BCC Minutes 04/11/2006 R
Aprilll, 2006
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, April 11, 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
Michael Pettit, Assistant County Attorney
Derek J ohnssen, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
It""
"~
.' (
-~~"-
AGENDA
April 11, 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 PRESENTATION 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
April 11, 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
T AMIAMI 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
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 1,2005 - Closed Session County Attorney Item 12A
C. March 7, 2006 - BCC/City of Naples Workshop
D. March 8, 2006 - BCC/District 1 Town Hall Meeting
E. March 14, 2006 - BCC/Regular Meeting
F. March 20,2006 - BCC/Flood Plain Management Workshop
G. March 29,2006 - BCC/EDC and Airport Authority Workshop
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
A. Advisory Committee Service A wards
5-vear Award
1) Chuck Mohlke for services on the Health Facilities Authority.
Page 2
April 11, 2006
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating April as Child Abuse Prevention Month. To be
accepted by Patrick Neale, President, Youth Haven Board of Trustees.
B. Proclamation designating May 6th as Day of Grace. To be accepted by Matt
Raulerson.
C. Proclamation designating May 13 - 21, 2006 as Tourism Week in Collier
County. To be accepted by Jack Wert.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Presentation to the Board of County Commissioners Mr. Grover Whidden,
Florida Power and Light Company, concerning its system hardening
program.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request by Robert Felt to discuss replanting the Wilderness
entrance to repair Hurricane Wilma damage.
B. Public Petition request by Connie Fullmer to discuss golf cart use on public
roads in the Community of Goodland, FL.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 l1.m., unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Recommendation to consider Adoption of an Ordinance Establishing the
Copper Cove Community Development District (CDD) pursuant to Section
190.005, Florida Statutes.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of members to the Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage
Advisory Committee.
Page 3
April 11, 2006
B. Appointment of member to the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee.
C. Appointment of member to the Radio Road Beautification Advisory
Committee.
D. Appointment of member to the Animal Services Advisory Board.
E. Appointment of members to the Tourist Development Council.
F. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners consider and
provide any necessary direction regarding the method of Organization of
Board Office Staff. (Commissioner Coletta)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to seek Board approval of an Amended and Restated
Developer Contribution Agreement with G.L. Homes of Naples for the
design and construction of Logan Boulevard between Vanderbilt Beach
Road and Immokalee Road in exchange for vesting and impact fee credits.
(Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation Services)
B. Recommendation to approve Professional Service Agreement No. 06-3931
for engineering and permitting services to be provided by Stanley
Consultants, Inc., for the four-laning of Golden Gate Boulevard from Wilson
Boulevard to Desoto Boulevard, Project No. 60040, in the amount of
$3,300,000.00. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation Services)
c. Recommendation to award Contract 06-3908 to Bradanna, Inc. in the
amount of $2,091,222.00 for construction of the upgrade of the scalehouse
facility and scales at the Naples Landfill and to approve the necessary
budget amendment, Project 59005. (Jim DeLony, Administrator, Public
Utilities)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 10:30 a.m. Status Report on F.S. Chapter 164
Proceedings in Reference to the Inverse Condemnation Lawsuit of Bernard
J. and Helen R. Nobel, and Vincent D. Doerr vs. Collier County, in Case No.
Page 4
April 11, 2006
05-0064-CA and for further attempts by the Staffs of the South Florida
Water Management District, The State of Florida Division of Lands, and the
County to reach an Agreement in the Matter.
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 that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners approve a resolution delegating authority to the
County Manager or his designee for the purpose of signing, for Collier
County as grantee, Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
Conservation Easements.
2) Recommendation to approve an Interim Management Plan for the
School Board-Section 24 property under the Conservation Collier
Land Acquisition Program.
3) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Sabal Bay
Commercial Plat Phase Three, approval of the standard form
Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount
of the performance security.
4) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Heritage
Bay Phase Two-A, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
Page 5
April 11, 2006
5) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Golden
Gate Estates Unit 48 Tract 77 Replat.
6) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Reflection
Lakes at Naples Phase 2C, approval of the standard form Construction
and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
7) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Reflection
Lakes at Naples Phase 2D, approval of the standard form Construction
and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
8) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Reflection
Lakes at Naples Phase 3E, approval of the standard form Construction
and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
9) Recommendation to award RFP #06-3906, Records Management
Services to Vital Records Control, LLC for an estimated annual
budget of $50,000.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approve
the Landscape, Sidewalk, and Swale Maintenance Agreement
between II Regalo Development and Collier County for the
improvements on Orange Blossom and Yarberry Lane.
2) Recommendation for the final maintenance acceptance of plats
generally within Riviera Golf Estates that have received previous
preliminary acceptance from the Board of County Commissioners.
3) Recommendation to approve the purchase of one (1) seventy-one (71)
passenger bus from Rivers Bus Sales, Inc. in the amount of$63,793 in
accordance with the Florida Department of Education Contract #2002-
15.
4) Recommendation to approve the piggybacking of the City of West
Palm Bid #05/06-13 for the purchase of a Truck Mounted
Page 6
April 11, 2006
Storm/Sewer Cleaning Machine from Environmental Products of
Florida in the Amount of$249,726.
5) Recommendation to approve a Declaration setting aside county-
owned lands for road right-of-way, drainage and utility facilities.
(Fiscal impact: $18.50)
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to Approve Removing Certain Accounts Receivable
in the Amount of$259,623.01 from the Public Utilities Division,
Utility Billing Sub-Ledger and to Write Off$137,762.05 of Public
Utilities Division Miscellaneous Accounts Receivable.
2) Recommendation to award Annual Contract for Well Drilling,
Testing, and Maintenance Contracting Services, pursuant to RFP 06-
3887, for (10) firms. (Estimated annual amount $6,000,000)
3) Approve a Resolution authorizing the submission of a State Revolving
Fund lowinterest Construction Loan Application and authorizing the
Loan Agreement to the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, and approve a change order to Purchase Order
4500045416 in the amount of$86,240.00 to Angie Brewer &
Associates, L.C. for the Reclaimed Water Aquifer Storage and
Recovery System Project, 74030.
4) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment to transfer funds in
the amount of $275,000 from the Collier County Water-Sewer District
Operating Fund (408) Reserve for Contingencies to cover
unanticipated operating expenses in the Irrigation Quality (Reuse)
Cost Center.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve a Tourist Development Council
Category A Grant Application in the amount of $79,848 and a Work
Order to The Chris-Tel Company for $57,848 for boardwalk repairs at
Tigertail Beach.
Page 7
April 11, 2006
2) Recommendation to approve an extension to the grace period for the
residency requirement for the Community Center Supervisor at
Golden Gate Community Center.
3) Recommendation to recognize additional revenue in the amount of
$1,500 and approve a budget amendment to increase the Client
Assistance budget.
4) Recommendation to accept donated funds in the amount of$2,000.00
and approve a budget amendment recognizing revenue and
appropriating funds for Golden Gate Community Center.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Report to the Board of County Commissioners concerning the sale
and transfer of items associated with the County surplus auction of
March 11,2006, resulting in $561,757.90 in gross revenues.
2) Report and Ratify Staff-Approved Change Orders and Changes to
Work Orders to Board-Approved Contracts.
3) Recommendation to confirm and consent to the re-assignment of
Contract No. 01-3276, Records Management Services from Document
Management Services, d/b/a Filestor, Inc. to Vital Records Control of
Florida, Inc.
4) Award Contract(s) #06-3929 Annual Contract for Architectural
Services to the following firms: Schenkel & Shultz, Inc., Victor J.
Latavish Architect, P A, BSSW Architects, Inc., CH2M Hill, Inc.,
Disney & Associates, P A and Harper Aiken Partners, Inc. Estimated
annual amount $1,000,000.
5) Recommendation to approve expenditures relating to travel associated
with educational advisory boards.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment to replace a
damaged ambulance for the Emergency Medical Services Department
in the amount of $177,000, recognize and appropriate insurance
Page 8
April 11, 2006
proceeds of $77,500, and appropriate $99,500 of Fund 490 reserves.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation to approve the creation of one 0.5 full time
equivalent (FTE) employee for the Marco Island Executive Airport.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Halas requests Board approval for payment to attend
function serving a valid public purpose to attend the Economic
Development Council of Collier County Exclusive Member Breakfast
on Wednesday, April 12, 2006; $21.52 to be paid from Commissioner
Halas' travel budget.
2) Commissioner Halas requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the 3rd
Annual Florida Tradeport Briefing and Barbecue on March 31, 2006
at the Immokalee Regional Airport; $40.00 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
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Approve
an Agreement Authorizing the Collier County Sheriffs Office to have
Traffic Control Jurisdiction over Private Roads within the Saturnia
Lakes Subdivision.
2) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners serve as the
Local Coordinating Unit of Government in the Florida Department of
Law Enforcement's Fiscal Year 2007 Edward Byrne Memorial,
Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program and designate the Sheriff as
the Official Applicant, Sheriffs office staff as Grant Financial and
Program Managers, approve the Grant Application when completed,
Page 9
April 11, 2006
and authorize acceptance of awards and associated budget
amendments.
3) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners designate the
Sheriff as the Official Applicant and Program Point-of-Contact for the
United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP),
Field- Initiated Demonstration Program Grant, for the Sheriff to
electronically submit the application through the Federal Grants.Gov
web site, and for the Board to accept the Grant when awarded and
approve budget amendments.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDA TION 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 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. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, adopt an Ordinance amending Section 74-308 (g) of
Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, as
amended, which is the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance,
No. 2001-13, providing for a change in the implementation date for the
annual indexing adjustments to the Correctional Impact Fee rates in order to
meet the implementation deadline of July 1, 2006 set forth by proposed
legislation.
B. This item reQuires that all participants are sworn in and ex-parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. Petition A VPLA T2005-
AR8683 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County's and the Public's
Page 10
April 11, 2006
interest in the 7.5 foot wide utility easement located along the east line of
Lot 50 and the east line of the north 55 feet of Lot 11 and in the 5 foot wide
utility easement located along the north 5 feet of Lots 11 and 12 and along
the south 5 feet of Lots 49 and 50, all in Block 61, according to the plat of
"Naples Park Unit No.5" as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 14, Public
Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 28, Township 48
South, Range 25 East.
C. Request that the Board of County Commissioners adopt an ordinance to
amend Ordinance No. 75-11 regulating commercial carnivals and
exhibitions.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
Page 11
April 11, 2006
April 11, 2006
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
The board of Collier County Board of Commissioners is now in
seSSIon.
Would you all please rise for the invocation by Jim Mudd, our
County Manager, followed by Pledge of Allegiance.
MR. MUDD: Heavenly Father, we come to you today as a
community thanking you for the blessings that you have so generously
provided. Today we are especially thankful for the dedicated elected
officials, staff, and members of the public who are here to help lead
this community as it makes the important decisions that will shape our
community's future.
We pray that you would guide, lead and direct the decisions
made here today so that your will for our county will always be done.
These things we pray in your holy name, amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It's a pleasure that each and every one of
us are here this morning.
And we'll start off with the County Manager, we'll see ifhe has
any updates on today's agenda.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, we do; just a few.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, agenda changes, Board of County
Commissioners meeting, April 11, 2006.
Add item 9G, and that's a request that the board consider
proclaiming April 25th and 26th, 2006, as Payment in Lieu of Taxes
Page 2
April 11, 2006
30th Anniversary Recognition Days and authorize the chairman to
sign the proclamation, and that item is added at Commissioner
Coletta's request.
The next item is 10A. Towards the bottom of paragraph 21H,
delete the words, mandated by this agreement, and add the word
directly. It should read, and the county shall reimburse developer for
all fees, costs, expenses and other charges actually paid by developer
directly in connection with the project within six months after the date
of such termination. That's at staffs request.
Next item is item 16Al. Delete paragraph 3 under considerations
of the executive summary. The paragraph reads, signature by the
chairman of the Board of County Commissioners has raised questions
concerning the attestation of the signature by the Clerk of Courts
simply because the authority to do so arises implicitly from ordinances
approved months or years prior to the signature. And that deletion is
at staffs request.
The next item is item 16B3. The agenda index refers to the
Florida Department of Education contract number 2002-15. It should
be contract number 2005-15. And that clarification is at staffs
request.
The next item is 16E 1. The dollar amount in the executive
summary title should be $561,707.50 rather than $561,757.90. That
correction was at Commissioner Coyle's request.
The next item, move item 17C to 8B. Request that the Board of
County Commissioners adopt an ordinance to amend ordinance
number 75-11, regulating commercial carnivals and exhibitions, and
that move is at Commissioner Henning's request.
And lastly, there's a time certain item today, and that's item 12A
to be heard at 10:30 a.m. It's a status report on Florida Statute Chapter
164 proceedings in reference to the inverse condemnation lawsuit of
Bernard J. and Helen R. Nobel and Vincent Doerr versus Collier
County in case number 05-0064-CA, and for further attempts by the
Page 3
April 11, 2006
staff of the South Florida Water Management District, the State of
Florida Division of Lands, and the county to reach an agreement in
this matter.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much. How about the
County Attorney?
MR. PETTIT: No changes, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We'll start off with the -- with
today's agenda with commissioners, starting with Commissioner
Henning.
Do you have any ex parte or any changes on today's agenda, sir?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have no ex parte, and I
would like to pull item number 16B2. I just want to talk about this on
the record just so I have a comfort level with that, please.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And 16B2, sir?
MR. MUDD: 16B2 would go to 10D.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I have one email in regards to 17
-- 1 7B in regards to the summary agenda today, and I have no other
changes that I want to make to today's agenda.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have no changes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And nothing to declare on the
summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no ex parte disclosure for
the summary agenda, and I have no further changes to the agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I entertain a motion for approval
of today's regular consent and summary agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
Page 4
April 11, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. 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: Any opposed, by like sign?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Carries unanimously.
Page 5
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
April 11. 2006
Add Item 9G: Request that the Board consider proclaiming April 25 and 26, 2006 as Payment in
Lieu of Taxes 30th Anniversary Recognition Days and authorize the Chairman to sign the
proclamation. (Commissioner Coletta's request.)
Item 10A: Towards the bottom of paragraph 21 H, delete the words "mandated by this Agreement
and" and add the word "directly". It should read: ... and the County shall reimburse Developer
for all fees, costs, expenses and other charges mandated by this Agreement and actually paid by
Developer directly in connection with the project within 6 months after the date of such
termination. (Staff's request.)
Item 16A1: Delete paragraph 3 under "Considerations" of the executive summary. The
paragraph reads, "Signature by the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners has raised
questions concerning the attestation of the signature by the Clerk of Courts simply because the
authority to do so arises implicitly from Ordinances approved months or years prior to the
signature." (Staff's request.)
Item 16B3: The agenda index refers to the Florida Department of Education Contract #2002-15.
Should be "Contract #2005-15". (Staff's request.)
Item 16E1: The dollar amount in the Executive Summary title should be: $561,707.50 rather than
$561,757.90. (Commissioner Coyle's request.)
Move Item 17C to 8B: Request that the Board of County Commissioners adopt an ordinance to
amend Ordinance No. 75-11 regulating commercial carnivals and exhibitions. (Commissioner
Henning's request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 12A to be heard at 10:30 a.m. Status report on F.S. Chapter 164 proceedings in reference to
the inverse condemnation lawsuit of Bernard J. and Helen R. Nobel, and Vincent D. Doerr vs.
Collier County, in Case No. 05-0064-CA and for further attempts by the staffs of the South Florida
Water Management District, the State of Florida Division of Lands, and the County to reach an
agreement in the matter.
April 11, 2006
Item #2B, #2C, #2D, #2E, #2F, #2G
MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 1,2005 CLOSED SESSION
COUNTY ATTORNEY ITEM 12A; MARCH 7,2006 BCC/CITY OF
NAPLES WORKSHOP; MARCH 8, 2006 BCC/DISTRICT #1
TOWN HALL MEETING; MARCH 14, 2006 BCC/REGULAR
MEETING; MARCH 20, 2006 BCC/FLOODPLAIN
MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP; MARCH 29, 2006 BCC/EDC AND
AIRPORT AUTHORITY WORKSHOP - APPROVED AS
PRESENTED
Motion to approve the following: November 1, 2005, Closed
Session County Attorney Item 12A; March 7,2006, BCC/City of
Naples Workshop; March 8, 2006, BCC/District 1 Town Meeting;
March 14, 2006, BCC/Regular Meeting; March 20, 2006,
BCC/Floodplain Management Workshop; and March 29,2006,
BCC/EDC Airport Authority Workshop.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So moved.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor of approving
the following items that were listed, 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?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, motion passes
unanimously.
Page 6
April 11, 2006
I believe the next thing, County Manager, is the service awards.
Item #3A
PRESENTATION OF THE OUTSTANDING SERVICE AWARD
TO CHUCK MOHLKE - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Service awards. And the service award number A
is advisory committee service awards, and we have one today, and it is
a distinct pleasure to present Chuck Mohlke with a five-year award for
services on the Health Facilities Authority. Mr. Mohlke?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Chuck, it gives me great pleasure to give
you this presentation.
MR. MOHLKE: And a pin?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That will be $2.50, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You should ask for a free parking
space.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You can have Commissioner
Coyle's if you'd like.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good morning.
MR. MOHLKE: Thanks so very much.
MR. MUDD: Chuck, if we could get a picture, turn around.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Turn around for a picture. We've got to
have a picture of your smiling face.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thanks for all you're doing, Chuck.
MR. MOHLKE: Thanks for the opportunity.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
(Applause)
Item #4A
Page 7
April 11, 2006
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING APRIL AS CHILD ABUSE
PREVENTION MONTH - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item on
the agenda, which is item 4A, under proclamations. It's a
proclamation designating April as Child Abuse Prevention Month, to
be accepted by Patrick Neale, president of the Youth Haven board of
trustees. Mr. Neale?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Where we at here?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Neale's not here.
MR. MUDD: Is anyone from the Youth Haven board of trustees
here in order to accept the proclamation?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Why don't we just go ahead --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Read it into the record.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- and read it anyway and put it in the
record.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You want to stand up here,
County Manager? I'll give it to you.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Whereas, every child in Collier
County is a precious gift and full of promise potential; and,
Whereas, child abuse and neglect is a serious problem in Collier
County across our -- and across our nation;
Whereas, child maltreatment occurs when people find themselves
in stressful situations without community resources and don't know
how to cope; and,
Whereas, to prevent child abuse and neglect in a community -- is
a community problem that depends on shared involvement among the
people throughout the community in organizations such as Youth
Haven. Those programs provide immediate protection of suffering
Page 8
April 11, 2006
children, support and information to families as well as community
awareness; and,
Whereas, child abuse and neglect is not only directly from
harming children but also increasing likelihood of criminal behavior,
substance abuse, health problems and risky behavior; and,
Whereas, all citizens of Collier County should become involved
in supporting families in raising their children in a safe, stable,
nutritional environment; and,
Whereas, children are the most precious resource with bright and
hopeful futures, and Youth Haven is committed to keeping promises,
keeping the children in our community safe and happy.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Commissioners
of Collier County, Florida, that April be designated as Children Abuse
Prevention Month and calls this observation (sic) to the attention of all
in our community to increase their participation and efforts of
supporting families, thereby preventing child abuse and strengthening
the community in which we live in.
Done in this order, the 11 th of April, 2006, and signed by the
chairman, Frank Halas. Motion to approve, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion to approve today's
proclamation. 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: Opposed, by like sign?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Carries unanimously. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are you going to hand deliver that?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Goodjob.
Page 9
April 11, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You were a child once, right?
MR. MUDD: I wasn't a child once.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's a long time ago.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We've never had that happen before.
Item #4B
PROCLAMA TION DESIGNA TING MAY 6TH AS DAY OF GRACE
- ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next proclamation is 4B, and
that's a proclamation designating May 6th as Day of Grace, to be
accepted by Matt Raulerson.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Face the camera. I know it's
embarrassing.
Proclamation: Whereas, Matt and Bess Raulerson have
established an annual Day of Grace Golf Classic and Charity Auction
to be held this year on May 6th in honor of their daughter, Emma
Grace, who was born with a rare chromosomal disorder called
Trisomy 18 and lived only 13 days; and,
Whereas, Trisomy 18 is so rare that there is very little research
about it; and,
Whereas, Matt and Bess Raulerson founded the event in order
that the proceeds could be used to change the future of other families
by funding research; and,
Whereas, Matt and Bess will donate this year's proceeds to
organizations and programs which provide research into the cause and
treatment of Trisomy 18 and other genetic disorders, as they did the
over $33,000 from the previous two years' events; and,
Whereas, in recognition of those in our community who support
this bold effort and have done so in the past.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Page 10
April 11, 2006
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that May 6, 2006, be
proclaimed the Day of Grace in hopes of bringing more attention to
this heartbreaking disease, and in recognition of the Raulerson
family's efforts to make a positive contribution to their community by
aiding others.
Done and ordered this 11 th day of April, 2006, Board of County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas, Chairman.
And Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I second that.
All those in favor of passing this proclamation, 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 passes, unanimous.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
MR. RAULERSON: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Matt, do you want to say a couple words?
MR. RAULERSON: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: From over here at the microphone.
MR. RAULERSON: I do. Thank you, Commissioners.
This is the third year we're hosting the Day of Grace Golf Classic
and Charity Auction. It is May 6th this year, to be held at Forest Glen
Country Club.
It's a four-man scramble golf format. Registration begins at 12
noon, and that's going to be followed by a raffle and live auction. It's
a great fun event and for a great cause. So if you or any of your
Page 11
April 11, 2006
friends are golfers or would like to come out and participate, please do
so. It's a -- it will be fun for everyone.
Thank you very much.
(Applause)
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 13-21,2006 AS
TOURISM WEEK IN COLLIER COUNTY - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, the next proclamation is 4C. It's a
proclamation designating May 13 through the 21st, 2006, as Tourism
Week in Collier County, to be accepted by Jack Wert, your Director of
Tourism.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I just want to say, since Jack Wert
has come on board as our tourism director, that big things have
happened here in Collier County.
And Jack, we want -- really appreciate your service here to
Collier County.
MR. WERT: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Whereas, the travel and tourism is the
largest industry throughout Florida, employs more than 900,000
people and produces more than 58 billion in revenue from taxable
sales; and,
Whereas, the travel and tourism industry supports the vital
interest of Collier County, Florida, and the United States, contributing
over 28,000 jobs to our community, economic prosperity, peace,
understanding, and good will; and,
Whereas, 1.6 million visitors contributed nearly $1.1 billion to
the economy of Collier County in 2005; and,
Whereas, it is in the best interest of the citizens of Collier County
to inform them of the direct and indirect benefits of tourism; and,
Page 12
April 11, 2006
Whereas, as travelers become more aware of Collier County's
outstanding beaches, golf, shopping, restaurants, natural and historic
cultural activities, travel and tourism will become an increasingly
important aspect in the lives of our citizens; and,
Whereas, May 13th through the 21 st, 2006, is being observed
throughout the State of Florida as National T ourism Week; and,
Whereas, given the contributions of travel and tourism to the
economics, social and cultural well-being of the citizens of Collier
County, it is fitting that we recognize the importance of travel and
tourism in our community.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by (sic) the Board of County
Commissioners, wishes to acknowledge the contributions to the
economy of Collier County, Florida, by the travel and tourism
industry by designating May 13th to the 21st, 2006, as Tourism Week
in Collier County, and that this proclamation be acknowledged by the
Greater Naples, Marco Island, Everglades Convention and Visitors
Bureau at their Fourth Annual Tourism Awards Luncheon on May 19,
2006.
Done and ordered this 11 th day of April, 2006, Board of Collier
-- Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank
Halas, Chair.
And I move for approval of this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor of approving
this proclamation, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Those opposed, by like sign?
(N 0 response)
Page 13
ApriI 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Passes unanimously.
Thank you very much, Jack, for your work. Outstanding.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Congratulations, Jack. We were
happier without hurricanes. We didn't have them before.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is that part of the tourism?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You've really brought a new level to
our tourism department. Thanks so much, Jack.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR.OCHS: Thanks, Jack.
MR. MUDD: Thanks.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Now we've got to get a picture of you,
Jack.
Do you want to say a few words, Jack?
MR. WERT: Thank you, sir.
For the record, Jack Wert, Tourism Director. And on behalf of
those 28,000 employees in the tourism industry, thank you for this
proclamation. It's, I think, very fitting to honor and recognize this
industry that brings so much to our community.
You mentioned that figure, Commissioner, of $1.1 billion, with a
B, as the economic impact of tourism to this community, and it really
does bring sales prosperity to Naples, every business in our
community, so it certainly is an important part of our way of life here
in Collier County.
And I extend the invitation to our Fourth Annual Tourism
Awards Luncheon to all of you on May 19th where we'll be honoring
a number of the shining stars in this industry who have gone above
and beyond and truly represented this industry very, very well.
Again, thank you so much for this particular proclamation, and
we will certainly have it read at that luncheon. And thanks so much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Where's the luncheon going to be
held?
Page 14
April 11, 2006
MR. WERT: It will be at the Naples Grande Hotel, which is the
former Registry Resort, and newly remodeled and I think we'll be a
real attraction for people to see one of the real wonderful assets that
we have here in our community. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
(Applause)
Item #5A
PRESENTATION BY MR. GROVER WHIDDEN, FLORIDA
POWER AND LIGHT, CONCERNING ITS SYSTEM
HARDENING PROGRAM - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item on your agenda is a
presentation. It's a presentation to the Board of County
Commissioners by Mr. Grover Whidden of the Florida Power and
Light Company concerning its system hardening program. Grover?
MR. WHIDDEN: Good morning, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning.
MR. WHIDDEN: For the record, my name is Grover Whidden,
area manager for Florida Power and Light Company.
Let me just bring this -- bring this up here.
Well, just like the weather has obviously changed in Florida, we
are having to change also. We're not going to be able to get there
overnight, but we are committed to getting better every day, as our
president recently said.
Some time ago we recognized that we weren't going to be able to
get there without a pretty comprehensive plan to strengthen our
system, so we did quite a bit of analysis. We employed an
international consulting firm to work with us on this. We got a lot of
input from people like yourselves, state and local officials, our
emergency managers, community leaders, most importantly, our
Page 15
April 11, 2006
customers, and we developed what we think is a pretty comprehensive
proposal.
Basically that proposal is a five-point plan we call the storm
secure plan, and it lays out exactly what we're going to be doing both
in the short and long run to make our system perform better during
hurricanes.
First we'll be hardening the electrical network; secondly, we're
going to -- we're proposing to make some additional investments and
underground conversions; third, to step up our pole inspections;
fourth, to increase our line clearing activities; and fifth, to complete
our post-hurricane and targeted facilities upgrade prior to this
upcoming hurricane season.
How are we going to harden our network? We're going to be
implementing much higher standards, which is going to not only
involve all of our new construction, but we're going to make system
upgrades to our existing facilities as well. We're also going to
prioritize lines that are serving our critical infrastructure facilities and
harden those first.
And last, we're going to basically develop a very comprehensive
road map, not only of how we're going to do that on a corporate level,
but how we're going to do that in our individual communities. And as
that becomes available, we want to share that with you.
This is a wind map. I'm sure many of you have seen similar wind
maps. But it shows in particular the coastal areas where Collier
County is located, how the extreme wind velocities get up to 150
miles an hour.
Our existing lines, although constructed to exceed the National
Electric Safety Code standards, which are actually only 60 miles an
hour, we have for a long period of time constructed our facilities for
90 mile an hour winds.
But our new lines and all of our -- all the replacement work that
we're going to be doing, they will now be constructed to the highest
Page 16
April 11, 2006
standard. In fact, no other utility in the United States is using this high
of a standard. And in for much of Collier County, that will be for 150
mile an hour winds.
