your presentation.
MR. FOLEY: Thank you, sir.
Item #8A - CONTINUED FROM EARLIER IN THE MEETING
ORDINANCE 2006-06: PUDZ-A-2005-AR-7403 GRAND INN OF
NAPLES, INC., REPRESENTED BY MICHAEL FERNANDEZ OF
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED REQUESTING A
REZONE FROM THE PUD ZONING DISTRICT TO THE PUD
MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT BY REVISING THE EXISTING
PINE RIDGE MEDICAL CENTER PUD DOCUMENT AND PUD
MASTER PLAN TO REDUCE THE COMMERCIAL USE TO
10,000 SQUARE FEET, RENOVATE THE EXISTING HOTEL
INTO A CONDOMINIUM BUILDING WITH 56 RESIDENTIAL
UNITS AND CHANGE THE NAME OF THE PUD. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY CONSISTS OF 4.20 ACRES AND IS LOCATED AT
1100 PINE RIDGE ROAD - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that will return back to paragraph
8, advertised public hearings. Everybody was sworn in on item 8A,
and that had to do with the Grand Inn of Naples and the Pine Ridge
Medical Center PUD document.
One commissioner was absent. You did ex parte, and I believe
you need to get ex parte from Commissioner --
Page 114
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If! may. And I apologize for
the late return. I had meetings, correspondence and phone calls, and I
talked to members of staff on it. Thank you.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Good afternoon, Commissioners. We do
have a revised proposal for your consideration today.
First let me put on the record a couple of items. This project was
originally approved by staff in their recommendations and reviewed
against the growth management plan and the land development code.
It was unanimously approved by the planning board, the planning
commissioners, and then brought to you.
There was an issue of parking. We addressed that. And one of
our commitments that's in our executive summary is that we will
provide two parking spaces per residential unit regardless of type, and,
of course, that was to address concerns that in a mixed-use
development, you may have some overlap. So we wanted to make
sure that we had two of those spaces, and the spaces that are used for
the residential component will be reserved.
In regards to the affordable housing issue, and that was the -- I
think the crux of where we were going as far as in our discussions at
the last meeting. We've done some additional analysis. We've met
with staff and we've talked to other governmental agencies in coming
up with our analysis and proposal.
In reviewing, first of all, the analysis, the monetary analysis for
the project, we have approximately -- our client has approximately
$12 and a half million invested into the land already, in the project,
which starts -- gives us a base to start with before any improvements
of $232,000. The range of the units' costs are going to be between 450
and 750.
We also have identified the cost for condominium fees in the
approximate $600 range; 550 for the single family and 650 for the -- I
should say single families, one-bedroom, and 650 for the two
bedrooms.
Page 115
January 24,2006
In addition, we've talked to the tax -- the tax appraiser's office,
and they've made a determination that the value of taxation would be
based on the market rate units and not the affordable housing units.
Based on that analysis, I can show you the analysis, looking at
the affordable housing program at the 25 percent, 50 percent, and 80
percent of the median income for what we would assume would be the
likely buyers here, as this is not a project that would probably be
conducive for families -- it would probably be singles and couples,
and based on that and those figures of income that are shown there, we
end up with a deficit prior to the mortgage.
In other words, people that are -- people that are earning in these
categories would not be making enough money to substantiate any
form of mortgage based on it, so they would have to have not only a
free unit, but they would have to have some kind of subsidized --
subsidation for taxes and so forth.
We then looked at it at the 100 percent, which is at the bottom of
affordable -- or gap housing, I should say. At the 100 percent in
review, we came back -- and that amount came back to us in terms of
still only being able to support a mortgage of about $20,000 or 77
hundred thousand dollars (sic), depending on the unit, which is
extremely low, and there's still a huge discrepancy in the values.
And then finally at the upper end of gap housing, we looked at it
in terms of what could be afforded. We did the two calculations again
based on one bedrooms and two bedrooms, and we ended up with
values of 122 --let's say, 122- and $124,000 would be the largest
mortgage that would be able to be afforded by residents within that
range. Again, looking at a huge discrepancy in value.
Now, one thing that we hadn't considered before, and I think it's
extremely important, and we discussed this and got an agreement with
Cormac Giblin, the current facility is a hotel, and that hotel will
generate a need for affordable housing. The condominiums as
proposed will also generate a need.
Page 116
January 24, 2006
Because they're both residential as far as land use relative to
people staying there and needing restaurants and needing shopping
and so forth, we are actually, by the change in this use, reducing
affordable housing demand on this project by approximately
two-thirds. Even if you say it's a half, we are reducing affordable
housing demand by your approval of this project, and I think that's an
extremely important point.
Going one step further though, in one of our discussions with the
commissioners, we were relayed a story about another product that
had a large discrepancy in values, and the solution that we came up
with to address that is that right now we've proposed, in the limited
room that we have of 56 units, to reduce the number of units by one
and allocate one unit for a caretaker's unit.
That would be available probably as part of a compensation
package for security or on-site maintenance, thereby providing an
affordable housing unit that would be available for that individual. So
it's an employee basically of the condominium there would have
residence. So we are providing a form of affordable housing by
providing that unit and reducing the number of units from 56 down to
55.
By approving -- by modifying the PUD and actually putting in
writing that it's only 55 units and a caretaker's residence, there would
only be 55 units available for sale and, thereby, when the association
takes over the facility, they wouldn't be able to come back and say,
well, we don't need that person to be there. Let's just sell their unit.
So it would remain as an opportunity for affordable housing on site.
With that I'd be happy to answer any questions you have, but I
believe we've made our case. From the standpoint of disapproval for
affordable housing is one -- is actually not detrimental for affordable
housing, but is enhancing it by reducing the demand of the facility.
I did forget one other point, and that is that we are other -- other
than the affordable housing, we are providing additional benefits. We
Page 117
January 24, 2006
are reducing traffic by the change of use that's currently proposed.
There's a reduction of 495 trips that we've identified and staffs
reviewed and agreed upon.
In terms of relative to the actual overall intensity that could be
approved, we're reducing it by almost two-thirds of the potential
intensity from traffic generation on the project.
Weare also providing a wall that will separate the commercial
and now the residential use between us and the neighborhood behind
it.
In our public meetings there was support for the residential use.
There was still concern about the existing restaurant and the impacts
from light and noise. There was a request for the wall. We found a
way, working with the utility companies, to get that installed. So
that's a public benefit.
Weare also, through this PUD -- there was a request made by
transportation to provide an interconnect to the adjacent commercial
project. We were able to find a way to meet that request, and that's
being provided for by the PUD.
So we think we've enumerated a number of different items here
that have the public support, the neighborhood support, and are of
public benefit, and we hope you can approve the project as proposed
now in this amended proposal. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, my concerns,
how you've addressed it is providing monies to the affordable housing,
and I always feel uncomfortable about that because we don't have a
standard or a rational nexus, and I definitely didn't ask for that
exaction, okay?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you agree with that, or you
felt compelled to do that to gain my support?
Page 118
January 24, 2006
MR. FERNANDEZ: The $1,000 contribution?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. We believe that it has become usual
and customary that that's an exaction that is sought by the board for
approval of residential projects, and our client said that he would be
willing to do that.
He has modified it from the standpoint that originally and
historically it's been $1,000 with the closing of each project. We have
agreed -- it had been suggested by Commissioner Coletta that we
provide that 1,000 up front. So within 30 days of the recision period,
or 60 days of the approval, I think is actually how it's written, we will
provide that $1,000 for each residential unit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I can't do exactions. It's
just unlawful, and that wasn't my intent. You realize that the density
that you're requesting is not a given; it's not entitlement, correct?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just have some questions for
our staff. That's the only question I have for the petitioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I've got a question here for the
county attorney. I think we're treading in an area that needs to be
addressed. And as Commissioner Henning pointed out, I didn't either
feel that we needed to do any extraction here, and especially when it's
placed on the Board of County Commissioners.
So I think we need some guidance in this area. Can you support
us here, County Attorney?
MR. WEIGEL: I think so, Mr. Chairman. In regard to
affordable housing or other -- any other amenities that a developer, an
applicant, developer's representative, may discuss with the Board of
County Commissioners, Mr. Henning is correct in the sense that there
is no systematic or programmatic arrangement in place that provides
for exactions or money toward affordable housing as an element of the
decision-making process of the Board of County Commissioners, in
Page 119
January 24, 2006
this particular situation, to amend a PUD. There are criteria for the
amendment of a PUD which do not include this, at least not at the
present time.
At the same time, the Board of County Commissioners has been
working with committees in the public, much discussion, concern,
toward implementing a program relative to providing for affordable
housing, and it could be doing the same in regard to other amenities as
well.
We have found in the past meetings of the Board of County
Commissioners in addressing petitions that, for one might say
undefined reasons, an offer or donation has been made to the county
through the Board of County Commissioners at the decision-making
process of a donation to be allocated specifically or generally toward
affordable housing.
And the fact is, it is not illegal, unlawful, for the Board of County
Commissioners to accept a donation that way. But Mr. Henning and
Mr. Halas are correct in the sense that the determinations of the board
relative to zoning, a zoning change or a PUD adoption or a PUD
amendment, or any other land use change, do not currently take into
effect a standard for a donation or a standard for the word exaction or
extraction, and things of that nature.
Extraction is not appropriate in the context of the discussion that
you're having here today or you've had earlier. It is -- it is essentially
in terms of a donation, which is unrelated to the decision-making
process. It's not unlawful to accept a donation. It can be problematic
if standards that are not part of the review process are brought to bear
in the decision-making process.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you. So ifthere is a motion in
this, that we should put in the motion that the developer here in this
case is donating and not that it's any form of extraction.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. I will reinforce that by saying that it
was suggested and we accepted it as a good suggestion that it is a
Page 120
January 24, 2006
positive improvement --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who suggested it?
MR. FERNANDEZ: It was discussed at our last meeting even as
far as when it would -- that app -- when it would be made. It was a
recommendation that was made.
We believe that the project on its own merit has enough public
benefit, both in reduction of impacts and positive impacts to the
neighborhood, that this is -- doesn't fit well to provide affordable
housing on this site, and we actually have a decrease in affordable
housing need by the approval of this project, and we believe that on its
own merits on those -- and the additional unit that we have provided
on site, that it's appropriate.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I just have some concerns that when you
said that there was some discussion the last time, I want to make it
clear that I did not propose any type of discussion in that manner of
trying to get involved in either trying to influence you in a donation or
an extraction.
MR. FERNANDEZ: You're actually right.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, okay.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. Let me just discuss the
property for a second. I've asked some questions not only you and
your owner, but also of Jim Mudd and Joe Schmitt, and from what I
understand, the building is not conducive to tearing it all apart and
demolishing it. You have to use what's existing, and there are a lot of
-- what was that, the -- what wall, that --
MR. FERNANDEZ: There are physical constraints. They're
concrete board walls.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. It can't be tom apart, so you
can only join a couple of these things together.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Correct.
Page 121
January 24,2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: In my looking at the property -- I
went over and took a look at it again -- it is not conducive for families,
I mean, little children running around. It's right there on all of that
public roadway and everything. I just don't think it's a good place for
families anyway. I think you're right about it being for one or two
single adults. That would probably work out fine.
As far as I'm concerned, because of the traffic and the congestion
in that area, I'd like to see it just go to like winter residents so that they
only have just so much traffic that's generated at certain times of the
year, because I don't know how anybody can even get in and out of
there anyway. So I'm fine with it the way it is.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta, he was next.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Of course, I've been
wrestling with this quite a bit, and I appreciate everything that the
petitioner has said. You know, and it's kind of hard not to agree with
him. And Commissioner Fiala, you brought up some good points
about what this is conducive for, what it isn't.
And that's absolutely true. Of course, the petitioner is -- in some
of the discussions that came forward that he generated, we mentioned
the fact that for every market rate unit that comes available there's --
for every seven market rate units that come available, there's a need
for one element of affordable housing.
And the petitioner has been generous enough to step forward.
And I assure you that his offer has followed the example of many
other developers out there that also exercised their conscience by
coming across with the, more or less, it's a standard donation of
$1,000 per unit.
And, you know, the idea that he offered to pay in advance, I
strongly embrace it. But once again, that's not going to be basis why I
make this my decision to vote yea or nay on this. If he was to
withdraw it, it wouldn't make any difference, in all likelihood.
Page 122
January 24, 2006
But I can think of very other -- very other uses -- few uses for this
particular piece of property. I don't know what else it could be used
for. I don't think we could afford to buy it and turn it into affordable
housing, and I don't think we would ever want to do that. It would be
the wrong type of affordable housing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. Can't put families there.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm sorry. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, this -- the
conversion of this property from a hotel to condominium does have
many positive benefits. It causes a reduction in traffic volume at this
site.
It does, in fact, reduce the demand for affordable housing
because if it were a hotel, you have many other low-paying personnel
there to service a hotel who would require affordable housing and
would otherwise be commuting back and forth. By converting it to
condominiums, we substantially decrease the demand for affordable
housing.
The -- and I think that we've all recognized that the affordable
housing problem was not caused by Collier County government. It
can't be solved by Collier County government. It requires a joint
effort between the government and the private sector. And I think the
recognition of the petitioner of their obligations and responsibilities to
help in that way, as a member of the private sector, is admirable, and I
appreciate the offer, and I think it's great, and I would consequently
make a motion to approve this petition.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You include in your motion
what the petitioner has voluntarily offered up --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- as far as the one unit for the
caretaker and the $1,000 per unit to be paid in advance rather than at
the time of the sale of each unit?
Page 123
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep. I think that's a wonderful
offer that he's made.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And this is not an extraction, but it's a
donation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nope. It's a recognition of the
responsibility of the private sector in helping resolve the affordable
housing problem.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is there any other further
discussion? There's -- yes, County Attorney?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes. I would appreciate, with the motion and
the specification, the motion having been place on the floor, that Mr.
Fernandez, on behalf of his petitionerlapplicant, indicated that his
opinion, approval, disapproval, any comment in regard to that motion,
because the board's about to take a vote.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That motion is one that we can heartily
support. I would mention, I don't -- I think it's a public hearing, and
you haven't asked for members of the public, although I don't know if
there were any here.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I plan to do that. Is there any public
speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, no public speakers. So I close the
public hearing.
MR. MUDD: I believe Commissioner Henning had some -- did
Commissioner Henning have questions of staff? I think you
mentioned that earlier.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You answered my question on
the viewer. Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So ifthere's no further discussion, we'll
call the question.
The motion was made by Commissioner Coyle, and I believe it
Page 124
January 24,2006
was seconded by Commissioner Fiala in regards to approval of this
with also noting that the developer here, the petitioner in this case,
said that he was donating this, the funds for affordable housing,
realizing that -- that we had a need here to make sure that we
addressed affordable housing here in Collier County.
So at that, I'll call the question. All those in favor, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have -- carries unanimous. We
needed four votes?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: 4-1.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: 4-1, yep. And that's--
MS. FILSON: A majority, not unanimous.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, the majority. 4-1 vote, with
Commissioner Henning --
MR. MUDD: Dissenting.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yep. Thank you.
Item #8B
PUDEX-2005-AR-8382: CLEVELAND CLINIC FLORIDA,
REPRESENTED BY JEFFREY NUNNER, P.E., OF NUNNER
GROUP LLC, IS REQUESTING THE SECOND 2- YEAR
EXTENSION OF THE ASTRON PLAZA PUD IN ACCORDANCE
WITH LDC SECTION 10.02.13.D.5 (a), LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF PINE RIDGE ROAD AND THE NORTH SIDE
OF 10TH STREET S.W. - CONTINUED TO FEBRUARY 28,2006
Page 125
January 24, 2006
BCC REGULAR MEETING AT PETITIONER'S REQUEST-
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Next item is item 8B. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
commission members. It's PUD-EX-2005-AR-AR-8382.
Cleveland Clinic Florida, represented by Jeffrey Nunner, P.E., of
Nunner Group, LLC, is requesting the second two-year extension of
the Astron Plaza PUD in accordance with LDC sections
10.02.13.D.5(a).
The subject property consisting of 8.56 acres is located on the
south side of Pine Ridge Road and the north side of 10th Street
Southwest in Section 17, Township 49 south, Range 26 east, Collier
County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Would all those that are going to
participate in the hearing of this please stand to be sworn in.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
We'll start off with the disclosures of the commissioners, with
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Spoke to two of the residents,
the president of the Logan Woods Civic Association and received an
email from him, and the Golden Gate Area Estates Civic Association,
received an email from that president. Also, after disclosures, I need
to make a statement.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've just received emails on
this one, and I've spoken to staff about it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I have received one email
today from the president of the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association
Page 126
January 24, 2006
and have talked to staff on it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have talked with staff and I have
received no other communication.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I received an email from one of
the people that was interested in this, was Golden Gate Estates Area
Civic Association president, Mark Teeters, and I've talked with staff
on that. And this email talks about continuation.
So at that, I'm going to let Commissioner Henning --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Commissioners, I live
down the street from this PUD. And talking with Mr. Weigel, the
concern was, you know, do I have any benefit or would it financially
impact, you know, my property or my bottom line, and so we kind of
went over it.