And to give you some idea, that is going to be coincidental. And
I think this is very logical. It will be coincidental with the wind
standards that are used in the Florida Building Code. So our facilities
will be designed to withstand those same -- those same winds.
How will we do that? Well, as you might imagine, it will mean
larger diameter wood poles. We'll also be -- we're working on a new
special design concrete pole which will be a super strong concrete
pole.
We'll have to be doing things like shorter spans of wire between
poles and the use of special hardware and insulators, and special I
mean nobody else in the industry is using anything like this, so a lot of
this is having to be developed as we -- as we speak.
The other thing we want to do, and I mentioned this briefly to
Chairman Halas earlier this morning, as a lot of you know, a lot of our
communities that have existing overhead facilities have expressed a
desire to convert to underground facilities, and we're happy to do that.
They -- by rule of Florida Public Service Commission, they have to
pay the cost of these conversions.
What we've proposed to the commission, and we hope to get
approval before too long now, is that we as a company would invest
25 percent of the cost of these conversions ourselves, realizing that
that does a lot to strengthen the system.
There's no doubt about it that areas that had underground
facilities, we were able to restore service much -- much faster. And
for all intents and purposes, those underground systems were not
damaged during the storms we've experienced in the last couple years.
The other thing that we're going to do is support, to the best that
we can, ordinances and legislation that require new lines to be
underground, which, fortunately, you already have a lot of that -- a lot
Page 1 7
April 11, 2006
of those requirements here in Collier County.
Another thing that we're doing, which there's been quite a bit of
media attention, too, is we are stepping up our pole inspections to an
eight-year cycle. And, of course, any poles that we find, they will be
replaced. And we're continuing with our other various inspection
programs.
Interestingly enough, although the media made quite a to-do
about it, only about two percent of our poles actually failed during the
hurricane. And when you can -- and we had -- I mentioned we
employed an international consulting firm to do an evaluation of how
our system performed during the last hurricane. Interestingly enough,
it did perform just about the way it was designed to, realizing that it
wasn't designed for, you know, as high of wind velocities as what
we're going to.
Another very important thing, and certainly one that I think all of
you are aware of, and especially in this tropical zone down here in
Southwest Florida, trees become very important.
And we are -- we've changed our way of doing business
regarding trees in that we're accelerating our tree trimming to occur --
75 percent of it to occur before we get into hurricane season, which
has meant some changes in our work practices. So we hope to have a
lot of that completed going into this year's hurricane season.
The other thing we're doing is we're stepping up our efforts to
promote our right tree, right place program, and not to plant trees, you
know, directly under these lines to begin with. That's really a lot of the
solution to the problem.
We're also finishing up our post-hurricane repairs. You might
have seen a lot of contract crews in the area. We're going through the
whole system now and making sure that it's completely up to -- up to
par in preparation for the 2006 hurricane season, replacing a lot of
conductors and hardening some of our substation facilities, although
those were already constructed, for the most part, for the 150 mile an
Page 18
April 11, 2006
hour wind standard.
So in summary, some of these things like the repairs, the
upgrading of the conductors, targeting improvements to some of the
main lines, improving the tree trimmings, a lot of that we can do in the
short term.
Some of the other stuff that I mentioned about increasing the
standard for the wind velocities, that -- that is going to take a while
and will probably be programmed over the next 10 years, but we'll be
doing it in priority order.
And we think all of these things combined will do a lot to harden
our system and hopefully provide better service to our customers short
of restoration times and times of hurricanes. I mean, we're still, to be
very clear, we're still going to have customers out when we get into
this -- into these kind of devastating storms, but we think we can do a
better job.
And with that, I'll answer any questions you may have. Thank
you again for having me.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Grover, thank you very much for the
update. I do have a couple of questions from commissioners, but I'm
going to start off and ask -- ask you if your firm is going to look at the
depreciation rate in regards to people that want to get involved and
bury lines in their particular neighborhoods. Are you going to have
also a depreciation of the lines, how long they've been in service?
MR. WHIDDEN: Yes, yes. That's part of the calculations.
When we calculate, you know, what it costs to upgrade the system, we
do take into account that we're removing depreciated systems and we
recognize that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Fantastic.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Interesting that you're here
today, Grover, to talk about this. I had just written the County
Manager about a week, week and a half ago, saying, while we're
Page 19
--_.~--~---~-,---_.- '~-'--"-'-~~-"---
April 11, 2006
tearing up all of these roads to rebuild, to widen, maybe we ought to
be burying these lines. And then, of course, he was saying, talk to
Grover Whidden about that because he's coming to see us.
And so that's what I wanted to propose, at least along the roads
that are being torn up now, and you'd have to replace the lines
anyway, and I'm sure that there's an expense involved. You could add
that expense to the 25 percent that you're already -- that you would
allocate us, and that shouldn't cost the county very much then to bury
them, maybe 35 percent less -- I mean, left for us to bury. And at the
same time, all of these major roadways would then not be so
dangerous during hurricanes, and I would love to have you consider
that.
MR. WHIDDEN: Well, certainly we would be willing to do that.
Some of the proj ects, the very critical proj ects that you're pushing
along, are -- you know, are way down the road as far as all of the
engineering and all of the work and everything, but certainly some of
your longer range projects. This is truly an opportunity, as --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
MR. WHIDDEN: -- you're presenting it, because generally
speaking, our company has to pay the expense of relocating these lines
and -- at least relocating them overhead, so we can take that money,
put it towards underground.
And then when you couple it with this new program of us paying
25 percent of the cost of under grounding, you know, that does -- yes,
that does make it -- that does make it a lot more economical, and it
certainly is never going to be more economical than that.
And so I think it is a -- it is something for you to look at. We
would encourage that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Good. Now, the second question is,
do you think -- I realize that we have roads under construction that
have already been designed and everything. But is there a way for
you to work with our transportation department to maybe -- even
Page 20
April 11, 2006
though we're beginning on some of these roads to dig up right now,
maybe by getting together real quickly, you could even start burying
these lines right now so that -- so that we'll have a more efficient
system? That's going to help accomplish what you've set out to do,
and it will certainly be good for our residents.
MR. WHIDDEN: We'll certainly be happy to talk to the
transportation department. I'm -- I think one of the things though
that's going to come into play is going to be scheduling and
everything. Because I know -- and as you well know also, these
projects have very tight schedules. And to get, you know, a lot of
redesign now might have schedule implications. But we will talk to
them about what projects might be suitable for doing this.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great. The guy's right back there.
Don't leave without talking to him.
MR. WHIDDEN: All right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I want to echo first what
Donna Fiala said, Commissioner Fiala, in the fact that the better way
to do things, and that would be to use the 25 percent you allow and the
fact that you offset -- when you offset the lines, you usually pick up
100 percent of it. But it seems that that would be a wonderful
opportunity to serve both ends of the community.
The other part I want to bring up is that, of course everything
your company produces is rate driven. Any services that you provide
have to come directly back to the consumer. And I do have some
concerns. Of course now, after the last hurricane, the electric rate
went up substantially to be able to cover cost of recovery.
It came to my attention -- and I wrote a letter to you, and I never
got really what I'd call a satisfactory answer, and it had to do with the
preparation that Florida Power and Light's been doing over the past 20
years or so as far as tree trimming.
Page 21
April 11, 2006
It's been my understanding that their budget -- and the only
reason I'm bringing it up is for a good point, to make sure we don't
repeat sins of the past -- that they cut back on their budget
considerably over the years for tree trimming.
Of course, we were 40 plus years between hurricanes and major
events. What I'd like to know is if you -- is something in place that is
going to be down into your game plan that will carry into the future to
avoid this happening again where we might be 10 years between
hurricanes, and Florida Power and Light seeing a cost-saving measure
may stop the tree trimming, the aggressive tree trimming program that
they're doing at this point in time?
I mean, in the end, the ratepayers have to pay for it. And if
they're without the power for a period of time because of damage done
by the trees that haven't been trimmed, the effect is enormous and it
lasts for a long time. Would you care to comment on that?
MR. WHIDDEN: Yes, certainly. Well, it's true. Back some 10
years ago, we did reduce costs by reducing our tree trimming
expenses. But long prior to the start of this last hurricane cycle, the
last couple of years, we had already stepped up those levels even
beyond what -- beyond the levels where they were cut.
So it really -- yes, we did reduce tree trimming expenses and,
secondly, I don't think you're going to see us do that, but I want to
emphasize the fact that -- that the expenditures -- we trim basically on
a three-year cycle, and so we had stepped up our tree trimming up to
much higher levels prior to this current hurricane cycle, so we don't
really think it was for lack of funding.
Now, the one thing that we do think we can do -- and we can do
much smarter job trimming. And we have -- I made some comments
on my presentation about our strategy, how we're going to expend
most of the resources before we go into the hurricane season.
The other thing that we're doing is, we had not always been as
aggressive with homeowners and homeowners' associations in
Page 22
April 11, 2006
insisting that the trees, you know, be trimmed to the proper clearance,
and we're getting a lot tougher on that, I need to tell you, and you may
be hearing from some -- from some of the citizens about that. But it's
very necessary that we have trimming, and we certainly recognize the
importance of those expenditures. I don't think you'll ever see us cut
back on tree trimming expenditures again, Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can you tell me if your program
applies equally to the rural areas of the county where you have great
expanses between the lines as far as the homeowners?
MR. WHIDDEN: Yeah, they really do. In fact, actually we're
even more aggressive in the rural areas, and the reason for that is
because in these rural areas the lines, a given circuit covers many,
many more miles.
And so it is -- it is doubly important on those rural circuits for the
trees that have the proper clearance; otherwise, you know, when you
have a line that's 60, 70 miles long sometimes, if you've got trees on it,
you're going to -- you know, you're going to knock it out, whereas, our
urban circuits are much shorter and -- but, yes, we pay a lot of
attention to the rural trimming.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And if you'd be so kind -- and
this will finish my discussion. I appreciate your patience -- to possibly
supply this commission with any internal reports generated showing
that progress is being made, it would be most appreciative --
appreciated.
MR. WHIDDEN: Be glad to, thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have a question, but I'd first like
to just make a suggestion that tags onto what Commissioner Fiala has
suggested. Perhaps the board can provide guidance to the County
Manager to instruct our transportation department to always consider
the option of undergrounding electrical utilities in their planning for
Page 23
April 11, 2006
road construction or widening.
If that's a step in our process to coordinate with FP&L and it's a
required step in the process, then we could make the appropriate cost
estimates and design modifications, if necessary, at the right time in
the planning process, if that were just formalized as a coordination
point. Okay. Would there be three heads--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Three nods to do that.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And just so you know, there's a cost
share that the county's going to have to pay on that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I understand, and we can make a
decision as to whether or not we want to proceed once we have the
cost estimates.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But it won't be just the, what, the
27 percent or--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Twenty-five.
MR. WHIDDEN: Twenty-five.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- 25 percent cost share because if
you're moving them --
MR. WHIDDEN: Right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- that's a 100 percent cost.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Grover and I talked about this one time
before when we -- when we brought the idea of franchise fees to the
board about three years ago. And I'm not bringing that forward again.
I've already done that twice, and I'm not going down that road unless
the board requests it.
But our figures where, when they move it, when they move the
line from one place to another because of road construction, that
represents -- that move of line represents around 35 to 40 percent of
the cost of what it would to bury that line.
So if you add that price with the 25 percent that they're already
Page 24
April 11, 2006
offering to bury, then the county has anywhere between a 40 -- a 35
percent cost share that they have to do, and it's probably the cheapest
time that you could do it.
I would say there's probably another opportunity that I wrote
down on my book, is those times when FP &L has to move the line
irrespective of the road because they have to upsize it or because of
the age of the particular line. That might be another opportunity
where you can get that significant savings in the cost of burying a line,
and I wrote that down on my book, if that's also the board's desire to
take a look at that too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep, that would be my desire,
okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala? I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I didn't get a chance to ask my
question.
Grover, you've indicated that new and replacement lines are
going to be built or installed to these new hurricane resistant
standards. That still leaves a lot of existing lines that don't meet those
standards.
So where would we stand in Collier County, let's say, by this
hurricane season as to what percentage of the distribution lines will, in
fact, exist at the new hurricane resistant standards of 150 mile per hour
winds?
MR. WHIDDEN: Over this hurricane season, unfortunately, the
only lines that will exist to the new standard are newly-constructed
lines, and we have prioritized some top lines that have critical
infrastructure which we're going to be upgrading.
But that will -- you know, due to time constraints and the fact
that, quite frankly, some of the hardware that we need for this is still in
development. Again, we're going to a standard that doesn't exist
anywhere in the U.S., so I'm afraid a lot -- a lot is not -- in terms of the
new wind standard, is not going to be done.
Page 25
April 11, 2006
But let me just clarify. It's our intention to harden the system
over time completely. We will replace, you know, all the poles in the
system probably -- it will be something like a 10-year plan. And, you
know, our attention is to harden the entire system.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And during that period, is it
possible for you to place additional guy wires on the existing poles
that don't meet the 150 --
MR. WHIDDEN: We'll be looking at some of that, yeah. There
are some opportunities, and that's -- one of the things that we're doing
even in the short run is we're inspecting these lines and everything.
We're looking for situations where it looks like, you know, we can do
quick fixes and greatly improve the resilience of the line. That's a
good call.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, just one last thing. County
Manager, just maybe as we move forward with this project, just
maybe there are FEMA dollars also that would help the county pay for
our 35 percent. Being that we're burying the lines, that might be an
advantage in the hurricane season and less money FEMA would have
to pay if they have grants available for us. So that might be something
to investigate. You probably have already thought of it, but --
MR. MUDD: We'll take a look at grant opportunity, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, Grover.
MR. WHIDDEN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thanks for your time.
MR. WHIDDEN: Thanks for your time.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY ROBERT FELT TO DISCUSS
Page 26
April 11, 2006
REPLANTING THE WILDERNESS ENTRANCE TO REPAIR
HURRICANE WILMA DAMAGE - TO BE BROUGHT BACK AT
THE APRIL 25, 2006 BCC MEETING - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: The next item, Commissioner, is public petitions,
and it's item C -- 6A, excuse me, 6, public petitions. First one is 6A.
It's a public petition request by Robert Felt to discuss replanting the
Wilderness entrance to repair Hurricane Wilma damage. Mr. Felt?
State your name for the record.
MR. BUNNER: Good morning, members of the board. My
name is Stanley Bunner. I'm from Cheffy, Passidomo, Wilson and
Johnson. I'm a local attorney here, assisting Mr. Felt with the
presentation.
MR. FELT: Good morning. My name is Robert Felt. I'm the
General Manager, Chief Operating Officer at Wilderness Country
Club and Condominium Association.
MR. BUNNER: Good morning. We've come here today to
request the board to use its lawful authority through lawful means to
assists us in stopping what we contend is a tenuous and overzealous, if
not an unfounded and totally coercive attempt by code enforcement to
apply portions of the land development code to Wilderness that are not
applicable in order to mitigate an alleged violation in cleaning up
Hurricane Wilma damage.
First, I would just like to introduce you to the community through
some photographs for those of you who are not familiar. Wilderness
is a planned unit development that was approved back in 1976. This
was at a time when there was no requirement to establish native
preserves and no requirement to establish conservation easements on
native preserves.
It was founded with the theory that the Hanson Native Forest
should be maintained to the maximum extent possible. You can see
that we have low-rise multiple-family dwellings nestled into the native
Page 27
April 11, 2006
preserve areas, what would be native preserve areas with native
vegetation and extensive forestry around the golf course.
Again, the policy of Wilderness is that we don't cut down trees,
and that has been maintained since the mid '70s. But like all
communities in Collier County, it was hit by four hurricanes over the
last year and a half. Last being, of course, Hurricane Wilma, which
caused extensive damage to the community.
What you're seeing here is a photo of some trees knocked over
onto the guard shack in the entrance area of Wilderness, which is an
area that has become a point of contention with code enforcement.
You can see the area's completely obstructed. There are a number of
trees broken.
But I'm going to show you some other areas of Wilderness that
were affected by the storm as well so you can get an idea of the extent
of the damage.
Here again, trees broken, no longer viable. The trunks are broken,
the branches are broken. In the gate area specifically, there were
numerous trees with broken branches, eventually some had been cut
back by -- in order to stop their interference with utility lines, and they
were removed.
Here again, broken branches rendering these trees non-viable for
the future, and they'd have to be culled out of the areas.
The average age of the residents of Wilderness 74 years old.
And as you can imagine, after the hurricanes, it was imperative that
the community clean up the roadways as quickly as possible so as to
allow free passage both for the residents coming in and out, their safe
passage, as well as for emergency services to be able to enter the
community.
Again, here we have trees in the roadway, culling out trees in
what would be native preserve areas.
Ultimately in the front entrance area of the community, code
enforcement came and they observed that Wilderness was cutting
Page 28
April 11, 2006
down certain trees that had been damaged by the hurricane.
Wilderness had solicited the assistance of FEMA representatives who
examined the trees that were cut down. The FEMA representatives
agreed that these trees were not viable for the future, and the trees
were removed.
Nevertheless, they were cited for a code violation for removing
alleged specimen trees in the front of the area. And as a result of that
citation, Mr. Felt contacted the county. He eventually spoke to Mr.
Sawyer on the county staff. He was informed that, in fact, the board
had passed a resolution, number 2005-410, which removed the
requirement to get a tree removal permit in the case of vegetation
destroyed by Hurricane Wilma that was threatening safety or health.
They removed that.
Nevertheless, the citation was issued. The code enforcement
insisted on going to a hearing, which we did have on March 3rd of
2006.
The county presented its case, according to the minutes, that this
entrance of Wilderness had a retained native vegetation area and that
Wilderness was a preserve that was required to have 25 percent native
vegetation.
We tell you today that both of those are untrue. But whether they
are untrue or not, nevertheless, the special master did find that the
county failed to prove its case and Wilderness was found not guilty of
violating this ordinance for tree removal.
Wilderness went to code enforcement and said, we value the
native preserves in our area, we value the native vegetation, and we
are willing to engage in a plan of replanting. In fact, we already have
one in the works to replant to repair this hurricane damage. They said
they'd work together with code enforcement.
Code Enforcement then invited Wilderness to attend a meeting,
which I attended as well. This was on March 29th of 2006. They
were then told that the removal of the vegetation [rom the guard shack
Page 29
April 11, 2006
area required voluntary mitigation.
Now, the voluntary mitigation on Wilderness' part was to entail
submitting themselves voluntarily to mitigation under certain sections
of the code that would require them to submit a site improvement
plan, which has inherent costs, but more importantly, would then
require them to officially designate native preserve areas that would
be subject to conservation easements.
The voluntary mitigation plan that they came up with was based
upon the supposed illegal removal of these specimen trees, which they
had been found not guilty of illegally removing.
When they presented the plan, it called for 122 slash pines to be
planted, and this could not possibly be done in the entrance area alone.
So what they then said was, they would have to take these trees that
would carry over from the entrance area and place them throughout
Wilderness and that at all of these locations throughout Wilderness
that they would plant, these trees would then become native preserve
areas also subj ect to a conservation easement.
Although I am speaking a great deal today, at that meeting I kept
relatively quiet until that point, and I asked code enforcement, why is
it the Wilderness would agree to a voluntarily mitigation that would
required them then to create conservation easements when they
already have a plan in place and they have been found not guilty of
any code violation?
To which I was informed that the violation that they have is that
they do not have 25 percent native vegetation. This is a requirement
under the land development code since 2003.
It was not a requirement at the time that Wilderness got its
planned unit development in 1976, and the land development code
specifically in section 9.03.01, subsection C grants projects that are
vested with an approved site development plan prior to June 19, 2003,
from any requirement to abide by this requirement of 25 percent. So
in a sense, we are grandfathered. It's not applicable to Wilderness.
Page 30
April 11, 2006
They then said that, well, what you have here is you had a legally
nonconforming use of the land before when you had 25 percent, but
now that you have removed a certain amount of trees from the front
area, you are now in an illegal nonconforming use.
Well, again, that is tenuous at best. The use of Wilderness is as a
multifamily dwelling community and a golf course. It is not as a
nursery, so they could not have put themselves into any illegal
nonconforming use by removing these trees, again, for which they
were found not guilty.
We were then presented with standards of preservation under
3.05.07 subsection H. Again, specifically Wilderness is exempted
under subsection 4 B from these requirements because their planned
unit development was approved before 19 June of 2003.
The list of requirements that they requested, the trees to be
planted would have to be planted throughout the community. They
could not be planted only in the front area. I can't stress this enough
that it would create areas of easement that wouldn't be created before.
When I resisted this, that's when the coercion came in. What
they told us was, if we did not agree to voluntarily mitigate, that they
would come to the board, they would seek a re-opening of the entire
planned unit development, and they would look at everything.
They would look at the carports, they would look at fire
enforcement. As you can see the carports there, they are not closed on
-- they are open on three sides. Those would not be conforming. We
would have to go back and redo those.
And really, if we go along with this voluntary mitigation and site
improvement plan, there is no saying where they would stop. They're
simply saying that they'll stop with that.
So what I would ask the board to do is examine what I've said
here today, hear the response from the county, should one be
presented, and ask yourselves, what law supports applying
nonconforming use law to vegetation? I contend that there isn't any
Page 31
April 11, 2006
law to support that. There is no case law.
Ask yourself, what's the good faith justification for re-opening
Wilderness' planned unit development? Again, there is none.
And lastly, why should Wilderness voluntary mitigate a code
violation they were found not guilty of committing, especially when it
entails the extra time and expense of a site development plan and the
establishment of preservation easements where none existed?
Finally, I would invite your attention to this slide which shows
our voluntarily mitigation plan, if you can see it. This pertains
specifically to trees.
In the county's mitigation plan, they're requesting 122 slash
pines. Wilderness already intends to put in 169 trees of varied
varieties throughout the area. This more than offsets the county's
reasonable demands. It does not require any change of their status. It
does not require a new planned unit development. It does not require
a site development plan. It does not require conservation easements.
That's all I have to say. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning has a question.
Do you have a question?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I want to put this on a
further agenda. I have knowledge of other threats of residents from
county government, and I think this would be a good opportunity to
hear the residents and hopefully give direction to the County Manager
on how to proceed with these and other similar cases. And I just -- I
mean, a 30-year-old community, I'm shocked. And I'm not going to
say too much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I will second that, the
motion to bring it back. I know this is not the time to resolve the
issue, but it's really puzzling to me.
We have special masters to deal with these issues. The special
master said that the county had not proved its case. They threw out
Page 32
April 11, 2006
the violation. I just cannot imagine that we are involved in this kind
of situation right now. And if the board isn't willing to make a
decision on it right now and just say, let's leave the Wilderness alone
and let them get on with their own replanting program --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Commissioner, I think it's
fair this is -- there are several things going on in code enforcement
with our residents, and I think we ought to allow the residents, similar
cases -- there's one in Briarwood or Berkshire, same thing. And the
threats coming out of county government is just appalling, and those
people need to be heard.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then I second your motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have some concerns. I know I have a
community up in my district that's concerned about replanting bushes
and shrubbery that was damaged during Hurricane Wilma, so I go
along with the process here.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Commissioner Coyle, you
were just saying something about you would -- you would kind of like
to just settle this right now and finish this one, and then we'll come
back with other issues, according to Commissioner Henning. Well,
I'm all for that, if we just settle this right now. It should be pretty
simple, if you'd like to make a motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think it needs to come back to the --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not sure we have enough
support.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We'll address all of it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I will second Commissioner
Henning's motion, because I don't think there's enough support to
proceed with it right now.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Page 33
April 11 , 2006
MR. BUNNER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We want a motion for that? All those in
favor of bringing this back at a future agenda? What would be a good
time, County Manager?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The sooner the better.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I think we can do it the next
meeting.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor of bringing this
back to the next meeting, 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?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Passes unanimously.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY CONNIE FULLMER TO
DISCUSS GOLF CART USE ON PUBLIC ROADS IN THE
COMMUNITY OF GOODLAND, FLORIDA - TO BE BROUGHT
BACK AT THE MAY 9. 2006 BCC MEETING
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next public petition is a public
petition request by Connie Fullmer to discuss golf cart use on public
roads in the community of Goodland, Florida.
MS. FULLMER: Good morning, Mr. Chair, Commissioners.
My name is Connie Stegall Fullmer. I'm president of the Goodland
Preservation Coalition. Thank you for hearing our public petition.
I just want to mention also that the president of the Goodland
Page 34
April 11, 2006
Civic Association, John Carter, is in the audience, a number of his
board members, and board members of our preservation coalition, as
well as a number of the residents, all sitting here. Would you all want
to stand for a moment.
I'm here to speak -- I'll read my comments. I'm here to speak for
the members of our association and for the 263 residents of Goodland
who have signed the petition we present to you today that we passed
out. Fifty-four of these individuals are golf cart owners.
We're petitioning you to pass an ordinance to designate the Island
of Goodland, Florida, as a golf cart community.
Goodlanders have been driving golf carts along the streets of the
community since the days that golf carts came to this area of Florida.
We use golf carts to go to the post office, to go to the marina for bait
for fishing trips, to the restaurants, to visit friends, or just a leisurely
drive around the community at daybreak or sunset to see what is
happening and enjoy the ambience of our village.
Riding our golf carts, riding our bicycles and walking in the
community is how we get to know our neighbors. Golf carts are one
of the characteristics that make our community special.
Our roads are narrow, but our roads are wide enough to bring
boats and boat trailers to our long existing marinas, for the school
buses and cars and boats to our future boating park.
There is no history of golf cart accidents in our community, and
for that matter, very little history of automobile accidents on our
roads.
At Christmas we have a golf cart parade, the carts are decorated
in colorful lights and decor. Santa is in the lead cart. We carol as we
go street to street for all the residents and children to hear, distributing
candy and cheer. The newspaper covers our event every year. That
rhymes. I didn't do it on purpose.
We have an annual poker run fundraiser for the Goodland Civic
Association that is attended by golf carts, boats and motorcycles. Our
Page 35
April 11, 2006
nine- year running annual Mardi Gras boat parade fundraiser for
Hospice of Naples is coordinated by volunteers riding from area to
area of the community on golf carts for the event. This is our history.
Since early this year, Goodland residents have been issued traffic
citations from a member of the county's sheriff's office who controls
our area for operating their golf carts on the streets of Goodland. This
occurrence was in stark contrast to our history of free use of the carts
on the island. People have always gone to the post office on golf carts
for the mail, but now they're being cited and ticketed.
People were afraid to go out into the roads on their carts. A $150
ticket for going to the post office was pretty intimidating. Fear of
being ticketed began to keep people off their carts and afraid to go out
in the community for errands and for visiting.
Upon request by community residents, members of the
community relations department of the sheriffs office and the officer
who had been issuing the citations came to our civic association
meeting last month to explain what could be done to make the use of
golf carts legal.
State statute mandates the guidelines for golf cart use on state
roads. Use of carts on county roads though falls under the county
government jurisdiction. County government can mandate the use of
golf carts on county road. Uniform Traffic Control chapter 316.212
regulates the operation of golf carts on certain roadways.
The operation of a golf cart upon the public roads or streets of
this state is prohibited except as provided herein, and this is what falls
under -- comes under your parameter then, Commissioners. A golf
cart may be operated only upon a county road that has been designated
by a county or a city street that has been designated by a city for use
by golf carts.
Prior though to making such a designation, the responsible local
governmental entity must first determine that golf carts may safely
travel on or across the public road or street considering factors
Page 36
April 11, 2006
including the speed, the volume and character of motor vehicle traffic
using the road or street.
Upon your determination that a golf cart may be safely operated
on a designated road or street, the responsible governmental
authorities shall post appropriate signs to indicate that such operation
is allowed.
So to summarize the title 23 of the motor vehicle chapter 316 of
the state uniform traffic control, the county has the authority to
designate Goodland as a golf cart community. Golf carts may be
operated in Goodland 24 hours a day provided the carts have
headlights, brake lights, turn signals, and a windshield; otherwise, they
may be operated sunrise to sunset.
Notwithstanding the previous section, all golf carts must be
equipped with efficient brakes, reliable steering, safe tires, a rear-view
mirror, and red reflectorized warning devises, both front and rear. The
privilege does not apply to those under the age of 14.
We suggest that the golf cart community begin at the point on
Goodland Drive where the Marco city limit abuts the county limits.
That's what -- you see on the picture up above that blue line indicates
where the Marco city limits designation comes in, right by the Caloosa
Village going into the Caloosa Marina. That's the Marco city line.
The white line shows the extension of our main road coming in
Goodland Drive, that takes you all the way down to the Goodland
Boating Park, the future Goodland Boating Park. But the main --
although the orange dots show our streets in the community, what we
would request in your consideration for the ordinance is that the golf
carting community be -- include all of the area on the outside of that
blue line within Goodland.
We have no through traffic, as you know, and our community is
already classified locally as a pedestrian community, because our
speed limit is 25 miles per hour throughout the community. And there
are 54 known golf carts in Goodland at our last count.
Page 37
April 11, 2006
It has been suggested by a county staff person in a piece of email
communication that the main industry in Goodland is alcohol and that
nighttime use of golf carts may not be a good idea. There is no
question that our weekends, especially Sunday, is a very fun time in
Goodland, but what you will find on the weekends is that the fun is
centered around Buzzard's Bay where our three restaurants are located
and is predominantly visitors from outside the community who come
here by car, boat and motorcycle and leave when the music stops.
The balance of Goodland is residential and quiet by comparison.
For a staff person to say that the community of Goodland's industry is
alcohol can only be a statement made by someone who does not come
to Goodland often and does not know that Goodland today is a quiet
residential community.
We respectfully ask that you will seriously consider directing
staff to create an ordinance for your review and to check with
Goodlanders, and if -- wherever we may be helpful to provide
information for staff to make sure that we do meet those qualifications
of safety and so on, certainly be very appreciative.
Do you have any questions?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Connie, you said that there
have never been any golf cart accidents ever, right? And the history
of Goodland is a long history, so that's a pretty safe record. I just
wanted to put that on the record.
I've spoken to our County Attorney's Office. And although we
need to bring this back, because we can't make any decision here, we
can ask staff to provide an ordinance, if that's something the
commissioners would agree to do, or we can just bring it back and
then ask staff to do this -- I wanted to say, boy, isn't it -- you know,
I'm a stanch supporter of the sheriffs office. I mean -- and I would
back them every step of the way, but this guy sure found an easy way
to write out tickets. Rather than red light runners, sit in Goodland and
Page 38
ApriI 11, 2006
ticket the people riding in golf carts. I wish he would have been on
the roads instead.
Anyway, Mike, would you -- would you give us some
information that you've learned, and then we can move from there?
MR. PETTIT: Surely. Ms. Fullmer's recitation of the law is
generally right on and accurate. I do know that staff has done some
preliminary investigation of this situation. They haven't had an
opportunity to my knowledge -- and Mr. Feder may know or Scott
Teach from our office may know. Otherwise, to my knowledge, I'm
not sure they've had an opportunity to meet with people in Goodland
recently.
The initial investigation would indicate some concern about
operation after sundown which, of course, there are some
requirements in the statute as to nighttime operation.
What the board would need to be aware and what the Goodland
residents would need to be aware is this board could also allow and
designate the streets in Goodland, or portions thereof, to be usable by
golf carts, but they could make the ordinance more strict in the state
statute if there appear to be safety issues. But that's -- certainly the
law allows it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But that's only ifit appears to be
safety issues, right? If -- we've been doing this for years and years,
and there's never been an issue involved, maybe we could take that
under consideration as well, right?
MR. PETTIT: Sure.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I mean, why fix it ifit ain't broken,
right? Anyway, I'd like to bring it back for us to discuss.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have some concerns. We have a boat
park that's going to be opening up soon, and I believe that right now
we don't know what the traffic is going to amount to in regards to that
right-of-way. I also have a concern in regards to -- golf carts are
pretty small. When you look at large pickup trucks bringing boats in
Page 39
ApriI 11, 2006
eventually, I'm concerned about that.
You could probably designate certain areas of Goodland, but I
would keep it away [rom the main thoroughfare where we're going to
have people that's going to be involved with Stan's and also down
where the new boat park is. So that's my biggest consideration right
now.
MS. FULLMER: The gentleman and his wife, Jim Fulcher, that
went almost door to door to get the signatures that are on your petition
there, those signatures come from every street in Goodland. And
they're only -- there's only one main street that all of those other
streets come in and off of. To limit us, it would almost be like
creating a little prison on one side of the community or other.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, you've got -- you've got all the
other areas that you could run the golf carts. But like I said, where
this white line is, that's the main thoroughfare down to where we're
going to have a lot close to 100 or could be --
MS. FULLMER: Yeah. And as you can see, all of the streets go
off of that main road.
But we would appreciate the review and can help, hopefully,
satisfy the concerns of safety. The boating park is some four to five
years off as well.
But we really do appreciate your concerns about safety . We
were concerned about that as well, but we've always used golf carts in
Goodland. There are two marinas there that have boat traffic coming
and going already, as well as school buses that come early in the
morning. Boat traffic is mostly early in the morning before people are
out and about anyway, so we have dealt with those issues. We've not
had golf cart accidents.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you already have boats coming
in and out --
MS. FULLMER: Certainly.
Page 40
April 11, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to the other park?
MS. FULLMER: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Connie, I'd like to get
together with you, come down to the community. I think probably
there might be a compromise to make everybody safe in the golf carts
on certain streets, so I'd like to see this come back.
MS. FULLMER: We're happy to get together and work with you
all as to whatever we need to try and do, because it's important in the
community as part of our character.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I want to make sure that we're
making a good decision. I don't want to see somebody hurt,
co-mingling of different types of vehicles and setting us up to fail, so
-- but I think that we can make it work, and I would like to see it come
back. I hope that we can put this in abeyance until I can get down
there as soon as possible. Just looking at my calendar, it might be next
month.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I agree, it should come
back. There are a lot of issues that need to be talked about. My
concern is the liability. And you know, I know we touched on it, but
the truth of the matter is, they are county roads, and that if we lessen
the requirements for those county roads by allowing uninsured
vehicles to operate on it, in the case of a major accident, who would
bear the responsibility? I mean, who would they sue? Undoubtedly
they're going to sue the county for allowing it, but I don't know that,
that's why we should bring this back. We can discuss that issue at the
time, too.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I have -- do I have a motion to bring
this back?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to bring it back.
Page 41
April 11, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And when do we want to bring this back,
sometime in May?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: As soon as possible.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I think Commissioner Henning
said he'd like to go down and his calendar at this point in time is pretty
full. Can we bring this back toward the end of May?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I make a suggestion, sir?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. My concern is that we
know June is going to be unbelievably filled with double meetings
trying to get everything done. So I would try to aim for a sooner date
rather than later and miss it and end up in June when we're going to
have a tremendous --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, we're thinking about last of May --
last meeting in May.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine. I can just clear
something from my schedule, just move it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. What do we have available there,
County Manager?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, you can do the first meeting of
May. Does that seem better? That's the 9th of May.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine.
MR. MUDD: That's a little bit earlier than the last one.
MR. PETTIT: Mr. Chairman, just to clarify . Would the motion
to bring it back include drafting an ordinance in conjunction with
working with transportation and listening to what their concerns might
be?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, that's in my motion.
MR. PETTIT: And also, obviously I assume working with the
residents.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I have a motion to bring this back
Page 42
April 11, 2006
on May 8th (sic) with the tie-in with our transportation staff, and I
think maybe we ought to tie in with the sheriff to make sure that we
can have some compatibility or whatever.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And risk management.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And risk management, yes.
MS. FULLMER: It is very important to try and do something
early. I will mention that as spokesperson, and the president of the
Goodland Preservation -- or Civic Association also, John Carter will
be out of town for the next two or three months, and as well as myself.
We will have some individuals that can come and speak for us.
But I do want to let you know that we will not -- I will not be here.
And we'll have time though to go over the issues with the
commissioner and staff.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Can I have a second on this
motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm the second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor of bringing this
back on the May 9th meeting, 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?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
MS. FULLMER: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2006-87: RE-APPOINTING ROBERT H. JONES
AND VIRGINIA M. DONOVAN TO THE FOREST LAKES
Page 43
April 11 , 2006
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE-
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is item 9A, and that
is appointment of members to the Forest Lakes Roadway and
Drainage Advisory Committee.
MS. FILSON: And, Commissioners, these two are both
reappointments, and if you choose to reappoint Robert Jones, he has
served two terms, so you'll need to waive section 7B of ordinance
2001-55.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's in my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion on the floor to appoint
these two individuals and that we conform with section B.
MS. FILSON: 7B of ordinance 2001-55.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
Okay. All those in favor -- in favor, 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?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2006-88: APPOINTING E. GLENN TUCKER TO
THE COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9B. It's
Page 44
April 11, 2006
appointment of a member to the Collier County Coastal Advisory
Committee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve Glenn Tucker.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion to -- there's a motion on
the floor and a second. Any discussion?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If not, I'll call the motion. 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: Opposed, like sign?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The motion carries.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2006-89: RE-APPOINTING HELEN CARELLA TO
THE RADIO ROAD BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9C. It's
appointment of a member to the Radio Road Beautification Advisory
Committee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve Helen
Carella.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I have a motion on the floor for
approval.
Page 45
April 11, 2006
Any discussion?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If not, call the question. 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: Opposed, by like sign?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And the motion carries.
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2006-90: APPOINTING LARRY GREENBERG TO
THE DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD-
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9D. It's
appointment of a member to the Animal Services Advisory Board.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'd like to ask if this could be reposted
again for advertising. There seems to be a conflict with the
committee's recommendation, and I know that we only had one
application. Is that possible?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would second it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is there any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Sue, correct me if I'm
wrong, the -- why the advisory committee's objected to it, because this
man owns a pet shop.
Page 46
April 11, 2006
MS. FILSON: Yeah. And I forwarded the same information to
the other commissioners that I forwarded to you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And I don't -- you know,
looking at the ordinance -- and I could be wrong -- I didn't know that it
was prohibited of business owners that sell pets, so I don't have any
problem with the applicant. We have one -- only one applied. So I
can't support the motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'll call the question in regards to
-- I made the motion and Commissioner Coy Ie seconded.
Those in favor of having this reposted and readvertised, signify
by saying aye.
Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, like sign?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I guess the motion fails.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I voted with Henning and Fiala.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion failed, 3-2.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve the applicant.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The motion on the floor is to
approve this. We have a motion and a second.
Those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
Aye.
Okay. Passes.
Page 47
April 11 , 2006
Item #9E
RESOLUTION 2006-91: APPOINTING EDWARD R. OLESKY
(W/W AIVER OF SECTION 5D OF ORDINANCE NO. 2001-55)
AND RICK MEDWEDEFF TO THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT
COUNCIL - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: The next item is to -- 9E, and it's appointment of
members to the Tourist Development Council.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion--
MS. FILSON: And, Commissioners -- I'm sorry. If this -- in this
one, if you appoint Mr. Olesky, you have to waive the two-committee
rule of2001-55.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve the
committee recommendations and to waive the rule as stated by Sue
Filson.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If not, I'll call the question. All those in
favor, signify by saying eye.
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: Motion carries unanimously.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, I make a recommendation that
you take a 12-minute break because you have a time certain item at
10:30.
Page 48
April 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sounds like a great idea to me. Thank
you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
(A brief recess was had)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much. Board of County
Commissioners is back in session.
Item #12A
STATUS REPORT ON F.S. CHAPTER 164 PROCEEDINGS IN
REFERENCE TO THE INVERSE CONDEMNATION LAWSUIT
OF BERNARD J. AND HELEN R. NOBEL, AND VINCENT D.
DOERR VS. COLLIER COUNTY, IN CASE NO. 05-0064-CA
AND FOR FURTHER ATTEMPTS BY THE STAFFS OF THE
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, THE
STATE OF FLORIDA DIVISION OF LANDS, AND THE
COUNTY TO REACH AN AGREEMENT IN THE MATTER -
MOTION TO PROCEED WITH SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT -
APPROVED W/STIPULATIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this brings us to our next item,
which is time certain for 10:30 this morning. It's 12A. This is a status
report on Florida Statute chapter 164 proceedings in reference to the
inverse condemnation lawsuit of Bernard 1. and Helen R.
Nobel/Vincent D. Doerr versus Collier County, in case number
05-0064-CA, and for further attempts by the staff of the South Florida
Water Management District, the State of Florida Division of Lands
and the county to reach an agreement in the matter.
And this item will be presented by Ms. Jacqueline
Page 49
April 11, 2006
Hubbard-Robbins.
MS. HUBBARD: Jacqueline Hubbard. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Okay.
MS. HUBBARD: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning.
MS. HUBBARD: As you know, we have been involved in a
fairly lengthy process over the Nobel/Doerr litigation and the vacation
of the roads in Southern Golden Gate Estates by the county.
As a result of that litigation, the attorneys for the state, the
attorney for the district, South Florida Water Management District,
Mr. Clarence Tears to some extent, and Ms. Ellen Chadwell, we have
been meeting with all of the -- all of the attorneys have been meeting
under section 164, and we have reached a tentative agreement, and
that agreement will be presented to the board probably at your next
meeting for approval.
But I am here this morning to discuss any aspect of that
agreement that I can discuss in public with you this morning.
Essentially what it means is that the state will attempt to purchase
outright the Nobel/Doerr property. And in exchange for purchasing
that property, assuming that the purchase goes through as is
anticipated, the litigation against the county by the Nobel/Doerr
plaintiffs will be dismissed, so that will go away.
The second aspect of this settlement is that the South Florida
Water Management District is not able at this time to tender to you the
640 acres, more or less, that was discussed originally for the vacation
of those roads in Southern Golden Gate Estates.
And what they've requested, which seems reasonable to us, is that
they be given a three-year extension on an annual basis, that is, they
will come before you beginning October of 2006, they will explain to
you the status of the -- their acquisition or of the land itself, the 640
acres more or less, and they will request an extension of that portion of
the agreement for another year.
Page 50
April 11, 2006
If you as a board accept both their rationale, their explanation and
their request to extend that part of the agreement for another year, they
will then come back to the board in October of 2007 and, once again,
present to you their progress on making this acreage available to the
county.
And if they're unable to tender the acreage to you in 2007, they
will again make the request to extend that portion of the agreement for
another year.
And under our tentative agreement we have basically, as
attorneys anyway, indicated to them that we would recommend to the
board that they allow the South Florida Water Management District
this ability to come with you for a period of three years to try and
tender to you the 640 acres.
Mr. Tears knows probably more about the reasons why they need
the extension than I do. I can tell you that I have been told that the
640 acres that was originally contemplated, most of that site at least --
approximately two-thirds of that site is being used as the storage area
for the muck that is coming out of Lake Trafford. It's coming out of
Lake Trafford, it's being placed on that acreage for reasons I'm not
sure, other than for storage.
We do have an -- a report from an environmental firm that
indicates that some of that spoilage, or whatever you call it, that muck
that's coming up from the lake, contains arsenic. The extent of the
arsenic and whether the arsenic is a danger to human beings at this
point, I cannot tell you. It does cause concern, and the district is
aware of that concern. And it does cover -- it will cover
approximately two-thirds of the acreage, which you do need to be
made aware of.
And I guess the ultimate resolution of the acreage would depend
upon what happens between the board and the South Florida Water
Management District.
At this point, as a representative of your attorney -- as your
Page 51
April 11, 2006
attorney on this matter, I, along with my office, recommend that the
draft agreement that has been circulated, that you give that deep
consideration and that it will be presented to you for acceptance
probably at the next board meeting.
And if you have any questions regarding that agreement, please
do not hesitate to pick up the phone and give me a call, or just come
by the office and discuss it with me.
MR. MUDD: Jackie, if you could hit one point I think you
missed. It was on the 640 acres, I believe it was point number six that
talks about after the lawsuit is dismissed, the state will be responsible
for maintaining the roadways and for providing access 24 hours a day.
MS. HUBBARD: Yes, that's true. The South Florida Water
Management District and state under the existing agreement have joint
responsibility for maintaining the roadways and providing the 24-hour
access seven days a week through that area.
The district has requested, and the state has joined in that request,
that in the event the lawsuit is dismissed and the settlement between
the plaintiffs and the county through the district and state is resolved,
that the district be relieved from that responsibility, and the
responsibility for maintaining the access be the responsibility of the
state alone. That is an important provision. Although it was provided
in your memorandum, I did not mention it this morning. Thank you,
Mr. Mudd.
MR. MUDD: Thank you, ma'am.
MS. HUBBARD: If you have any questions about any of this,
I'm prepared to answer them to the best of my ability.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Jackie, I'm concerned about these
never-ending delays in getting this thing resolved. I, quite frankly,
don't see that there's any motivation to get anything resolved as long
as people understand that they can come in and ask for another year
and another year and another year.
Page 52
April 11, 2006
I would certainly be interested in agreeing with that if, in the
interim, they would re-open the areas that were previously used for
off-road vehicles and let people use that until such time as they come
up with the additional 640 acres.
There's -- I mean, what harm can come of that? That area has
been impacted fairly heavily already. Why not let the people use it?
And then they'll continue using it until such time as the state comes up
with the 640 acres that is suitable.
I think that's a reasonable compromise here, and would give them
some incentive to get this thing resolved and, at the same time, would
permit people to have a place to recreate.
MS. HUBBARD: I think that's a very good suggestion, and I'll
be happy to convey that to the state and the district and inform you of
their response.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, we have to make sure that
the other members of the board agree with that approach, but --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can go along with that
personally. I don't see where the 640 acres has to do with it -- the
Nobels/Doerr (sic) case. I just -- I mean, that's a separate agreement
between the Board of Commissioners and the state and the district.
Now, I can tell the Board of Commissioners when I met with
Representative Mike Davis, he's very upset about the -- not having the
ATV'ers use Southern Golden Gate Estates. In fact, he had a bill on
the floor for consideration of giving the federal government their
money back and taking -- taking this out of the SURP project.
But what he is looking at and has directed DEP to look at is, go
find a 100-acre site for the A TV'ers, and I don't remember if it's an
interim basis or a permanent basis in addition to the 640 acres.
So I go along with Commissioner Coyle's suggestion, and also
adding for them to give us an interim 100 acres in the process.
And I'll get together with you, Jackie, what Representative Davis
Page 53
April 11, 2006
has specifically in mind, whether it's an interim or it's a permanent in
addition to the 640.
MS. HUBBARD: Thank you. That sound like a very good idea.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Back when this all started, I
think I made the comment, and I was hoping I'd be proved wrong, that
I doubt seriously they're ever going to find a place in Collier County
where you're going to come up with 640 continuous acres that they'll
be able to use, and that's the reason why I voted against the original
agreement.
I think that's still true today. I think that when we get down to it
and we get through the whole thing and we wait three years, we're
going to find out the Fish and Wildlife and the Army Corps of
Engineers come back and they declare that a habitat for panthers, a
habitat for this, and that we're not only -- we're going to be out all this
time waiting for a resolution to come around.
I think it was an agreement that water management, even though
they may have had the best intentions at this time, and this county
commission, can never be fulfilled to that letter of the law.
My question is, is who's going to make us whole for the lost time
that we have for the R V' ers that have been using this outdoor resource
for years? I mean, yeah, we're getting a million dollars a year, which
is a pittance, from water management, for the giving up of the roads.
But it was a promise made that they were going to supply a certain
amenity to our people out there for recreational purposes. That has
not happened.
Now, whether their intentions were right at the time or they were
wrong, still the contract hasn't been lived up to, and I don't think we
should endorse this contract and continue it.
We should put everything at suspended animation and demand
that restitution be forthcoming -- and where it can't be. You can't
extract blood from a stone. You can't make them -- the Fish and
Page 54
April 11, 2006
Wildlife people open up an area that they've got closed, but we can
certainly bring pressure on them through water management.
So my suggestion would be is, to expound upon the suggestions
that have been made by Commissioner Coy Ie and Commissioner
Henning, that we do not agree to the contract, that we send it back to
our staffs to talk about what is going to be done to make restitution
and to try to make the RV community whole, as whole as possible.
That would be my suggestions to this commission.
MS. HUBBARD: And I want to make sure I understand what
you're saying. You're saying that -- your suggestion is that the
settlement agreement not be entered into and we go back to the old
agreement or we find the old agreement to be in breach and--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The old agreement to be in
breach, as far as the providing of the RV, the 640 acres. I mean, not
only are they unable to provide the 640 acres, they're unable to get
around the obstacles of the Picayune in providing a reasonable access.
We've had numerous people try it. Mike Davis has poured his
heart and soul into this, and he's now going to ask for something like
$38 million in state funds to try to buy back what we received from
the federal government with the idea that we can be released from the
agreement. That's probably unlikely that he'll get the money, but I
really appreciate the fact that he's trying.
And meanwhile, we're made less than whole as every day goes
by, and the users have inability to be able to exercise what was their
right on public lands before, and it should be now. Somehow pressure
has got to be brought at one end or the other to be able to bring this to
resolution, because obviously nothing's happening on its own accord.
MS. HUBBARD: I think I understand what you're saying,
Commissioner Coletta.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney, can you help me out a
little bit here? Was this really public lands or was this land that was
used prior owned by individuals? And was it owned by the people
Page 55
April 11, 2006
that have vehicles whereby they go out there and use this? Did they
own that land or was this public lands? Can you answer these
questions for me?
MS. HUBBARD: Are you speaking now of the Nobel/Doerr
land, or are you speaking of the 640 acres?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm speaking of like Bad Luck Prairie.
Was that public lands or was that owned by an individual or was it
owned by an OHV concern?
MS. HUBBARD: I think that question should be properly
addressed to South Florida Water Management District or the state.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. HUBBARD: In terms of the land that I've been dealing with
with the lawsuit, I've been dealing with the land that's owned by
Nobel/Doerr. In terms of the settlement agreement, we've been
discussing the 640 acres as required to be delivered under the initial
agreement.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Was Nobel/Doerr, this land, was this
part of the area that the people recreated in?
MS. HUBBARD: Not to my knowledge.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And so I need to talk to someone
else then in regards to, like, the lands that were used like Bad Luck
Prairie, whether that was owned by a recreational group or whether it
was owned by private or whether it was public lands; is that correct?
MS. HUBBARD: If you're speaking of land that's within the 640
acres that was contemplated to be given to the county --
MR. MUDD: No, I'm talking about all the Southern Golden Gate
MR. MUDD: No. He's talking about the South Golden Gate
Estates.
MS. HUBBARD: Oh, no. I have no information personally
about that. But maybe Ms. Chadwell does.
MS. CHADWELL: Hi. Ellen Chadwell, for the record. The
Page 56
April 11, 2006
best that I recall was at the time this agreement was originally entered
into, the state had acquired most of the lots out there in those Golden
Gate platted subdivisions. There was a lot of A TV use along those
roads. I don't know if they were -- I don't know exactly where the
prairie was, Bad Luck Prairie in relation to that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think it's Hard Luck Prairie.
MS. CHADWELL: Oh, Hard Luck Prairie. I'd have to go back
and look at a map and refamiliarize myself with the area. But a lot of
the platted lots were state owned at the time. In fact, the majority of
them were at the time. And the best I can recall is, like I said, the
A TV use was occurring along the roads back there, and then down
into the other areas. I'm sorry I can't be more help.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is that then considered public land?
MS. HUBBARD: Well, it's state-owned lands. I don't know what
process they have to go to to open those up for public use.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: What I'm stating is that, prior to the state
going in there and starting to buy all those lots up, was that private
land or was that public land?
MS. CHADWELL: It was private.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Was any of that land that was
taken, was it owned by any A TV organizations?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No.
MS. CHADWELL: No. And there wasn't -- the land acquired
by the state, was any of that owned by A TV organizations?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
MS. CHADWELL: No.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I believe we have some public
speakers on this.
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we have six.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh, six, okay.
MS. FILSON: Yes, we added another one.
Jose Varela. He'll be followed by Michael Miller. Mr. Miller, if
Page 57
April 11, 2006
you would like to come up and stand on board.
MR. VARELA: I'm going to need a little bit of help getting my
presentation together.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sir, we have a time limit of three
minutes.
MR. VARELA: Yep, I will -- I promise I will not go over that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may? Jose here is the
representative of a very large user group out there, and he is here on
their behalf. Rather that were 50 some people, he stands here alone
today.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. If someone -- somebody else
that's here from this organization that wants to speak, if they'll
relinquish their time, that's fantastic.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may, the other people in the
audience basically belong to other groups. There's not that many
speakers. I do know that a lot of work went into the presentations
you're going to see right now, and if any reasonable amount of time
could be granted, I would appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Normally we have three minutes.
How about five minutes, sir? Can you get it done in around five
minutes?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He can have my time.
MR. VARELA: Yeah, should be okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good. Thank you.
MR. VARELA: Thank you, Commissioners, for allowing me the
time to come before you and tell you what you have not heard till this
moment. And what you have not heard till this moment is the truth.
The truth that this land was taken away under a promise to give to the
children of this county a place to ride, and that has yet to be fulfilled.
What I'm about to show you is a video that was shot on January
5th of last year where Commissioner Coletta and Commissioner Halas
were present as the different agency spokespersons were there to give
Page 58
April 11, 2006
this presentation to the citizens of the county.
What I want you to hear is, I want you to listen as the
Department of Forestry chairperson blames the Acquisition
Restoration Council for deeming A TV use no longer compatible in the
Picayune Forest.
Don't you guys just love technology?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have the same problems daily.
MR. VARELA: It's supposed to make life easy, I cannot see.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: This is not counting against your time
either, sir.
MR. VARELA: I hope not. There we go, sorry.
(The video was played)
I appreciate the opportunity to be here.
MR. VARELA: Is there a way to make this louder?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah. Just take your--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Volume control button there.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah. See your volume control button
down there?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right where the hand is.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You got your mouse there, sir?
MR. VARELA: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. There you go. Click on that.
There you go
"-- basically any management we do has to be through an
improved management plan by the Acquisition Restoration Council,
which I happen to sit on. They, through that council, have the ability
to dictate what we can and cannot do. Division was equipped has -- as
we first started managing the land, chose not to enforce the law
because we didn't feel they were enforceable boundaries, it was
anything that we could --
MR. VARELA: Okay. Did you all hear the advisory restor --
the Acquisition Restoration Council being blamed, or do I need to
Page 59
April 11 , 2006
play that again? Did everybody hear that, or do you need me to play it
again?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why don't you tell us what it said?
MR. VARELA: It says basically, the Department of Forestry
chairperson, on the meeting that was held on January 5th of last year
blamed the Acquisition Restoration Council up in Tallahassee,
basically an advisory committee to the South Florida Water
Management District, on the closure of the ATV, ORV, Jeep,
whatever you like to call it, use out in the Picayune Forest because
they deemed it noncompatible.
So what I just showed you was basically a video clip of that
forestry chairperson blaming the Acquisition Restoration Council.
The next slide I'm going to show you is an email from a
gentleman by the name of Jack Muller who, up till recently, was the
vice chairman for that same Acquisition Restoration Council
committee up in Tallahassee.