The impacts would happen if the traffic was directed down my
street, which the proposal never has been. The benefit would be a
potential -- or if there was shopping there that would enhance my
value of my property.
But at this point I don't know what's going to be there, so I don't
see -- there's no conflict in my participation or vote on this item.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is there -- would the petitioner like to
make his presentation?
MR. NUNNER: Yes, thank you. Good afternoon,
Commissioners. My name is JeffNunner, representing the Cleveland
Clinic. Cleveland Clinic, Florida is requesting a two-year extension
on the Astron Plaza PUD.
This property's been held by the Cleveland Clinic in part to have
a location to relocate administrative functions from the campus across
the street on Pine Ridge Road. Today that need has not been met to
relocate those administrative people, so that's the reason why this
project hasn't moved forward.
I've reviewed the staff recommendation for approval, and am in
agreement with it. That recommendation is based on several items.
Page 127
January 24, 2006
The PUD in the master plan is consistent with the current growth
management plan, including but not limited to density, intensity and
concurrency requirements.
The approved development has not become incompatible with
existing and proposed uses in the surrounding areas as a result of the
development approvals issued subsequent to the original PUD and
zonmg.
Also the approved development will not, by itself or in
conjunction with any other development, place any unreasonable
burden on essential public facilities.
I can answer any questions that you have. In order to be brief, I'll
conclude my presentation.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any of the commissioners have
any questions to ask?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If! may, just one. What I'm
curious about is, from the time this was originally approved to now, if
you were to go forward by new standards that exist today, how much
difference would there be? I know that there would be certain things
that would be meaningful and there might be some that are -- would
make no different. But I'm a little bit concerned. How much have
things changed in the past -- how many years has it been, five years?
MR. NUNNER: This is our second extension.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The original one, go back to the
original.
MR. NUNNER: Around -- yeah. The PUD was last approved --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: First approved.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Original.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Original.
MR. NUNNER: Well, originally -- first let me answer the
question. We will meet the current land development code
requirements when the project goes to site plan approval, if that's your
concern.
Page 128
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Current as far as --
MR. NUNNER: As far as parking requirements, landscaping
requirements. Weare bound -- our PUD requires us to meet the
current land development code at the time of development.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How about -- how about such
things as impact fees? You'd have to pay the current impact fees?
MR. NUNNER: Current impact fees, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if we had new impact fees
or if we had an affordable housing element come into play before you
went for permitting, then you'd be obligated for that also?
MR. NUNNER: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So there is -- if you went back--
if we forced you back through the whole process to start from square
one again, what would be the gain for the county?
MR. NUNNER: I can't think of it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there something as far as the
residents of that area being unhappy with what your plans are?
MR. NUNNER: No. And I've spoken to residents that I was
able to contact that have contacted county staff. I called them myself.
And one of the concerns was traffic on 10th. But our project is
restricted. Our project is restricted to a left-out and a right-in, so
anybody coming in or out of this project will not be accessing 10th
Avenue.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm just curious. Joe Schmitt,
you don't have to come up front, just nod if you agree with everything
that you heard.
MR. SCHMITT: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we ought to employ that
policy all the time. Just don't speak, just nod.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I didn't want to overtax
Page 129
January 24, 2006
him.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Now, this -- I want to
address building height very briefly. This started out with a 35-foot
building, then at one of the extensions of the PUD it was changed to
42 feet, and then it went to 60 feet.
I'm going to ask Commissioner Henning, since this is in his
district, if a 60- foot height limitation is compatible with the
neighborhood there and if that is acceptable to him.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Commissioner, that's not
one of the considerations that we're -- that's before us.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we can't -- we can't
change height in this request of extending a PUD.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you sunset the PUD, they have to
come back in for another PUD.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you can change anything you
want to change on it. So the question then -- and I'm not suggesting
that you do, okay? I don't want to be unreasonably restrictive here.
It's just that when I see a building grow from 35 feet to 60 feet through
successive extensions --
MR. NUNNER: Can I address --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- it bothers me a bit.
MR. NUNNER: One of the reasons that happened is just because
the site has such an irregular shape. And when we did go to that
higher building height, we increased the setback from 1 Oth Avenue to
125 feet, which would actually give people from property line to
property line 185 feet to that building.
Also when we -- when we -- we were -- when we were working
on the additional height, we did site line studies at that time to
establish the setback and to ensure that the residential area was not
impacted.
Page 130
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. NUNNER: So that was all done previously and addressed
at the board when that was approved.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I understand. I'm not going
to belabor the point because I'm not the one who determines
compatibility in that neighborhood. So I'm not going to go into
somebody else's district and try to tell them what I think is right, but --
so I'm okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: My concerns are that this has been on
the books since 1990 and doesn't really seem to have any direction
here of what's going to be developed there.
I don't believe our staff has even gotten any plans in regards to
what you have on here. And it would seem to me that if you had
something that you had in mind, that you would come forth with staff.
I can't really see why we need to extend this PUD because there's
really -- right now there's nothing slated for that. I've talked with staff
on this, and basically they said there was nothing in regards to what's
being planned for it, okay?
MR. NUNNER: Correct. Again, the Cleveland Clinic has held
this property, and they get calls very frequently from developers and
realtors. It's in an activity center, and it can be rezoned to a service
station and fast food, although that's not part of this PUD today. We
don't want to see that there.
Again, it's been held for overflow expansion from the campus
across the street, and the need just hasn't been there yet. They have
not expanded that facility to a point where they need the additional
space.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, then if that's the case, then it
sounds to me, from what you just stated to me, that you really don't
know when you're even going to look at expanding this thing, so --
MR. NUNNER: I can tell you --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- we can say that if we don't continue
Page 13 1
January 24, 2006
this, give you a continuance on this, this PUD, then obviously you're
going to have to come back and come with plans and tell us what
you're going to do with it. I'm sure there's not going to be a gas station
there. You're not going to sell this piece of property and put a gas
station there or anything else that --
MR. NUNNER: No. The intention is to go forward within the
next six months with additional office space for the Cleveland Clinic.
They just -- we have just finished the last shell square footage in the
clinic building.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So is staff -- have you talked to staffin
regards to what your plans are in the next two years on this thing?
MR. NUNNER: Nothing has been submitted yet.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. NUNNER: But we're working on a site plan that would
have this expanded to an office use.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But at the time that you asked that this
PUD be extended and not sunsetted, did you then sit down with staff
and basically layout a plan of what you're going to have, requesting
that -- the reason that you wanted this PUD to be extended and not
sunsetted?
MR. NUNNER: That's part of our application, that we need it
extended so we can expand into this property --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. NUNNER: -- with one of the permitted uses.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any other further discussion on
this item?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I have -- do I have a motion or, do
we have any other discussion? Oh, we have staff. I'm sorry. Excuse
me.
MS. DESELEM: Good afternoon. Pardon me. For the record,
Kay Deselem, principal planner with zoning and land development
Page 132
January 24, 2006
revIew.
And you have been provided with an executive summary that
does support the petitioner's request to extend this PUD for two more
years. This would be the last extension they could get. If, in fact,
they do not develop by the date in 2007 that's provided for, at that
time they would either need to rezone the property or amend the PUD.
But staff has looked at the information that's provided in the LDC
to consider the PUD extension, and staff believes that this petition is
consistent and in compliance with those factors in the LDC.
If you have any questions, I'd be happy to address them.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So you feel that they're worthy of this
extension of this PUD, that it meets all criteria and that they've
discussed with you what their future plans are in regards to developing
this PUD?
MS. DESELEM: I have had some discussions with petitioner's
agent, Mr. Nunner, regarding what it is he proposes to do. And
basically what they've stated in this application, as well as the
previous extension request, is what he stated. They just didn't know at
what point in time. It hadn't fit into the plans yet. Cleveland Clinic's a
large facility, and this, like he said, is designed for overflow. And
they just weren't ready to go that route yet.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. My concern is that -- in regards
to what they're really going to -- you know, when they're going to start
initiating this. And you're telling me that they've had preliminary
discussions with you in regards to when they're going to get started on
this? Or is it just -- do you think it's just looking to have this extended
and then see what's going to happen at the end of two years?
MS. DESELEM: I can't speculate as to what his concerns are as
far as what he's planning to do, other than to state that he hasn't given
me any specific dates that he might be seeking a preapp. meeting for
an SDP or actually submitting an SDP.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Page 133
January 24,2006
MS. DESELEM: We basically deal with the fact of whether it's
appropriate to extend it the two years.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. DESELEM: I might add, if you're not comfortable with the
two years, it's assumed that you can go with less than two years if you
believe that's too long.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, my concern is it's been sitting
there for a number of years, and they've come back and -- as
Commissioner Coyle has brought up, that it started off with 35-foot
building heights, then it morphed to, I believe, 40 or 45, and now it's
morphed to 60.
So -- and yet nothing has been done since 1990 other than going
through a reiteration and increasing the building height. And the
surrounding area on that side of the street, I believe, is all residential.
So I think I have some concerns in that direction also.
So I'll let my other fellow commissioners chime in here, starting
off with Commissioner Fiala, I believe is, was next.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank you. I, too -- I just have
a concern. I figure that in almost 16 years -- and they haven't -- you
know, haven't figured out what they're going to do with it yet -- and
like it was said here, no development approvals have been sought,
didn't provide any specific reasons why the development hadn't
proceeded and so forth, now they're up -- they're asking for more time
extensions.
To me, why don't you just let the thing die, and when you decide
what you're going to do with it, whenever that is, then you don't have
any time limitation at all, then you can come back when you know
what you're going to do with the property, if it's one year, two years,
or 10 years, and then you can move forward with that.
MR. NUNNER: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think you got edged out of there,
huh?
Page 134
January 24, 2006
MS. DESELEM: He wants to ask you something.
MR. NUNNER: Well, I'd like to ask for a continuance. There's
been some other occurrences that I think we need to bring this back to
you in a different presentation with some more concrete plans. If I
could ask for a continuance --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That might be smart.
MR. NUNNER: -- I think it would be -- everybody would be
well served.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, what --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning has got a
question here, and I wanted to direct that to Commissioner Henning
first, and then we'll decide what we're going to -- what direction we're
going to go in
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I'll second the motion.
And Mr. Nunner, there's some correspondence recently at the
bewitching hour of some civic associations that need to be reached out
to. No fault of yours. And it's very confusing to our staff and
everybody on these civic associations, what is their -- what is their
boundaries? And somehow we need to address that. I mean, you
have, in this case -- and there's all kinds of different cases, a
SantalLogan Association and then you have the Golden Gate Estates
Association, you know, and we all want input.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think I want to go there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We all have input -- seek input
on that, but who do you notify?
MS. DESELEM: If! may? I spoke with Lisa Koehler from our
office, that is development services, and she is working with the GIS
people. They're trying to get something set up where it will actually
identify the parameters of all those different civic associations.
Homeowners' associations and property owners' are pretty easy
to identify as far as the area, but when you're talking about a civic
association, it is very difficult.
Page 135
January 24,2006
And I was talking to the petitioner earlier as well trying to
decide, how do you know whether there is a civic association? You
almost have to have the information before you can look it up, and
that puts everybody in a rough spot.
We do try to, if we know, advertise it, let those people know.
And I did call one of the gentlemen this morning, or yesterday, I'm
sorry, regarding one of the civic associations, when I was able to
determine that they might be affected by this petition.
But we are working on it internally, trying to get a GIS map that
identifies all those different areas. So hopefully we can circumvent
that problem in the future.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'd just like to make one point.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you
were going to --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: What I'm concerned about, if we have a
continuance on this, it's got to be -- the continuance has got to be
somewheres down the road so that any of these civic groups that may
have an input into this, that there's meetings conducted, that there's
input into this. And if this isn't taken -- and so that everybody
understands what's involved in this whole process. If that doesn't
happen, then I can't have this continue.
MR. NUNNER: No. We had the signs up. And like I said,
when Kay notified me that she had some phone calls, I called the
people directly. And just based on my experience, that's the best way
to iron out the differences. And typically their fears or their concerns,
after you speak to them, they usually go away. So I'm happy to meet
with the homeowners' associations.
But I would like to get the continuance. I did -- within two
hours, had some additional information that probably needs to be in
this package that I will include in the continuance application.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
Page 136
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just a brief comment. As far as
the geographic location the civic associations have an influence over,
it generally extends well past their own area of particular influence.
Like, for example, the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association. Even
though Vanderbilt Country Club is not part of Golden Gate Estates,
they're included in it also, all the way down to Belle Meade and
surrounding areas. They have interest in what takes place on the
agricultural land.
Immokalee is interested in everything that takes place from Ft.
Myers, all the way up to Alva, back down to about Golden Gate
Estates. They really want to know what's taking place.
You might be able to come up with some sort of line of feed. I
mean, you can't give them too much information. But if you send out,
wherever you got a notice like this, maybe to a general mailing of the
presidents and the board members of the associations, it's something
they can always delete from their machines, but it's not a case of, I
don't know.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, irrespective -- and in Jeffs
defense, while things have been going on here today, some things
were also going on with his client. And I believe Mr. Nunner has
made some statements on the record today that tomorrow might not be
true, okay?
And I believe that it would be good if this board continues this
petition item for the second meeting in February so he can have
dialogues with his client and he can also talk to any homeowners
groups, and this whole situation might change by the 28th of February.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At -- where we stand right at the
present time, I entertain a motion for continuance of this to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I already motioned.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You already made a motion? Do we
have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
Page 13 7
January 24, 2006
MS. FILSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Well, I must have been sleeping
at the switch.
There's been a motion made by Commissioner Fiala and a second
by Commissioner Coyle for --
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Henning.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Wait a minute.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh, Henning, I'm sorry. See, I told you I
was sleeping at the switch -- that we're going to continue this till the
second meeting --
MR. MUDD: Twenty-eighth of February.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Twenty-eighth of February this will be
coming back to the Board of County Commissioners.
So if there's no further discussion, I'll call the question on this.
All those in favor of the continuance, say aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Those opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It carries.
Yes, County Manager -- or County Attorney.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. Just as a postscript to this agenda
item, I wanted to say, I appreciate Mr. Henning and, of course, any
commissioner that comes to me with a question relating to an agenda
item and/or a potential conflict.
And just to add to the dialogue that he and I had, I look forward
to advise him and I did advise him that based upon the facts as we
Page 138
January 24, 2006
discussed fairly comprehensively, it appeared that there was no
conflict.
And I also point out, just for the record generally, the fact that he,
as a resident on that street, would appear to be affected no differently
than any other resident on that street, and that's an important factor
that we take into account when we advise on certain potential
conflicts.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'd like to put in the record, that was the
particular email that I had received just before coming back out here
to the dais to reconvene the meeting, and it was from a homeowners'
group in Golden Gate Estates, so I just wanted to make sure that that's
corrected on the record.
Okay. County Manager?
Item #lOE
RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD BID NUMBER 06-3898 FOR
THE PURCHASE OF CHEMICALS FOR USE BY THE WATER
AND WATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENTS IN THE
ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $2,000,000 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 10E, and that
is a recommendation to award bid number 06-3898 for the purchase of
chemicals for the use by the water and water reclamation departments
in the estimated annual amount of $2 million.
And Mr. Paul Mattausch, your director of your water department,
will present.
MR. MATTAUSCH: Thank you. For the record, Paul
Mattausch, Director of the Water Department.
I have before you today, speaking on behalf of both the water and
the water reclamation departments, an item to purchase chemicals for
the treatments of water and wastewater. I have a brief presentation
Page 139
January 24, 2006
prepared, but prior to that I'd be glad to answer any questions that you
may have on this item.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner
Coyle and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Is there any further discussion on this item before we call the
question?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If not, those -- all in favor, signify by
saymg aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
MR. MATTAUSCH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, Paul. Did a great
job.
Item #lOG
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE SPECIFIC GLITCH
LANGUAGE TO THE 2005 GROWTH MANAGEMENT BILL
THAT ADDRESSES COLLIER COUNTY'S CONCERNS WITH
CONCURRENCY AND PROPORTIONATE SHARE THAT WILL
BE PRESENTED TO STATE LEGISLATORS FOR INCLUSION IN
2006 LEGISLATION - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is item lOG, and that
Page 140
January 24,2006
is a recommendation to approve specific glitch language to the 2005
growth management bill that addresses Collier County concerns with
concurrency and proportionate share that will be presented to the state
legislators for inclusion in the 2006 legislation.
The materials for this item were provided to the Board of County
Commissioners on Friday last week, did not make publication for this
particular packet, but were delivered to the Board of County
Commissioners and are available either in the boardroom or in the
County Manager's Office.
This requirement we talked about at the last board meeting, that
we had a request from Representative Mike Davis that basically said
that he would champion these particular items during this legislative
session but needed our glitch language, and that was in direct response
to the petition that Commissioner Coyle, as your chair, gave to the
Southwest Florida legislative delegation in December on your behalf
and basically laid out your legislative priorities for the 2006 Florida
legislative session.
And he -- and Commissioner Coyle received a promise from that
dais with those legislators sitting behind it that they would help us
with that process as it went on, and this has to do with the glitch
amendment to Senate Bill 360.