And here's what I'd like to show you. This is an email from Jack
Muller in reference to a question that was asked of him. It says, in a
message dated 3/2 of'06, Jack, on Tuesday, Rick Varela petitioned the
county commission to review the MOU with the district. The
commission agreed and is going to look at this again, being how the
district has violated the agreement. This will be on the agenda March
28th.
He asked me a question, and can you save us time on this. Did
ARC review any, not just ORVs, recreation plans for the Picayune
Strand? If so, what dates so he can get the transcripts. Thanks for
your help, Brian.
And now this is Jack's response. During the six years I was vice
chair of ARC, the only thing we reviewed that addresses management
or anything else about the Picayune Strand State Forest was the
request by the Mikasuki Tribe of Florida to collect palmetto berries
and other vegetation for their needs. This was granted under a special
Page 60
April 11, 2006
use permit to be developed by the Florida Development of Forestry.
Other than that, we never talked about the Picayune Strand, never
saw any paperwork on this matter. Thanks for asking, Jack Muller.
So who's telling you the truth here today? Is the South Florida
Water Management telling you the truth or are the citizens of this
county, the ones that have been impacted by their decisions with no
scientific data to back up their findings whatsoever telling you the
truth?
I'd like to show you a couple more reports I was able to find. The
next is the master recreation report, and this was done between the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the South Florida Water
Management District. And this report was done on October of 2004,
and it shows as being the final draft.
I'm going to go ahead and do a search for the word A TV. Not a
single reference to A TV under recreation plan. So how can they call
this incompatible when there's nothing in the report to back it up?
And this is their management plan, their master recreation plan, and
there's not a single reference to A TV.
So let's go ahead and try doing Jeep. Nothing. OHV, nothing.
ORV, nothing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, this is getting us
nowhere. We know what the problem is. We're trying to arrive at a
solution. What's your recommendation?
MR. VARELA: Commissioner Cole (sic), my recommendation
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's Coyle.
MR. VARELA: Coyle, I'm sorry, I apologize. My
recommendation to this commission as a parent, a concerned parent,
not only for my kids but for all the kids of Collier County, is -- I'm not
asking you necessarily to rescind the agreement.
I'm a conservationist myself, and I would like to one day see the
Everglades restored. But for the time being, modify the agreement or
Page 61
April 11, 2006
rescind the agreement and allow us to ride back in the Picayune on the
county-owned roads until the 640 acres are found. Ifwe don't do this,
time goes by, memories are lost, and the South Florida Water
Management District will never ever, ever find the land for us.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you agree with the
recommendations that are made by three commissioners on this panel
today?
MR. VARELA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much.
MR. VARELA: Thank you for your time, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you. Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Michael Miller. He'll be
followed by Frank Denninger.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We're back to the three-minute time
limit.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MILLER: I also agree with Jose on this whole issue. I
represent Hiassen Motors out of Atlanta, Georgia. We're one of the
nation's leading manufacturers of A TV s and motorcycles.
We constantly and consistently, you know, are always lobbying
for riding areas in different states. In Florida, this happens to be one
of our strongest points, seeing as Florida's the number one A TV state
in the United States.
Right now in many of the counties, especially Collier County,
riders are utilizing roads, canal edges, swamps, private property,
legally or illegally, as a place to ride. They typically don't title their
vehicles when they purchase a vehicle, although it is the law. If you're
not riding in an areas such as Croom's or a governed sanctioned area,
you do not have -- you just don't title your area -- your vehicle.
So those -- that money is not being collected as well because it's
not -- they aren't going to Picayune, they're not going to Croom's,
Page 62
April 11, 2006
they're not going to these areas to ride.
As well as, it's a safety issue. When you -- when you consider an
A TV -- and A TV has an engine that gets hot and also can throw
sparks, cause fires, brush fires, that type of thing, there are things in
place to keep that from happening, such as spark arresters and such.
Governed areas like Croom's requires spark arresters. They do
inspect for spark arresters. Those types of things need to be looked at.
There are several different grants available to support an area
such as this. The federal government gives -- Division of Forestry
gives a $350,000 grant for the development or maintenance of riding
areas. The Department of Environmental Protection gives $480,000
grant for the same thing.
So basically what it boils down to is that the Army Corps of
Engineers isn't interested in any agreement involving any human
activity in any of its -- in any of its controlled areas. What they want's
a completely hands-off approach, which, even if there isn't any riding
area, what it boils down to is that they don't want anybody in the area,
so how's it supposed to be preserved for our children?
I'd just like to give one more example. In Croom's they -- just
give you some numbers. They had 46,935 individual riders for the
2005 season. That's a lot of riders, and that's a lot of -- a lot of revenue
and income that this county could be bringing in if we had such an
area. Thirty-three thousand, one hundred eighty-two camping permits
issued, and 14,888 new riding permits issued. That's -- just in the
riding permits is $580,000 in revenue.
So, again, like I said, I am for having a new riding area.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mr. Miller, you keep referring to
something named Croom's. What is that?
MR. MILLER: Croom's is a riding area up north.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh.
MR. MILLER: It's in the Brooksville area. it's a state-run riding
area.
Page 63
April 11, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a question. Since you're involved
in manufacturing A TV s and you talked about grants, have you ever
thought about having a private/public partnership in regards to
acquiring grants so that you can buy some land and it might benefit
the South Florida Water Management?
MR. MILLER: Our company is fairly small. We are a subsidiary
of Suzuki.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You have a large organization of people.
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I would think if you had some kind
of a dues program, or whatever, that you collected funds, that you
could have a cost share involved in some of these grants.
MR. MILLER: Well, if it's already available through the federal
and -- federal government and state governments, then why would we
need to do that?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Why would you need to do that?
Because I think it -- that since you're a manufacturer and you want to
benefit what your product -- what you're doing, I would think that if
you got involved in something like this -- it's like people that want to
build golf courses, they have -- you know, the PGA gets involved in
building golf courses. And whether it's grants or however they do
that, it's through their membership that they're, you know, allowed to
build golf courses. I think this would be a great opportunity for you.
MR. MILLER: That would be something for, you know,
companies like Suzuki and Yamaha and Kawasaki to look at, of
course, and they do do a lot of motor cross tracks and that sort of
thing; however, most states -- in Arizona there's thousands of acres of
riding area available. So, you know -- and it's openly available to
people. So that's something that -- where we -- nobody's ever had to
step in before.
And quite honestly, I'm not speaking for Suzuki or Yamaha or
Page 64
April 11, 2006
any other company out there, but I can tell you from Hiassen's
standpoint, if -- they would not be willing to look at just Florida, of
opening up an area, because everybody else allows it. Every other
state allows a riding area.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Frank Denninger. He'll be
followed by Brian McMahon.
MR. DENNINGER: How you all doing today? It's a pleasure to
be before a commission as highly qualified as you all are, and
concerned about their citizens' future.
I'm speaking today -- I'm Frank Denninger on behalf of the
Everglades Coordinating Council. And I want to thoroughly, 100
percent, 2,000 percent, support the commission-based proposals that
were heard here today -- actually they were exactly what I was going
to say, and it's fantastic to hear it -- as far as setting the agreement
aside, returning to the status quo pre-agreement conditions until such
time as the part -- as our partner fulfills their commitment.
And at the same time, if there is any potential for renegotiation of
certain components of the agreement, I might suggest one additional
component to be a prohibition against any gating installations on Jane
Scenic Drive, which was part of the vacation agreement, which is
being seriously considered at this time.
That would be another future negative impact and more serious
damage to the citizens of this county, and actually it would actually
damage Dade County citizens, because that's their main access to the
east side of Picayune Strand. Without it, they get a 50-mile detour one
way to get to the northern entrance, up State Road 29, over Oil Well
Road, south on Everglades, into the north entrance, which is the only
other entrance currently.
And also -- like the gentleman before me, speaking of revenue.
I'm from Dade County. I'm a little bit aware of what's going on there
with this issue. There's basically a demonstration scheduled there
Page 65
April 11, 2006
Friday for similar reasoning, but a little different details.
But what will be alerted there is that the county actually is
planning -- they're working with the Division of Forestry, as Collier
could, to get funding from the A TV advisory committee that forestry
has established that will work with the county or private/public
partnership, what have you. In fact, I'm going to be suggesting to one
dealer in Dade County when I get home today, to check with Dade
County on partnering, because they're studying the site now. They've
already got a grant, about 75,000 with a 15,000 match. Just a study
sitting, not that they'll be able to find one.
Because the same panther that's pursuing taking access away in
Collier County will pursue access anywhere in this state for the rest of
time. And I'm as good a proponent of good environment as anybody
else, but it has a potential of wiping out a lot of other things along with
that protection. And the sad part is, everything should be able to occur
together.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Brian McMahon. He'll be
followed by Clarence Tears.
MR. McMAHON: My name's Brian McMahon. I'm in front of
you again. I was one of the ones who spoke when we visited this
about a year and a half ago.
I'd like to thank all the commissioners for taking a second look at
this issue. It's not often that you get a second chance to look at the
repercussion of a decision you made and have the ability to do that
agaIn.
I appreciate what Jim Coletta and Mr. Coyle -- I guess he's gone
-- said regarding possibly holding off and trying to maintain the
county as being a stakeholder in the Picayune Strand.
One of the water management district's largest contentions about
the 640-acre site has been the cost of lands; however, they knew that
Page 66
April 11, 2006
when they entered into the agreement, what the cost of land was. I
mean, it did go up substantially, you know, again.
But if we just continue to grant the extensions, I for one -- my
son's 15 years old. If we continue to grant the extension year after year
for three years, by the time we get back on that bike again, my son's
18. I lost that time. You know, he may be off doing college or in the
army or doing whatever he's going to do when he gets out of high
school, but I surely do not want to lose the next three years with my
son. I enjoyed the amount of time that I spent out there riding with
him in the prior seven.
Another issue that's going on out here beyond ATV use is the
Corps of Engineers has come out with a letter. The Division of
Forestry wrote up a recreation plan which included off-road vehicle
use, or off-highway vehicle use in the Picayune Strand.
The Corps of Engineers sent a letter into the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service claiming that the off-highway vehicle area, as well as
the shooting range and other -- as Colonel Carpenter said, human uses
are generally prohibited activities.
When the Picayune Strand first came about in 1986, I believe it
was, this was supposed to be the largest recreation area in the State of
Florida. And right now, it appears that what's going to happen in the
Picayune Strand unless we, the county, maintain our ability to be a
stakeholder in this, is it's going to be a giant fence, just like what we
see along Highway 29 in the Florida Panther and National Wildlife
Refuge. There will be a 200- foot boardwalk in there, and that's all
we're going to get in there.
The county can maintain, by rescinding or suspending the
agreement, can maintain a stakeholder claim in this. I believe it's
going to make our bargaining position for all activities, including not
just A TV, equestrian, shooting range. These are all things that are
desperately needed in Collier County right now.
And I would like to please urge you to consider at least
Page 67
April 11, 2006
suspending the agreement with the water management district until
they come up with a suitable site.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you sir.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Clarence Tears. He'll be
followed by your final speaker, Dr. Mogelvang.
MR. TEARS: Clarence Tears, director of Big Cypress Basin in
South Florida Water Management District.
Try to set the record straight. I think it was in March we did
tender an offer to Collier County for 624 acres. That was the Lake
Trafford property.
At this time -- I saw some recommendations through emails by
county staff that they had concerns about some of the core samples
taken on the lake, and some of the arsenic levels exceeded industrial
standards.
At that time staff recommended we should wait until the proj ect
is completed before we determine if this site is acceptable. So I did
meet the commitment and tendered an offer to Collier County. And
that was the only section of land that I had available.
No one wants to sell land that size in Collier County.
Everybody's keeping the land. And once you talk to some of these
property owners about ORVs on sections of lands they own, they don't
want OR V s on their sections of land because of some of the problems
they're experiencing now.
In Southern Golden Gate Estates, it was privately-held land. The
state acquired this land at $120 million that they brought back to
Collier County. In addition, another $120 million is going to be spent
in Collier County to restore it.
Weare not the management agency that will be managing
Southern Golden Gate Estates or more formally known as the
Picayune State Forest. This is -- the Division of Forestry will manage
the land. They're required to put together a management plan.
Page 68
April 11 , 2006
Recent comments that I've seen on the management plan is that
they said, if you start looking at ORV use and other impacts, you need
to do an assessment. So basically the federal agencies involved in
reviewing the management plan are asking for more information.
During the construction phase, which is an important time where
we're removing roads, trying to get the flow rides, keeping Jane Scenic
Drive open, and trying to manipulate Southern Golden Gate to restore
it, you do not want all types of use out there during the construction
phase, and that's the reason why everything is being reviewed at this
time.
The district is committed to finding this section of land for
Collier County, and we continue to look. I've asked these ORV
groups in the past, some of them, to help me find a section of land that
I can buy, and we'll buy it.
You know, we're committed to it. We're committed to the
county. But don't lose sight that there's more than one stakeholder and
one user in Southern Golden Gate Estates. Some people like it quiet.
They just want to go out and walk. There's primitive camping right
now, there's equestrian use. There's other uses being utilized in
Southern Golden Gate Estates.
In addition, look at long-term economic return on this investment
today, the saltwater/freshwater balance, your estuarine system, in the
economics to our community 50 years out. This is truly a restoration
project, and we have to go through these stages to make sure we do it
right and we don't screw up what we're trying to repair.
And thank you very much for your time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a question. I've tried to use Jane
Scenic Drive recently, and the upkeep of that road has deteriorated
tremendously since the county has turned over that road. What are we
going to do to enhance that?
MR. TEARS: Well, that was part of this agreement we're
working on to put a little more leverage on the state to repair and
Page 69
April 11, 2006
maintain the road, because the state technically is the owner of
Southern Golden Gate Estates. And through this agreement we've
been working with your staff on, you know, we're trying to get the
state to commit to maintaining in the upkeep of those roadways.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So were you the negotiating
person, or South Florida Water Management was the people who
negotiated this contract to collect all the south -- Southern Golden
Gate Estates? You negotiated the deal to buy all this land for the
state?
MR. TEARS: Did we? No. It was through state land
acquisition. They actually purchased all the land in Southern Golden
Gate Estates.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At the time that they bought the
land, do you know if there was lands that was -- that were public lands
that was open for people for riderships of the ORVs?
MR. TEARS: Most of the riding ofORVs in Southern Golden
Gate Estates was across private property. They were actually riding
on public roadways at that time, so that was actually technically in
violation because they were actually public highways.
Some of the land was acquired way back in '87, so there was
parcels -- as of '87 we were trying to acquire the 55,000 acres. So
every year there was more and more land in public ownership. So to
tell you that none of the land was in public ownership at the time,
someone may have traversed the property, I can't.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Was there any of this property
that was owned by clubs ofORVs?
MR. TEARS: Not that I know of.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final-- you ready for your final speaker?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. Did you have a question? Well,
he's going to wait till after.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I guess I'll wait.
Page 70
April 11, 2006
MS. FILSON: Final speaker's Dr. Mogelvang.
MR. JENKINS: If you could check for Wayne Jenkins on this.
MS. FILSON: Oh, you know, you probably numbered it 10.
Okay.
MR. JENKINS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Dr. Mogelvang, and then Mr. Jenkins.
MR. MOGELV ANG: Mr. Halas, if you just open your mind just
a little bit to one little area, and this is something that came up as I
heard your comments rather than something that I would have thought
of ahead of time.
But public land and public use. What public land is that -- public
is the people. That money that that land is purchased with is -- I gave
you some of that money myself. I doubt if there are very many people
here who didn't. That's public land, our land. The citizens of this
country paid for that land. So when we talk about ownership, think
about it that way a little bit.
Also think about some of the ideals on which our country was
based of personal freedom. I came down here in '75. I was the first
plastic surgeon in town. One of my patients was a guy by the name of
Jesse Hardy. He, a disabled veteran, put his whole life into a little
place, no electricity, no telephone, did it all himself, and they took his
land away from him so they could have it out there. It's a beautiful
area.
Also, there are lots of different uses for public land, and some of
the things that people cherish the most are freedoms that they have.
So I'm just saying, let's all be a little bit more flexible.
Yeah, the -- I don't even own one of those things. I've got a
swamp buggy, and I get into that. But they make a little bit of noise,
but they -- they -- they are not harmful.
I have a video of my swamp buggy out in Bear Island running
down the road, and mama panther is trying to get her kids to get off
the road so my buggy won't run over them, and she finally walks
Page 71
April 11, 2006
down the road so far that the kids look at each other and say, mama's
going to leave us if we don't go with her, and they go running down
the road. You ought to just watch that video. That might give you a
little bit more insight.
Just a little bit more on my background. Yes, I am an
outdoorsman, yes, I do love hunting and fishing, and yes, guns, do
make money and yes, swamp -- I mean make noise. They do make
noise, guns make noise. But this is supposed to be a free country and
we tolerate each other's activities.
I can tell you that since they have restricted OR V access in the
Everglades, the hunting is nowhere near as good as it was 25 years
ago. It's -- the hunting has decreased greatly, the quality of the
hunting and the presence of the animals. So some of these things are
actually just the opposite of what an overly, if I can use the word,
maternalistic view of conservation is.
And so I would say, let's let the people have access to that area.
It's a good, fairly safe activity, and they're doing it on their own.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Wayne
Jenkins.
MR. JENKINS: Good morning, and thank you. My name is
Wayne Jenkins. I'm here representing the Collier Sportsman
Conservation Club. Thank you for checking into that. I got all
dressed up and thought I wasn't going to be able to do anything here,
which refers to, I wore my Wishing Well shirt, Wishing Well
foundation shirt. And this issue kind of reminds me of, we're in a
giant wishing well here, it appears.
I know there's some of you sitting up there wishing this issue
would just go away. There's many of your constituents wishing the
government agencies would honor their commitments to them, and I
think the only happy group out of everyone is the South Florida Water
Management District and their silent partner, the Army Corps of
Page 72
ApriI 11, 2006
Engineers. They simply got their wishes for right-of-ways by coming
here and making a promise.
About a year and a half ago, this room was jammed full of people
that was upset over Collier County losing -- giving away 300 miles of
right-of-way, and I think you all remember those meetings. There
were a lot of upset people that had recreated used that area for a long
time that were put out with nowhere else to recreate.
We asked you back at that time when you were discussing the
issue, what happens if the South Florida Water Management District
does not uphold the agreement and provide us a section of land?
Today I'm here not to say we told you so, but to ask you again, what
are you going to do about South Florida Water Management District
breaking their agreement now?
Remember the statements from a former county commissioner
and South Florida Water Management representative that was here,
that finding a section of land for A TV use wouldn't be a problem with
a whole year to look for it. I heard it. It's in your minutes. Where is
the accountability?
That person I just referred to has left the Southwest Florida Water
Management District. We can't vote out unelected officials. Who is
big enough to stand up to these bureaucrats and their promises?
One out of five of you commissioners said at the time this came
up that this was a bad deal, and it was unenforceable. And I will say
I'm very proud of the man of that 4-1 vote that stood up with that idea,
because that's why we're here today.
And I'm not here to put you down. I'm saying, we've got a
problem that needs to be addressed because it wasn't handled the last
time.
The South Florida Water Management District philosophy
apparently was, promise them anything, but come back here with that
right-of-way. They did their job.
Just to give you a brief update in removing old recreational uses
Page 73
April 11, 2006
out of there, the -- in addition to the ORV mudding track that was
promised a place for that, the Division of Forestry came up with a plan
for a little over 12 miles of off-road vehicle trails. Army Corps of
Engineers has since said, that's not acceptable.
We're losing our recreational rights. We keep losing them
because nobody is standing up to these people. They can come in and
promise you something one day and do what they want to the next.
I'm out of time. And I appreciate your time.
Commissioner Halas, if I may just, one thing that seems to be
maybe a sticking point with you, I've heard you ask several times, did
different clubs own property out there.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, sir.
MR. JENKINS: And I'll say, to my knowledge, no club did. I
will tell you there were many individuals that owned property out
there that had their own private camps out there. They used A TV s to
ride out there. There were a lot of individuals that did own property
out there that supported this issue.
Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle, I believe
you were first.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I am still where we were at
the beginning of this meeting, and I guess I'm a little disappointed we
didn't have more recommendations and support for what we were
recommending here, but we got -- mostly got criticism.
So I'm going to just let the other commissioners handle this issue.
And if you don't like my recommendation of telling the water
management district and all the other bureaucracies -- I mean, you
know, what's new about bureaucracies that don't work? Is anybody
here really surprised? No.
You know, that's counterproductive to sit here and debate this for
Page 74
April 11, 2006
hours. We know that they don't work. We know that they have
competing interests, that there's no one single person in charge of
making these decisions, but we do have an agreement, and I'm
prepared to enforce the agreement.
And what I would like to do is to -- is to tell them to get you
some places to recreate until they come up with the 640 acres that they
promised, end of story, you know.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know, we could have voted on
this 45 minutes ago. All right. But anyway that's still my motion. If
they want to take some more time to evaluate the 640 acres, fine, but
open up that land right now for you to go back and recreate where you
were before.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Maybe I can build upon that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, go ahead.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta, you're next.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I like what I'm hearing.
It sounds like some common sense is coming into this. I'm not going
to say that anyone that was negotiating on this at the original time had
larceny in their heart. I think that their intentions were well meaning
at the time; however, I don't think they were really looking at it, and
they didn't research the fact that land wasn't available.
We heard very well from water management that it's very
difficult. Well, you know, that's something I tried to point out and a
number of us tried to point out before that it was going to be difficult.
It's next to impossible.
I would like to make a motion. I don't mean to -- but it picks up
on what you said, Commissioner Coyle, but it goes a little farther -- to
not sign the extension of the present agreement and give Southwest
Florida Water Management District 60 days to resolve the situation.
If a good faith effort is not forthcoming in that 60-day period, that we
Page 75
April 11, 2006
direct the County Attorney's Office to start proceedings to file the
necessary papers to renounce the original contract for noncompliance
and start action to receive compensation for damages.
That's a mouthful, I know, but this puts the horse where it
belongs, in the front of the cart, and the responsibility where it lies. It
sends a clear message that we're about ready to get really serious and
to follow through on what we're saying, rather than just delay this and
have a meeting again in July, then another one next September, and
keep this rhetoric going on forever. Let's put a time limit on it and
bring it to an end.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second the motion for
discussion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Point of order, Mr. Chairman,
point of order. You had a motion on the floor by Commissioner
Coyle, and you had a second. Now I'm sure--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I didn't hear the second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I didn't hear the second either.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't either.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I seconded.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I'm sure it can be built
upon, but what Commissioner Coyle's -- Coletta's motion, to me, I
don't know what it said. You're saying good faith, resolve this in good
faith. What does that mean?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'm glad you asked that
question. And I didn't want to try to draw this out as a total contract.
That's why we have a County Attorney. But good faith would be to
meet the users' needs that are out there. In other words, to put the
pressure on Fish and Wildlife, the Army Corps of Engineers, whoever
it is, and whatever entity we have to deal with to re-open the Picayune
Forest until that point in time they can resolve the issue.
Page 76
April 11, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. You said to meet the
needs, meet the needs, and that was a part of the second, and I
confirmed that with Representative Mike Davis. What he said to me
over the phone was -- now, I said 100 acres, that's what he had in
mind, but he said to meet the needs of the ORV community in Collier
County in the interim basis.
Now, when I just spoke to him, he says he's hoping he will have
an answer within 10 days, so that's going to be prior to our meeting.
And if we just back up our state representative of what he's saying and
what he's trying to do, I think, you know, we would probably get a lot
further.
Now, Commissioner, at the end of the day, this agreement still
has to come back to the board. And I think you've heard from your
colleagues that we're not going to accept any more delays.
Commissioner Coyle has said it; I have said it.
And when this agreement comes back, we've got to have
something for this -- what we thought was good faith, that we would
have 640 acres for the use of. We don't have it, so that's why your
colleagues are steadfast in making it happen tomorrow. So I don't see
what's wrong with our motion today.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Possibly Commissioner
Coyle could restate the motion and we might be able to discuss it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I could, Mr. Chairman. Let's
make sure we understand where we are right now. This all started out
because the County Attorney has been in negotiation --
MS. HUBBARD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- with representatives of the
parties that are suing us --
MS. HUBBARD: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- as well as the state, and they
Page 77
April 11, 2006
have come to us with a proposed settlement that will resolve the
lawsuit.
MS. HUBBARD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It will require the state to maintain
the roads, it will provide for the state to locate and give us recreational
property equaling at least 640 acres, more or less, and it provides for a
series of extensions that I don't like.
So all I have done is to say, let's proceeds with that settlement
agreement, eliminate the extensions and say to the state, we will agree
with this settlement of you maintaining the roads and dropping this
lawsuit or resolving this lawsuit provided that you give the people the
land right now -- or we can set some time frame, 30 days, 60 days,
whatever -- but give the people land right now to recreate on while
you're looking for 640 acres, and the longer you look for the 640
acres, the more they're going to use the land that you've just given
them.
So I don't see any downside from that because they were using it
before, you took away the use, and you didn't provide a replacement.
So start letting them use it again, end of story.
And so my motion then really is to accept the settlement proposal
with the exception that we would not have this series of extensions in
time unless they, the state, provide access to the land now that was
previously used by these people for recreation, and they will retain the
right to use that land until such time as the 640 acres suitable for their
purposes is designated by the state. Is that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's correct, that's the way I
understand it. And I'd just put a caveat, or other suitable lands.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MS. HUBBARD: Because, quite frankly, I don't know exactly
what lands they were using before.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, they were what is called
the Bad Luck Prairie, in what is now called the Picayune Strand.
Page 78
April 11, 2006
MS. HUBBARD: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Or, Ms. Robbins --
MS. HUBBARD: Hubbard.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- other -- Hubbard.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Jackie.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Other suitable lands.
MS. HUBBARD: I understand.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I will not make that mistake
agaIn.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do you have a time limit in that
motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I would give them --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's got to come back.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, it's got to come back, but for
guidance to the staff, they're going to have to go -- I'd say 60 days.
MS. HUBBARD: Sixty days to make that decision; is that okay?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Is that okay? I mean, does that
make sense?
MS. HUBBARD: Yes. I--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I mean, they've had what, two
years now?
MS. HUBBARD: They've had a year -- about a year and a half.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I need clarification. Is this back to the
original motion, Commissioner, that you made originally, and all
you're doing is just enhancing that motion because --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. It's all the same thing. I was
just putting it into the context of this agreement, this settlement
agreement.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is that the motion we've got to vote on
first?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, that's right, the same motion.
Page 79
April 11, 2006
It was just in the context of this particular agreement.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Question?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do we have anything built in? I
mean, what we're doing is we're making the demand. What is it we
have to be able to bargain with? If they don't fulfill this demand,
what's the next step?
MS. HUBBARD: Well, here's what you need to be aware of.
One is that the lawsuit for inverse condemnation, which is fairly
separate from the 640 acres issue, does carry some potential liability
for the county if, in fact, the state decides it will not go through with
the purchase of that property, if we don't go through with the
agreement; however, that is something that I can bring back to you
after I've taken this matter up with the state attorneys and the district's
attorney.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're just providing right now
guidance to legal staff to take the current negotiated settlement
agreement back --
MS. HUBBARD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- for this modification I've just
described.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then if you take it back and
you get an agreement, then it comes back to us for a formal -- formal
approval.
MS. HUBBARD: Approval or disapproval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or disapproval.
MS. HUBBARD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you take it back to the state and
you come up with maybe not 60 days, but they can give it to you in
four months, then we can sit down and decide whether or not that's
Page 80
April 11, 2006
acceptable to us.
MS. HUBBARD: That's correct. And you should be aware -- I
think I have an obligation to remind you that the original agreement
has already been entered into and that as a result of that original
agreement, certain actions were taken by the board already to vacate
the -- or at least to vacate the roadways and to cease the county's
management over those roadways. And there are ramifications of that
that we should also have to look into in the event you reject the
agreement in total.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Call the motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Well, first did you want to leave
your motion on the floor?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are you satisfied with what we're going
through at this point in time?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, the fact that it's coming
back to us for review again does leave it open. I don't think it goes
quite far enough, and I do agree with Commissioner Henning, that
Mike Davis is doing a wonderful job out there. I see the action that
we're doing today is a help for Commissioner -- or excuse me, for
Representative Davis, to bring pressure on from this end and to
complement the work that he's already doing.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So do you want to pull your motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. My motion has been
pulled.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Are you going to second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (Nods head)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion on the
motion that's on the floor at this present time by Commissioner Coyle?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Seeing none, I'll call the question. All
Page 81
April 11, 2006
those in favor of -- is there a question?
MS. FILSON: No.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. 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: Opposed, by like sign?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries. I think you've got your
marching orders, I hope.
MS. HUBBARD: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MR. JENKINS: I know I am out of order. But could I point out
something you just discussed?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. If you'd come up to the mike, sir.
And state your name for the record, please.
MR. JENKINS: Thank you. My name is Wayne Jenkins. What
you have experienced with what members of the sporting community
and outdoor users groups have been fighting for a long time, you're
addressing your problem. We gave the right-of-way to the water
management district, our right-of-ways.
The water management district does not have the management of
the Picayune Strand. That's under the Division of Forestry. So we
can go back and say, you know, either you give us our right-of-ways
back or give -- let us ride on Bad Luck Prairie or we're going to take
our right-of-ways back, they don't have that authority. I just want -- I
just want you to understand that. Because there's just so many
different agencies and fingers in this thing, you can't talk to one person
and get the same answer twice.
Page 82
April 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But I think we've got a pretty good legal
staff, and I think that we'll try to address all those particular concerns,
SIr.
MR. JENKINS: Yes. I just wanted to make you aware of that.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, can we move on
1 OA? We've got some residents here before -- can we take that as the
next business?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I guess so.
Item #10A
AN AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPER
CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENT WITH G.L. HOMES OF
NAPLES FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF LOGAN
BOULEVARD BETWEEN V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD AND
IMMOKALEE ROAD IN EXCHANGE FOR VESTING AND
IMPACT FEE CREDITS - APPROVED W/STIPULATIONS
MR. MUDD: Sir, the next item is, at the board's pleasure, is
10A. It's a recommendation to seek board approval of an amended
and restated developer contribution agreement with GL Homes of
Naples for the design and construction of Logan Boulevard between
Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road in exchange for vesting
in impact fee credits.
Mr. Norman Feder, your Administrator for Transportation
Services, will present.
MR. FEDER: Thank you. Commissioners, back in December of
2002, this board approved a developer contribution agreement with
GL Homes for the construction of two lanes within a four-lane
right-of-way basically of Logan Boulevard between Vanderbilt Beach
Road and Immokalee Road.
Page 83
April 11, 2006
Since that time, both the county, who had responsibility to
acquire a portion of the right-of-way that was not already committed
and being held aside by GL Homes, and the developer, who was
required to do the design and proceed forward towards construction
after receiving permitting, have been working on the project.
The county had some delay in acquiring its right-of-way. That
right-of-way is acquired. It is a nursery. A lot of business damages
issues and other things that we went through. That was acquired.
Shortly after we acquired that right-of-way, the developer was
able to get the last of their permitting. They have moved on the
design. That is complete.
We did hold a couple of public meetings back in 2004 on the
design. Everything is now ready to go. But as we looked at the
developer contribution agreement which came to you in December of
2002, obviously the dates no longer applied.
Other issues needed to be brought up today, and that's what you
have in front of you today is essentially the same provision, the
vesting of 850 homes for the provision of impact fees, which shows
now as being a little over $7 and a half million for a project estimated
about 8.9 million, almost 9 million, with the balance as it was
previously to be covered by the county.
I will note though that the provision of that difference right now
is less than 16 percent towards the county's cost as it's envisioned right
now based on this estimate of cost, and our fees are slated very shortly
on residential to go up somewhere in the vicinity of 40 percent so it
probably would end up being no cost to the county as the project
develops of those 850 homes.
But nonetheless, this is to move on that two lanes, Logan
Boulevard. An important item, especially now that we do have that
section of lmmokalee under construction under the design build and
the upcoming proj ect with the state on the loop at 1-75 to give a relief
destination.
Page 84
April 11, 2006
Under this provision now, the dates for construction would start
June of this year. As I said, all the permits, all the design and all the
right-of-ways in hand, with completion in just under a year, in May of
2007.
I open it up for any questions you might have.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner -- or excuse me, Norm
Feder. A question I have, you said this is a two-lane road, but you're
going to have a right-of-way of four lanes; is that correct?
MR. FEDER: That is correct. And also the design provided for
the permitting, the federal permitting for an ultimate four lanes. Of
course, the water management is just for what you're building, which
is two lanes right now.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Will this have sidewalks and will
it have bike paths also?
MR. FEDER: Yes. It's a full cross-section. And what they'd be
building though initially would be essentially what would end up
being the northbound lanes, and we will correct on that for two lanes,
and then eventually come back and then build the other two lanes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I had a question concerning the
cancellation clause of the agreement on page 15 of 42, paragraph H.
Specifically it says, if the county reduces the number of approved
units compared to that which is currently approved and! or poses any
other condition of approval, then the developer shall have the right to
terminate this contract and receive a reimbursement for all the money
that was spent on the construction of the road.
Now, I understand that under most circumstances there would be
no benefit to the developer to cancel this agreement, but I can think of
some circumstances where it would be, and I don't understand why we
have to reimburse for the road if they've already sunk the money into
it. The only reason that road's being developed, as far as I can
determine, is to serve the developments that are in that area and the
Page 85
April 11, 2006
traffic therefrom.
So I'm still wondering why there isn't some prorated
reimbursement process mentioned in this agreement.
MR. FEDER: Commissioner Coyle --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: For example, just to take it to the
ridiculous, if we decide we want to reduce it by one unit out of the,
what, 850 that are authorized, they have the right to cancel and get
reimbursement from all the money that they spent on the road.
Now, I know that is not likely to happen, but something in
between can certainly happen. What happens if there's a declaration of
bankruptcy? Do they get all the impact fees paid back after they've
been sunk?
MR. FEDER: What I will tell you is, the provision -- and I'll ask
Scott Teach to address it in more specifics. Essentially, as I
understand this provision, they are building this section of roadway
which was in our long-range plan and ultimately to be four-Ianed.
This is an effort to try and advance that construction.
What is provided for here, if they were to abandon, let's say,
revisions to their PUD, they don't have the permitting for this section
of development, let's say, something comes up, time goes by, board
somehow makes the decision and changes, the fact of the matter is,
they would have built this roadway, we would have gotten it at a
lesser price than we could have built it, we would then be obligated to
pay them back for it, but they would also, if they chose to take that
action, be removing that vesting for the 850 units that they have.
So that's my understanding of the provision. It's sort of a double
edge. It doesn't provide for a pro-rata share, as I think you mentioned.
And we raised that to the developer. You might want to ask them, but
I'll ask Scott Teach to address this a little bit further as well.
MR. TEACH: Scott Teach, for the record.
Commissioner Coyle, Mr. Feder's explanation was correct.
There are provisions in this contract which is essentially unchanged
Page 86
April 11, 2006
since the originally agreement was entered into, paragraphs 8 and 10,
for example, that do provide, if the project came under budget, that
there would be allowances made.
And so there's really no reason why it couldn't be in this
paragraph, 21H, other than the fact that this was not the agreed-upon
language.
This paragraph was originally objected to in its entirety, whittled
down, shaved, changed, and this was the result of a compromise. But
if this is something that the board directs be further discussed with the
developer, it certainly can be done.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't know if the board agrees
with me on this, but it just -- it just seems to me that under normal
circumstances it's fine, but it's the abnormal circumstances we have to
guard against.
And there are things, conditions that I can imagine here that
certainly are not contemplated but could have an unfavorable impact
on the taxpayers of Collier County.
MR. TEACH: Well, we would still end up with the road project
being completed. And if they were to terminate, of course, we would
incur that expense, but of course they wouldn't get that 850 units that
they bargained for. And I think that's the key here. They're
bargaining for these 850 units. And so their understanding, if they
don't get what they bargained for, they want the right to pull out, and
that's really the gist of it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have a big concern with
Immokalee Road and the congestion on Immokalee Road. Is there
any way that we can -- we can form an agreement with this developer
not to start any building until that section of Immokalee Road is
complete? I just see another disaster coming right at us like a big old
truck, you know. If they're constructing at the same time we're
Page 87
April 11, 2006
constructing, we even have more of a problem. I would like to see
that somehow worked out in this agreement.
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, I will defer in a second to the
developer, who's probably the only one who could answer your
question specifically. What I will tell you though, the section of
Immokalee Road, unlike when we did the original contribution
agreement, is under contract now under the design build.
We're moving forward. They still don't have the permitting on
their development. But you are correct, in this agreement, there's
nothing to preclude if they got their permits, them moving forward.
Although I think, unlike when we were in December of 2002, we're a
little bit more ahead of the game than necessarily the developer is at
this point, but I'll defer to the developer and how they may want to
respond to that.
MR. RATTERREE: Good morning. For the record, my name is
Kevin Ratterree, vice-president with GL Homes. I'm going to respond
to both questions, if you don't mind.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
MR. RATTERREE: As it relates to the issue of proportionality
of the payment, we have an existing development order that was
approved for the Terrafina property. That development order allowed
850 homes. It was not phased to the construction of Logan Boulevard
from Vanderbilt to Immokalee, it was not phased to the construction
of the six-Ianing oflmmokalee. That project could proceed forward
under today's rules and regulations under the existing development
order.
Over the past three years, we have been involved in a relatively
bitter battle with regard to the Army Corps of Engineers regarding the
infamous flowway regarding the three projects. Had that permit been
issued three years ago, this would have been a non-issue. This project
would have been substantially complete at this time.
Unfortunately what has happened is, without that permit we still
Page 88
April 11, 2006
have a project which has yet to get out of the ground. So the traffic
that would be coming from our development hasn't even occurred yet
because the proj ect hasn't even come forward yet.
All Logan was doing is advance funding the construction of a
road which was on the county's, you know, ultimate road build
program, but there was no funding to do it. So this was a mechanism
to get a public road which would be used by all of the public in the
general area in a way that would not cost the county additional dollars,
which was, we would fund it, we would take impact fee credits for it
through the life of the project.
The reason 21 H is in the agreement, which is the proportionate
issue that was raised, is that if, for whatever reason, the county decides
to revoke our development order or start taking units away from our
development order, we have funded $9 million of our money to build
a public road, which we weren't even required to built under our
development order.
We did it as a good-faith effort to the county to try to relieve
some of the traffic congestion problems that were out here, and in
exchange for that, we're not getting back what we bargained for,
which was the original development order.
The agreement gives us the right but not the obligation. As Norm
clearly said, all the agreement is doing is giving us traffic vesting for
the agreement. So if the county were to decide to remove some of
those units from our development order, we have the right to remove
it, but in removing it, we also remove the traffic vesting that came
along with it. The benefit to the county is you still get the road. The
negative to us is that we don't have any vesting unless the agreement
stays in full force and effect.
I think I got them all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
MR. RATTERREE: If I didn't, please let me know.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It didn't.
Page 89
April 11, 2006
MR. RATTERREE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I realize that you're going through a
lot of ordeal with the Army Corps right now. There's a lot of
permitting issues involved and so forth.
What I'm very, very concerned with is the congestion on
Immokalee Road. Right now it's horrendous; people can hardly move.
And I'm saying, even if it takes you another year to go through all
your permitting and so forth and you have like six months left before
our road is finished so there's still a lot of congestion out there because
of the road construction, I would suggest, or I would ask, that you
don't start your construction and even add more of a problem to that
road until the road is complete. It will probably be finished at the
same time, but I want some assurance that we can protect that
roadway.
MR. RATTERREE: Commissioner, with all due respect, I can't
agree to a provision like that. That's simply putting us at the discretion
of a future action which is going to occur with regard to the design
permitting of a roadway section for a project that's not even phased to
that roadway section.
We have diligently tried to work forward to get the Army Corps
permit. But the bottom line with us is we are spending $9 million
building a road which will help alleviate the traffic constraints and
concerns that you have on Immokalee. To then be constrained to the
Immokalee widening simply puts us in a position where the $9 million
is going toward something that we can't ultimately use because we
can't pull our permits to build our project.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Actually what you're doing is
putting the $9 million up to guarantee your 850 units.
MR. RATTERREE: We're putting $9 million up to build a
public road for the benefit of all the public, not only our 850 units.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, and they are getting
Page 90
April 11, 2006
vesting on that. I've got to remind the board that we asked GL Homes
to build this section that we're talking about in between Immokalee
and Vanderbilt to relieve Immokalee Road.
And as you heard, he has his development order now. So without
this agreement, he could still build his community once he gets his
permits from the Corps of Engineers.
And the problem -- the concern that I have, you know, Norm and
the folks are doing -- trying to do their best to get the roads done, but
we need some help, you know. We can't -- we can't get these roads
done.
And that's why I was in favor of getting some help from, you
know, the developer to front his money to build our road. That's -- I
wish that we could -- could ask. But I'm concerned, if we say no, the
developer's going to say no, and then we don't have a road; we don't
have the money to build it. And he's -- they're putting up their money
and they still don't even have their Corps permit.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm just worried about the impact on
Immokalee.
Norm, could you give maybe your thoughts on this? I mean, I
don't want to hurt anybody else, but --
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, I fully appreciate it. I guess I just
started to ask a question that maybe I can let the developer respond to.
But in answer to the question on Immokalee Road, we're in the
design build. I should be completed within two years. The loop,
possibly three years, and I'm giving you generally worst-case scenario.
I hope to give a frame of reference.
My question to the developer was, even if they had permit
approval to begin their development today, which they do not have,
but if they had that, obviously they can't build 850 units overnight or
everybody's going to try and figure out his formula. So I'm trying to
figure out what might be -- what might be his schedule of buildout to
give you a frame of reference on a worst-case.
Page 91
April 11, 2006
I've given you what I think is realistically sort of worst-case or
anticipated on construction. Two years on the six-laning, possibly
three years because of issues with the state and federal government on
the loop. So with that, maybe he can give you an idea on the
development side of it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I meant, when you start
construction, there's always more traffic generated because of all the
trucks going in and out all day long than you normally would have,
which is more of an impact on Immokalee Road, but I --
MR. FEDER: But understand, the idea of this is, is within a year,
just under a year, I'd have Logan as an alternate for traffic to be able to
take and hopefully some more work done on Vanderbilt or further
down Logan down to Pine Ridge as a reliever.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't think it would be difficult
on this road if they're allowed to proceed if they have their --
MR. FEDER: We have a lot of constraint along Immokalee; I'm
not going to say differently, Commissioner, you know that very well,
a lot of development. But this is actually an attempt to start providing
some of that reliever, which is one of the reasons that originally, I
believe, the board approved this developer contribution agreement
because Logan will give another alternate for all that traffic we have
during construction and even after construction on Immokalee Road.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think if we go to Exhibit D, the
phasing schedule, it might clarify some of Commissioner Fiala's
concerns, but it raises questions for me.
Let's start with year three. By October the 1 st, 2008 -- by the
way, this is on page 29 of 42.
October the 1 st, 2008, apply for and receive a minimum of 50
building permits within the Terrafina development. And then October
1,2009, apply for and receive a minimum of 125 building permits.
Usually when we're talking about phasing, we're talking about
Page 92
April 11, 2006
maximum units. Now, tell me what this means.
MR. RATTERREE: Commissioner, that was actually a
carryover of the original developer contribution agreement. It was the
opinion of the County Attorney's Office in the original DCA done in
December of 2002 that to show the continuation and good faith of the
developer and pulling the necessary permits to receive the impact fee
credits, that they would be pulling permits at a specified number, and
those numbers were literally just taken from the agreement and put --
or discussed with the developer and put in the agreement. It's not a --
it's not a phasing as to a maximum. It was just to show good faith that
the developer is proceeding with their project.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I guess I don't even see the benefit
to the county for even doing that.
MR. RATTERREE: It really does nothing substantively to the
agreement, simply because at that time the road has already been built.
So the benefit to the county has already been derived. The public road
has been built, it's open to the public. The developer's just proceeding
at what would be the developer's pace with construction of the project
based on sales. It was literally just a continuation of a concept which
was in the original agreement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But it implies that, that you
wouldn't be pulling more than 125 building units before October the
1 st, 2009.
MR. RATTERREE: It's actually the exact opposite. It's
implying that we would have to have pulled.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You would have to pull that many?
MR. RATTERREE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Now, is there any problem with
specifying a maximum? Do you have a building phase schedule that
you might have in mind?
MR. RATTERREE: Well, Commissioner, the difficulty that we
have is we don't know sitting here today whether this Army Corps
Page 93
April 11, 2006
permit is a 30-day issue or a six-month issue or a year issue. The
difficulty with agreeing to a phase is, as I said earlier, our DO as it
exists today has no phasing obligations associated with Immokalee.
So that PUD, once that Corps permit is issued, can proceed under its
normal due course.
By agreeing to a restriction on the maximum, as Norman just
said, you can have situations where the county thinks it's going to be a
year, it ends up being a year and a half or it ends up being two years,
and so we are artificially being restricted in our ability to pull building
permits for something that is beyond our control, which is the ability
to get that six -lane section under construction.
Again, I'm back to, the concept was, we were fronting $9 million
building a road that the county did not have the money to build to try
to alleviate that traffic constraint on Immokalee. So the county's
getting a benefit. Our benefit was that we would get vesting for our
proj ect. And we're trying to keep with that original concept.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, as it currently exists, if you
don't get your Corps permit by -- in time to apply for the minimum of
50 building permits by October the 1 st, 2008, you're going to be in
violation of this agreement anyway.
MR. RATTERREE: That's -- if you -- again, I was just carrying
those forward because it was a concept in the original agreement. I
have no issue with removing the minimums in there. I do have a
problem with putting maximums in there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If you were to assume that the
Corps permit would be issued tomorrow, do you have a schedule in
mind as far as buildout is concerned?
MR. RATTERREE: Our approximate schedule is, this 850-unit
project would be a six-year project. We would have about six or seven
months of land development and access. We would start pulling
permits. Our general run is around 30 starts a month in our
community. So we start 30 homes every month so--
Page 94
April 11 , 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So if you got the Corps permit
tomorrow morning, when would be the earliest you would be prepared
to start pulling permits?
MR. RATTERREE: Vertical construction for residential units
versus the entry features, we would probably be at least seven months
out.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Coyle, if I could, I
have no idea why we have minimums in here, and I would recommend
to the board's considerations, since I just spoke to legal, and if the
developer agrees, that they be removed from here. My reason for
recommending removal is, I agree with Commissioner Coyle, it makes
no sense at all to have a minimum. Honestly, I don't care if they never
come in for an impact fee credit once they've paid for the roadway.
Sorry about that.
But having said that -- but having said that, I do not necessarily
want something that's going to put this item in jeopardy and looking
back to paragraph H and other issues. So I would recommend that the
minimum, if we are not going to get maximums in here, at least the
minimums should be removed, if that's the board's direction.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let's pursue maximums for
just a moment. Is there a way you can make what you would consider
to be a conservative business estimate about maximums, assuming the
earliest possible approval of the Corps of Engineers permit?
MR. RATTERREE: For the initial maximum, the answer is yes.
My difficulty is beyond that initial maximum, I am in complete
reliance upon -- and again, with all due respect to everybody -- a little
bit of that was happening with the last agenda item. I am not in
control of the permitting of that road.
If that road gets delayed for whatever reason, the negative comes
to me, as well as the residents of Collier County. But the negative as
the developer is, I can't pull my building permits yet. I have already
Page 95
April 11, 2006
funded $9 million of my company's money to build a public road
which is used to alleviate that traffic. I'm the one that gets the burden.
That's my concern.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I believe we have some public speakers.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir, and he was registered, so I'm assuming
that --
MR. RATTERREE: I'll waive my time.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is James Kirk. He'll be followed
by Meggan Davis.
MR. KIRK: Thank you, Commissioners, for your time. I'm here
on behalf of my community. I'm the president of Longshore Lake
Homeowners' Association, and we are one of the communities of the
Quail Creek communities, and we use Immokalee Road on a regular
basis. I have 1,500 residents within our community, and we're out
there all the time. And I'm here to implore you -- no, I'm here to beg
you, don't do anything to slow down opening up another north/south
route. We need it, and we need it very badly.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: And your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Meggan
Davis.
MS. DAVIS: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm here also from
Longshore Lake. I'm a director. And as a taxpayer in Collier County,
as well as an interested party that lives off Immokalee Road, I
appreciate the developer contribution, that the developer is paying for
the construction of this road. So that's one thing that I applaud you
for, and I appreciate that fact.
I also, living on Immokalee Road and being a resident of North
Naples -- and North Naples, all of North Naples and out into the
Estates and Immokalee, any way -- any way that we can move people
north to south before they have to get to the 75 interchange is a
tremendous value to working-class people, people who have to make
their way in and have to deal with 75 and that interchange.
Page 96
April 11, 2006
So I also implore you to keep -- you know, we really need these
north/south avenues for -- to move people back and forth in Collier
County. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Any further discussion?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Commissioner Coyle,
would you be okay if I make a motion removing Exhibit D?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'd be fine either way. I
really -- just a minor point, but I'll be okay with it anyway.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to
approve and -- amending it to remove Exhibit D. I'm sorry?
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, can I recommend remove year
three and four sites? What Exhibit D does do is talk about their
starting up the road and finishing the road, and I would like to keep
that in.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, yeah. Which -- I'm sorry.
MR. RATTERREE: I appreciate that, but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's three and four, the last
two paragraphs --
MR. RATTERREE: Yeah, it's three and four.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- Exhibit D. That's my motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any further discussion?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I'll call the question. All
those in favor of the motion by Commissioner Henning and seconded
by Commissioner Coyle, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 97
April 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries. And I think we're going
to break for lunch and --
MR. RATTERREE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- be back at --
MR. MUDD: 1:10.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: 1: 10, yep. Thank you very much.
(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. Board of County
Commissioners is back from lunch recess, and --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to advertised public
hearings.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Item #8A
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE COPPER COVE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (CDD) PURSUANT
TO SECTION 190.005, FLORIDA STATUTES - MOTION TO
CONTINUE TO THE APRIL 25, 2006 BCC MEETING -
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: And that brings us to 8A, which is a
recommendation to consider adoption of an ordinance establishing the
Copper Cover Community Development District, CDD, pursuant to
Page 98
April 11, 2006
section 190.005 of the Florida statutes.
MS. KENDALL: Yes. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, County
Commissioners. For the record, Marcia Kendall, Comprehensive
Planning Department.
Today I wanted to read for the record that the entire petition that
is submitted and before you today meets all the requirements that are
set forth in Florida Statutes chapter 190.005(2) A through F for the
establishment of a community development district.
With regard to the petition and the section 8A, pages 3 and 4,
there were typos, however, they have since been corrected, and I
believe the board has been notified.
And if you have any questions, the County Attorney and I will be
more than happy to answer them; otherwise, I'll turn the floor over to
Colonial Homes representative, J ames Ward.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have one question and -- I'll wait till the
gentleman gets up to do the presentation.
MS. KENDALL: Okay.
MR. WARD: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For your record,
my name is Jim Ward, representing Colonial Homes, Inc., the
petitioner, with respect to the establishment of the Copper Cove
Community Development District.
As Marcia had indicated to you, we submitted a petition to the
Board of County Commissioners for the establishment of the
community development district, and today is your public hearing
with respect to the adoption of that proposed ordinance.
The primary purpose of the establishment of the district
legislatively is to allow for public infrastructure to be developed and
funded by a community development district such that new residents
moving into Collier County and specifically the residents moving into
Copper Cove will bear at least some portion of the cost of that
infrastructure over time.
It provides a mechanism for the developer to fund that
Page 99
April 11, 2006
infrastructure through the issuance of tax exempt municipal bonds and
the levy of non-ad valorem special assessments.
Some of the keys to ensuring that those residents are aware that
this community development district exists are contained in the statute
that -- they include language on the sales contract with respect to this
community development district, specific disclosure of the amounts
that will be financed and that they will be required to pay for over
time on an annual basis and in totality for the debt service associated
with these bonds, and finally, a recordation on all of the property that
the district does exist and that it does have the right and authority to
oppose taxes and/or assessments with respect thereto.
The conditions that you look at with respect to the establishment
process, as I indicated, are contained in 190.005, and they are -- the
answers to all of those questions are contained also in our petition --
are answered in our petition that has been submitted to the board.
There is an initial board of supervisors that you appoint pursuant
to this petition. There will be a landowners' election of the
landowners within 90 days of the establishment date of this district to
elect a permanent board on staggering two-year and four-year terms.
The applicant -- or the petitioner has indicated also that we will
elect a member of the board of supervisors who is a resident of the
district as soon as possible after a resident moves into the boundaries
of the community development district itself.
So with respect thereto, that's all the presentation I had for you,
and I'll be glad to answer any questions that you may have with
respect to this petition.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. I have a couple commissioners that
have some questions. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I didn't receive the
changes to the agenda so -- and I do have some questions but they
may be answered through the changes. Does anybody have the
changes?
Page 100
April 11, 2006
MR. WARD: I'll -- in the petition itself, in Exhibit 8A, which is
the report required to be submitted by --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: What page is that, sir? Can you tell us?
MR. WARD: Yes, sir. It's behind tab 8, and it's going to be on
page 3 of 12 and on page 4 of 12.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. WARD: And on page 3 of 12 in subsection A, policy 15(B)
2, bolded, develop a system of incentives and disincentives. And the
answer to that, the third line down towards the end, the petition says
policy exhibit, 16(B) 2, and that should read 15(B) 2.
And then on the next page, which is 4 of 12, in policy 17(B) 3
where it starts out, allocate the costs of new public facilities, in that
response on the last line at the very end it says, policy 18(B) 3, and it
should be policy 17(B) 3. And with that, that's the only change to the
petition itself.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to hold my questions
until I look up those, if you don't mind, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't understand where you were
referring to because of -- page 4 or page 3 of 112 --
MR. MUDD: No, Commissioner. He said 3 of 12. It's on page
89ofl12.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Are we talking about agenda 8A?
Okay?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It's on page 89 of 112.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Eighty-nine.
MR. WARD: Thank you. I don't have your agenda page
numbers.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And that would be page 89 and page 90.
You got it?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
MR. MUDD: Okay. And what he basically just said is under
policy 15(B)2 that's in bold, if you go to the answer portion on the
Page 101
April 11, 2006
third line where it says, is consistent with policy 16(B)2, the state
plan, it should read 15(B)2. And on the next page, on page 90, under
policy 17(B)3, again in bold, if you go down to the answer portion on
the third line, and will implement policy, and it says 18(B)3, that
should read 17(B)3.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MR. WARD: Thank you. And let me -- Mr. Arnold, the planner
who prepared this, advises me that the next policy statement, policy
17(B)4 on the same page that you were just on, in that response at the
end of the sentence, it says, consistent with policy, and it says 18(B)4,
should say 17(B)4.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Does that clear up anything for our
fellow commissioners?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I'm going to review it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Question that I have when I was
going through this is, looks like the average citizen basically -- each
homesite looks like it's charged about $55,000. And what -- over what
time frame is that?
MR. WARD: Over -- the district is capable of issuing bonds over
essentially a 30-year period. So that would be repayable over that
period of time.