In further discussions with Representative Davis, he made it
clear, since we're novices at drafting glitch or legislative language, we
are -- we are novices, believe me, in that regard. He basically said, he
said, used the KISS principle, Keep it Simple, Stupid, and -- because
everybody will understand it, try to minimize all the changes so it
doesn't look like it's in an inherent complete rewrite of the bill. That
will turn everyone off. So try to keep it short. Try to keep it as simple
as possible, but get what you want as a county put into that bill.
With that, I brought the staff together, Ms. Deb Wight, my
assistant; Mr. JeffKlatzkow, assistant county attorney; Randy Cohen,
your director of comprehensive planning; brought Joe Schmitt and
Page 141
January 24, 2006
Don Scott, over there in the back on the cell phone trying to get
something resolved with transportation, I brought them all in a room
with our legislative lobbyist, Mr. Keith Arnold & Associates, to talk
about how we went about this.
After that meeting was over, we basically had these changes to
Senate Bill 360 that are all in the concurrency section of that bill that
had to do with Florida Statute 163, and I have -- you have that before
you.
The two objectives that were paramount were to make sure that
we could have a stricter concurrency requirement in Collier County
than what was defined in Senate Bill 360, and at -- also at the same
time, to keep our impact fee structure in the way that we basically
have regimed, to have growth pay for growth in Collier County.
I believe in a very simplified manner we've been able to do that.
And the changes to the four sections -- basically it's four sentences
that have been added to that bill, and that gets our point across.
Subject to your questions, I recommend that the Board of County
Commissioners approve this particular draft language, that I draft a
letter to Representative Davis to give it to him and all our other
legislators in Southwest Florida along with the Florida Association of
Counties.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Just to reassure you, this language
is consistent with what you approved in my letter to the governor, it's
consistent with what we all told most of the people who met with me
and the secretary of DCA, it's consistent with what we told Secretary
Cohen of the DCA, and -- so it's not new to you.
This is the strategy that we wanted to pursue all along, and I
think that if we can get these changes made in the legislation, it will
solve almost all of our problems with respect to this bill, and -- or this
act. And I think we can live with it, and we won't have to slog
through this -- this bill quibbling over terms and contradictory
Page 142
January 24, 2006
statements which still remain in this bill, by the way. But it would be
a never-ending process to try to sort that out. I think this is a good
solution.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'm very pleased with the
words. I think you've done exactly what you set out to do. The words
are succinct. They're simple, right to the point. They're not confusing
at all, as Commissioner Coyle was just saying, and there is
misinterpretations that can be had. Not in these words. These are
perfect.
I suggest that -- I know you said we'd send it to all of our
legislators and so forth. I'd like to include John Thaxton who has been
working on our behalf on this impact fee task force. He's just been a
champion for Collier County, and I'd like to include him with these
words, and I'm glad that you're going to include the Florida
Association of Counties, and anybody else that you think would
benefit from -- I think all of the counties would benefit from this. I
think that these are the words that each and every county should want
to submit because they're fair. They give everybody the opportunity
for home rule, and -- which is something that's been trying -- they're, I
felt, trying to take away from us with SB 360. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I can say that -- before I turn this over to
Commissioner Coletta, I can say that right from the onset, when the
Florida Association of Counties put a work group together to try to
address the 360 problem, that this has been an ongoing discussion, and
it's been out there in the forefront with all the different meetings that
I've attended with the Florida Association of Counties.
And whatever the item that's been placed on our agenda,
basically is what we've been fighting for for all the counties here in the
State of Florida.
So we're waiting for the final executive report that's going to be
Page 143
January 24, 2006
turned over to the legislative body. But I can assure you, as
Commissioner Fiala said, that we had a real champion that was placed
on the governor's board, the governor's handpicked board, in regards
to addressing these issues.
And if it wasn't for Commissioner John Thaxton, I don't know
where we would be in this process.
And the other thing I want to state is that all through this, as we
were getting to the end of this ordeal, the hearings and so on, that it
started out with myself being involved in this, and then slowly but
surely we've had other commissioners that have been getting involved
in this whole process.
And I can assure you that our presence there, I believe, has
helped, not only gives support to John Thaxton, but the people that are
on the committee realize that Collier County was there to represent
every one of the stakeholders, and also all of the citizens here in
Collier County.
So at that, I'll turn it over to Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well-- and since we're
recognizing accomplishments of John Thaxton, which we very well
might, I also want to mention that he was -- just recently assumed the
chair position of the Southwest Regional Planning Council.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: He did?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, where he'll be even more
effective in the future, to be able to assist us.
But this has been an effort, not only John Thaxton and, of course,
our lobbyist, but Commissioner Halas needs special recognition for
the fact that he has taken the time to work right with the Florida
Association of Counties as one of their directors and to keep this thing
alive.
I can assure you that if it wasn't for Collier County's intervention
early on, Commissioner Halas's and then following with the rest of the
commissioners, I don't think we'd have gotten the interest up of the
Page 144
January 24, 2006
rest of the State of Florida. It was through that type of effort that the
other commissioners throughout Florida, at least the ones that care
enough to take part in this, have taken an interest in it, and it's been
enough to be able to stem the tide.
But also too, we do need to give due recognition to our
legislative representatives who have been a guiding force through this
whole thing. And in the end when the day -- the day will come that it
will go before them, and with our help in the audience, continuously
there at each one of these meetings that come up to discuss this
particular subject as it goes through committees, and our legislative
people will be there to make sure that it comes out right for us, I'm
sure of that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me jump in before
Commissioner Coyle and just add, also we need to give recognition to
Commissioner Coyle because he's been a champion on this as well.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's true, from early on.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. It just occurs to me while
we're talking about this, nobody knows what we're talking about.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's true. It's all in code.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, it's really true. We
haven't told anybody what these -- what these changes mean or what
they say. So rather than reading from the document, there are two
things that the changes that the staff has put together really mean.
(Chairman Halas left the meeting room.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Number one is that we can retain
the right to use impact fees as a way to fund growth. And number
two, if we want to have a stricter concurrency system so that we can
demand that infrastructure exist before we approve any development,
this new language you're recommending gives us that right, whereas,
the state growth management bill deprives us of that right.
So it's important that the public understand what we are trying to
Page 145
January 24, 2006
do. But please don't get the impression that this problem is solved,
because it first has to be approved by a majority of the legislators who,
by the way, gave us the bad bill in the first place. So we're a long way
from solving this thing, so let's not get too comfortable with it. But
the language that we've put together is good language, and I hope we'll
approve it.
In fact, I make a motion that we approve it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. We have a motion from
Commissioner Coyle and a second from Commissioner Fiala for
approval.
Is there any other comments?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Hearing none, all those in favor,
indicate by saying aye.
(Chairman Halas entered the hearing room.)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And it passes unanimously, 5-0.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Did you say he became chairman of
the RPC?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
Item #lOH
RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND EXECUTION OF THE
Page 146
January 24, 2006
ATTACHED UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT TO
CARIBBEAN VENTURE OF NAPLES, LLC - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to the next item,
which is 10H. That's old l6D I that was asked to be pulled from the
regular agenda by Commissioner Henning, and it reads, a
recommenda -- recommend approval and execution of the attached
utility easement agreement to Caribbean Venture of Naples, LLC.
And Mr. Chuck Carrington, your real estate expert, okay, subject
matter expert on your staff, will present.
MR. CARRINGTON: I don't have a presentation, but
Commissioner Henning, I'd be glad to answer your questions, or I can
give a brief overview.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, no. You don't have to
answer any questions. It's just -- this is part of the Fleischmann
property that we just purchased, part of the Caribbean zoo.
MR. CARRINGTON: Yes, sir, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, you know, my perception
is, the whole campaign was based upon saving the zoo and the
surrounding areas from develop (sic) only for us to approve a utility
easement on the same property for the development to the north. So I
just can't support it, and no offense to anybody. I just don't think it's
in compliance to the wishes of the people that are paying for this
property .
MR. CARRINGTON: Can I explain a little bit here then and
make sure we're all clear on what we're doing?
The county, we own parcel three, 18, one and two. When -- as
part of the contract when we acquired the property from TPL, TPL
reserved an access easement over that 950 feet that you see the little
crosshatched right there, and that was to provide them access to this
parcel here. So that was part of the deal, that they would have access
to it.
Page 147
January 24, 2006
Now, subsequent to us getting the contract signed because we
were rushing around to meet a December 19th date because that was
their deadline with the Fleischmanns, then the buyer got ahold of TPL
and says, hey, wait a minute, you forgot in the contract to include for
utility easements as well. We need that because we're not sure if we're
going to be able to bring utilities off of Golden Gate or off of
Goodlette- Frank.
So that's when they came to us and asked if we would bring it
back to the board for that purpose. And that gives them the alternative
then when they do their development plan to give them that ability to
go from both ways. But you're really not diminishing the value of the
property, because that access easement is already on there, and that
was part of the transaction.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That was a part of the original
transaction we voted on?
MR. CARRINGTON: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hold on just a second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can I clarify one thing?
MR. CARRINGTON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You said it was not a part of the
original one?
MR. CARRINGTON: The access easement over the 950 was
part of the -- the transaction deal with TPL.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you get on the mike? I
can't hear you.
MR. CARRINGTON: Oh, I'm sorry. Excuse me. I'm not up
close enough.
The access easement over the 950 feet, that was part of the
transaction with -- that we had with TPL.
Page 148
January 24, 2006
Now, that did not include the utility easement over the same 950.
Caribbean Ventures came back to TPL after they realized that that
wasn't in there and they told them that, you didn't include the utilities
-- they had a right to put the utilities in, but it was too late, we couldn't
go back. We'd have to come back to the board. We couldn't make the
December closing date if we did that. So they asked if we would
come back to the board afterwards to get the utilities put in there.
But it's really not diminishing the property any more at all, that's
why the value is diminimis. It's really -- you can't even put a number
on the value of it because the ingress and egress easement is what
diminishes the value, and that was part of the original deal.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Did he answer your question,
Commissioner?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is there any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do we have any speakers on this?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle, I believe a second by Commissioner Fiala in
regards to this agreement ofthe Caribbean Ventures of Naples, LLC.
I'll call the question. All those in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Those opposed, by like sign.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. CARRINGTON: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Page 149
January 24,2006
Item #11
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to paragraph 11,
which is public comments on general topics.
Mrs. Filson?
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, we have two speakers. Bob
Schank; he'll be followed by Houston Thompson.
MR. SCHANK: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Bob Schank. I'm here today on behalf of your Collier County
Fair Board; Rick Bell, our president; and our new manager, V onda
Wilkey (phonetic), to publicly invite you to our 40th annual Collier
County fair along with staff and the entire community of Collier
County.
Your fair board, over the last 40 years, I can tell you -- 15 years
of mine being out there -- have worked very hard to put on the very
best fair we can for our county with what we have to work with, and
each year it keeps getting better and better.
Some of the attractions this year -- and I can't recall all of them,
and I won't try to -- but we're going to have a beauty pageant, a
newlywed game, we're going to have a battle of the bands for all the
teenagers to rock and roll, groups all the way from Tampa down to
southwest -- down to Everglades City actually, will be participating.
And I know you've heard of Fear Factor. We're going to have a
fear factor. I don't know what it quite involves, but it sounds pretty
interesting. Also we're going to have a tractor sledge race, sled race,
and I suppose that's similar to drag racing, only we're going to be
using tractors.
Ron Diamond, who's been a big fan of all the kids in Collier
County through many generations, the last two, three generations
anyways, will be out there with his magic show, and we're actually
Page 150
January 24, 2006
bringing back professional wrestling, of which yours truly will be
refereeing that.
And after my wife Doris cooks my final home-cooked meal
Friday, I'm getting into a vigorous athletic physical fitness program to
prepare myself for anything these professional wrestlers may throw at
me. But it's going to be a fun time.
And besides all the fair food we've got out there and all the rides
and attractions and games, truly the nucleus of our Collier County fair
is focused on our agricultural livestock. I think we all can agree, not
enough is said about our farmers in Collier County, and this is a
wonderful opportunity for our farmers to bring their products to the
fair so we can all see what goes on out there and the products they
have to offer.
And nothing could be said enough about our 4-H club in Collier
County. These kids work so hard getting them hogs fattened up for
competition and all the chickens and horses and rabbits.
And my fans are the roosters, because I stay out there at the fair.
And if you all know me, I'm a real early bird, and there's nothing like
the competition that occurs around five in the morning when them
roosters start going. So it's a lot of fun.
And not only that, traditionally for Collier County, over the years
we've had a horseshoe competition which involves our county
commission, and at times has involved our county manager with his
assistant.
We'll have it again this year, and I know there was some conflict
last year on who really won the competition. And I know my eyes
aren't what they used to be, but it appears Commissioner Coyle's
holding a gold horseshoe, which could be bronze. We're not quite
sure. But Commissioner Halas doesn't agree with that.
I do know one thing for sure, Cheryl Coyle threw the first ringer,
I believe on the first round of that competition, and she didn't get
much after that.
Page 151
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was about it.
MR. SCHANK: But she did throw that first ringer. But we do
wish you'd come out and support us this year.
And your parks employee, Tim Thomas, is putting it on for you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
want Commissioner Coyle to miss it.
But I do know the fair board has a heavy favorite only because he
represents their district, and that's Commissioner Coletta; however, I
do feel Commissioner Henning over there has somewhat of an
advantage because he's got that long reach, so it will be interesting.
And Donna, she's just going to -- Commissioner Fiala's just going
to throw --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just want to baby-sit.
MR. SCHANK: -- that thing and see what happens. But
anyways, we're going to have a good time, and we sure hope the
community supports it again. It's our 40th fair.
And with that, I do have some pictures that I did clear through
counsel that I can give you for Commissioner Coyle and
Commissioner Halas. You two can squabble over this. But once
again, thank you for your time, and we hope to see you out at the fair.
By the way, I believe --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Could you give us the date?
MR. SCHANK: I believe I said that's February 3rd--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, the date.
MR. SCHANK: -- through the 12th.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Bob, before you go,
something about a food drive?
MR. SCHANK: I'm sorry; the food drive?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The food drive that they're
putting on?
MR. SCHANK: Oh, the canned?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The canned goods.
Page 152
January 24, 2006
MR. SCHANK: Yes. That will also be out there this year for --
anyone who brings a can, I believe they get a discount at the gate.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's on Friday -- the first
Friday of the fair and the following Thursday, if they bring a can of
food, they get a dollar off the admission, and the canned food ends up
in the food bank. We're looking for all the support we can get.
And obviously you couldn't read the sign I kept holding up, but
that's all right.
MR. SCHANK: I can't read that sign. Thank you so much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Leave it to Commissioner Coletta
to be trying to collect additional food.
MR. SCHANK: Yeah. And look what he's doing. He's setting
an example for all of us.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's true. Thank you very
much.
MR. SCHANK: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Houston Thompson.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Boy, that sure looks like gold
horseshoe to me.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's bronze.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Houston?
MR. THOMPSON: For the record, Houston Thompson.
MS. FILSON: Or Thompson.
MR. THOMPSON: I'm here to represent two of the people that
live on Round Key that got a ticket this past week. People -- they are
all workers so they couldn't go. I said I would come and show you
people.
And I have all of them -- everything you have there, ordinance,
code enforcement and everything. And according to this, it's illegal to
park on a street in Collier County. Did you all people know that? Did
you all know that?
Page 153
January 24, 2006
I mean, they're saying -- like we're older people. We only have
one car. We park in one -- we never worry. But here are two people
that go to work. One girl pulls in just in time for the other girl to
leave. She got a ticket only because they ticketed the other guy, and
they couldn't get one without getting the other one, which is fair.
But on Round Key, it's not a thoroughfare, and there's no reason
why -- unless you put a sign down there that says parking -- you're
allowed parking there. And I can't -- you know, you're not allowed to
park on the grass, so where are these people going to park if they have
two or three cars? Anybody have an answer?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, in the driveway.
MR. THOMPSON: Can't always get three in there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Double driveway you can, can't
you?
MR. THOMPSON: Yes, double one you can, yes. But they're all
singles around there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, double driveway's
allowed.
MR. THOMPSON: Please.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Double driveway's allowed in
our code. You can build a double driveway.
MR. THOMPSON: No, because you're left -- well, one side of
your wheels would be into the grass the way they're made around
Villa 7, from Lakewood --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The only Round Key I
know is south of --
MR. THOMPSON: Glades.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- Port of the Isles. And the only
way you can get there, by boat. So I'm not sure where you're talking
about.
MR. THOMPSON: No. Where the Glade runs right directly into
Lakewood. Right around that comer there is Round Key.
Page 154
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Put a double driveway in. I
mean, that's why you got single-car driveways and double-car
driveways is to accommodate your needs.
MR. THOMPSON: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. THOMPSON: Right. But we are letting affordable people
move into the neighborhood here who have more cars than I do, and
I'm just representing them.
According to what this paper says, which are the code
enforcement and everything -- I have three daughters who come from
every direction, east coast, north, and if they come to my house for
Christmas, they're going to get a ticket. They could get a ticket. I
don't know if on Christmas day they could. But that would be -- they
should get a ticket, according to what this paper says.