Now, I will tell you, I -- usually in these projects you do not see
that full cost borne by the resident. Usually some of it's borne by the
developer. But that is the total infrastructure cost for this project, so --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And what -- so what does the citizen that
buys property here, what do they -- what part of this is -- do they take
as a burden versus what the developer puts forth?
MR. WARD: It -- in this project it could range probably
upwards to about 60 to 70 percent of that total cost number, although
statutorily the developer can issue -- or the district is able to issue
bonds that would finance the full 16 and a half million. But I suspect
it will be about 70 percent -- 60 to 70 percent of that number,
Page 102
April 11, 2006
Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. First of all, I thank you very
much for answering one of my -- my tremendous concerns about a
CDD right up front before we even had to talk about it, and that is
adding one member of the community as soon as the houses are being
sold so that they get in on somewhat of a leading edge anyway and
can represent the homeowners, and I really appreciate that, and I just
wanted to say that on the record.
MR. WARD: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If that doesn't happen, I have a
problem ever voting for anything like that.
But the second thing I had to ask was, when we talked about the
eminent domain, that part still bothers me. I mean, as long as you own
the property, I don't see why you would need eminent domain, but yet,
can you with -- can we withhold all eminent domain powers on this
CDD?
MR. WARD: I'll let your County Attorney answer that, but my
understanding of the reading of the statute -- and just so you have a
flavor of this, I have been doing this for probably 25 years now and
have worked on a couple of hundred community development districts
across the state. You cannot add to or subtract from the general power
or specific power authorizations that are given to CDDs statutorily.
Now, to answer your question on an eminent domain matter, first
of all, it can only be exercised within the boundaries of the district, not
X, outside of its boundaries.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, but that says only without the
county's consent, but by this -- by voting for this, you're giving --
we're giving you the consent. Does that mean then you have eminent
domain outside of the district?
MR. WARD: To the extent that you -- no, only within the
boundaries of the district. You never -- a community development
Page 103
April 11, 2006
district, under current law, can never exercise eminent domain power
outside of its boundaries. Even if you chose to want to give us that
consent, we still couldn't do it statutorily.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that's good to hear, okay. But
then I was wondering, if you can't exercise eminent domain powers
outside, only inside and you already own all the property, what do you
need eminent domain powers for?
MR. WARD: Generally you'll find in most community
development districts they -- in all my years and in -- I think one
district I'm aware of, and they wanted to build a park, never used an
eminent domain power, but it has to meet the test that you have to
meet when you use your eminent domain powers for a valid public
purpose. And that means you just can't go by and take somebody's
property because you want to. Remember, we don't have land use or
zoning powers anyway, so our authorized public purposes really for
eminent domain are really contained in the statutes.
And if you look at that, that's really for roads or utilities or -- and
utilities in this project are turned over to the county, so that's a non-
issue. So they're generally for parks or something of that nature. And
on essentially a PUD or a developed project such as this, you very,
very rarely find it ever used. And as I said, I've only seen it used once
in a project, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great. And just as we were saying
to the County Attorneys, can you ever withhold eminent domain
power from a CDD?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't believe so. I believe once you've
created them, they have that power and it's inherent in what they do.
Your statute has two general power provisions, one, they have
inherently, the other this board can grant them. And the eminent
domain is one they have inherently. I don't think --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's state statute?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, state statute. I don't even think if
Page 104
April 11, 2006
they said in this podium right now that we will not exercise it, that that
would be binding on them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I just -- you know, I'm
always thinking about the people that buy into it and trying to protect
them, but if it's not something that you feel is injurious to the future
residents, then fine.
MR. MUDD: But I believe Mr. Klatzkow did say that if on the--
if on the -- Jeff, if you could help me here a little bit before you sit
down. He did say if Mr. Ward basically made that statement at the
podium, that it wouldn't be binding; is that what you just said?
MR. KLATZKOW: No, I don't think it would be, no.
MR. MUDD: Okay.
MR. WARD: I'd be glad to make it, but I don't think it would be
binding either on the CDD board. But I think he's absolutely correct,
it's inherently given to a CDD pursuant to the legislative authorization
in 190 so--
,
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney, do you have anything
to add to that?
MR. PETTIT: No, I agree. This is a creature of state statute.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you. And those
corrections did answer my questions, but it poses another question.
Some CDDs are to build public infrastructure. Most CDDs that we
have seen, it builds private infrastructure. In this case, it's all private;
is that your understanding?
MR. WARD: Actually, no, Commissioner. Under the law, the
district can only build public infrastructure, and that means
infrastructure that benefits -- there's two types of benefits. One, the
general public, and that would be the public essentially outside of the
boundaries of the CDD itself where -- off-site improvements, such as
roads or utility lines, et cetera, but even if it's within the boundaries of
a district and a community development district builds that
Page 105
April 11, 2006
infrastructure, whether you live within the district or not, you would
still have access to that public infrastructure just by the fact that it is
public infrastructure and it is being financed by tax exempt municipal
bonds.
Under -- if you step forward just a minute or so and say, a
community development district, as the county, can issue tax exempt
municipal bonds, it rises to the level of, essentially, an internal
revenue service test, and that essentially means that you have to
provide public access to the general public, even including residents
outside of the boundaries of the district for that public infrastructure.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So are you telling me --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not finished yet.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Ward, I recognize you as an
expert in managing and the knowledge of CDDs, and I think it's very
important for the Board of Commissioners and the public to realize the
statement that you just made.
MR. WARD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It is, you cannot deter the
general public from using these facilities. So if you build a clubhouse,
you cannot stop me from using that clubhouse.
MR. WARD: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you build a road, you cannot
stop me from building (sic) that road, even though you have a gate up
there.
MR. WARD: That's correct, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, if you really want a public
benefit, you would connect the road off951 to Roost Road. That
would be a public benefit without any fettered gates or whatever there.
Now, I understand that you have already platted, okay. Am I
correct? The board has accepted the plat?
MR. WARD: I'm being told yes.
Page 106
April 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And Mr. Feder and I spoke
about this interconnection. Being that it's already platted, there's not
much we can do. But also, in the correction to the answer to the state
comprehensive plan, 17(B) 3, which you answered, it says, the
allocated cost of new public facilities is based upon a benefit received
by existing and future residents.
So I'm going to get back to Commissioner Halas's question,
because just this Sunday I've seen a CDD that this board created, is
asking a phenomenal amount for their housing.
So would you be willing, since you answered the question to
meet the criteria, to put into the ordinance stating to us, the Board of
Commissioners have to make this decision, how it will benefit existing
and future residents of this community?
MR. WARD: Yeah. I think that's contained -- those answers are
contained in the petition itself, so you were -- we could represent to
you that there is a benefit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I want to see some kind of credit
in the ordinance, because I don't want to see half a million dollar
houses or market rate houses when the residents are -- can go right
down the street and buy a house or a home that that infrastructure is
already built, and they're paying for it when they buy the house.
Just -- the example I want to tell you, is Treviso (phonetic) Bay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Treviso Bay, yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nine hundred ninety-five
thousand dollars for a villa. The board approved a CDD in there to
put the infrastructure in.
MR. WARD: Yes. I think I helped with that one. Wentworth
Estates CDD, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. I'm sorry, I don't see a
benefit. So if we can -- I shouldn't say we; I should say I. If I can be
assured that the residents will receive a credit for the infrastructure
Page 107
April 11, 2006
they're going to pay over time within the ordinance, I don't have a
problem with it.
MR. WARD: Commissioner, we can certainly make the
representations to you that there is a benefit to the property and the
future residents. I cannot sit here in honesty and tell you that we can
give the residents a complete credit for the full value of the
infrastructure. Remember, legislatively the purpose of this is really to
allow this kind of infrastructure to be financed and paid by future
residents. The market actually will drive the annual assessment rates,
so -- I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Ward, with all due respect, I
can't support the petition.
MR. WARD: I understand, Commissioner. I think it's important
to recognize some of the statements I said earlier, which really include
the -- certainly the covenant that we'll put on the land that the district
exists, the fact that you can move into a CD D and you will have the
assessments and what that number is before you ever sign the sales
contract. Those are really the very, very significant protections in the
statute.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's by law.
MR. WARD: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, I understand that.
MR. WARD: And I think most developers these days, including
this developer who I've worked with before, really go well beyond that
in making sure residents who are moving into their communities
completely understand how much assessments they are going to be
paying irrespective of the sales price of their home. And hopefully
they will all make that decision up front before they sign their sales
contract, or at least, I implore them to make sure they understand that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Ward, with all due respect,
answering 17(B) 3, I fail to recognize that you have demonstrated that
this is a public benefit, creation of the CDD.
Page 108
April 11, 2006
MR. WARD: I understand, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any other questions?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I hear a motion?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is there any speakers on this?
MS. FILSON: No, sir. So you can close the public hearing.
MR. KLATZKOW: May I just say one thing, sir? In addition to
what Commissioner Henning brought out, there are six factors that
this board must look at in deciding whether or not to approve the
CDD. It's on page 3 of your executive summary.
I would turn your attention to factors number 3 and number 4,
which may be of some concern, and that is, should this board consider
not approving this, they might want -- this board might want to
consider whether or not these factors also are in play in addition to
what Commissioner Henning has brought up.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: May I ask the petitioner a
question?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Ward, would you be willing
to continue this to the next meeting to address those?
MR. WARD: Yes, Commissioner . We would certainly be more
than willing to try to work with you until the -- your next commission
meeting to answer your questions. And I'd be more than happy to
meet with you to try to do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, is that okay?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure. We'll entertain a motion on it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a motion that
we continue petition 8A -- I'm not sure if there's a petition number on
it -- until the April 25th BCC meeting.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any discussion?
Page 109
April 11, 2006
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I'll call the question. All
those in favor of continuing this till April 20 --
MR. MUDD: Fifth.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- 25th. All those in favor, signify by
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Carries unanimously.
MR. WARD: And Commissioners, just so I understand, we'll try
to define better for you the benefit that accrues to a property and the
future residents from the adoption of this ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. WARD: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2006-16: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 75-11
REGULATING COMMERCIAL CARNIVALS AND
EXHIBITIONS - ADOPTED W /CHANGES
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item on the agenda is,
again, under advertised public hearings, paragraph 8, and it's 8B, and
that used to be 17C, and it's a request that the Board of County
Commissioners adopt an ordinance to amend ordinance number 75-11
regulating commercial carnivals and exhibitions.
And this item was asked to come to the regular agenda at
Page 110
April 11, 2006
Commissioner Henning's request.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, Mr. Chairman, the only
reason I pulled this, talking to the County Manager, I thought it was
important -- and I think it's a good suggestion, but I would like to just
include the historical approvals of those special events, carnivals and
exhibits because it might -- the board members might not feel that the
-- some ones that we have not recognized in the past might not be
appropriate. And I don't know if you want to give the explanation that
you gave me?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I believe what Commissioner
Henning is -- we had in our discussion basically, a first-time in Collier
County event that comes forward with an exhibition or a carnival, may
it be a one-ring circus with an elephant and zebra or whatever that
basically shows up on the agenda, you probably want to hear that the
first time.
And then if it's a reoccurring particular issue and you didn't have
problems with the first one, the liability coverages were all done, they
cleaned up after the event and we didn't have any problems with it, at
that particular juncture you would delegate the second, third, and
fourth, if it's historic in nature, would delegate that to staff to basically
review and approve. But the first time that it ever gets held, it comes
to the Board of County Commissioners for approval.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So we can't get into something like a
Lady Godiva exhibition.
MR. MUDD: Staff would not -- staff would not have that
delegated authority.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What's wrong with Lady Godiva?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You got something against
horses?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, I --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Just want to see if everybody's awake.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- I just want to ask the County
Page 111
April 11, 2006
Attorney if we can do that slight amendment to recognize the existing
ones, and the future ones come to the board like they have in the past.
MR. PETTIT: We can certainly prepare some language to
accomplish that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we just amend what is here
and add for the chairman's signature?
MR. PETTIT: We could. Are you thinking, Commissioner, in
terms of specific events that have occurred in the past or do you want
a more of a broad statement?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Board-recognized. Let's say
board-recognized previous event.
MR. PETTIT: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I think it's a good idea, if
there is assurance that the liability issues will be properly addressed by
the County Attorney before the staff approves it. If that obligation
were to be placed on staff to make sure that the County Attorney
provides a legal opinion that all the liability issues have been properly
addressed, I think it's a good idea.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I would like to see us
add to that. Suppose we get a diversion from a yearly event that's
been taking place and the same organization wants to hold it with
dramatically changing the event, that we leave it up to the County
Manager to be able to refer it back to the commission because it -- of
questionable reasons, then it could be referred back?
In other words, what we're doing is giving them authority within
the bounds that we mentioned to be able to act, but at times that
something comes up like a first-time event, like Commissioner
Henning mentioned, I think that's a great idea, or if something is
dramatically changed, like possibly the location. It might no longer be
Page 112
April 11, 2006
appropriate for where it's going to go, that the County Manager has
the right to be able to refer it back to the commission.
MR. MUDD: I don't believe at that particular juncture it would
be a historic event. It would be a first-time event again, and I think it
would --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, it would be a change from
the present make-up of that particular event. Suppose like we have a
yearly carnival that takes place out in Immokalee, and suddenly that
land that they're going to build it on is no longer available and they
move it to downtown -- or the coastal area at a place that's totally
inappropriate.
MR. MUDD: That would come back to the Board of County
Commissioners because at that particular juncture, I believe the public
has the ability or needs to have the ability to come in front of the
board and basically petition, and you can hear their concerns on that
particular carnival or exhibition permit.
We would only -- Commissioner Henning and I talked. It would
only be something that was repetitious, the same as it was last year --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. MUDD: -- that the bored had already approved, that staff
would have that ability.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we just -- we just add into
it, recognize the event in location. Commissioner Coletta, does that
satisfy your concerns?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, yeah, as long as the
County Manager can react to situations that we can't foresee sitting
here. I mean, he's going to exercise good sense. But I'm sure that if
we build it in such a way that his hands are basically tied and he has to
approve something for conditions that we can't foresee at this point in
time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think it covered it when it said
historical. Historical meant the same location also in the same type of
Page 113
April 11, 2006
venue they're going to have year after year after year.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No reason we can't add those words
though, just to clarify.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So the County Manager isn't
boxed in at some point in the distant future for the events unforeseen.
MS. MURRAY: Mr. Chairman, may I? Susan Murray, Zoning
Director. We're the entity responsible for reviewing and then
ultimately approving these.
And might I suggest -- Commissioner Coletta's suggestion, I
think is a good one, but not only could it be a locational change, but,
perhaps, they're doubling the size this year, it's in the same location,
maybe adding some land. That could impact it as well.
Might I suggest that we give at least some leeway to staff,
discretion leeway that says if significantly changed either in location
or stature or what have you, that the staff has the authority to at least
evaluate it and then determine if it needs to go to the board for
approval? Because I hate to just box us in to just a locational change
when something else could change and have -- you know, create
incompatibility or some issues.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think that would meet all the
ends we're looking for, it really would.
MS. MURRAY: I think ultimately we would be striving not to
bring it before you if it just kind of was the standard rubber stamp
every -- every year.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You bet.
MS. MURRAY: But if something changed like that, that we
would at least be able to evaluate it in our professional opinion and
say that the applicant did have to come back before you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That was exactly the point I was
going to make.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Page 114
April 11, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Susan just didn't give me the
chance.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve with those
changes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion to approve with the
changes recommended by the Board of County Commissioners, and
we have a second on that.
If there's no further discussion, I'll call the question. 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: Opposed, by like sign?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Passes unanimously.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Mr. Chairman, could I just interrupt
our meeting for a moment?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You sure may.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I don't want to put a damper on
anything, but I just got word when I got back from lunch that we lost a
good friend to our Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, the leader in
the remote control airplane group in Collier County. He's been a
leader wherever he goes, and my heart is just heavy for his family
right now. Joe Overbeck passed away last night of a massive heart
attack, and I just ask that you keep his family in your prayers. Thank
you.
Page 115
April 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you. Thank you for bringing that
forward.
Item #9F
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS CONSIDER AND PROVIDE ANY
NECESSARY DIRECTION REGARDING THE METHOD OF
ORGANIZATION OF BOARD OFFICE STAFF - COUNTY
ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A CONTRACT FOR THE OFFICE
MANAGER OF THE BCC, WHICH ALSO INCLUDES AN
ANNUAL EVALUATION TO BE DONE BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 9F, and that's
a recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners consider
and provide any necessary direction regarding the method of
organization of the board office staff. That item is Commissioner
Coletta, his -- did the executive summary.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
If I may, I'm sure the commissioners have read the three choices
we have. And first choice, if I may go through them briefly for those
in the audience to be listening -- would be to retain the present set-up
where the employees that we have are directly under the County
Manager; the second one would be to have the jurisdiction, control of
the employees, under the Board of Commissioners, very similar to
what we do with the County Attorney and the Airport Authority; and
the third one, it was suggested was personal aides to commissioners,
and each commissioner would be able to hire -- hire and fire their own
employee at will, similar to what our representatives do and, I believe,
the Lee County Commission does.
The reason for this is I think we reached the point where we
Page 116
April 11, 2006
would be best served if we had our employees under our own direct
control. There's been some instances -- although we have the best
County Manager I think Collier County has ever had, and I'm saying
that to him in a nice way so I can get concessions out of him later.
Why beat around the bush?
There have been different instances where my help has been
questioned by members of the County Manager's Office as to
directions that I have assigned them to go as to, was that under the
County Manager's guidance. I just questioned them briefly, and
generally they were cleared up, and we were able to go forward.
There has been talk about reorganizing the County Manager's --
under the County Manager so that our aides would be -- at one point
time in this particular idea -- I don't know if it took definite form or
not -- but they were talking about, when we leave office, that our aides
would be put into another part of county government.
And this left some instability in our office, unsure of what's
happening, and I would like to prevent the problem arising sometime
in the future where an aide may be pushed by someone from the
County Manager's Office or another part of the county as to exactly
what the intent of the commission is. And I'd like to have them under
our direct control.
And for that, I'd like to open up for discussion. I've already
talked to the County Attorney's Office, Mr. Pettit. If you have any
questions that you want to send his way, he'll be happy to answer
them, and of course, Sue Filson is here available to answer questions
also.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. I'd like to open -- okay.
Commissioner Henning, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'd be in favor -- and
Commissioner Coletta, tell me if you'd be in favor for the office
manager to be a contract employee, and the Board of Commissioners
score just like they do the County Attorney and County Manager, and
Page 11 7
April 11, 2006
let the office manager be responsible to the -- not to, but for the aides
in the office to manage, to delegate, so on and so forth.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think that's an excellent
suggestion. That quite -- that falls into line with what we do with the
County Manager, the County Attorney. We don't do it with the
Airport Authority, but we do select the people that serve on that board.
And we do get to hire them, the person that is the director of the
Airport Authority.
So that would be the logical way to go. And we could evaluate
the situation on a yearly basis.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Myself, I'd like to see the status quo ofa
memo that was brought down. I believe that everybody has to answer
to someone, whether you're the president of a corporation, you answer
to the board of directors or you answer to the stockholders.
And my take on this is, I'd like to see this person answer to the
Assistant County Manager and be under the guidance of the Assistant
County Manager. That's my take on it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Which person?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The person who is in charge of the
supervision of our aides.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle is --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle. I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I like the idea of doing it as
Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Coletta have suggested.
We have a -- we have a procedure for doing that for the County
Attorney and for the County Manager, and I think if it were consistent,
we could -- would solve it without having to break new ground. I
mean, we've got procedures for doing it and all that sort of thing.
And I think there -- there is a very clear separation between the
Board of County Commissioners and the employees of the County
Manager. And I can see some potential for possible violations of the
County Manager's Ordinance if we have our aides reporting to the
Page 118
April 11, 2006
Assistant County Manager but yet we're assigning them tasks. We're
specifically prohibited to do that with County Manager employees.
And it's that legal concern that I have that is likely to get us all
into a lot of trouble. And I think that if we had a contract employee
administered in the same way that we administer the County
Attorney's contract and the County Manager's contract, it would be the
easiest way and probably the cleanest way to go without getting
ourselves into a bad situation that was unintended.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So you're suggesting a contract -- having
that person as a contract --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, as a contract employee.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think that was Commissioner
Henning's suggestion actually. I'm not going to take credit for it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, we're all working
together. It's just ideas. I'm going to make a motion to direct the
County Attorney to prepare a draft contract for the office manager of
the Board of Commissioners and also an annual -- annual evaluation
for the board members to rank. That's my motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Now, does that also give us the
jurisdiction of being able to write the performance reviews for our
aides or putting information into it that we can read or see?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that would all depend on
the contract, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And if -- just to take it another
step further. I mean, I would like to have input of the contract, actual
assisting the County Attorney contract in the scoring, and then bring it
up to the board, or if the County Attorney can ask the individual board
members, do you have any other input before we bring this before the
Page 119
April 11, 2006
board to approve.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah. I'd like to have input into
executing performance review of my aide directly, and then seeing
that information upon reviewing her performance review or his
performance review, however.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that could be put in the
contract that that can be part of the office manager's duties, is to bring
that performance evaluation to the commissioners to evaluate their
aide.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I really don't think I have
anything more to add. I think Commissioner Henning has covered the
rest of it, although I'd be more than willing also to work with the
County Attorney's Office on that contract, but I'm sure that
Commissioner Henning would also do an excellent job.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So what we're discussing here is
that we're going to come up with a contract. Now, are we going to put
this out for bids then once we come up with this contract?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't -- I'm not going to go
there.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, it's something--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, this is a very
difficult and touchy situation that we're talking about. We need to set
-- we have an office manager. Presently we have an office manager.
We need to set time lines of the evaluation and then we need to --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And who's this office manager going to
directly report to? Is this going to be --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The Board of Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: As a whole or does -- who directs that
person? Would it be who's ever the chair at that time is her overseer
or the supervisor?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's --
Page 120
April 11 , 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: His supervisor.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's ask the County Attorney to
bring something back. But here's what I envision, Mr. Chairman, is
just like the County Manager, he doesn't report to one commissioner,
not the chair; he reports to all of us and he listens --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sometimes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He gives us -- yeah, sometimes
he listens. And gives us advice. And I mean, it just -- it works the
same way. Is -- if he thinks it's fair, fair and balanced, I don't think it
would be a problem. But if it's out of the ordinary, like it has been in
the past, the County Manager brings it to the commissioners, and say,
what do you think of this idea? And we say yea or nay as a board.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I just want to make sure that we have a
direct link and we have -- a direct link as far as supervision goes so
there's not an open-ended policy.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, I just totally agree with that.
Hopefully with the input of the individual board members, I'm sure
that we can come up with something that everybody would be happy
with.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So is there -- Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Just one more thing just to
dovetail on what Commissioner Henning said. Very similar to what --
the County Attorney and how it works with the County Attorney and
with the County Manager, that while no one commissioner has total
responsibility, we can sit up here at any point in time and make a
determination. Of course, when the yearly reviews come, if we're
dissatisfied with performance, you know, within the lines of the
contract, then we can make adjustments at that particular time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But I do think that the
management that we've got in place now should stay at least for a --
Page 121
April 11, 2006
the foreseeable future until we have a chance to make an evaluation of
performance against the contract that we established.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The only request that I have is
that that particular person doesn't get involved in everyday problems
with other commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I beg your pardon? I don't
understand.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, okay. Just so we don't run into
situations where we have before.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, there again, too, under
commissioner comments we can handle it at any point in time. I don't
think there's any issue that we can't discuss when the time comes up
that we can't handle it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Call a motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Anybody going to make a motion
on this?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, there is a motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's a second, too.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All right.
MR. PETTIT: May I, before you proceed? I hate to interject. I
want to be sure I've got my direction clear. I'm happy to draft a
contract, and it's my understanding, I would -- I would draft a contract
with the notion that this relationship would be like the one that now
exists between Mr. Mudd and the board or Mr. Weigel and the Board,
and then work with you, Mr. Henning, on the terms of that contract; is
that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. And also we're going
to have an evaluation sheet that we're going to prepare for the Board
of Commissioners.
MR. PETTIT: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
Page 122
April 11, 2006
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those opposed, by like sign?
Aye.
Item #9G
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING APRIL 25 AND APRIL 26,
2006 AS PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES 30TH ANNIVERSARY
RECOGNITION DAYS - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: The next item is 9G, and that is a -- that is a
proclamation. That is a proclamation for a request that the board
consider proclaiming April 25th and 26th, 2006, as payment in lieu of
taxes 30th anniversary recognition days and authorize the chairman to
sign the proclamation. And that item is at Commissioner Coletta's
request. And Commissioner Coletta, I'll read this item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think it's necessary. I
believe everybody has already read it, and I make a motion for
approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. All those in favor, signify by
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
Page 123
April 11 , 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Carries unanimously.
Item #10B
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT NO. 06-3931 FOR
ENGINEERING AND PERMITTING SERVICES TO BE
PROVIDED BY STANLEY CONSULTANTS, INC., FOR THE
FOUR-LANING OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD FROM
WILSON BOULEVARD TO DESOTO BOULEVARD, PROJECT
NO. 60040. IN THE AMOUNT OF $3.300.000.00 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that bring us to our next item,
which is item lOB, and that's a recommendation to approve
professional services agreement number 06-3931 for engineering and
permitting services to be provided by Stanley Construction, Inc., for
the four-Ianing of Golden Gate Boulevard from Wilson Boulevard to
DeSoto Boulevard, project number 60040 in the amount of
$3,300,000, and Jay Ahmad, your Director of Engineering for
Transportation, will present.
MR. AHMAD: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the
commission. For the record, my name is Jay Ahmad. I'm your
director of transportation engineering and construction management.
And I'm here this afternoon to ask for your approval for a
negotiated professional service agreement number 06-3931 with
Stanley Consultant, Inc., for the four-Ianing of Golden Gate Boulevard
from Wilson Boulevard to DeSoto.
This commission -- the Board of County Commissioners
approved an aggressive five-year program that included many roads
Page 124
April 11, 2006
for improvements to the capacity and widening, and this Golden Gate
Boulevard is on that list of the five-year program.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may, sir, I think this is
absolutely wonderful, and I wanted to make sure you got it across to
the public out there what we're talking about, and I can't tell you how
pleased I am that you're bringing this forward, and I make a motion
for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh. Let Commissioner Henning
make that second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. I appreciate all the
seconds up and down the roll.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do we have any speakers on this?
MS. FILSON: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We've already--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, we have a motion on the floor and
a second in regards to the four-Ianing of Golden Gate Boulevard from
Wilson to DeSoto Road (sic). I'm going to call the question if there's
no further discussion.
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: Opposed, like sign?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Excuse me. Excuse me for one
second. Whoa. Okay, go ahead.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hey, have we got any opposition?
(N 0 response)
Page 125
April 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I guess not. Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Where did he go to lunch today?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't know.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Wow. Okay.
MR. AHMAD: Thank you.
Item #10C
CONTRACT 06-3908 TO BRADANNA, INC. IN THE AMOUNT
OF $2,091,222.00 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE UPGRADE OF
THE SCALEHOUSE FACILITY AND SCALES AT THE NAPLES
LANDFILL AND TO APPROVE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to agenda item 10C.
It's a recommendation to award contract 06-3908 to Bradanna, Inc., in
the amount of $2,091 ,222 for the construction of the upgrade of the
scale house facility and scales at the Naples Landfill and to approve
the necessary budget amendment, project number 59005.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion to approve.
MR. MUDD: And Mr. Dan Rodriguez, Director of Solid Waste,
will present.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: One speaker.
MS. FILSON: Yeah. I have a speaker on this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And then I've got -- I've got
quite a few questions.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh, okay. Well, that's why we'll have
discussion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's what it's for.
Page 126
April 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's what it's for.
Commissioner Henning, I believe you're first on the list since
your light is on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do we really need to spend $2
million to haul a bunch of crap over --
MR. RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Dan Rodriguez, your Solid
Waste Director. Good afternoon, Commissioners.
Absolutely, Commissioner. This new facility, this new scale
house, provides the infrastructure that we need to plan for the future.
Our current scales are old. They've met their useful life. We only
have two.
One of them goes down, the traffic backs up to 951, as well as a
scale house, as you know, is rough. I can go into detail. I have a short
presentation, if you prefer.
MR. DeLONY: Let me help you, Dan.
It's just time, sir. I think that -- Jim DeLony, your Public Utilities
Administrator. Let me make sure that this is more than just a scale
house.
This is certainly going to provide some adequate facilities for us
to monitor what goes across those scales. The existing facility was
organized and started out with about 200 trucks a day. Some days we
have as much as 700. Our average is anywhere from 3- to 500.
The facility is very -- highly vulnerable to storms. And as you
may remember, this is the first facility we need up and running so we
can begin to get the debris hauled in there.
This project provides for that type of facility, provides us with
infrastructure for the enduring feature we have here called our landfill,
at the same time provides some infrastructure that doesn't exist out
there.
It's more than scales, lift stations, utilities. Some enhanced with
-- construction with regard to our monitoring of the odors of the
landfill, and other things that are within the scope of this project.
Page 127
April 11, 2006
So yes, I think we do need to spend this money, and yes, I think
this is a very necessary and very important aspect of our solid waste
management program, and that's the reason we're bringing this
forward for a recommendation to the board, sir.
So I hope I've answered your question, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Rodriguez was doing an
excellent job.
MR. DeLONY: Well, I wanted to make sure that I nailed this
one, because the fact of the matter is, is that, since I've been here,
we've really had a lot of challenges keeping this thing up and running
to meet demand, and we've worked hard the last four years to get this
thing going. Bless Mr. Rodriguez's heart, we kind of birthed this thing.
And so I just kind of wanted to make sure that we put on the
record here of the need that we have for this facility.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For a bunch of garbage?
MR. DeLONY: Well, sir, solid waste. And it's something we're
not going to stop doing.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Isn't this going to have better monitoring
effect as far as what we're putting into the landfill like medical refuge
and stuff of this nature?
MR. DeLONY: No, sir. This just strictly deals with the weights
and the ability to handle the traffic that goes through there, and the
ability to handle it, you know, in an efficient way. If we don't move
trucks quickly through that facility in an efficient way, then everybody
here, in theory, is taxed with the time it takes for those trucks to move
through that process.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commission Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Yeah, and I am a
little bit familiar with it. Like many of my fellow residents, I've been
in that line before that's gone through, and I possibly planned at the
right time. I never had a very long wait.
My concern is the fact that the scales we've got now, they don't
Page 128
April 11, 2006
work or they do work or -- I'm a little bit lost. What is the -- what do
we gain by this? How much faster does traffic move?
MR. DeLONY: First of all, we've going to move from two scales
to three. We're going to be able to add additional scales. The scales
we have out there now we've been having trouble keeping them up
and running. They've reached their service life. We've pretty much
out-tempoed them to the point now that there's time for replacement of
the scales.
We've got drainage problems with stormwater in and around
those scales. We have problems with regard just to the width of it and
the size of the trucks going through there. And this provides that
enhanced level of service that I think that is commiserate with the
demand that we have there.
And also, the last thing, I think there's a lot of security issues that
we have not addressed heretofore ensuring that their access and also
protection of that facility meets the current standards, and that's what's
incorporated in this project.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What security issues?
Somebody's going to come in and steal the stuff?
MR. DeLONY: Actually, pilfering or damage or causing harm to
that facility, particularly the scales and anything else that's out there,
will have no access control points that's to the standard of the fencing
as well as clambering and monitoring of that facility.
So I think that that's probably obligations that we need to do there
and make sure there's no harm being done in that facility, or anything
that's being done that's not in accordance with our permit.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: At present -- the present plan, I
mean, we're going to be discussing the landfill at great lengths in
October, the workshop. At present lengths, what time are we
expecting this landfill to expire at what we have, our present
schedule?
MR. DeLONY: Sir, if we're able to find the right technology fit
Page 129
April 11, 2006
and we were able to maintain the diversion program and even enhance
it, you know, our landfill life could be 50 years, 20 to 50 years
minimally. This facility is going to be required throughout that time
period.
And any plans that we make associated with either a strategy of
diversion or a strategy of using technology, we're always going to
have an intake facility to weigh those trucks and measure what exactly
we're handling there so we can properly cost it to the person that's
providing the -- bringing the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Give me just a rough
breakdown of the costs. Like, what are the scales going to cost?
MR. DeLONY: Sure, stand by.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: The scales cost about $215,000,
Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Two hundred fifteen thousand
each or both of them?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: All three of them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: All three of them.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Sure. To give you an idea of the cost--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's about 10 percent of the
total amount of money you're asking for.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's 10 percent of the total
amount of money you're asking for -- just for the scales.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Now the increased--
larger house that you're going to put there, the business building,
whatever you want to call it, the scale house.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Scale house, correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's a prefab building that will
be going into place, and that's about, what, 50-, $60,000?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: No, that's not a prefab. That would be a
Page 130
April 11, 2006
cinder block construction building.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And the cost for that would be
what, 80,000, 100-, 200-?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: No. The cost of the construction for the
building is about -- well, not for the building, but for the scale house is
$1.6 million. But you need to understand, that includes the
infrastructure, the 1,600 feet of sewer force main, a lift station --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: -- about 500 feet of water main, fire
hydrants, which are desperately needed at the landfill. Just last week
we had two fires there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: As well as communication lines, security
fiber optics, things like that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I'm sorry to have doubted
you. I mean, you restored my confidence in what you're doing.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Thank you, Commissioner. Appreciate your
support.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make a motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Already made a motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, okay. You're right.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I got a second, too.
MS. FILSON: And I still have a speaker.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: How about -- Commissioner Coyle, I
believe, is next.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, he turned my light on.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh, he did, okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We do have a public speaker
though.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning, and then we'll
get the public speaker.
Page 131
April 11, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I've just got to say, you
could dress her up, but she is what she is. Is that including
architectural features on the building, architectural features?
MR. RODRIGUEZ: It's a pretty basic cinder block building with
a tin roof.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know if you have permits
or not, whether you requested architectural features on a dump
building or not, but --
MR. RODRIGUEZ: The permit should be --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine. You answered my
question.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: -- out this week.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
MR. RODRIGUEZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm just going to -- will this be part of
gap housing in there, too?
MR. DeLONY: No, sir, not today.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just because it's east of 951.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We'll give you a discount on it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I think you've got one public
speaker.
MS. FILSON: Yes. Mr. Chairman, Kenneth Thompson.
MR. THOMPSON: I'm Kenneth Thompson. And I'm trying to
find out how Mr. DeLony needs all them scales when he can't get the
garbage off the streets.
You know, this is what I'm -- I'm bothered with this man next
door to me. It's really not his fault, but when he -- when the garbage
runs, he'll put it out at night, and I'm getting really sick of it.
I called Mrs. Barbara Opel ( sic) -- I can't say her name right --
and she does a pretty good job. But, you know, I'm getting sick and
tired of calling people.
Hell, I'm retired and I don't need to bother with nobody, and I
Page 132
April 11, 2006
really want to get away from Naples because I think it's become a
disgusting place. Really, it has.
But you wanted to know last month -- last time I was here how
much a permit costs, 37 years ago, I'll show you one. It's a cardboard
thing. It's like brand new. It cost two dollars and a half for the permit,
and if you wanted water, that was another two dollars and a half, and
if you wanted electric, that was another two dollars and a half, so you
figure that up -- I can't -- and that's what a permit cost 38 years ago.
The house I'm in, that's what it--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thirty-eight years ago?
MR. THOMPSON: Thirty-eight years ago, that's what it cost.
The house I'm in right now belongs to my wife, and the permit is as
good as this paper. It's beautiful.
And I also got a Sear's catalog for sale for 1809 . You could buy
-- you could buy a horse and two-seated surrey for $8.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Now that's cheap transportation.
MR. THOMPSON: Yeah. You could get the whiskey for an
extra 50 cents. I got that.
But that is the honest to God truth, and it's the most beautiful
catalog. I took it to Sear's down there the other day, and I wanted to
buy a turning plow for two dollars, and they were going to keep mine,
yeah.
You know, I just like to come over and talk to you. I get away
from my wife, because she's always -- I called her a minute ago, and
she told me she's cooking spaghetti. And I can't stand it. I don't want
to be home no more.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think we ought to put a -- find a place
for you as a historian. You're doing a great job here filling us in on
what took place way back when.
MR. THOMPSON: You know, I don't really know why -- why
do you weigh garbage? You know where the airport is, that's where
the garbage used to be years ago. Everybody went out there and made
Page 133
April 11, 2006
a living out of it. They did, and that's where the garbage used to be.
And I've had so much of Naples, I think I ain't ever going back
home. I'm going to get a plane on Air Tran. I fly for free anyway.
They tore me all to pieces, so why not ride for free?
But Mr. DeLony, he ought to get his garbage. You know, he
don't need no scale. Just go out there and dump it. Mash it down,
that's all you need.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Any other public speakers?
MS. FILSON: That's your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
and a second.
If there isn't any further discussion about horses and whips and
everything, and whiskey, I'll call the motion.
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: Any opposed, like sign?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion passes, unanimously.
Item #10D
FINAL MAINTENANCE ACCEPTANCE OF PLATS
GENERALL Y WITHIN RIVIERA GOLF ESTATES THAT HAVE
RECEIVED PREVIOUS PRELIMINARY ACCEPTANCE FROM
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS - APPROVED
Page 134
April 11, 2006
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 10D. It used to be 16(B) 2. And this is a recommendation
for the final maintenance acceptance of plats generally within the
Riviera Golf Estates that have received previous preliminary
acceptance from the Board of County Commissioners.
And Mr. Norman Feder, your Director for Transportation
Services, will present.
MR. FEDER: Commissioners, this is an item that we had put on
consent. Essentially what you have is, we had had preliminary
acceptance of the roadways in this area quite some years ago. There
was never any record of final acceptance.
What we're doing here today is just confirming that we've been
maintaining throughout time. The only thing that's excluded is the
landscaping that is on Charlemagne, and that landscaping does have a
separate landscape agreement, will be unaffected by this action.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right. It doesn't -- it doesn't have
anything to do with any of the people's property, just the roads, right?
MR. FEDER: Just the roads themselves. And again, this issue is
not related to anything else that's under discussion now other than the
fact that these roads have been maintained by the county and will
continue to be.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you're just going to be make it
legal. Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any further discussion?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Not hearing any, I'll call the motion. It's
on the floor by Commissioner Fiala, seconded by Commissioner
Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Coletta.
Page 135
April 11 , 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Or 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: Opposed, by like sign.
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries unanimously.
Item #11
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is paragraph 11, public comments on general topics.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I have two speakers. The first one
is Kenneth Thompson.
MS. FILSON: He'll be followed by Keith Tompkins.
MR. THOMPSON: You know, there's one other thing I wanted
to say too. I can't wait for 10F; I forget what it is.
You know, EMS, I think you need to take them horns and cut
them right off of them trucks. And they're using -- they're using them
for their own thing.
They go up and down Bayshore Drive, and they see me out in the
yard, they sit down on that stupid horn, and they're real good at it in
the middle of the night.
So I hired me a private investigator, and he's a -- he's following
them, and I'm going to give you the tapes, and I'm going to show you
just what they do. They come all the way from Golden Gate to out --
there's a 951 Publix, and they'll sit in the parking for two hours doing
Page 136
April 11, 2006
nothing, and then back and forth, eating that chicken and throwing the
bones in the parking lot, and it's the truth, so help me God.
And please tell them to cut the horns off, will you? Just the least
thing anymore. It's all the trouble I have with my health. And I fell
the other day flat face down and drove a pill bottle right through my
ribs into my heart. And I don't know, it just about killed me.
So if you don't do nothing else -- and I see back here where
they're wrecking them. But why don't you let the man that wrecked it
pay for it, and it will stop this mess, you know. It's costing the
taxpayers a lot of money.
I think you ought to take the wheel off and let him ride the wheel
until it wears him raw, and then, by gosh, he wouldn't do that again. It
costs a lot of money for these EMS trucks. You don't believe it?
And Mr. Mudd over there, I hope you don't give him no money,
because he's the guy that's going to do the giving.
And I think you're going to have to stop this craziness on
Bayshore Drive with them because I can't take it. They're running up
and down the road like they own the things, blowing the horn, the
SIrens.
You go down there to the hospital, and they're not supposed to
blow the horns -- the sirens within a block, and they'll just sit right
under the thing going off. I was down there the other day, and I went
20 feet till I see that thing ( sic). It's terrible.
And other than that, I'm going to just, I think, leave Naples. I'm
getting disgusted. But I'm going to miss you, Mr. Halas. I'm going to
tell you something, if you don't want a two dollar permit, I'll sell you
one for four. That's exactly what I got it for.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll buy it for four.
MR. TOMPKINS: God bless all of you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Keith
Tompkins.
Page 137
April 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't see Keith.
MS. FILSON: I guess he's left. That's it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time I'll -- are we finished
up pretty close with -
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. The only thing I have -- the only thing I
have to mention is tomorrow we do have the school j oint workshop
with the Board of County Commissioners. Each commissioner has
received their read-ahead.
I will let you know that they are -- they are in the process of
reviewing their school impact fee, just like we are with the draft, and
they're going through that process.
I don't believe that their -- that their commission members are
prepared to discuss that particular thing at length. I don't believe
they're prepared to discuss it at all, as they're doing that review. They
still have to be briefed by their staff and the consultant that we hired to
do that impact fee.
And I would ask the board, tomorrow, if you have some
comments, to try to keep them short. They're a little uncomfortable
with that particular thing going right now because it's being vetted.
It's still got to go to our DSAC, still has to go to our productivity
committee, still has to go in front of the school board for their
recommendation, and then all that stuff comes back to you, okay, for
you to make the final decision about the school impact fee.
So I just ask you if -- tomorrow, if that would be an item that you
would try to avoid a little bit, and just -- you might want to make
mention that you'll be working on it here over the next month or so as
they go through that process.
Page 138
April 11, 2006
As you know, it's a pretty significant increase. So some folks
really did get into it and were really talking to the -- our particular,
Tindale Oliver, who did -- who did the study, to get into the fact and
figures. And I know the productivity subcommittee is really into this
already. Ms. Vasey's already had a series of questions and already
had those answered. Still going through that process.
That's all I have, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do we -- on that same line, can we get
into the discussions -- are we going to be able to discuss who has the
responsibility for roads around the schools and sidewalks?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I believe that has to do with
concurrency. And who -- and who does it and how you get it laid out
and the agreements that need to transpire, I believe that's all -- I
believe that's all part of it.
I believe there is a -- there is a portion of how you fund that that's
probably outside someplace in between no man's land. Norman's got
his piece that he does for roads and sidewalks and whatnot, and the
school's got their part about what happens to their compound. And the
stuff that leads to a new facility is kind of an issue, has been over a
series of years, as we tried to discuss that. I believe that's well within
bounds, sir, as you talk about currency.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, great.
Okay. County Attorney?
MR. PETTIT: Mr. Chairman, two quick items. First, there's a
meeting Monday night of the board concerning the Vanderbilt Beach
extension proj ect, and I'm going to request that you, under section
236B declare or ask that to be deemed a special meeting of the Board
of County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do you need a vote on that?
MR. PETTIT: I can have a vote of three commissioners or I can
have you declare it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'll declare it then. It's a special
Page 139
April 11, 2006
meeting and it's not considered a workshop but it's considered a
special meeting. We hope to be able to finalize what we need to
address if at all possible.
MR. PETTIT: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: And just to assure you, that I think it's been
known for some time that the board might act at that meeting to elect a
route, so I don't think this is unusual.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Make sure that's clear.
MR. PETTIT: Secondly, at the last meeting the County Manager
brought forward an item to get some differences in his benefit package
and some enhancements. And I've spoken with the HR director, and
there was some concern on her part. It was not clear that that was
extended to employees in the County Attorney Office, and I'm
requesting that the board clarify whether it was to be extended to the
employees in the County Attorney Office.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is there any discussion from the board
members that are present here?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, while we're on that particular item,
make sure you extend it to your new contract employee that's going to
transpire, the people that work for you, as you go through it. So let's
not have to do this twice. There's the County Attorney's Office and
Mrs. Filson's agency that need to have that on it unless Ms. -- I might
be speaking out of turn, but I don't think I am.
MR. PETTIT: Well, I think that's a good point. I think what--
you can make it that once a contract is entered into, that those
employees would get those same benefits, I guess, retroactive to April
1 when they begin for other employees.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is there any discussion from the
board members?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I have approval on my -- nods of
Page 140
April 11, 2006
heads here to give direction to the county -- or to the County Manager
or County Attorney?
MR. MUDD: Sir, could we have a motion on that, please, just to
clear it up just a tad better than that?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is anybody so inclined to make a
motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You make it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'll make the motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion's been made and
seconded to make sure that these benefits are passed on not only to the
County Manager's staff, but to the County Attorney and to the staff up
here and the BCC.
MR. PETTIT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'll call the question, if there's no
further discussion.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: (Absent)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Those opposed, by like sign?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It passes unanimously with the people
that are present at the present time.
Can we go back to public input? I think one individual finally
arrived here.
MS. FILSON: Keith Tompkins.
MR. TOMPKINS: Thank you very much. I'm sorry I'm tardy.
For the record, Keith Tompkins. I'm the property manager for Eagle
Creek Golf and Country Club.
Page 141
April 11, 2006
Last week we attended -- myself and members of Eagle Creek
Golf and Country Club attended a public hearing on the road widening
project of951, which is being paid for and conducted by Wal-Mart, as
part of the Wal-Mart developer contribution agreement and others.
And we had some concerns about that.
The public hearing was held last Tuesday. The deadline for
submitting comments to the FDOT regarding input on the project is
this Friday.
Unfortunately some of the design elements of the road widening
project are very troubling to Eagle Creek and I think ought to be
troubling to the county in general.
And I am here today to discuss very briefly a couple of those
issues and ask for your assistance, if we could have a little bit of time
to work through these issues.
Number one, the road widening calls for a dramatic increase in
the stormwater swales that run alongside 951. It's more than doubling
the capacity. In so doing, they will disturb all the way up to the
property line of Eagle Creek, which is very thickly and densely
planted at this point.
It's done that way now because the right-of-way line was moved
through the years. We didn't plant the right-of-way. The right-of-way
line got moved after the PUD was approved earlier.
In so doing, it's going to destroy a very thick and luscious buffer,
which I think would be the envy of the county if they were mandating
a new proj ect.
Number two, in doing the drainage ditch that way, it's going to
hold a lot of water. The county is also mandating sidewalks on both
sides of 951; therefore, it requires elevated boardwalks, wooden
boardwalks with handrails to basically sit in this ditch outside of Eagle
Creek, which really is expensive, and, quite frankly, a very inefficient
way to do that.
Third, there are indications that Eagle Creek failed -- that the
Page 142
April 11, 2006
noise readings that were taken by the sound engineer, we did fail the
sound test for out-years of the increase in traffic.
They also failed on the other side of 951. They did mandate --
FDOT did mandate that Holiday Manor have a wall installed in front
of them, so part of the project is including a wall.
We would like similar consideration because of noise. We had
fewer people impacted by it because of the density, so therefore, they
weren't mandating a wall on our side of 951. We would like that
looked at.
To conclude, what I am simply asking is that we pause before our
county staff gives approval to FDOT, that it be reconsidered a little bit
on engineering. Obviously, what's going to be there is going to be
there.
We've worked well with Wal-Mart, but we simply -- we think
that this is not something the county would want. You've inherited a
lot of bad design from the past. This seems to be a lot of bad design,
and ones that, I think, Collier County has a chance to effect something
right now. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do we have any comments from
transportation director?
MR. FEDER: Commissioners, I'll just throw out a couple of
things and may stand to be corrected if that's necessary.
First of all, this is a project that is being done and permitted
predominantly through Florida DOT, since the right-of-way is
predominantly with DOT's area.
But having said that, the rural cross-section with the swales that
were mentioned, I guess the question I'd have is whether or not the
stormwater might be taken on by adjacent development.
The feeling was, it was not the opportunity to treat the water in
any other fashion and, therefore, they went to the rural cross-section to
stay within existing permitting. To have gone outside of that requires
extensive permitting, and this is being handled pretty much as an
Page 143
April 11, 2006
intersection proj ect by its nature.
Secondly, the vegetation is, indeed, unfortunate. You've got
vegetation out in front of the golf course. We concur, we'd rather have
an urban cross-section, if we could have had that, if the stormwater
could have been addressed.
But I believe it's 40 feet that were dedicated when the
development was put in place. That vegetation that was out there, and
even possibly added to over time, we're part of the state's 200 feet of
right-of-way, and, unfortunately, got reutilized in this project.
And it wasn't a matter of taking of right-of-way, but rather
utilizing that right-of-way, which unfortunately took it out of
vegetation.
The last thing -- and again, this one I particularly would ask to be
corrected on, if necessary, is, it's our understanding that there was
some funding provided before it was realized that maybe this
vegetation be removed by the developer for extensive landscaping in
lieu of a sound wall, that that was received by the community mostly
for the residential area more than the golf course, I think.
And then, of course, they found that in the design, some of that
vegetation which was in state right-of-way was being removed for
retention. So I think that puts those issues in perspective.
We would like to have an urban cross-section, but without the
availability to treat the stormwater -- and the additional permit time
required took it out of what the state is working with as a major
intersection project and into a very different type of project, is why
they're doing it in that way.
But we do concur, we would have rather had an urban
cross-section ideally, but I don't think we're facing that right now.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a question. When you talk about
the vegetation and the right-of-way, was this similar to what I
experienced in Wilkshire Lakes area?
MR. FEDER: Yes, it is.
Page 144
April 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What did you experience?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: What I experienced is that the developer
took it on themselves after they gave us the right-of-way to add
additional vegetation, so that as people moved in, they assumed that
that vegetation actually belonged to them.
And then when we were in the process of widening Vanderbilt
Beach Road, they realized that we were taking some of their buffer or
their vegetation, and they didn't realize that the developer had tried to
enhance his property using county land that was given to us as a
right-of-way to do that particular enhancement, and it caused quite
some senous concerns.
But I think we -- we worked through the process, and it ended up
that they realized that the developer had basically short-changed them
in regards to how much property they really had.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I had -- oh--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Did you want to -- did you
want to respond?
MR. TOMPKINS: I was going to answer him, but go ahead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just had -- we were talking about
the drainage. And one of the comments I heard that evening also was
from the people in Holiday Manor. Now, you have to understand, the
Holiday Manor is only two feet above sea level, which is a lot lower
than the other side of the street.
They're going to be building up everything around them. The
Wal-Mart has to be built up in order to even build there. And they're
very, very concerned.
Right now the drainage is improper as it is and they flood.
They're very, very worried about when they have improved drainage
what's going to happen to them. And apparently there's no provision
for the other side. Something of -- they were requesting, asking,
Page 145
April 11, 2006
pleading, for some kind of a structure that will move the water out and
into Henderson Creek rather than into their mobile home park. And I
don't know if --
MR. FEDER: Commissioner, the development itself is required
to retain on site. The roadway project maintains basically historical
flows and what it creates. It will not exasperate, in any way, Holiday
Manor. It will not solve, in any way, the flooding in Holiday Manor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are they going to be putting
culverts under the road to move the stuff that's over in Eagle Creek
that's in front of Eagle Creek, the drainage? Are they going to move
that water over?
MR. FEDER: My understanding is they're handling the swale.
What has come to them, historically, they'll still have to handle, but
they'll be handling just the roadway, and that's why the wider swale to
address that.
But, again, the area in the mobile home park, we did look at the
roadway entrance there. It's done pretty well, but unfortunately the
streets coming down into the mobile home area are even lower, and it
will not exasperate the situation; in other words, it won't bring more
stormwater to them, but it will not resolve their issue. I just want to
make sure you know that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, okay. Then my question is,
what happens if it does bring more water? I mean, you know,
everybody says --
MR. FEDER: If they can show that, then the roadway project
needs to be modified, and all of the calculations are that it retains it on
site. That's required by permitting. And conversely, if, in fact, the
development project is allowing it off site rather than retaining on site,
that would have to be addressed as well.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And can we hold up any -- any final
approvals of anything if they are, indeed --
MR. FEDER: Of course, then you could require it to be
Page 146
April 11, 2006
addressed as a code issue, like with the development later.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Secondly, about the wooden
boardwalks. We've experienced in the parks department that wooden
boardwalks splinter and deteriorate rather quickly. Is there something
that we can implore them to build that would use a material that would
last a while?
MR. FEDER: First of all, it's my understanding -- and you were
at that meeting -- that we're trying to pull away from that. As the
development goes in further to the north of them, there will be
sufficient right-of-way not to have to put the wooden boardwalk in.
So I think the funding for the boardwalk, which is fairly
expensive, may be provided without the sidewalk until that other
development comes forward.
I know my own road and bridge crews are not excited about
maintaining a wooden boardwalk. Although I will tell you, they
worked pretty well in Lee County along Daniels Parkway and other
places where they've had them in and they've worked well.
So I will defer. You were at that meeting, I was not,
Commissioner. But I think there was some discussion in maybe not
moving on the wooden boardwalk right away. And I don't want to
mislead you, but that's somewhat of what I was understanding.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm so worried about shortcuts.
They want to get this road built quickly, but I'm afraid of shortcuts,
and then the people that will suffer the consequences are those people
that are living in Eagle Creek, Holiday Manor, all of that surrounding
area. And I'm very concerned about that, and I feel like I'm being
steamrolled.
And the last thing, about the wall and the noise study. It was
interesting that night, I asked the question, they were saying they took
a noise study of that area and that Eagle Creek didn't warrant it. And I
said, well, why don't you take the noise study where the Super Wal-
Mart exists now? And they said something about there was too much
Page 147
April 11 , 2006
traffic and noise there. I said, then you're comparing apples to apples.
Wouldn't you want to do that? But they didn't want to do that.
MR. FEDER: They do not take on existing noises. It's done on a
modeling basis. They do take the volumes. They take elevations,
they take distances, the number of receptors. That's why Holiday
Manor -- because in a mobile home park, you have so many receptors
close to each other that it helps meet the standard. That doesn't mean
that the noise volume is less in this area.
And so when we do the noise study, rather than creating a wall to
City of Collier (sic), we're using the federal standard, and we are
where it's appropriate providing the noise provisions. The state has
done the same in this case.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So rather than take the noise study
where we can see it's actually -- what the actual sound is, they're not
going to do that?
MR. FEDER: They are able to model the issue. And what
they're saying to you, you've got different conditions there, so you're
just taking a noise study there rather than actually modeling the exact
conditions that you'll have in the future at this site. And so that's the
difference.
You're saying if it's a -- if it's a like development anywhere in the
county it's going to have the same level of noise, and that's what
they're trying to say to you, I think.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So you -- yeah.
MR. TOMPKINS: Just 30 seconds and we're through. But what
I'm asking here basically is, the issue with the sidewalk and the swale,
the very, very deep swale, that the -- why wouldn't the county go
ahead and mandate that it be a buried culvert so that you would have
-- we'd pipe the water around?
You have an opportunity not to have open drainage ditches
alongside 951 where people are going 45 and 50 miles an hour. Why
wouldn't you go ahead and mandate from a county perspective, and
Page 148
April 11, 2006
then it would give you a flat surface for a walkway, and it would
likely lead to less interruption of the buffer.