Can we change that somewhere so they can park around the
street here somewhere?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You mean temporary parking, for
instance, like -- like, for instance, holidays or --
MR. THOMPSON: You can't put that down -- you can't put that
down or that would be discrimination. You're doing it for Christians
and things like that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I meant just for anything. I
mean if--
,
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Fiala said
holiday. She didn't say Christmas.
MR. THOMPSON: Well--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you know, like I have a lot of
kids, and when they all come and visit, we can't all fit in the driveway.
MR. THOMPSON: Where do you put them?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They go on the grass actually. And
I know you're not allowed to park on the grass either, but I don't have
any place else to put my kids' cars, so -- and they're over there at least
Page 155
January 24, 2006
once a month when we have a family affair, you know, for
somebody's birthday or function or whatever. I don't know what to do
about it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, move to my -- come to
my house and have it there. I live in the Estates. You can park in the
grass.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sir, I think what -- you're bringing up a
good point, but you have to realize that we don't allow parking on the
streets because most of the streets are narrow. If you have to get
emergency vehicles down through there, like a fire truck and stuff of
this nature, that could cause a problem, okay?
And so that's why -- and what Commissioner Henning was -- the
point he was trying to make was that you have the ability -- if you
have just a single drive, that you have the ability to expand it to a --
wider to accommodate additional people if you -- if you're going to
run into that situation all the time.
So I think Commissioner Coyle also has a comment.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The point is that we just don't
dream up these ideas. Almost every law we pass is passed because
citizens come to us to get a law passed.
The people have been upset for many years here about too many
vehicles being parked at a single home and them being parked on the
side of the road and in the swales and the grass, and the homeowner
associations have come to us to get us to stop that, and so we have
implemented these rules to stop that.
It is not possible to grant individuals exceptions from those rules,
but what we have been very good at doing is if someone has a party at
their house or someone has some guests at their house and they're
going to be there for a while, if you just call code enforcement and let
them know, code enforcement has been very good about cooperating
with things like that.
And now, they'll check back and see if this extends too long, and
Page 156
January 24, 2006
they might give you a ticket if it extends too long. But the first thing
to do is, if you're going to have a problem, call code enforcement and
explain it to them. They're reasonable people, but their obligation is to
enforce the law, and the law was developed because lots and lots of
people wanted us to do it that way.
And there were public hearings about this. We've gone over and
over this. So we're not going to be able to do anything about your
specific situation. We can't grant exemptions to the law.
MR. THOMPSON: In here it says if you have -- you're not
stopping the traffic. You can bring your fire engine down this street
and somebody park here on the street, too. I measured this.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You can't park on the street, okay?
Whether it is blocking the street or not, you can't park on the street.
You can't park in the swale off a street. There are certain places where
you can park vehicles. You can park them in a garage, you can park
them in the driveway. That should give everybody at least a minimum
of two parking spaces.
If that isn't enough, you can widen your driveway and you can
park maybe one or two more vehicles there, but there are limits on
what you can do with respect to paving the front yard to accommodate
too many vehicles. People don't want you to have five or six vehicles
parked in front of your house. They don't think that's good for
property values.
So a lot of thought has been put into this, and we don't have a
perfect solution. We have merely responded to the complaints of
people who said, we've got too many cars parked in front of too many
houses, and it's not good for our neighborhood, and we're trying to do
something about it.
If you have a problem or if the people you're speaking on behalf
of have a problem, ask them to contact code enforcement, notify them
what the problem is, see if code enforcement can suggest a problem
(sic) to resolve it. And if you're having a party of some kind, they will
Page 157
January 24, 2006
always grant you exceptions for that, they always do that. Just notify
them in advance and talk to them. They're pretty reasonable people.
MR. THOMPSON: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that who gave them the ticket was
code enforcement?
MR. THOMPSON: Yes. Code enforcement gave the ticket.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MR. THOMPSON: Thank you. And I'm sorry you have so
many children.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I'm not.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that -- Ms. Filson, is that the last
speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
Item #12A
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ADOPT A RESOLUTION SUPERSEDING
RESOLUTION NO. 94-136, AND PROVIDING GUIDELINES FOR
CONSIDERATION OF APPLICANTS FOR APPOINTMENT TO
ADVISORY BOARDS - CONTINUED TO FEBRUARY 14,2006
BCC REGULAR MEETING - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Thank you.
Commissioner, that brings us to paragraph 12, which is the
county attorney's report, and it's l2A. It's a recommendation that the
Board of County Commissioners adopt a resolution superseding
resolution number 94-136 and providing guidelines for consideration
of applicants for appointment to advisory boards.
MS. FILSON: And Commissioners, if! may, I know that the
board gave direction to the county attorney to amend this -- can you
Page 158
January 24, 2006
hear me?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
MS. FILSON: -- to amend this; however, I have concerns in
reference to the amendments. And the first one is in -- on the first
page, number two where it says, the board deadline for submission of
recommendations by the advisory committee shall be extended to 60
days.
And that's only 19 additional days after the 41. And I'm afraid
that might not be enough time, and the word shall is permanent. And I
would prefer that it stay can be extended.
And then my second concern is number three where it says
advisory committee shall consider all applicants and positions they are
seeking. And the problem I have with that is, I have several
five-member boards where three members' terms expire in one year,
and then two years later the next two expire.
And if it's a year that three of them expire or even some of my
seven-member boards -- and I do advertise at least two months ahead
of time to get the applicants and send out the expiration letters --
however, as you all know, sometimes I have to advertise three or four
times to get applicants. And I advertise for three weeks, and if I do
that and you put shall, they're not going to -- there's no possible way
they're going to have a quorum to interview these, because shall
means they have to do that. Those are my concerns.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney, do you want to chime
in here?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think this is an issue that you and Ms.
Filson work out and maybe continue this item.
MS. FILSON: And I did call the County Attorney's Office with
my concerns, but they tried to incorporate into the resolution the
direction of the board at the last meeting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Just do what Sue wants and
Page 159
January 24, 2006
bring it back for our approval.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
MS. FILSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Can you clarify the shall and the will and
all that good legal terminology?
MR. WEIGEL: There comes a point when we have a publication
deadline. But we were talking; where she's suggested about shall be
extended to 60 days, I think what she has asked is just that it may be
extended period so that it's her prerogative.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, yes.
MR. WEIGEL: We're trying to give some certainty to this so
everyone would know that it's not forever. But in this case, as long as
you know that it's at her control, that she may extend it, then that
works fine for us.
MS. FILSON: And I previously did. If they had problems, you
know, and they were legitimate, then I let them extend it before I bring
it, because you can't go strictly by the book in all cases.
MR. WEIGEL: Attorneys try to go strictly by the book.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Number three?
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. In number three where she talked about
the advisory committee shall consider all applicants, I guess if they
have a quorum problem or to the extent that there are vacancies or
applicants are already on that committee, we can put a sentence in
there to kind of massage that and give you the flexibility you'd like.
MS. FILSON: Maybe like the board strongly recommends, but
not shall.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Recommends. Because I mean,
suppose they don't come up with a recommendation? I mean, I would
rather have a recommendation, but if they for some reason can't agree
or they can't get a quorum together, we can't hold up. I'd just as soon
keep marching forward.
MS. FILSON: Okay. And the majority of the time they can
Page 160
January 24, 2006
come up with recommendations, albeit not the quasijudicial boards;
however, there is an occasion where they can't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The only thing I would ask if
we did do that is that we have it noted in our executive summary that
this took place.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir; yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So what do you need, some -- three nods
at least, or four nods from the commissioners here to --
MS. FILSON: Just one from you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'm confused about which
sentence you're talking about. You said three, I presume that means --
MS. FILSON: Number three--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Paragraph three.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Three.
MS. FILSON: Number three, and it starts out, prior to, and then
you go down to the next sentence, and it says, the advisory committee
shall consider all applicants in attendance and shall determine by a
majority vote of the quorum which applicant meets the prerequisites
or -- for appointment or reappointment to their committee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. What's wrong with that?
MS. FILSON: The word shall I have a problem with because it
means they have to make a recommendation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. It means they can make a
recommendation to accept, to reject, or to not consider?
MS. FILSON: Either. You know, you've directed the county
attorney to put in here that every advisory committee shall interview
the applicants and make recommendations to you, and I'm just saying
that there are some circumstances where that may not be possible.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Wait a minute. That particular
sentence doesn't say interview.
MS. FILSON: It says, all applicants in attendance, it's the same
thing, which is what you intended, for them to interview the applicants
Page 161
January 24, 2006
and give you a recommendation. I believe that's the direction you
gave to the county attorney.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then you could solve that by
saying all applicants, rather than in attendance, right?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, the interview aspect is really in paragraph
one.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could you just change that shall to
may in both cases?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we want them to consider the
applicants, don't we? I mean, shouldn't it be mandatory?
MS. FILSON: Yeah. We want recommendations, but I believe
the direction that you gave to the county attorney was you wanted
them to interview them prior to giving you the recommendation --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, yes, that would be very nice.
MS. FILSON: And the word -- I think that's very nice too, but
the word shall I have a problem with.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, how are they going to
interview them if --
MS. FILSON: Well, I'm saying the majority of the boards will
be able to do that, but there may be some instances where they can't.
Like if I have to advertise three times to get applicants --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, wait a minute. Where did we
say that it took a quorum to do the interview?
MS. FILSON: I'm not talking about take -- it takes a quorum to
do anything for any advisory committee.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If we specify here that it doesn't
have to be. The majority in attendance?
MS. FILSON: I think it does.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, it's a majority of the quorum. So if it's a
five-member board and you have three present, 2-1 vote could -- you
know, could make a recommendation as far as that goes.
Page 162
January 24, 2006
How about in that paragraph three that we say, shall to the extent
practicable, and that way the county attorney or the staff liaison or
some combination can work with them --
MS. FILSON: To the extent practicable, yeah.
MR. WEIGEL: -- as the situation -- as the situation occurs.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Why don't we have you two sit down
and come up with some good verbiage that everyone can -- feels
comfortable with, and then that way we won't be doing it on the fly,
would that be --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Could I make one other
recommendation about this?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't you just say, except
from the -- except with the inability to obtain a quorum, you will
interview and make a recommendation?
MR. WEIGEL: And I think you're saying the inability to achieve
a quorum is because a few of those applicants are already members?
No?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
MS. FILSON: No, because applicants can vote for themselves.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure.
MR. WEIGEL: All right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So all you're saying is you're afraid
that for some reason they won't be able to get a quorum so they cannot
make a decision. So let's just say, except for the inability to get a
quorum, you will interview the people, or you shall interview the
people, and make a recommendation?
MR. WEIGEL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Being that we --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala, go for it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Being that shall -- when you change
the word shall to may, and that satisfied you with the first sentence,
Page 163
January 24, 2006
right, because then you weren't required to do anything, why can't you
just change the shalls to may, and that makes it nice and simple.
MS. FILSON: Well, may means they can if they want to, and
shall means they have to.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So. But you're saying they can't
sometimes, so why --
MS. FILSON: And I want to be able to -- I want to be able to tell
them that they have to do this. But if the law says they shall do it and
there's unusual circumstances, that's a problem.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we want them to do it, and
the only reason they can't do it is if they don't have a quorum. So why
don't we just say, except for the fact that you can't get a quorum,
you've got to do it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to continue.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, and I second that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Me, too; me, too.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I really believe that the two of you need
to sit down and try to figure out what needs to be put in the verbiage
so everybody feels comfortable and we take care of this, okay, and
then bring it back at a later date. So--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you have trouble getting a
quorum, just let us know.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And add one more, is, too. What does is
mean?
MR. WEIGEL: Oh, yes, yes. I remember.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So at that, we have a motion for
continuance on this issue by Commissioner Coyle and a second by--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, Coletta.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Coletta, and a second by -- who was the
second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, myself, that's right. I forgot. And
Page 164
January 24, 2006
-- it's been a long day, huh?
So I'll call the question on this for a continuance on this and -- to
be brought back in regards to the resolution for interviewing
candidates for the advisory board.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Those opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It carries. Good luck.
MR. MUDD: Is there a continuation date? Is there a date you
want it to come back to the board?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sometime next year would be real
fine.
MS. FILSON: We could probably bring it back at the next
meeting. We can argue over this tomorrow over something.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Good luck.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to staff and
commission general communications. Commissioners, I have two
items to discuss with the board.
MS. FILSON: You know what? I had one other question, I'm so
sorry. May I ask one other question in reference to this? It's very
important.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We don't have a quorum.
MS. FILSON: The question that I need to ask you -- this is all
committees in general except quasijudicial, correct, this new
resolution?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's what the ordinance says.
Page 165
January 24, 2006
MS. FILSON: Including the productivity committee?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yep.
MS. FILSON: Because you had -- give them different direction
that you wanted three applicants for one position, and then you were
going to pick the applicants. So are you going to change that, include
the productivity in this reso.?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Treat them all the same.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Thank you. I wanted to make that clear.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. With that correction, okay.
MS. FILSON: Sorry.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. County Manager?
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, there's two items that I'd like to
talk about. First item is, on 1 February we are -- we are going to start
the beach renourishment process along the Naples and north Collier
beaches, and I believe Mr. Gary McAlpin has talked about that with
the board.
In order to do that in front of some homeowners along the beach,
we need a temporary construction easement. There are, right now,
two dozen homeowners that haven't provided the temporary
easements. And we're getting to that I February start of construction
date, and personally -- from my personal opinion, this is not a -- this,
what you have on your overhead, is not a satisfactory outcome of not
getting a temporary construction easement, but that's what you get
when you don't have one in and your neighbors do. They get sand on
their portion above the high water line and you don't. And it stops at
the high water line. Oh, by the way, this is an actual picture.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What is this?
Page 166
January 24, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Swimming pool.
MR. MUDD: Well, this is -- this is a beach renourishment
project with one of the property owners without a temporary
construction easement provided, and we have no right to go on their
property with the sand.
So therefore -- Commissioners, you're shaking your head. So,
therefore, you get a project that has beach renourishment all the way
to the dunes with the property owners that have given a temporary
construction easement and the person that doesn't provide it doesn't
get the sand and it has to stop at the high water market because we
don't have the ability nor the legal right to trespass on their property
and provide that sand.
So what you get is a series of weak points. And, you know, we
all want to talk about this as beach renourishment, but some other
people talk about it as shore protection. And when you get into the
renourishment of a beach, it has a dual benefit. You get a nice beach
and at the same time, for those homeowners, you get shore protection.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Where is that?
MR. MUDD: I've asked Gary McAlpin where the picture is.
He's told me it's a real picture. It hasn't been doctored up, and he's
trying to determine if that was the last time that Naples Beach got
renourishment and it's one of the properties here or it's on the east
coast, and he hasn't determined that yet, but he has a do-out (sic) for
me.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: East coast.
MR. MUDD: Sir?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's got to be on the east coast.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: Well, Commissioner, I think we need to go
through the process one more time to notify those two dozen property
owners that, you know, that you've got your final shot at a temporary
construction easement so that we can provide sand. If not, this is what
Page 167
January 24, 2006
it could look like out in front of your property, and it causes a problem
during the next storm, because at the next storm you have now two
dozen weak spots on your beach, okay, and water normally takes the
least --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Resistance.
MR. MUDD: -- resistance to go someplace, so it makes that
property owner more prone to surge if we have one. And I believe
you need to not only document those areas, but I believe you also need
to provide that information to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, okay, so that if the storm does come up, that it's well
documented, everybody has the information, and so the county is less
liable in a suit against it because somebody will say, well, it's the
beach renourishment project that caused my property to be more
vulnerable. And the real issue was, no, it was your inability to give us
a temporary construction easement that made your property more
vulnerable, and here is the result. Yes, sir?
But before I send that letter, I would -- I would like the board to
know that -- and get your blessing in order to do that, because we are
about three weeks out from the start of this construction. And it isn't
because of lack of trying. There have been numerous notices that
have been sent, and there are approximately two dozen, of which 18
reside in the City of Naples.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We've been doing beach
renourishment for a long time. I have never, ever, ever seen anything
like this happen. I have never seen a problem with putting sand on
beaches that even closely resembles something like this. Why all of a
sudden is this a big problem?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, because we don't have the
construction easement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why not do it, just do it, put the
sand where the sand has to be? And if there's a cost to the individual
for doing that, we just bill them and put a lien on their property.
Page 168
January 24,2006
MR. MUDD: Well, I believe the county attorney will talk to you
a little bit about not having construction easements when you do a
project, sir.
MR. WEIGEL: I could.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, go ahead, please.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Well, it's really the reverse, and that is,
back when the county did the '951'96 beach nourishment, our capital
projects division at that time went out, working with the engineer, and
obtained the temporary construction easements, I think, in every
instance up and down the areas that were to be renourished, knowing
that that is the permission that one has, such as government and its
agents, the contractors, to get on the property, the private property, to
do what has -- for the staging, mobilization and things that have to be
done.
That's typically done through a negotiation process, otherwise it
takes on the -- it takes on the form of what you might call inverse
condemnation, which is the legal concept of advertently or
inappropriately getting on property and creating what's called a
temporary taking.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Wait a minute. Let's not get off the
subject here.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, I didn't see in this
photograph any private property for staging of anything.
MR. WEIGEL: No. Well, I'm just talking about the concept of
the easement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, I can't believe there's
any private property to the right of the dune, right?
MR. WEIGEL: That may well be the case. I don't know
anything about this photo or the presentation. I'm just responding to
the fact that --
MR. MUDD: Sir, it extends all the way to the high water line,
Page 169
January 24, 2006
yes, sir. That's their property.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What extends all the way to the
high water line?
MR. MUDD: There is property. Their property extends out to
the high water line in a lot of instances, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, now, the county manager--
or county attorney is talking about staging areas and access. Those I
understand. You've got to have places to put pipes, you've got to get
into the beach, you've got to get trucks and dirt movers and front
loaders and things around. That I understand. But a problem with
putting sand on the beach and leaving big holes in it is something I
don't understand.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner, I think what they're
referring to is that the property that we're looking at here, the property
rights of that homeowner belong all the way to the high water mark,
which is probably the edge that is on the right-hand side ofthe hole.
So they could only put sand to that point because to the left of
that ridge where the hole starts belongs to the property owner, and the
property owner basically said, I don't want to have a renourishment of
sand. And so we're saying that in order to accomplish this task, that
we have to have the okay, because if this fills up with water, obviously
what it's going to do, it's going to end up trenching out, and we're
going to ruin all the beach access.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you see, that's the point, and
I don't believe that we're obligated to accept something like that. You
know, it's my belief that we could go ahead -- in this particular case,
we could go ahead and fill in all that water, fill in sand evenly over
that entire portion, and then bill the property owner for the sand, and if
necessary, attach a lien to his property for it in the same way that we
go in and cut some body's grass on a vacant lot and bill them for it or
put a lien on it.
If we've got a situation that is causing us difficulty with getting
Page 170
January 24, 2006
the beach renourished -- I mean, certainly you can't leave it like that
because it will erode for the places where you do have the permits. So
you just do it.
I don't understand -- and maybe putting up this photograph is
what's gotten me all worked up here, but I don't understand why
anybody would accept that sort of thing. But now if you want to talk
about getting access to staging materials, now that's an entirely
different issue, so I'm confused.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Well, I hadn't quite finished talking about
it. I said, typically there's staging and mobilization occurs on the
upland part of a beach, which can be landward of the mean high water
mark, which is typically a line of demarkation of the private land and
then the public area, but not -- there can be -- if when you look at
deeds and things of that nature and go by the metes and bounds
descriptions, you can -- you can ascertain the private propertylpublic
beach distinction far more clearly, like with a surveyor something of
that nature.
It -- I think what Jim is indicating is, this is, perhaps, kind of an
overboard example of a problem, but there conceivably can be issues
which are coordinated, I think, most carefully in the formative stages
of any beach renourishment project where the property rights are
recognized to the extent that they must be and should be, and to the
extent that there is a -- often a win-win situation where there is
significant benefit, as Jim was indicating, to the upland owner not
merely in terms of storm protection insurance consideration of a
positive nature of these kinds of projects occurring.
And so that it's almost surprising -- it is surprising to think that
there would be a reticent owner that would not lend the beach aspect
of their private property into the composite project.
But these are just kind of the things that the professionals look at
as we go forward, and for the most part, I think, are minimized before
they become irreconcilable in case there are differences of opinion.
Page 171
January 24, 2006
MR. MUDD: I guess what I'm asking is, I'm asking if! could
write a letter to the two dozen, let's call them holdouts, for lack of a
better word, and basically say, let's do --let's do the right thing for the
entire beach. This is a silly situation.
I agree with Commissioner Coyle. I think this is a silly
photograph, but I got to tell you, if you don't have rights to put the
sand on their property, you're there.
So you can do a bit of a taking. And if the board -- if the board
so designates, and I don't get the voluntary temporary construction
easements from those owners and the board tells me to put the sand all
the way to the dune line irrespective of that, I'll execute that, and the
county attorney can figure out what our liabilities are on that particular
issue. But I believe having holes like this is not good for our beach.
It's not good for our community.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's a health, safety, and welfare
problem.
MR. MUDD: I think it sets us up for a bad hurricane season.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, yeah. This would not be toler
-- there's no possibility that this should be tolerated. But nevertheless,
okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whatever you got to do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Did you write the letters
initially asking them for permission for construction easement?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. Gary McAlpin, out of Jack Wert's
shop, is our pock (sic) on this, along with our engineer, and they've
done numerous meetings, letters in order to do that. Again, we're
sitting at around two dozen holdouts on these --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you're asking us to write another
letter?
MR. MUDD: No. I'm just letting you know that I'm going to
write a letter --
Page 172
January 24,2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see.
MR. MUDD: -- and sign it --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: -- to basically talk to them and show them that,
you know, this is not a very good situation, okay, in that process, and
it doesn't set up for a good beach renourishment project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I've got a question to ask the county
attorney. I'm sure that this is not the first time this has been -- that this
has come about in any particular community. Is there -- to your
knowledge is there any type of case law, or you haven't really looked
at that at this point in time in regards to addressing an issue like this
for safety -- health, safety, and welfare.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, it's -- that's a very good point. I heard Mr.
Coyle mentioning that as well. What I tend to think is, is when you
come to call it a collision of the private property rights, real property
rights, and the health, safety, welfare and a community project of this
nature, that we may find that the values of the project by the county
supersede the value of the purported damage or desire not to allow
someone to go forward by the private property owner. And so it may
be that there is not a liability of a real sense.
And, again, I don't have a case to tell you right now, but I'm just
applying the general principles that we typically go to court in a
question of determining value and damage and coming up to a mean
average of what we're contending with here. So it may not be so
problematic.
But as Jim indicated, private property rights can come and be a --
can be a player, at least for a while. And to the extent that county
attorney can assist in any way, we look forward to working with them
on that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So what kind of direction do we --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I just need the board to
Page 173
January 24,2006
acknowledge the fact that I'm going to send a letter to try to
voluntarily work with the two dozen folks in order to get the
temporary construction easements before we start this plan. On the
first meeting of February I'll let you know if! have received any
positive results from any of the 24, and I'll keep -- continue to give
you updates as the meetings come about, just, you know, the two --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So you need some nods?
MR. MUDD: Yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: I would feel a lot better if! had some nods on this
one.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: The next item that I need to talk about a little bit
has to do with the zoo, and Commissioner Henning brought it up
earlier. Not necessarily what we're going to talk about, but we've got
to talk about the parcel, because I've got the public services division
administrator trying to develop a conceptual plan to provide to the
Florida Communities Trust to apply for a grant before a 1 May
deadline.
This is a conceptual plan that our staff has come up with to try to
get an idea of what we can -- we're trying to layout something that's
beneficial for the entire community.
Conservation Collier folks are a little bit concerned that if the
board's going to ask them to buy that 90-acre piece that's in yellow
right here that goes all the way up to Golden Gate Parkway, and some
of it's going to be stormwater and parking to go out and enjoy the
trails that are over that particular area, that they are reticent about
buying the property in the first place.
And I believe their initial estimate that we've at least seen in a
temporary executive summary last meeting was to the tune of around
$4.7 million for that 90 acres.
Once Collier -- if Conservation Collier acquires the property, the
Page 174
January 24, 2006
property pretty much goes into a passive position. It has -- it has no
development rights. You don't have the ability to go back in and put
in a stormwater series of lakes that you see on this particular chart, and
you get constrained to a certain extent.
You heard Clarence Tears today mention that they want to be a
partner in developing the stormwater pieces of this particular project.
You notice he wasn't forthcoming in saying that he'd give us $5
million for the purchase price. That was -- that was kind of let out, but
I did ask the question, and he said he would be more supportive of
getting the project underway in order to do that.
You'll see on this diagram a series of trails that connect down
south, I believe, with the Gordon River Greenway project, or at least
the conceptual plan that I've seen of it, plus it goes north across
Golden Gate Parkway, and it would connect -- I borrowed the
Southwest Florida slide show today.
It would connect with this property to the north with a walkway
across the road, over the road, so we could link up to the trail piece on
the Gordon River water quality park to keep that particular project
moving, and I'm talking about the walkways.
Commissioner Coyle had some concerns, because in the editorial
page, it looked like all this area that's basically wetland and mangrove
forest had been plowed in and somebody had put a big drainage ditch
down the middle. That wasn't the case. It was just a bad photo.
But I guess the reason I'm asking is, when we had our initial
meeting with staff, we also had the owner of the property to the north
and to this area over here to the side -- it's that triangular piece --
basically come to the meeting and said, wouldn't it be good to have
some kind of a unified plan of development that ties in not only the
zoo, but the stormwater, the trails?
What he is ultimately conceptually saying, that he wants to build
up in the north area and over here to the east, and maybe there are --
and along with the Conservancy to see what they have to -- what they
Page 175
January 24,2006
have in store with the parcel that's over here to the side, and that's that
-- basically that seven acres that we had talked about before -- and
bring all of that in so you can start talking about the same architectural
themes, you can talk about some privatelpublic partnership on who's
going to build the road, because that property the developer has over
here is pretty well landlocked. And if this is a conceptual road down,
I believe we could get the developer to pay for most of that road that
would serve a public purpose as far as the Parkway is concerned.
There are a lot of gives and takes in this particular thing if you
want to do it. There are some criticisms because Commissioner
Henning brought up a good point, you know, we bought -- the
referendum talked about the zoo and conserving the lands around it.
But what I'm looking for from the board is, do you want us to
proceed to bring everyone together on this 166 acres that the
Conservancy, the owners of the properties to the west and to the north,
the zoo, bring in the folks in here to come up with a unified plan for
this particular piece of property and bring it all together, or do you
want us to say, no, we're not going to do a unified plan?
A unified plan of development is a PUD, okay? So I want to
make sure that you understand that -- or do you want to just say, no,
we'll let everybody come in with their own thing, and you'll address it
one piece at a time?
The unified development plan, you still are the ultimate approval
authority for that. We'd go out and start developing that and bring
everybody together, but the board would still be the approval element,
may it be piecemeal or together in that one piece.
I just need some direction from the Board of County
Commissioners before we can --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: My concern, and we discussed it briefly
this morning, is the fact that if Collier County Land Acquisition buys
this, that's not in their resolution in regards to buying land and to
develop it in this manner, so that's the only concern I have on it. And
Page 176
January 24,2006
I'll turn this over to Commissioner -- I think Fiala was first?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, yes. First of all, when we
bought this land, we really wanted to buy all 167 acres. I think we all
agree to that -- or 166 acres or whatever it is.
We couldn't do that, and so we had to give it up, but we felt that
what -- in my opinion what we settled upon was to at least have a
unified plan for the land. We were talking about a central park. And I
think that that's what the voters voted on was a central park, a place
that we could enjoy that everybody would have access to. And I
believe that that is the way that we ought to move forward.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think this is a really good
preliminary or conceptual plan. It doesn't rearrange a lot of the natural
habitat but it does achieve the goal of letting the public access it and
use it effectively. It has a great water quality component because it
helps filter out some of the impurities before they go into the Gordon
River for the stormwater. So I think you've got a lot of really good
elements here.
I think it -- no, I know it is consistent with the intent at the time
that we asked the taxpayers to help us purchase this, because what we
were doing is protecting it from commercial and residential
development. That's what we said we wanted to do. We did not want
to see all this land developed.
So we're preserving it but creating a lot of environmentally
important features here, and I think that that actually improves the
land rather than detracts from it.
I am very concerned about talking about a unified development
because I have the feeling that what happens in a unified development
is you start taking density from the land that we own and transferring
it to the land that is going to be developed commercially by the
developer. That disturbs me.
I -- we had an arms-length relationship when the Trust for Public
Page 177
January 24, 2006
Lands purchased this property and selected the buyers, and for us now
to turn around and to get in bed with a developer on a unified plan is
troublesome to me, and I don't know if that's what you meant. But if
it's -- the term unified plan means it comes under one PUD--
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- and it includes all those things,
and we become a partner in that process. Now, that scarce me, it
really does, although I understand why it makes sense. I mean, there
are a lot of reasons for it, and there are a lot of good reasons why the
developer would like to have it, because he'd like to have some of
those densities that we're not going to use on our property, and he
could transfer it over to his area.
So there's some complications with that, but that's not critical for
you to get a conceptual plan to get a grant in, okay? So we can
approve this as a conceptual plan right now. It would serve the
purpose of getting your grant application submitted before May; is
that true?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we can deal with that other
stuff later if you'd prefer to do that.
MR. MUDD: I think you need to tell me if you want to do a
unified development plan or not because -- let me tell you why with
the Florida Communities Trust Grant.
I believe there are some issues in the Florida Communities Trust
Grants that you have to be forthright in providing. I think you need to
be able to say if there are development rights to your property or that
you forego using those. You need to answer that question.
You need to answer the question about, okay, which part is going
to be in preserve? Is it going to be exactly what's there, or is there
anything going to be some other preserves that are on that
development in that other piece that a developer might own?
If that developer is willing to do some kind of gap housing issue
Page 178
January 24, 2006
for you, he is going to be looking for some kind of density that doesn't
exist on the books that you can provide him. You have some on this
parcel that he might be able to get.
Commissioner, when you said density for commercial, I went,
(shakes head.) You know, but if it -- but ifit serves a public benefit
for workforce housing, that might be something that this board is
interested in, and -- but that's up to the board to decide.
I'm just not -- what I don't -- I want to be able to discuss it
because I think it's really, really important. And the board just needs
to give me some guidance. And I don't mean to catch you short.
And oh, by the way, if you want to wait another meeting while
you think about this, this is fine with me. I know I'm just bringing it
up this time because they had their meeting, they had this particular
discussion. There has been some articles in the paper that said, well,
we don't want to -- you know, we either get all 89 acres unincumbered
or we don't want to play. You know, I've heard that already in the
paper.
And before this gets too far gone where you can't retrieve it, we
just need to talk about it just a little bit and have a good discussion
about what we want to do. I believe the central park was key in the
dialogue, to conserve as much of this property as you possibly can to
do it.
But you know, when they passed it and bought it, the referendum
was purchasing. You purchased it and you paid about $2 and a half
million more than what you had on the referendum to buy it with.
Now you've got to put the central park in and get that piece together,
that costs money too. And you somehow have to leverage how you're
going to be able to do that as a board for this county.
I believe having the land and not developing the final piece, that
central park issue, you know, you've got it and everybody's waiting to
see how that's going to transpire.
I believe the Florida Communities Trust Grant is important to
Page 179
January 24, 2006
that particular project in order to get that done. I believe the Big
Cypress Basin funds are important to get those particular stormwater
ponds done.
I believe you're going to need some money to do driveways and
parking lots and those kind of things. I believe you have the
opportunity to leverage this whichever way you want to.
You can put some -- you could make an ultimatum,
Commissioner Coyle, in this particular case. Say, hey, look it, if
you're going to trans -- the only thing we're going to talk about is
workforce housing, and you could make that known. And at that
particular juncture you might find a developer that doesn't want to be
-- doesn't want to be bothered with it.
If that's the case, that's fine. Then we can just take that off the
table and now you don't -- now you don't have that supposed black
cloud over the Board of County Commissioners that there's a
developer involved in this particular issue. It's whatever your desires
are in this particular thing. But I believe you have an opportunity.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: My concern is, I think it's a great plan. I
think it needs -- is something that needs to be addressed, but I don't
believe that this piece of property then should be purchased by the
conservation land acquisition.
I believe that we should find other avenues of buying that land
then, because that's not what the purpose of the Collier County land
acquisition was to do in this case.
So that's where I stand on it. It's a great plan, I think we need to
go forward on it, but I don't believe that we should use Collier County
land acquisition money.
MR. MUDD: Conservation Collier.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Conservation Collier.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, I'm not going to
stand in the way of the majority of the commissioners if they want to
Page 180
January 24, 2006
develop this property, but I just don't believe that's the intent of -- I
mean, it was pressures about land being sold to a developer to develop
it.
Now, one person could interpretate (sic) development as
development or another person can say, you know, what's wrong with
a central park type theme? But I'm going to take the conservative side
and not support the concept but not stand in the way of the majority.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta, I believe.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've got a concern of the fact
that if we don't take advantage of any opportunities out there to better
the conditions for all our people in Collier County, that we're going to
be missing an opportunity that's not going to repeat itself again. But
I'm for keeping our options open on this.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'm not sure I hear much
guidance for the county manager here. There are a couple of key
decisions that have to be answered yes or no, okay. And one of those
is, is this a good conceptual plan for the purpose of submitting the
grant for funds before May the 1 st? I say it is.
The second is, do you want to join forces with the developer in a
unified plan? I say, no, you don't want to do that.
Number three is, do you want to negotiate sometime from the
future in whether or not the developer helps pay for part or all of that
access road? My answer is yes, certainly.
And then the last question is whether we want to transfer some
density from the land the county owns to the developer in order to
make -- in order to grant additional density for the developer? My
answer IS no.
We can grant densities right now if we think that they are
necessary for affordable housing. We don't need to transfer it from
someplace else, and I think we can deal with it under that alternative.