I understand it's a county right-of-way. That's not the dispute. If
there's a way to make Wal-Mart engineer it so that it preserves the
buffer, then we ought to try to do that rather than -- that was my
suggestion.
MR. FEDER: And again, the issue on that is, we're not allowed
usually to culvert in a swale because the treatment aspect is being
open to sunlight and to air, and so you don't get the treatment. You
get conveyance, but you do not get water quality treatment when you
put it into a situation. And that's a permitting requirement.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think what needs to be done is maybe,
Commissioner, you need to work with the people from Wal-Mart and
with the group, citizen's group, and I think you could probably come
up with some compromises.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Couldn't that night, so --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I think it's something that's an
ongoing process. I know on the issues that I ran into in my district,
that I've worked with homeowner groups and I've worked with the
developers, and lots of times we come to a good consensus. And I
think that's a good start.
MR. BOLF: Commissioner, if I might, I'm here on behalf of
Wal-Mart.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sir, I'm sorry. Are you signed up as a
public speaker?
MR. BOLF: No, sir. We didn't know this was going to come up.
We anticipated it would not.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, this was just public comment, sir,
so --
MR. BOLF: Then on behalf ofWal-Mart, we did have some
comments we'd like to share, but I understand that we'll have to do
that at a different time.
Page 149
April 11 , 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, wait a minute. Maybe we
could resolve this issue right now. I mean, you've got -- you've got the
parties at the table. Let's hear what the gentleman has to say.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I would like you to have -- sign a
speaker slip though, would you, please?
MR. BOLF: Certainly.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think we have a protocol to follow
here, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, I understand.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I appreciate it.
MR. BOLF: Good afternoon. My name is Tom Bolfwith the
law firm of Ruden McClosky on behalf ofWal-Mart.
I was deeply involved in the developer's contribution agreement
that has us building this road on behalf of the county.
And we were imposed fairly tight restrictions in terms of time,
that we could not start before April 1 and we had to be finished by
October 31. This agreement was negotiated last year, signed in June.
So this hasn't been steamrolled. This is -- now we're 10 months
after the agreement and easily a year more after we started this. So it
has been a steady process. We have worked closely with the
adjoining homeowners' association.
We actually negotiated with them to try to deal with the
stormwater at one point in time and were unsuccessful in that.
I would just ask that it be -- you all required that we not open for
business until this is done. And so we can't, on the one hand, have
restrictions put in our way and then, on the other hand, say, but you
can't -- you can't be rewarded at the end of the day and open up for
business. But we can work with them. We have no problems sitting
down chatting with them, but we are under a very tight time frame
that's been imposed on us, and we can't have it both ways.
Page 150
April 11, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, sure we can.
MR. BOLF: If you want to be unreasonable, but I think it would
be unreasonable to tell us we have to finish.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's a matter of opinion, sir.
But what about the noise study for Eagle Creek?
MR. BOLF: With -- the Department of Transportation and the
county have their regulations and how it goes and how that is
conducted. I understand fully what Mr. Feder was saying. You do it
based on the existing noise out there, and then you compare to after
the road is completed what the noise will be. And their studies show
that it did not warrant a noise wall.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But who's going to pick up the
tab, since you're moving the structure closer to Eagle Creek -- Keith, if
that's what I'm understanding. You're putting a road closer to Eagle
Creek -- is, who's going to bear the cost on those outer years when it
does reach the level of impacts to Eagle Creek residents where you
have to do some kind of noise abatement?
MR. BOLF: I don't know if that's going to be the case, if that, in
fact, will be the situation. And this is a public right-of-way, a public
road that's -- it's a -- it is owned by the public. You know, it's built by
us, and we have provided it for you now. But what happens in 10 or
20 years from now? It's going to be a dedicated public road. And like
any other road in the community that gets busier over time, the
county, or in this case the Department of Transportation, whoever is
going to have jurisdiction over it, will have those decisions to make,
but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It wouldn't have been a problem
if the road wasn't moved closer to the community, correct?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Did you buy right-of-way?
MR. BOLF: This is existing right-of-way.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Did you buy right-of-way, or is this the
existing right-of-way of the road?
Page 151
April 11, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's existing right-of-way, but
you're putting the surface closer to the community.
MR. BOLF: I'll tell you, as a condemnation attorney, that is a
very common occurrence, and that's something those homeowners
should have been compensated for at the time that this happened. This
was a reality that's out there.
But having said that, there's a lot of roads that get expanded, in
Collier County or elsewhere. You don't build a noise wall just because
a road's being expanded.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
MR. BOLF: There are specific regulations about it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You do it under the criteria of
the noise study.
MR. BOLF: Right, right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If it shows that the noise
abatement -- I mean, it's going to need noise abatement in the future,
sometimes we build that noise abatement.
MR. BOLF: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So maybe we ought to get --
give some direction on this, because I can see there's nothing going to
move here on this side.
MR. BOLF: Well, I think this is something that we first heard
about last week. We didn't know anything was going to come up. I
was asked to appear just to kind of monitor, and when I heard
something coming up, I'm letting you know of what our concerns are.
And I think you have to give appropriate notice and et cetera.
But we have been dealing very closely with the transportation
department, obviously with the Department of Trans -- with all the
regulatory agencies and the local homeowners to address their
concerns. And this is not a process that started last week. It's a
process that started over a year ago.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Our meeting is advertised, and
Page 152
April 11 , 2006
we handle the public's business, and a member of the public addressed
the board.
MR. BOLF: Right. And so -- and if this is a concern, this is a
concern that should have come up long ago in the process as opposed
to when we, literally, are about to start the road project.
And so we're under the time constraint of completing it by a
specified deadline that has been imposed upon us and on further
restrictions we can't open for business. And we'll work with you all
you want, but we should be able to continue on and also operate our
business at the same time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Let me -- maybe I can shed a little light.
I had a very similar situation like this in the widening of Vanderbilt
Beach Road. And as I said, what took place is that the developer
originally built into the right-of-way.
And, of course, when the county came back to take that
right-of-way because it was given to them in the PUD agreement,
what took place is that we did a sound wall study and ran into some
situations very similar to this, that it didn't meet the criteria of FDOT
as far as sound requirements.
And so what the Department of Transportation did is gave those
people the option of saying, as we put in curbing or whatever else, that
we'll give you the benefit of buying concrete to build your own sound
wall if you so desire, but you don't meet the sound criteria. And so
that's where they're at at this point in time. They're building an MSTU
for that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And that isn't what I
heard. That clearly isn't what I heard. It's apples and oranges. And I
think Commissioner Fiala is only trying to protect her residents in
having a roughshod over big business.
So I'm going to support Commissioner Fiala in that, and whether
we can get a report by the next meeting or --
MR. FEDER: One item that I did mention -- and I'll get back to
Page 153
April 11, 2006
your attention, since I have the two parties here that maybe can shed
light on this. I just called Don Scott in the break. And it's my
understanding that there was already monies provided to this
development for storm -- for noise barrier assistance, and they
accepted that money and now the question is that they want to storm --
a sound barrier wall built.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. FEDER: And maybe that can be confirmed or
disconfirmed.
MR. TOMPKINS: Want me to address that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. TOMPKINS: We have not accepted money. We have not--
to this minute we have not accepted money. We negotiated at length
over this kind of a thing. Nowhere were we ever told that the sound
test was going to fail that decibel threshold for out-years on traffic, at
no point were we aware that our buffer was going to be decimated by
stormwater issues. None of those issues came up.
We have not seen money at this point, and we simply are asking
that Collier County impose what you can to have it properly
engineered to the most advantageous way for the people of Collier
County. That's really all I'm asking. We're not trying to stop anybody.
I understand the considerations about the road.
The people of Eagle Creek have been there a long time, and
they've paid handsomely in taxes through the years. They simply
would like it thought out and well thought out.
And, yes, this has been going on a long time, but with all due
report to Don Scott, I mean, I think he was caught off guard by this a
little bit. It came about very quickly. He had not seen the plans until
fairly recently, and the hearing came about very quickly.
For one of the two weeks that the plans were available for public
viewing and comment, Edison Community College was closed for
spring break. I mean, it really got very compressed. I'm not
Page 154
April 11, 2006
grandstanding here. I don't think we really had a legitimate chance to
really think all this out. And oh, by the way, Friday's the deadline, and
it's Good Friday.
I mean, all I'm asking is that we consider a few of these issues to
see if we can mitigate these. And in talking to the sound engineer
where they -- where the sound tests have actually failed, that was news
to all of us on Thursday night.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'd really like to see the commissioner of
that district, along with the director of transportation or that
transportation group, along with the citizens and along with W aI-Mart,
I think if they'd get together, I think we could get a lot of this hashed
out, especially --
MR. FEDER: I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- we've got a short time frame, and I
think that needs to be addressed.
MR. FEDER: We will also take a look in more detail about the
noise barrier issues.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I want to know when the
study was taken and what month of the year.
MR. FEDER: Well, actually it's a modeling process, but we will
get all that data, and we'll research it in great detail.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. I think your suggestion's a
good one. I mean, this discussion is pointless, quite frankly. I mean,
it's not an advertised public hearing. We don't have all the people here
to answer the questions. We can't make a decision here today, so what
are we doing?
MR. FEDER: We will take a look at it and bring it back to you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think the chairman's idea's a good
one.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
I think we left off with the County Attorney. Do you have
Page 155
April 11, 2006
anything else to bring forward?
MR. PETTIT: Nothing else, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'll start with Commissioner
Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for Golden Gate
Boulevard.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I -- is everybody tuned up here? I
hope so, because we're going to sing Happy Birthday to
Commissioner Fiala.
(Happy Birthday was sung in unison)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And many more.
(Applause)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's tough getting to be 68, you know
that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sixty-eight? I thought you were 48.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, right.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't have anything more to bring.
And I just want to thank everybody here today. Hopefully we'll get
out of here -- I'll end it right there.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Yes. I wanted to thank
Kendra's Aunt Ruth, who's 85 years old, for baking us a cake today.
That was so sweet of her.
I wanted to know how David is doing.
MR. PETTIT: David is doing very well. In fact, he is
anticipating being in the office Thursday. So he's recuperated -- I
think, recuperating ahead of schedule, so things are going well.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's good. I keep thinking of him.
I wanted to just put this on the table, but I know that our County
Manager's already working on this. But we had talked at the last
Page 156
April 11, 2006
board meeting about maybe a hearing officer to approve variances,
and I wanted to throw on the table -- I've checked with our County
Attorney's Office, that possibly just the planning commission could be
responsible for doing that. We wouldn't have to spend any extra
dollars to hire anybody, and our Planning Commission could go
through that, and they could make the final decision.
And when I talked to the County Manager, he said that he would
be looking into that, and that's part of his report. But I just wanted to
let you know that I'm doing that, being that I can't tell anybody that
other than when we're sitting at a meeting.
And then the last thing is, I want to throw on the table -- not for
any discussion today -- but there's a Riviera Golf Course that might be
available for sale sometime in the future, and maybe if the price gets
low enough, we might want to look at it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It would be a good site for
affordable housing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We did that already.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, did we?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, we didn't. I went through
all the records. We did not make a decision on that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, you're right.
That's all.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ifwe can buy the golf course cheap, that
would be great, then we could have a golf course here, and for Collier
County.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Public.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But it's got to be cheap, yeah, and I'm
cheap.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How about free? Because free
works.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You can't sell it for anything else, so
maybe it would be --
Page 157
April 11, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do you have anything else,
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you for the lovely song.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You're welcome, happy birthday, many,
many more.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Would it be possible if the
board can get an update on some of the road projects that are delayed
because of hurricanes or other reasons? I mean -- not now, maybe just
in an email or something of -- because I know we have some delays
there, and we need to communicate that stuff to our public. Thank
you.
Good meeting, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I got one question to follow up on that.
Did we get those telephone poles, those electric line poles out of the
roadway on Immokalee?
MR. FEDER: Yes, we have.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good. FP&L is -- I should have asked
Grover when he was here earlier today. Have we got the poles -- how's
that proj ect coming?
MR. FEDER: That project is starting to move now. It is one of
those that was delayed with the hurricane and with the follow-up of
the utilities.
Weare providing our weekly reports to everybody on all the
projects, as well as the website. And I will get a memo out on status
of all of (sic) -- you want to view as a follow-up. But we are weekly
sending you our activity reports and projects, as well as having them
on website. And as I said, I'll get you some more information.
But we're starting to move on -- FP&L's starting to be much more
Page 158
April 11, 2006
responsible, and appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. How about Vanderbilt Beach
Road?
MR. FEDER: Same situation. They seem to be moving well on
phases two and three. I would like them to get done on one. They
have a box culvert there at the airport that they're working on now,
and I think they're waiting for rain not to pave on a section, but
hopefully they'll get that section paved before the rain comes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Manager, have you got
something to add?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I just have one thing. We will get
a written report out, because I know a lot of you have emails that you
send to constituents and -- for road projects. I'll make sure that you've
got that in writing, and we'll get that done.
With the board's permission, I'd like to have the county auditor
come to the next meeting and give you an update of where we sit on
the county audit, the annual audit.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. I think it's very important. That
has an effect on our bonds, doesn't it?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And you need to know where we sit on
this thing.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Let's do that. Any other business to be
brought forth?
(N 0 response)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ifnot, we are adjourned.
***** Commissioner Fiala moved, seconded by Commissioner
Coyle and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted * * * * *
Item #16A1
Page 159
April 11, 2006
RESOLUTION 2006-84: DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE
COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE FOR THE PURPOSE
OF SIGNING, FOR COLLIER COUNTY AS GRANTEE,
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR)
CONSERVATION EASEMENTS - TO PROVIDE EXPLICIT
AUTHORITY TO ACCOMPLISH A MINISTERIAL OR
ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION IN THE TDR SEVERANCE
PROCESS
Item #16A2
AN INTERIM MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE SCHOOL
BOARD-SECTION 24 PROPERTY UNDER THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM -
TO SUPPORT APPROPRIATE PUBLIC ACCESS AT A COST OF
45.700.00 FOR THE FIRST TWO YEARS
Item #16A3
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "SABAL BAY
COMMERCIAL PLAT, PHASE THREE", APPROVAL OF THE
STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE
PERFORMANCE SECURITY - WI STIPULATIONS
Item #16A4
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "HERITAGE BAY, PHASE
TWO-A", APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - WI STIPULATIONS
Page 160
April 11 , 2006
Item # 16A5
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES. UNIT 48 TRACT 77 REPLA T"
Item #16A6
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "REFLECTION LAKES AT
NAPLES, PHASE 2C, APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - WI STIPULATIONS
Item #16A7
RECORDING OF THE FINAL PLAT OF "REFLECTION LAKES
AT NAPLES, PHASE 2D, APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD
FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A8
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "REFLECTION LAKES@
NAPLES, PHASE 3E, APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - WI STIPULATIONS
Item #16A9
RFP #06-3906, "RECORDS MANAGEMENT SERVICES"
Page 161
April 11, 2006
AWARDED TO VITAL RECORDS CONTROL, LLC - FORAN
ANNUAL BUDGET OF $50.000.00
Item #16B1
LANDSCAPE, SIDEWALK, AND SW ALE MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN IL REGALO DEVELOPMENT AND
COLLIER COUNTY FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO ORANGE
BLOSSOM AND YARBERRY LANE - EXPENSES
ASSOCIATED WITH IMPROVEMENTS AND ONGOING
MAINTENANCE IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
DEVELOPER AND HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION
Item #16B2 - Moved to Item #10D
Item #16B3
PURCHASE ONE (1) SEVENTY-ONE (71) PASSENGER BUS
FROM RIVERS BUS SALES, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF
$63,793.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CONTRACT #2005-15 - TO
TRANSPORT THE INMATE WORK FORCE TO AND FROM
THE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Item #16B4
BID #05/06-13 : APPROVAL OF THE PIGGYBACKING OF THE
CITY OF WEST PALM FOR THE PURCHASE OF A TRUCK
MOUNTED STORMISEWER CLEANING MACHINE FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL PRODUCTS OF FLORIDA IN THE
AMOUNT OF $249,726.00 - TO ENHANCE THE DAILY REPAIR
AND MAINTENANCE ON COUNTY ROADWAYS
Page 162
April 11, 2006
Item #16B5
DECLARATION SETTING ASIDE COUNTY-OWNED LANDS
FOR ROAD RIGHT -OF- WAY, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
FACILITIES WITH A FISCAL IMPACT OF $18.50 - LOCATED
ACROSS FROM THE ENTRANCE TO CALUSA PARK
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Item #16C1
REMOVAL OF CERTAIN ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE FROM
THE PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION, UTILITY BILLING SUB-
LEDGER IN THE AMOUNT OF $259,623.01 AND TO WRITE
OFF PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION MISCELLANEOUS
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $137,762.05-
BALANCES FROM INACTIVE ACCOUNTS FROM 1978 TO
2003
Item # 16C2
RFP 06-3887: AWARDING ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR WELL-
DRILLING, TESTING, AND MAINTENANCE CONTRACTING
SERVICES TO (10) FIRMS - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16C3
RESOLUTION 2006-85: FINAL APPROVAL AUTHORIZING
THE SUBMISSION OF A STATE REVOLVING FUND LOW-
INTEREST CONSTRUCTION LOAN APPLICATION AND
AUTHORIZING THE LOAN AGREEMENT TO THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, AND
Page 163
April 11, 2006
APPROVING A CHANGE ORDER TO PURCHASE ORDER
4500045416 IN THE AMOUNT OF $86,240.00 TO ANGIE
BREWER & ASSOCIATES L.C. FOR THE RECLAIMED
WATER AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY SYSTEM
PROJECT,_74030 - TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC WATER
SUPPLY BY INCREASING AVAILABILITY OF RECLAIMED
WATER TO BE USED FOR IRRIGATION
Item #16C4
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $275,000.00 FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY
WASTE-SEWER DISTRICT OPERATING FUND (408) RESERVE
FOR CONTINGENCIES TO COVER UNANTICIPATED
OPERATING EXPENSES IN THE IRRIGATION QUALITY
(REUSE) COST CENTER - EXPENDITURES HAVE EXCEEDED
FY2006 BUDGET IN THE FIRST THREE MONTHS OF THIS
YEAR DUE TO A SERIES OF UNANTICIPATED SYSTEM
FAILURES
Item #16D1
APPROVING A TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
CATEGORY A GRANT APPLICATION IN THE AMOUNT OF
$79,848.00 AND A WORK ORDER TO THE CHRIS-TEL
COMPANY FOR $57,848.00 FOR BOARDWALK REPAIRS AT
TIGERTAIL BEACH - TO KEEP PUBLIC BEACH PARKS IN
SAFE AND ATTRACTIVE WORKING CONDITION
Item #16D2
EXTENSION TO THE GRACE PERIOD FOR THE RESIDENCY
Page 164
April 11, 2006
REQUIREMENT FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER
SUPERVISOR AT THE GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER
- TO ALLOW SUPERVISOR TO SECURE RESIDENCY BY
AUGUST 1.2006
Item #16D3
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING ADDITIONAL
REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,500.00 AND APPROVAL
OF A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE CLIENT
ASSISTANCE BUDGET - REIMBURSEMENT FROM A SOCIAL
SERVICES CLIENT WHO RECEIVED A LEGAL SETTLEMENT
Item #16D4
ACCEPTANCE OF DONATED FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$2,000.00 AND APPROVAL OF A BUDGET AMENDMENT
RECOGNIZING REVENUE AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR
THE GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER - DONATION
FROM THE COOL CRUISERS OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA
VOLUNTEER GROUP
Item #16E1
UPDATE ON THE SALE AND TRANSFER OF ITEMS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE COUNTY SURPLUS AUCTION HELD
ON MARCH 11,2006, RESULTING IN $561,757.90 IN GROSS
REVENUES - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 16E2
STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS AND CHANGES TO
Page 165
April 11, 2006
WORK ORDERS TO BOARD-APPROVED CONTRACTS -
ALLOWING THE BOARD TO OVERSEE THE EXECUTION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES AND TO PROMOTE
ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE USE OF STAFF AUTHORITY FOR
THE PERIOD OF 2/17/06 THROUGH 3/16/06
Item # 16E3
RE-ASSIGNING CONTRACT NO. 01-3276, RECORDS
MANAGEMENT SERVICES FROM DOCUMENT
MANAGEMENT SERVICES, DIBIA FILESTOR, INC. TO VITAL
RECORDS CONTROL OF FLORIDA, INC. - AS DETAILED IN
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16E4
AWARDING CONTRACT(S) #06-3929: ANNUAL CONTRACT
FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES TO THE FOLLOWING
FIRMS: SCHENKEL & SHULTZ, INC., VICTOR J. LATA VISH
ARCHITECT, PA, BSSW ARCHITECTS, INC., CH2M HILL,
INC., DISNEY & ASSOCIATES, P A AND HARPER AIKEN
PARTNERS, INC. ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT $1,000,000.
- TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR MULTIPLE PROJECTS
WITHOUT ISSUING INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS FOR PROPOSAL
Item #16E5
EXPENDITURES RELATING TO TRAVEL ASSOCIATED WITH
EDUCATIONAL ADVISORY BOARDS - SERVING A VALID
PUBLIC PURPOSE
Item #16F1
Page 166
April 11, 2006
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO REPLACE A DAMAGED
AMBULANCE FOR THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
DEPARTMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $177,000.00,
RECOGNIZING AND APPROPRIATING INSURANCE
PROCEEDS OF $77,500.00 AND APPROPRIATING $99,500.00
OF FUND 490 RESERVES - REPLACEMENT NEEDED DUE TO
HEA VY DAMAGE SUSTAINED IN A MOTOR VEHICLE
ACCIDENT IN 2005
Item #16G1
CREATION OF A 0.5 FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE)
EMPLOYEE FOR THE MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT
- TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE LEVELS OF CUSTOMER
SERVICE DUE TO INCREASING JET TRAFFIC
Item #16H1
PAYMENT REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER HALAS
TO ATTEND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF
COLLIER COUNTY EXCLUSIVE MEMBER BREAKFAST ON
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12,2006; $21.52 TO BE PAID FROM
COMMISSIONER HALAS' TRAVEL BUDGET - SERVING A
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE, LOCATED AT THE HILTON OF
NAPLES
Item #16H2
PAYMENT REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER HALAS
TO ATTEND THE 3RD ANNUAL FLORIDA TRADEPORT
BRIEFING AND BARBECUE ON MARCH 31,2006 AT THE
IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT, IMMOKALEE, FLORIDA;
Page 167
April 11, 2006
$40.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER HALAS ' TRAVEL
BUDGET - SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE
Item #1611
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED ANDIOR
REFERRED:
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by
the Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 168
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
April 11, 2006
1. 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) March 4, 2006 through March 10, 2006.
(2) March 11, 2006 through March 17, 2006.
B. Districts:
(1) Heritaae Greens Community Development District - Minutes of
November 7, 2005; Agenda of November 7, 2005.
(2) Naples Heritaae Community Development District - Minutes of
May 16, 2005; Agenda of May 16, 2005; Minutes of July 18,
2005; Agenda of July 18, 2005.
(3) Cedar Hammock Community Development District - Minutes of
October 10, 2005; Agenda of October 1,2005.
C. Minutes:
(1 ) Pelican Bay Services Division MSTU - Agenda of Budget
Committee of March 22, 2006.
(a) Clam Bay Sub-Committee - Agenda of March 22, 2006;
Minutes of November 9, 2005.
(b) Budget Sub-committee - Minutes of February 15, 2006.
(2) Coastal Advisory Committee - Minutes of January 12, 2006.
H:\DA T A \FRONT DESK - 2006\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondenee\0411 06 mise eorresp.doe
(3) Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Advisory Committee - Agenda of April
6, 2006; Minutes of March 2, 2006.
(4) Parks and Recreation Advisory Board - Agenda of March 15,
2006; Minutes of March 15, 2006.
(5) Citizens Corps Advisory Committee - Minutes of Workshop of
February 15, 2006.
(6) Immokalee Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee - Agenda
of March 15, 2006; Notification of cancellation of February 15,
2006 meeting due to lack of quorum.
(7) Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee -
Minutes of February 13, 2006.
(8) Development Services Advisory Committee - Agenda of March
1, 2006; Minutes of March 1, 2006; Agenda of February 1,
2006; Minutes of February 1 J 2006.
(9) Tourist Development Council- Agenda of March 27, 2006;
Minutes of February 27, 2006.
D. Other:
(1) City of Naples Community Redevelopment Aaency - Annual
Report for FY ending September 30, 2005.
(2) Area Aaency on Aaina for Southwest Florida, Inc. -
Administrative Monitoring Report for Collier County Human
Services dated February 13, 2006.
H:\DA T A \FRONT DESK - 2006\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\0411 06 misc corresp.doc
April 11, 2006
Item #16J1
AGREEMENT AUTHORIZING THE COLLIER COUNTY
SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO HAVE TRAFFIC CONTROL
JURISDICTION OVER PRIVATE ROADS WITHIN SA TURNIA
LAKES SUBDIVISION
Item #16J2
TO SERVE AS THE LOCAL COORDINATING UNIT OF
GOVERNMENT IN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT'S FISCAL YEAR 2007 EDWARD BYRNE
MEMORIAL, JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM
AND DESIGNATING THE SHERIFF AS THE OFFICIAL
APPLICANT, SHERIFF'S OFFICE STAFF AS GRANT
FINANCIAL AND PROGRAM MANAGERS, APPROVING THE
GRANT APPLICATION WHEN COMPLETED AND
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AWARDS AND
ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS - AS DETAILED IN
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16J3
DESIGNATING THE SHERIFF AS THE OFFICIAL APPLICANT
AND PROGRAM POINT-OF-CONTACT FOR THE UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE
PROGRAMS, OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE AND
DELINQUENCY PREVENTION (OJJDP), FIELD-INITIATED
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM GRANT, FOR THE SHERIFF TO
ELECTRONICALL Y SUBMIT THE APPLICATION THROUGH
THE FEDERAL GRANTS.GOV WEBSITE, AND FOR THE
BOARD TO ACCEPT THE GRANT WHEN A WARDED AND
Page 169
April 11, 2006
APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS - AS DETAILED IN THE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item # 1 7 A
ORDINANCE 2006-15: AMENDING ORDINANCE 2001-13, THE
COLLIER CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE, PROVIDING FOR A
CHANGE IN THE IMPLEMENTATION DATE FOR THE
ANNUAL INDEXING ADJUSTMENTS TO THE
CORRECTIONAL IMPACT FEE RATES IN ORDER TO MEET
THE IMPLEMENTATION DEADLINE OF JULY 1.2006
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2006-86: PETITION A VPLAT2005-AR8683 TO
DISLCAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND
THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN THE 7.5 FOOT WIDE UTILITY
EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG THE EAST LINE LOT 50 AND
THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTH 55 FEET OF LOT 11 AND IN
THE 5 FOOT WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG
NORTH 5 FEET OF LOTS 11 AND 12 AND ALONG THE SOUTH
5 FEET OF LOTS 49 AND 50, ALL IN BLOCK 61, ACCORDING
TO THE PLAT OF "NAPLES PARK, UNIT No.5" AS RECORDED
IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 14, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, LOCATED IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP
48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST - TO CONSTRUCT A
COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON THE SITE
Item #17C - Moved to Item #8B
Page 170
April 11, 2006
******
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:48 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
~?~/
FRANK HALAS, Clialrman
ATTEST:.;
DWIG:HT~. BROCK, CLERK
bj'-C~H ~~t
, ' . AtteSt. ... ~..tha,~ I
. . ',t_tIn 011"..
These minutes approved by the Board on t1>~ \ 25 .2'tIJ.p , as presented
~ or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI
LEWIS.
Page 171