So I would say, no, we don't want to transfer development rights
Page 181
January 24, 2006
from property that the taxpayers just bought in order to help a
developer create a more profitable project.
And I think there's too close a linkage between those two things,
and we've got to make sure we keep an arms-length relationship with
respect to that portion of this property that was sold to the developer,
and we cannot be seen as subsidizing or attempting to participate in
creating a more profitable project for a developer. I think that's a very
dangerous thing because then the next time you want to go out to the
taxpayers and ask them for some money to buy some property, they're
going to have some tough questions that we can't answer.
So those are -- those are -- did I miss anything as far as the areas
of --
MR. MUDD: I think you hit them all, but those are the kinds of
questions that I need answered.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And so did I give you clear
answers as to what my impression was? Do you understand where I
am on that?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I have -- I have one commissioner that's
given me some pretty clear guidance, okay? And I need at least two
more.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, let me be the second one
because my turn is up next anyway. That's exactly what I felt. When I
said a unified plan, I was never thinking of giving away any of our
development rights.
Sometimes things are so shaded I can't even pick through them. I
take things just as they're said, and thank heavens for these other
commissioners as they pick them apart, and all of a sudden new things
bubble to the surface, and I'm beginning to understand what we're
really talking about here.
I would never want to give our development rights away. When
we bought this, we hated to give up any portion at all. But the
developer that bought that because we couldn't afford it all, he's
Page 182
January 24, 2006
allowed to do with it as he pleases. I don't think we should have
anything to do with that.
But we bought this specifically for a park, not for development,
not for anything else but the enjoyment of our community from now
and forever more.
And so every point that Commissioner Coyle picked apart in this
and answered to, I have to say yes to.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'm afraid I'm going to
have to take a slightly different spin on where you're both going. It's
not so much we're giving up a density right to be able to enrich the
petitioner, who has to come before this commission to be able to get
anything approved in the end, regardless.
I see it as looking at it as a possibility to be able to grow some
affordable housing somewheres in there, and you can only do it --
we've been through this a thousand times and we'll go through it a
thousand times more. Unless there's a certain amount of density that
comes place (sic).
Yes, he can get the right for some density, a very limited amount
of density to be able to take place through an affordable housing
effort. But it's very limited. You've got to remember the amount of
land he's got to build on here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But didn't he assure us that he was
never --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know. We haven't got there
yet though. It's just the whole thing is, a decision can be made down
the road when we start to weigh it. If we're concerned about the
person making a profit on it, I assure you that no one's going to touch
one of these things at all from one end to the other unless there is a
profit.
But when it comes before us, if we try to block it in such a way
Page 183
January 24, 2006
that there isn't enough density allowed, you won't have an affordable
housing element that might be able to go closer to the road, and we're
going to be right back to square one with the same old scenario, events
we've been following since day one in this commission. If we want to
cancel this out, let's cancel it out after we hear what the petitioner has
to offer.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'd just like to get an understanding with
the county manager that I think this is a great project, okay, but my
concern is, who is going to purchase the land now? If we can get the
great Cypress Basin to buy this piece of land so they can develop it --
and I think it's very important that we take care of Naples Bay and the
Gordon River watershed. But I can't see where that -- those funds
need to be taken from the Collier County Conservancy land
acquisition area, so if --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We're saying the same thing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. That's my position, is that
we should not have Collier County -- or Conservation Collier buy this
land because there are too many impediments to what we want to do
so --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I hope we gave you direction in that
manner. And the other issues that we've been discussing, I think when
that comes back before us, I think we can address all that, the issues.
And I'm not sure how -- I'm not sure how the affordable housing
portion got involved in this,
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's -- the important issue is that
when the county staff begins to -- prepares and submits the request for
the grant funds, they need to know what's going to happen with those
development rights.
So what I have suggested is, and my position is, that we shouldn't
use any development rights that the taxpayers paid for, essentially, for
the purpose of subsidizing a commercial and residential development.
So we should release or dispose of those development rights and
Page 184
January 24, 2006
go ahead and get our grant request in as quickly as possible. And
when the time comes to consider the development, we'll take a look at
the development with the developer and we'll make all reasonable
decisions we can make with respect to densities, density bonuses, if
we wish to make those density bonuses, so they can -- they can
provide us some affordable housing if it is possible. But if we don't
release the development rights on this property, we're not likely to get
the grant. Is that true?
MR. MUDD: I believe that to be correct, but I'm going to check
one more time on that. I'm not -- I'm not going to take anything away
that the taxpayers have as far as in the land right now to make sure -- I
want to make sure we're in the best position we can be for that grant.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Absolutely.
MR. MUDD: And I believe what the board is telling me, to get
in the best position we can to get as much money as we can from the
Florida Community Trust. Is that what I'm hearing?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And I will go, and I will cross every dot
and every T (sic).
Now, what I've heard from the board right now is, you don't want
-- I've at least had three commissioners say -- well, I've got two
commissioners that have said no to a UDP with the developer, and I've
had -- Commissioner Coletta's said, let's see what the options are
before we say no, okay?
That's where I'm at right now. That's Commissioner Coyle,
Commissioner Fiala, and Commissioner Coletta so far on that
particular item.
I've got -- I think I've got three commissioners on the
Conservation Collier purchase that say no. I believe Commissioner
Coyle. Commissioner Fiala, I got your name down there because you
were abiding with him.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
Page 185
January 24, 2006
MR. MUDD: And Commissioner Halas.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's right.
MR. MUDD: Okay. So I've got three nos on that. So I've got
firm direction on the Conservation Collier purchase of the particular
property .
Good conceptual plan, I have Commissioner Coyle and
Commissioner Fiala that have said yes, it's a good conceptual plan.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I said it's a good conceptual plan,
because I think it addresses some issues with Gordon River --
MR. MUDD: Okay. But we're in the ballpark with the
conceptual plan. And before we submit, we will come back to this
board and get the final okay on it, okay? I just want to get an idea that
we're -- that we're seeing what's going on.
I mean, Commissioner Coyle had some real-- he called me up
and he saw that little thing on that -- and it was all black where all the
mangroves are, and he said, somebody been in there with a bulldozer?
He says, I can't support that.
I said, no, no, sir. It's a bad picture, and it didn't come out well in
the paper, and I believe in the Perspective section of Sunday's edition
there was --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Much better.
MR. MUDD: -- a nice picture of this that was a lot clearer that--
what folks were talking about. They're talking about a walkway, a
place to enjoy.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, before you go much further,
can we get Commissioner Halas's position on the unified plan with the
developer? You said you didn't have -- you only had two
commISSIOners.
MR. MUDD: I only have two that say no, and I have one that
says maybe. Now I'm looking for either a couple more maybes or--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Couple more nos.
MR. MUDD: At least a no.
Page 186
January 24,2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: At least a no.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I say no to everything, so if you
need --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There you go, there you go.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ifthat gets in, then fine, it's no.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, you're --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have some concerns, as Commissioner
Coyle brought up, to where we have real strong ties with the developer
in regards to density bonuses and everything else. I think that needs to
be addressed for what -- it has to stand on its own merit, and I think
we have to address it that way but, so -- but so that's where I stand.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, I have enough guidance. Thank
you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. She needs a break.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Why don't we take a 10-minute
break. I'm not sure how much longer we're going to go here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I hope not much longer.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Board of County Commissioners is back
from recess, and finish up where we left off. I guess we gave you
enough guidance on that last issue to --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. I got the guidance.
I think the next person to speak is David, then it goes between the
commISSIOners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. David?
MR. WEIGEL: If I may, just one item, and that is I'm requesting
of the board for a closed executive session at the next board meeting at
your convenience during the course of the meeting, potentially
noontime.
It's in regard to what we call settlement negotiations and/or
litigation strategy and expenses in the pending case of Collier County
Page 187
January 24, 2006
versus North Naples Fire Control and Rescue District, case number
02-1702-CA, pending in the 20th Judicial Circuit in and for Collier
County, Naples, Florida.
And attending would be the Board of County Commissioners;
myself, County Attorney David C. Weigel; Assistant County Attorney
Ellen T. Chadwell; Craig V. Willis, Esquire; and County Manager
James V. Mudd.
And this is in regard to settlement and/or litigation strategy on an
imminent domain case, condemnation case, road related, with the
North Naples Fire Control District.
So pursuant to the sunshine law, I've given you advance notice.
I'd appreciate if we could set it up for next -- next board agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And this will be held at lunch period?
MR. WEIGEL: It would be -- if you like. Whatever works for
you. But for Tuesday, February 14th meeting. And if 12 noon works,
that's the way we'll put it in the program.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Valentine's Day.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Works for me.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, could I make sure that Leo Ochs is
in attendance to that meeting? Because I believe Mr. Ochs has
information that you'll need.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, Leo can't be there, but you can be, so--
MR. MUDD: Okay. How about Dan Summers?
MR. WEIGEL: No.
MR. MUDD: Okay. I'll attend and I'll give you the information.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good idea.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you, Jim. That's all. Thank you very
much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We'll start off with
Commissioner Henning from the right, or my left, I should say.
Page 188
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I'm on the right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, you're the left.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: In the left.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The far left.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, the -- recent issues
in the Naples Daily News really concerns me about the Riveria Golf
Course, and I asked Sue to assist me in finding the minutes of the
meeting where we talked about purchasing that, and it was on
November 29th that we -- County Manager said that somebody
approached the -- the owner approached him for the county to buy it
and wanted us to consider that, and after lunch we would talk about it.
And then at the end of the meeting it was said, I think those items
should be at the workshop agenda, and the housing workshop agenda.
And then when that came around, we were told -- well, the chairman
said -- stated to the residents that it is not on our agenda.
And I just want to clear the air that we never had the opportunity
for discussion and direction about purchasing or not purchasing this
piece of property.
So -- and frankly, I'm not sure if -- I have a little concern of the
county manager putting a developer and a landowner together for
affordable housing, that we surely need, but it's sure controversial, and
it makes it tough for Commissioner Fiala. And I hope that wasn't your
intent to put Commissioner Fiala in a tough position.
But it's kind of a moot point of making a decision on this piece of
property whether we're going to purchase it or not, but I hope it
doesn't happen in the future.
MR. MUDD: We're not purchasing the property, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I know, but we never had -- I
never had an opportunity to say yes or no on that.
November 26th you said, after lunch you're going to get back to
us, and then after lunch you said, well, we'll put it on a housing
workshop.
Page 189
January 24,2006
MR. MUDD: It's because the board didn't want to talk about it at
close of business of that meeting.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And at the housing
workshop --
MR. MUDD: At the housing workshop, the room was filled with
folks from Riveria, and this board wanted to do a gap housing
workshop, okay, and didn't want to address that particular issue. I
assumed at that particular time this board wasn't interested in buying
that particular property. If it was, you would have told me to go out
and get after it.
I don't believe -- I don't believe on anybody's -- in anybody's
mind on the dais with that room full of Rivera folks out there that it
escaped anybody that we had talked about the Rivera piece the
meeting before that workshop.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I can understand why they
came to the workshop, because it says, Mr. Mudd, before lunch, I
think those items should be on a workshop agenda for housing. That's
why they packed the room. And we just never had the opportunity to
say yea or nay on the issue.
So I mean, it's gone. I mean, it's not -- I'm not trying to make a
big deal out of it. I hope in the future when we're going to consider
something, that we, you know, do it in the public, and let's, you know,
either vote on it or get a consensus like you have before, that's all.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'd like to at this time see if the
ex-chairman would like to respond to that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, yeah, since I was a party to
all that. I think -- I think we explored the possibility of buying a golf
course last year, and it didn't work out. We didn't -- pretty much
expressed an interest that we didn't want to deal with that sort of thing
anymore, at least I did, and I think we did that publicly.
But with respect to that particular workshop, it wasn't on the
agenda, so nothing had been -- had been scheduled. And if -- there
Page 190
January 24, 2006
probably was a miscommunication to the people about what was
going to be discussed there, but that could easily have been solved had
someone read the agenda because it clearly was not on the agenda.
And I was never -- never approached with the idea that we might
want to buy that property because I would have dismissed it out of
hand. I wouldn't have done anything with it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Here's the minutes, if anybody
wants them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, I'm more than happy to
-- and I'm not trying to make a big deal out of it -- is I did have an
understanding that this was offered to the county, this golf course,
that's what it says here, and we are to think about it over lunch, and
then it changed after lunch to a housing workshop. That's all.
And, you know -- you know, the perception ofthe citizens is
really what I'm concerned about, Commissioner. The perception of
the citizens by what was stated, that we were going to discuss it at this
housing workshop, and that's why they showed up. We didn't --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And they were told then
that we weren't going to discuss it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We weren't going to discuss it,
and we never did discuss it. It's just a recent correspondence to some
constituents that the board turned it down, and we never did have the
opportunity to turn it down.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you see, that's not what
happened. We're not purchasing it. Somebody else purchased it,
okay?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I understand.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And what the public needs to
understand is, that because somebody else purchased it and they might
have a plan for that purchase and that plan might include rezone, it
hasn't come before us and will not come before us probably for six to
Page 191
January 24,2006
eight months, so we won't have anything to make a decision on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What I'm referring to is a
response to Mrs. Sweigert the BCC was not interested in partnering
with the owner of Rivera Golf Course for affordable housing. I'm just
saying, you know, I never got an opportunity to say I don't want to
partner with the owner of Rivera Golf Course. That's all. Let's -- you
know, just kind of set the record straight.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, I was never interested
in doing it, quite frankly. I thought we pretty much made that clear
with the last golf course we were thinking about purchasing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For a golf course.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, for whatever, yeah, golf
course or whatever.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I agreed with that statement. I
don't think we should be in that type of business. But anyways, and--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: My understanding--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's all I have.
MR. MUDD: Point well taken, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I think Commissioner
Henning was trying to clean up some -- you know, do some
housekeeping here and pointing out that we probably need to finish
some of these things, and -- anyway, I, too -- I've had some problems
with Rivera. I've had some -- oh, my goodness -- heartache over the
Rivera people and what's happening to them.
And when I read in the paper how we were more than assisting
the buyers and sellers in this and how we were going to fast track
them and get them through this and I -- I guess I was led to believe
that we weren't -- well, I had some -- maybe I had some -- how do I
say it -- mixed messages, that's what I want to say, mixed messages.
But what I would want to say is here, if we're so eager to help the
sellers and buyers, we should also be helping these people. This is --
Page 192
January 24, 2006
this is where they've lived. This is -- they're in their last years. This is
their retirement community, and it's a low-income retirement
community, or at least it started out to be that way. I think now some
of the prices have climbed.
But now to just change their whole way of living, we're going to
destroy their community. And I don't know who in our -- in our staff is
helping them.
I can see we're all helping the other people with -- the buyers and
the sellers, but I don't know what we're doing to help these people, and
I think we owe them the same amount of diligence as we are giving to
these buyers and sellers.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. And there was one meeting with the
buyer and -- when he wanted to sell to the county. And when he was
-- he was in the room during the gap workshop. He being the owner's
representative, or one of the owners of five, who basically says, that's
not going in front of the board, asked me if I knew a person that does
affordable housing, and I said, yes, I do. I think I have -- there's a
reputable developer in the county I know for sure, and that was Bill
Klohn, and I connected the two.
We also did have a meeting with staff and Commissioner Fiala
with the homeowners' representatives. Mr. Weigel was there, Mr.
Feder was there, Mr. Schmitt was there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I called that meeting.
MR. MUDD: And I was very sick that day, if you remember
correctly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. And you sat in the back of the
room because you didn't want to breath on anybody, and that's good. I
called that meeting because we didn't even have any questions -- or
any answers.
MR. MUDD: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: None of us knew what was going
on. And when we got there, we found that there had been much going
Page 193
January 24, 2006
on, but nobody else knew anything. I felt like I was -- well, not only
felt like, I realized I was just totally out of the loop. This stuff was all
going on behind the scenes, and I was never made aware of any of
that. Luckily I called the meeting.
MR. MUDD: And I don't believe the developer has come in with
the preapp. yet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Tomorrow, I understand.
MR. MUDD: Is it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's what Joe Schmitt told me
yesterday.
MR. MUDD: And they're coming in to tell us what they have
planned, and that's when we'll get to see the first -- to look underneath
the basket, so to speak, to see what they're coming forward with in that
process. I believe there's issues there. I believe there's issues with a --
well, one of the documents that the homeowners presented to us
during your meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Give that to a couple lawyers -- you
give it to 20 lawyers, and you'll get 20 answers on that.
MR. MUDD: So far --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sorry about that, any lawyers.
MR. MUDD: -- I believe there's been at least 35 opinions now,
okay, on that particular issue as they go along. And oh, by the way,
nobody fast tracks anything until the board zones the property
correctly and they approve the project. At that juncture you basically
have that -- you have that authority to tell us to go do that or not as far
as affordable or workforce housing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you know, I think I and the
people of Riveria would like to be kept in the full loop. I mean, I don't
want to -- I don't want to have to keep saying, did anything happen
today? Did anything happen today? I would like to be kept in the
loop.
And I think -- and I don't know that this is legal or not, if it is
Page 194
January 24, 2006
legal, I would like to even be invited to some of those meetings so that
everybody knows what's going on and happening between the buyers
and the sellers and to those people who live in the community that it
will affect.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's not wrong of me to ask, is it?
MR. MUDD: No, ma'am. I don't think there's anything to
preclude you from going to the preapp. meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think it would be nice if the Rivera
people were able to attend. So maybe if you could let me know before
the close of this day when the preapp. meeting is and what room.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I don't believe -- well, I can't tell you if
that's an open meeting or not. My comment to you is, I don't see any
reason why the commissioner can't go to that meeting. But that
preapp. meeting is from that developer that pays that fee to meet with
the staff in order to see where that particular issue is concerned. I
don't believe it's a public meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, well. Tell me when it is, I'll go.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. If it's tomorrow, I'll give you the
time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you. I'll cancel whatever I
have.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Kathy. Thank you.
Oh, I wanted to say one more thing. I -- David, I wanted to thank
you so much for this. This only takes a minute. You talked all day
long. Don't you tell me.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, children.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: David, I want to thank you for this
book that you sent to all of us. This was just great, and I will keep it as
a handy reference. I can see all the time and effort that you put into
this. It's a great reference guide, and I just wanted to thank you
Page 195
January 24, 2006
personally for that.
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta? You've got three
seconds.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Way to go, Mr. Chairman.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now I've got to use
Commissioner Coyle's time.
Yes, I have a situation I'd like to talk to you about. Weed and
Seed, it's a program -- no, seriously. Weed and Seed in Immokalee,
it's been a very successful program for a number of years now.
They've got a problem in that -- well, they work very close with
the sheriffs department. It's helped to break down, unlike your
neighborhood, it brought down crime in Immokalee by quite a bit. It's
-- sheriffs department's been very active. It's been a government
sponsored program for the most part that has a lot of citizen
involvement.
There's a problem in the fact that there's a funding gap that takes
place that's going to be a total of $27,000 shortfall until November of
2006 when they get their funding for the following year, which will be
their last year.
I'd like to put it on the agenda for discussion and see if we might
be able to come up with the funds for it. Possibly not so much from
the general fund, but maybe from the CRA in Immokalee. I'd like to
be able to do that --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- the next February meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Nod your head.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was pretty good. Oh, you're
finished now?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no. Actually I've got four
or five more things.
Page 196
January 24, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, give me a break.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. Let's just see here real
quick.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We'll need a supper break here pretty
quick.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'll tell you what, out of
politeness for Commissioner Coyle, who has endured so much today,
I'm going to forego my next four items and surrender my time to him.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're very kind.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're right, you're very right.
Say some more, make up for it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I just have one thing that
deals with legislation, and I'll tell you about that in just a few minutes,
but -- that's a teaser to keep you tuned.
But let me make just a quick comment about the problems we've
been talking about that Commissioner Henning and Commissioner
Fiala have been talking about and using Rivera Estates as an example.
The public doesn't -- and, in fact, probably can't understand the
process we go through here. And it's been a -- it's been troubling for
me all the years I've been on the commission, is that when an idea
comes up, whether it's from an advisory board or whether it's from
someone else and it becomes public, people jump to the conclusion
that the commissioners are going to approve it.
And it gets everybody all upset, and then you start speculating
about what's going to happen and you get involved in discussing it.
And what you hear initially is generally not at all what finally results
after you go through the entire process of a review and approvals.
It will be, I think, probably six to eight months before this thing
works its way through the process, gets to the Collier County Planning
Commission, and then finally comes to the Board of County
Commissioners.
Page 197
January 24, 2006
And what comes out at the end at that point is going to be
probably greatly different from what goes in now. I mean, it always is
true. I've tracked these things myself and I get involved in the
negotiations and the discussions and meetings of homeowners'
associations, and it all changes as you go through the process.
So the thing I would try to impress upon everybody is to try to
learn, that is, for the public to try to learn the process we have to go
through, and just because somebody floats an idea about buying a
property, rezoning it and building rezoning, doesn't mean that's what's
going to happen, and there's no reason to start criticizing
commissioners about the way they vote or won't vote or alleging that
they're doing something illegal. You know, that's counterproductive.
But it's just the process we have to go through, and it is very
inefficient, but it is thorough and we finally get to the point where, I
think, we make a reasonable decision.
So now, let me get to the other really interesting issue, and it's
about legislation again.
As you know, there are some legislation floating around right
now in Tallahassee that has the potential for substantially reducing our
property tax revenue. The portability of the Save Our Homes
provIsIons.
Now, quite -- from a personal standpoint, I can develop a really
good argument for doing that, particularly intracounty, within the
counties where if one person -- you know, they've gotten to the point
where they no longer have children, they want to downsize, they want
to go to a smaller place but can't afford to because of the way the
prices have escalated, I can understand how it makes sense to let them
take the portability of their save their homes initiative and transfer it to
a new home.
But anyone coming from outside the county that really is creating
an additional impact on the county shouldn't have that same
portability. But either of the two provisions, whether it's intracounty or
Page 198
January 24, 2006
intercounty, will reduce our income tax revenues.
We haven't taken a position on that one way or the other, to the
best of my knowledge. And if we don't get something done, I mean, if
we don't take a position on this, we might find that a decision has been
made in Tallahassee that dramatically reduces our property tax
revenue and our ability to fund the projects that we have going on
here.
So it's -- I just suggest that maybe we ought to take a look at it
and try to develop an opinion on it and decide what you want to do
about it.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, just to -- a point of clarification.
When you did your priorities for the county and for Southwest
Florida, in the Southwest Florida delegation, one of the things was to
oppose portability.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: And I believe this board has said they want to go
along with it, to oppose it. But I believe there are some nuances that
are being proposed, and I think there's -- there's a half dozen bills up
there right now that are talking about this particular issue, either on the
Senate or the House side, that have already been filed.
It will have -- it will have revenue impacts to this county and to
the school board, and so it's something that we're going to have to look
at. And it's -- and I don't believe we -- we, the county, including the
constitutional officers and the school board, have figured out exactly
how much that means to us if that gets enacted.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, I am convinced that it
will have a much greater impact if it's permitted for intercounty
transfers than if it is limited only to intracounty transfers.
But anyway, that's the reason I bring it up, because of the
nuances that are developing up there. And it might be appropriate if
we give some consideration to, what would we do if they changed the
policy to consider only transfers within the same county?
Page 199
January 24, 2006
Would that be better? Would it be better for us to get on board
that kind of legislation and help support it rather than taking the risk of
having the other kind, the intercounty, transfers thrust upon us?
So it's just something I bring up for your consideration. If -- it
might be appropriate if we developed an official position on that.
I know it's in the list, but it's far more effective, I think, if we
have a particular position about a bill to go to somebody who's
sponsoring it, and our Senator Saunders is sponsoring one of them,
and go to them and say, look, you know, here's the impact it's going to
have on us. Would you consider revising your bill to do it in different
way.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. We have to read the tea leaves to a
certain extent. If this is a foregone conclusion because this is an
election year issue where everybody's trying to get themselves in the
best posture they can and it's going to happen to us, then we probably
need to limit -- limit our -- the damage to the county as much as we
can.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're absolutely right, and that's
what it is. It's a way to look really, really good to the tax -- to the
people who vote in Florida, and have it paid for by the local
politicians, because you and I will then have to vote for higher
property taxes to make up for the difference because somebody
wanted to look really good during an election year.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I believe this is an item that's a
referendum item. If it gets the 60 percent that it needs in the House
and the Senate, then it goes on to referendum for November. And one
thing I haven't determined is when it would be effective. You know,
is it the year after the referendum and it comes on board? I still have to
look into that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let's be clear about it.
There's nobody who will vote against that bill.
MR. MUDD: Oh, sir, whatever the language is that goes in that
Page 200
January 24, 2006
referendum, it's passed.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's passed, that's right. Okay.
That's it for me.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So have we given any direction
here in regards to what we need to address with Senator Saunders in
regards to this bill that pertains to us?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or any other sponsor.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't think we've really given you a
direction other than what Commissioner Coyle--
MR. MUDD: No, sir. I need to take a look at that, and I need to
basically go out and survey a little bit out of -- from our lobbyist to see
if this is pretty much going to happen, and we need to sit and try to do
the minimal damage kind of bill for the county that we can possibly
come up with.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So what you'll do is you'll go out, do a
survey, do the homework --
MR. MUDD: Yeah, I need to talk to --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- and then get back with us?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, good.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I do have a couple of issues here,
and I don't -- hope I don't take up too much time here.
This is news and notes that came out of Florida Association of
Counties, and I thought it was very important that we brought forth
some of the discussion that was up -- in regards to the impact fee
review task force, and this is the group that's put together basically by
the governor.
And just to give you some insight of what was discussed and
where we are, and I just wanted to make sure that -- I think most of the
commissioners that were there know exactly what took place, but it
really didn't get out to the press, and I think it's important that people
Page 201
January 24, 2006
that may be listening in understand where we are in Collier County
with respect to some of the vote and where -- how it affects us, and are
we within the arena of this whole thing.
And to start off with, one of the items that was voted on, it was
an 8-3 vote, and it was affordable housing recommending impact fee
ordinances, including a significant provision addressing affordable
housing issues, and if everybody realizes that Collier County, we do
address affordable housing and we make sure that where there's an
impact to people who have low income, that we have provisions set
aside to address those issues as far as addressing affordable housing
and offsetting the impact fees on that.
Administrative fees. Recommend -- again, this was the vote of
8-3. They voted that -- recommend that fees not exceed the actual
cost of administration, and I think that we've proven to them that we're
within the realm. I think they're looking at three percent or less, and
we're well within that realm. So we are in concurrence to what their
suggestion was.
Delay in new or increased fees. Recommended new impact fees
and increase not take effect until 90 days after the effective date of the
ordinance. And I think that we've addressed that many times when we
look at increasing impact fees or making adjustments.
Quality of data. That's another area that -- recommend requiring
the use of -- use of most recent and localized data when calculating
impact fees and reporting recommended statutory direction on
accounting and reporting of the collection and expenditure of
collection fees.
Both these issues, we use dual nexus input in regards to making
sure that we have the most current information in regards to
addressing impact fees. So I think our input there, what -- they
understand that Collier County, I think, is pretty much in line on this,
and this is the stuff that's going to be put into the executive summary
and then passed on.
Page 202
January 24, 2006
So the collection of it and expenditure of impact fees. We make
sure that all impact fees are used in -- for impact and nothing is used
for addressing maintenance or other items. So I think that we're very
clear on our position in regards to legislation.
Some of the ideas that were proposed by the task force, and it
was voted in fair favor of several additional state and local revenue
sources for infrastructure and affordable housing. The members
recognize that the most -- that more revenues would be a help -- would
help address the high cost of impact fees by preventing additional
credits while calculating the amount of fees.
The task force specifically recommended that the legislature
adopt the following sources, and here are the following sources they're
looking for other than impact fees:
Dock stamps. Allow local government to adopt a documentary
stamp assessment, a real estate transfer fee similar to the Miami-Dade
County's 45 cents per 100 of value recorded.
The other discussion -- item of discussion, and they approved,
was sales tax. Allow a local option sales tax to be adopted by a
majority or supermajority vote of the governing body of the county or
school board as an option to the current referendum requirement.
Right now we know that in order to address sales tax, that you
have to -- it has to be on a referendum, and they're looking to change
the legislation where that would be put on the shoulders of either the
school board, of course, or the county commissioners.
Revenue sharing pledge. Increase the amount of state revenue
that may be pledged to the retirement of debt by counties in the county
revenue sharing program, and that's another area that I think we need
to look at closely.
One of the other items that was brought up is PECO funding,
which is Public Education Capital Outlay, provide full funding for
public school construction in regards to addressing the issue with
addressing more and more classrooms and also more schools. And I
Page 203
January 24, 2006
think all of us are -- feel that that's a very important issue, and I hope
that they do.
And then on the last one here, is affordable housing funding.
Restore full funding to the Sadowski Act state and local housing
programs. And as everybody should know, that a few years ago, that
funding source was rated by the state, and it's been to the point where
we're not getting as much funding to address affordable housing
needs.
And so, that was another issue, and I thought that -- I hope that
we do get this funding restored for the Sadowski Act.
In addition to recommending some statutory direction, the task
force, through various majorities of the membership, also decided to
recommend against statutory direction on burden of proof, and that is
that they were -- there was some discussions about having the burden
of proof on the counties.
And we said, we pretty much have the burden of proof now in
regards to -- because we use dual -- or Rational Nexus in regards to
addressing impact fees. And I thought that we've pretty much worked
in line with making sure that we did have a burden of proof.
Presumptively unchallenged impact fees. No recommendations
needed for legislation establishing impact fee amount that would be
presumptively unchallenged in court. So we're not sure where that's
going to go in regards to that.
Impact fee cap. That seems to be rejected at this point in time,
but I've -- we understand through the grapevine that that may raise its
ugly head when legislation is starting -- is to be written in regards to
addressing impact fees.
So I think we're going to have to really be -- be careful in regards
to how the legislation is going to be proposed and that we need to
make sure that we take the necessary means to address that, and
hopefully we can get our representatives to make sure that some way
or another we can limit that.
Page 204
January 24, 2006
And credits was a tie 6-6 vote, decided not to make any
recommendations for statutory direction on requiring credits in impact
fee calculations.
So that's about all I have to say. I just want to make sure that
people understood what was going on regards -- with this impact fee
task force committee and how it fit in with Collier County's programs.
And I think that all of the information that we have addressed to
the task force committee, I think there's been people there that's
looked at this very closely and realizes that we might be the -- in the
forefront as far as addressing impact fees and addressing growth and
concurrency and so on.
And I just want to say again, on behalf of John Thaxton from
Sarasota County, we really want to thank him for all his time and
effort into this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I could, it's one last thing I
wanted to do, and you just reminded me. I'd like to see if we could
direct the chair to write a letter of thanks to John Thaxton.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Will do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And also congratulate him on
his recent -- being named to the chair position of Southwest Florida
Regional Planning Council.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Was he appointed or elected; do you
know?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He was elected by the council.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, elected. Okay. So then -- yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'll write -- I'll get two letters out. One
for thanking him for the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think we've got -- we've got to
check to see if you've got enough nods.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh. We got enough nods?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, absolutely.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Page 205
January 24,2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: See, I told you. What'd I tell
you?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Sue Filson, you got something?
MS. FILSON: I have a brief update, if you're interested, on the
Southwest Florida Expressway Authority.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good.
MS. FILSON: I understand that the governor's going to make
our appointment this week and not wait for Lee County to submit their
package. They still haven't submitted, but they have appointed John
Albion to serve on that committee. And I've been emailing back and
forth with Tina Matt from Swifty.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is there any last-minute
discussions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If not county -- Board of County --
Collier County Commissioners is adjourned.
***** Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Fiala and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted *****
Item #16Al
RECORDING OF THE FINAL PLAT OF "CLASSICS
PLANTATION ESTATES, PHASE THREE," APPROVAL OF THE
STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE
PERFORMANCE SECURITY - W/STIPULATIONS
Item # 16A2
Page 206
January 24, 2006
RESOLUTION 2006-11: FINAL APPROVAL OF THE
ROADWAY (PRIVATE) AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF "INDIGO LAKES, UNIT FIVE". THE
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
PRIV ATEL Y MAINTAINED - W/RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE
SECURITY
Item # 16A3
RECORDING OF THE FINAL PLAT OF "AVE MARIA, PHASE
ONE", APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A4
AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH LUIS
SANTOS, JR., AND MARIA LEONOR SANTOS FOR 5.7 ACRES
UNDER THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION
PROGRAM, AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $194,750 - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16A5
RESOLUTION 2006-12: AMENDING RESOLUTION 05-409,
WHICH ESTABLISHED PROCEDURES AND A REGULATORY
PROCESS PROGRAM FOR EXPEDITING THE DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW PROCESS FOR QUALIFIED ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL FAST TRACK PROJECTS, IN
ORDER TO CORRECT TIMEFRAMES FOR TWO OF THE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESSES
Page 207
January 24, 2006
Item #16A6
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR "FOREST PARK, PHASE 2" - W/REDUCTION
OF UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Item #16B1
TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED SERVICE PLAN
UPDATE FY 2006 - TO OVERSEE IMPLEMENT A TION OF
TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED SERVICE PLANS IN
FLORIDA
Item #16B2
BID #06-3927 "GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD (PINE RIDGE
ROAD TO V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD) ANNUAL
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT" TO ADVANCED
LAWN AND LANDSCAPING SERVICES, INC. IN THE
AMOUNT OF $151.793.40 (PROJECT #601345)
Item #16B3
RESOLUTION 2006-13: COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS
DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED FEDERAL
TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5310 GRANT
APPLICATION AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENT, AND TO
ACCEPT THE GRANT IF AWARDED - TO PROVIDE
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES TO THE ELDERLY AND
DISABLED RESIDENTS OF COLLIER COUNTY AT AN
ESTIMATED COST OF $160,000 FOR TWO (2) VEHICLES
Page 208
January 24, 2006
Item # 16B4
BID #06-3928 "LIVINGSTON ROAD (V ANDERBIL T BEACH
ROAD TO IMMOKALEE ROAD) ANNUAL LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE CONTRACT" TO COMMERCIAL LAND
MAINTENANCE IN THE AMOUNT OF $189,398.40 (PROJECT
#620717) - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16B5
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE ADDITIONAL
REVENUE FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION
PATHWAYS PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $112,834.14
AND RECOGNIZE CARRY FORWARD IN THE AMOUNT OF
$162,934.00 FOR PROJECT NO(S). 690821, 600331, 690811,
690822,600321 AND 600501 FOR A TOTAL OF $275,768.14 - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16B6
BID #06-3926 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY (LIVINGSTON
ROAD TO 66TH STREET) & (60TH STREET TO SANTA
BARBARA BLVD.) ANNUAL LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
CONTRACT TO ADVANCED LAWN & LANDSCAPING, INC.
IN THE AMOUNT OF $117,887.90 (PROJECT 600277) - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16B7
RESOLUTION 2006-14: COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS
DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED FEDERAL
TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5311 GRANT
Page 209
January 24,2006
APPLICATION AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENT, AND TO
ACCEPT THE GRANT IF A WARDED - TO HELP PROVIDE
RURAL TRANSPORTATION IN COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16B8
REJECT BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF COLLIER
BOULEVARD SIX-LANE IMPROVEMENTS (GOLDEN GATE
BOULEVARD TO IMMOKALEE ROAD), BID NO. 05-3881,
(PROJECT NO. 65061, CIE NO. 37) SUBMITTED BY BETTER
ROADS, INC. - TO BE REVIEWED FOR COST SAVING
OPPORTUNITIES AND ADVERTISED FOR BID AGAIN
Item #16C1
RESOLUTION 2006-15: SATISFACTIONS (5) OF LIEN FOR
SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE
COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE
SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1995 SOLID WASTE
COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS. FISCAL IMPACT IS $60.00 TO RECORD THE
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
Item #16C2
RESOLUTION 2006-16: SATISFACTIONS (16) OF LIEN FOR
SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WHEREIN THE
COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND SAID LIENS ARE
SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1996 SOLID WASTE
COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS. FISCAL IMPACT IS $170.00 TO RECORD THE
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
Page 210
January 24,2006
Item #16Dl - Moved to Item #10H
Item # 16D2
ENTERTAINMENT CONTRACT WITH CDB, INC., FOR $35,000
FOR A PERFORMANCE BY THE CHARLIE DANIELS BAND
AT THE 8TH ANNUAL COUNTRY JAM - TO BE HELD MARCH
10 AND 11, 2006 AT THE VINEYARDS COMMUNITY PARK
Item #16D3
SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM GRANT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $588,400 FOR FY2006 - TO PROVIDE FREE
NUTRITIOUS MEALS DURING THE SUMMER TO COLLIER
COUNTY CHILDREN LIVING IN DISADV ANT AGED
NEIGHBORHOODS
Item #16El
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $153,600 FOR
UPGRADES TO THE IMMOKALEE GOVERNMENT CENTER
TO ACCOMMODATE THE CLERK'S BACK-UP COMPUTER
SYSTEM - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 16E2
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH GEORGE VEGA, TOM BROWN,
LARRY MARTIN AND JACK STANLEY, AKA PALM LAKE
INVESTMENTS, FOR TEMPORARY OFFICE SPACE TO
HOUSE THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER DURING
CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE ANNEX
BUILDING AT A FIRST YEAR'S ANNUAL RENT OF
Page 211
January 24, 2006
$173,785.68 AND RELOCATION EXPENSES OF $63,000,
PROJECT 52004-1
Item # 16E3
RATIFY ADDITIONS TO, MODIFICATIONS TO AND
DELETIONS FROM THE 2006 FISCAL YEAR PAY AND
CLASSIFICATION PLAN MADE FROM SEPTEMBER 18, 2005
THROUGH DECEMBER 30, 2005
Item #16E4
GENERAL RELEASE ON BEHALF OF COLLIER COUNTY
GOVERNMENT IN THE MATTER OF THE STATE OF NEW
YORK VERSUS WILLIS GROUP HOLDINGS LTD., WILLIS
NORTH AMERICA INC. AND WILLIS OF NEW YORK INC.
(COLLECTIVEL Y "WILLIS") IN EXCHANGE FOR
CONSIDERATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,852.43 - AS
DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16Fl
SOVEREIGN MEDICAL, LLC AS THE SOLE SOURCE VENDOR
FOR THE PURCHASE OF EZ-IO ADULT INTRAOSSEOUS
INFUSION SYSTEMS BY THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL
DEPARTMENT AT A COST OF $29,700.00 - TO PROVIDE
RESCUE PERSONNEL STATE OF THE ART DEVICES AS A
SECONDARY VASCULAR ACCESS WHEN CONVENTIONAL
INTRAVENOUS ACCESS IS UNACHIEV ABLE
Item # 16F2
Page 212
January 24, 2006
WORK ORDER HM-FT-3271-06-03 UNDER CONTRACT 3271
WITH HUMISTON & MOORE ENGINEERS TO PROVIDE
ENGINEERING SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION
ENGINEERING INSPECTION (CEI) FOR MAINTENANCE
DREDGING OF CLAM PASS FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED, TIME
AND MATERIAL PRICE OF $59,820.00 AND APPROVE A
REVISED PROJECT BUDGET (90028) TOTALING $265,000
WHICH INCLUDES $205,180 FOR CONSTRUCTION
DREDGING AND APPROVE ALL NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS
Item # 16F3
GRANT AGREEMENT #06-DS-3W-09-21-01 BETWEEN THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND
COLLIER COUNTY ACCEPTING $52,957 TO FUND
HOMELAND SECURITY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
INITIATIVES AND APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO
RECOGNIZE AND APPROPRIATE THE GRANT FUNDS - TO
CONDUCT EXERCISES AND TRAINING WORKSHOPS,
EMERGENCY PLANNING ACTIVITIES, AND THE
ENHANCEMENT OF CITIZENS CORPS PROGRAM
Item #16F4
RFP #05-3864 IN THE AMOUNT OF $121,775 TO VISION
INTERNET FOR THE REDESIGN OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
GOVERNMENT WEB SITE - TO HELP REDESIGN,
MAINTENANCE AND HOSTING SERVICES TO BE MORE
EASILY ACCESSIBLE TO COLLIER COUNTY RESIDENTS
AND BUSINESSES
Page 213
January 24, 2006
Item #16F5
REJECT BID #05-3891 FOR THE PURCHASE OF EMERGENCY
MEDICATIONS - TWO QUALIFIED BIDS WERE RECEIVED,
STAFF DOES NOT BELIEVE IT IS POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN
EMERGENCY MEDICATIONS IN THE MOST EFFECTIVE
MANNER
Item #16F6
BUDGET AMENDMENTS - FUNDS ARE NEEDED TO FUND
ON-GOING EXPENSES FROM PALM LETHAL YELLOWING:
BUDGET AMENDMENT #06-0096
Item # 16F7
RESOLUTION 2006-17: FLORIDA EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES COUNTY GRANT APPLICATION, GRANT
DISTRIBUTION FORM AND RESOLUTION FOR TRAINING
AND MEDICAL/RESCUE EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $137,829.00 - TO EXPAND AND IMPROVE PRE-
HOSPITAL EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
Item #16Hl
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
FIALA TO ATTEND THE EDC'S 30TH ANNIVERSARY
KICKOFF CELEBRATION ON JANUARY 30,2006 AT THE
NAPLES BEACH HOTEL AND GOLF CLUB; $60.00 TO BE
PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA' S TRAVEL BUDGET -
SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE
Page 214
January 24, 2006
Item # 16H2
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
COLETTA TO ATTEND THE LOS TRES REYES MAGOS
CELEBRATION SPONSORED BY THE NAPLES HISPANIC
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ON JANUARY 6,2006, LOCATED
AT THE BEST WESTERN NAPLES PLAZA HOTEL, 6400
DUDLEY DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA; $35.00 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET-
SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE
Item # 16H3
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
COLETT A TO ATTEND "CANDIDATES NIGHT 2006" ON
FEBRUARY 3, 2006, LOCATED AT THE COLLIER ATHLETIC
CLUB, 710 GOODLETTE ROAD - THE COMMONS, NAPLES,
FLORIDA; $40.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET - SERVING A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE
Item #16H4 - Withdrawn
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
HALAS TO ATTEND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COUNCIL'S BREAKFAST EVENT TO BE HELD ON JANUARY
25,2006 AT LAPLA Y A BEACH RESORT, 9891 GULF SHORE
DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA; $39.00 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER HALAS' TRAVEL BUDGET - SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE
Item # 16H5
Page 215
January 24, 2006
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
HALAS TO ATTEND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COUNCIL'S ANNIVERSARY KICKOFF CELEBRATION AT
THE NAPLES BEACH HOTEL TO BE HELD ON JANUARY 30,
2006; $60.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HALAS'
TRAVEL BUDGET - SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR
REFERRED:
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by
the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 216
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
January 24, 2006
1. FOR BOARD ACTION:
A. No items for board action.
2. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS
DIRECTED:
A. Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida
Statutes, Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of
County Commissioners for the period:
(1) December 3, 2005 - December 9, 2005.
(2) December 10, 2005 - December 16, 2005.
B. Districts:
(1) No items for board action.
C. Minutes:
(1) Collier County Airport Authority: Agenda of January 10, 2005;
Amendment to January 10, 2005 Agenda; Agenda of February
14,2005; Amendment to February 14, 2005 Agenda; Agenda of
March 14,2005; Agenda of April 4, 2005; Minutes of April 4,
2005; Agenda of May 16, 2005; Agenda of June 13, 2005;
Minutes of June 13, 2005; Agenda of August 8, 2005;
Addendum to August 8, 2005 Agenda; Agenda of September
12, 2005; Addendum to September 12, 2005 Agenda; Agenda
for "Special Meeting" of September 26, 2005; Agenda of
October 10, 2005; Addendum to October 10, 2005 Agenda;
Agenda of November 14, 2005; Addendum to November 14,
2005 Agenda; Minutes of November 14, 2005; Agenda of
December12,2005;Addendum~December12,2005
Agenda; Minutes of December 12, 2005.
(2) Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee: Minutes
of November 9,2005; Agenda of December 14, 2005.
H:\DA T A\Melanie\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\I.24.06 Misc. Corresp. Memo.doc
(3) Bayshore/Gateway Trianqle Local Redevelopment Advisory
Board: Agenda of January 11, 2005; Minutes of January 11,
2005; Agenda of February 1, 2005; Minutes of February 1,
2005; Agenda of March 1, 2005; Minutes of March 1, 2005;
Agenda of March 16, 2005; Minutes of March 16, 2005; Agenda
of April 4, 2005 (Community Workshop with HDR Engineering);
Agenda of April 5, 2005 (Community Workshop with HDR
Engineering); Agenda of April 12, 2005; Minutes of April 12,
2005; Agenda of May 2, 2005 (Community Workshop with HDR
Engineering); Agenda of May 3, 2005; Agenda of October 4,
2005; Minutes of October 4, 2005; Agenda of November 1,
2005; Agenda of December 6, 2005.
(a) Bayshore/Gateway Trianqle Local Redevelopment Advisory
Board Subcommittee: Agenda of February 21, 2005;
Minutes of February 21, 2005; Agenda of March 7, 2005;
Minutes of March 7, 2005.
(4) Citizen Corps Advisory Committee: Agenda of May 18, 2005;
Minutes of May 18, 2005; Agenda of July 20,2005; Agenda of
August 17, 2005; Agenda of October 19, 2005; Agenda of
November 16, 2005; Minutes of November 16, 2005.
(5) Development Services Advisory Committee: Agenda of
November 9, 2005; Minutes of November 9, 2005.
(6) Domestic Animal Services Advisory Committee: Agenda of
January 18, 2005; Agenda of February 15, 2005; Agenda of
March 15, 2005; DAS Director's Report of March 15, 2005;
Agenda of April 19, 2005; Agenda of June 21, 2005; Agenda of
July 19, 2005; Agenda of August 16, 2005; Minutes of August
16,2005; Agenda of September 20,2005; Agenda of October
18, 2005; Minutes of October 18, 2005; Agenda of November
15, 2005.
(7) Collier County Environmental Advisorv Council: Minutes of
November 2,2005; Agenda of December 7,2005; Agenda of
January 4, 2006.
H:\DATA\Melanie\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\1.24.06 Misc. Corresp. Memo.doc
(8) Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainaqe MSTU: Minutes of
November 9,2005; Agenda of December 14, 2005.
(9) Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee: Minutes of
September 26, 2005.
(10) Golden Gate MSTU Advisory Committee: Minutes of
November 8, 2005; Agenda of December 13, 2005.
(11) Collier County Historical/Archaeoloqical Preservation Board:
Agenda of December 21, 2005; Minutes of November 16, 2005.
(12) Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee:
Minutes of November 14, 2005; Agenda of December 12, 2005.
(13) Lely Golf Estates Beautification MSTU Adyisory Committee:
Agenda of December 15, 2005; Minutes of November 17, 2005.
(14) Parks and Recreation Advisory Board: Agenda of October 19,
2005; Minutes of October 19, 2005; Agenda of November 16,
2005; Minutes of November 16, 2005.
(15) Pelican Bay Services Division: Agenda of December 8,2005;
Minutes of November 9, 2005; Biological Monitoring Report;
Clam Bay Restoration Project Report Number 8; Clam Pass
Restoration and Management Plan Bathymetric Monitoring
Report Number 6; Water Quality Sampling Update Report
Number 6.
(a) Clam Bay Sub-Committee: Minutes of November 9, 2005.
(16) Collier County Planninq Commission: Minutes of October 6,
2005; Agenda of December 1, 2005; Revised Agenda of
December 15, 2005.
(17) Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Advisory Committee: Agenda of
January 5, 2006; Minutes of December 1, 2005.
H:\DATA\Melanie\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\1.24.06 Misc. Corresp. Memo.doc
D. Other:
(1) Collier County Public Safety Coordinatinq Council: Agenda of
June 9, 2005; Minutes of June 9, 2005.
H:\DATA\Melanie\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\1.24.06 Misc. Corresp. Memo.doc
January 24,2006
Item #16Kl
PUBLIC UTILITIES ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT STAFF
AND THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO PURSUE
ALL LEGAL REMEDIES TO RECOVER LOST REVENUE BY
FOCUS ENGINEERING, INC. - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16K2
AMENDMENT TO MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT/LETTER
OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND FOR THE COUNTY MANAGER WITH
THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD PURSUANT
TO COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2002-27, AS
AMENDED - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 16K3 - Moved to Item # 17E
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2006-02: RZ-2005-AR-7825: MANDALA Y PLACE
LLC, REPRESENTED BY GARY BUTLER, OF BUTLER
ENGINEERING, INC., REQUESTING A REZONE FROM THE
ESTATES (E) ZONING DISTRICT TO THE RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE-FAMILY (RSF 5[3]) ZONING DISTRICT WHICH
ALLOWS 3 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY, CONSISTING OF 2.31 ACRES, IS LOCATED AT
3111 BAILEY LANE, IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #17B
Page 217
January 24,2006
RESOLUTION 2006-18: SE-2005-AR-8626: BARRON COLLIER
COMPANIES, REPRESENTED BY BRUCE E. TYSON, RLA,
AICP, OF WILSONMILLER, IS REQUESTING A SCRIVENER'S
ERROR ON THE WINDING CYPRESS DEVELOPMENT OF
REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI). THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS
LOCATED IN SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #17C
ORDINANCE 2006-03: AUTHORIZING AIRPORT-TYPE
SEARCHES OF INDIVIDUALS WHO ENTER THE W. HARMON
TURNER BUILDING (ADMINISTRATION BUILDING) AT THE
MAIN GOVERNMENT COMPLEX
Item #17D
ORDINANCE 2006-04: AMENDING CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE IV,
OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES, COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE
"EXCA V A TION ORDINANCE"
Item #17E
ORDINANCE 2006-05: AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. 2002-27 CREATING THE PELICAN BAY
MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT;
PROVIDING FOR: MODIFICATION OF PURPOSE RELATING
TO THE MANGROVE FOREST PRESERVE; CHANGE OF
NAME OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE PELICAN BAY
SERVICES DIVISION BOARD; REVISION OF APPOINTMENT
PROCEDURES UPON VACANCY; REVISION OF DUTIES OF
Page 218
January 24, 2006
THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PELICAN BAY SERVICES
DIVISION BOARD) AND THE COUNTY MANAGER;
MUL TIPLE VICE CHAIRS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN CODE OF
LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:29 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
~-~~~
FRA HALAS, C amnan
,r- "
A TFr\;'~::::::'
T _..::S).:.. " ....' ,
DWlOl;lT"E.B1<9cK, CLERK
. .. '. '..:
BY.,::; -AlJpekLxJi) ,QC
",:1,. ,~~.~~,:,.~,.>"" {
These minutes approved by the Board on J-~. /J :Jj'O& , as
presented v or as corrected '
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 219