BCC Minutes 09/26/2006 R
September 26, 2006
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, September 26, 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 in REGULAR
SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples,
Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Frank Halas
Jim Coletta
Fred W. Coyle
Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Mudd, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Derek J ohnssen, Office of the Clerk of Court
Crystal Kinzel, Office of the Clerk of Court
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Ii'
-"^"'",
".....,,.
.. ~~=
AGENDA
September 26, 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. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS
WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS
ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
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
Page 1
September 26, 2006
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 VERBA TIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3)
MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMP AIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Reverend Stephan L. Nagy, Lely Presbyterian Church
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
B. August 28, 2006 - BCC/Tropical Storm/Hurricane Emesto Meeting
C. August 29,2006 - BCC/Tropical Storm/Hurricane Emesto Meeting
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation recognizing the Troops In Touch For The Holidays campaign
to be accepted by Mr. Cody Anderson.
2
September 26, 2006
B. Proclamation recognizing the United Way of Collier County Agency for
their outstanding contribution to the community and wishing them yet
another year of great success as they kick off their 2006/2007 season. To be
accepted by Ernie Bretzmann, Executive Director, United Way of Collier
County; Reg Buxton, United Way Campaign Chairman and Georgie Foster,
United Way Campaign Chairman.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. To recognize Scott Belanger as Employee of the Month for September 2006.
B. Presentation by Florida Department of Environmental Protection for the
early closure of the Wastewater Consent Order originally scheduled to be
closed in 2016.
C. To recognize Gary McAlpin for his exceptional leadership and management
of the Collier County/City of Naples 2006 Beach Renourishrnent Project.
D. To recognize Allen Madsen for his exceptional performance as the on-site
representative of Collier County and ambassador to the public for the Collier
County/City of Naples 2006 Beach Renourishment Project.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request by Shirley Ison to discuss towing charge to remove
car from Rock Road.
Item 7 and 8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 D.m., unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
A. The petitioner reQuests to continue indefinitelv the BCC hearin2 date in
order to evaluate the proposed development after the CCPC
recommendation to the BCC. This item reQuires that all participants be
sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided bv Commission members.
Petition: CU-2005-AR-7181, Basil Street Partners, LLC, represented by
Clay Brooker, Esquire of Cheffy, Passidomo, Wilson & Johnson, requesting
approval of a Conditional Use for a passive recreational facility in the
Agricultural (A) Zoning District, as specified in Section 2.04.03 of the
Collier County Land Development Code. The subject properties, consisting
3
September 26, 2006
of 4.32 acres, are located at 10111 and 10121 Keewaydin Island, in Section
14, Township 51 South, Range 25 East.
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. This item to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. Public Hearing for the Board of County
Commissioners to consider and decide whether Collier County should
exempt itself from the provisions of F .S. 316.2123 that generally permits the
operation of All-Terrain Vehicle use on unpaved public roads under
specified conditions and restrictions therein, which takes effect on October
1, 2006.
B. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Petition: PUDZ-2005-
AR-8337, Sembler Florida, Inc., represented by Dwight Nadeau of RW A,
Inc., is requesting a rezone from the Estates (E) zoning district to the
Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district for a
proposed commercial shopping center to be known as Brooks Village
CPUD. The subject property, consisting of22.7 acres, is located on the
southwest quadrant of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and Pine Ridge
Road, in Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida.
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Appointment of member to the Contractors' Licensing Board.
B. Appointment of member to the Board of Building Adjustments and Appeals.
C. Appointment of member to the Development Services Advisory Committee.
D. Discuss the potential merits of requesting the Florida Department of
Transportation to reserve 20 million dollars of available future funding
outside their 5 year work program for advancement with reimbursement to
the County for the Davis Boulevard widening project. (Commissioner Halas)
E. Creekside Commerce Park PUD Amendment Reconsideration Request.
(Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Coletta)
F. Naples Daily News PUD (PUDZ-2005-AR-8833) Reconsideration Request.
4
September 26, 2006
(Commissioner Henning)
G. The Annual Performance Appraisal for the County Manager. (Commissioner
Halas)
H. The Annual Performance Appraisal for the Executive Manager to the BCC.
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to consider a recommendation from the Habitat
Conservation Plan Advisory Committee to implement a Red-cockaded
Woodpecker Compliance Plan (Bill Lorenz, Director, Environmental
Services)
B. This item to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. Report to the Board of County
Commissioners by representatives of the mining industry about the status of
earth mining and specifically the mining of hard rock within the limits of
Collier County and the limitations that have been put on those resources by
Growth Management Plan and land development regulations. (Joseph K.
Schmitt, Community Development and Environmental Services
Administrator)
C. Recommendation to approve Collier Countys Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) and
Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Consolidated Annual Performance and
Evaluation Report (CAPER) for Fiscal Year 2005-2006 as required by the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and authorize
the Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners to certify the CAPER
for submission to HUD. (Susan Golden, Grants Administration Manager,
Housing and Grants Department)
D. Recommendation to approve the purchase of the Forsyth homestead and six
rental units by ajoint purchase agreement for property required to provide
for a Stormwater Management Pond in the Gateway Triangle Area (Gateway
Triangle Stormwater Improvement Project, Project No. 518031) and to
accept a $529,000 contribution from the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA
Fund 187 to the Stormwater Fund 325 for the total cost of this purchase.
Fiscal Impact: $1,260,500.00. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation
Services) (This is a Companion Item to be heard after Item 14A)
5
September 26, 2006
E. Recommendation to adopt a superseding resolution authorizing the fee
simple and easement acquisition of property by condemnation for the
purpose of constructing stormwater improvements to alleviate flooding in
the East Naples area known as Phase One of the Lely Area Stormwater
Improvement Project (LASIP). Fiscal Impact $1,838,000 (Project 511012).
(Gene Calvert, Director, Transportation/Stormwater Management)
F. Review and approve the FY2007 Annual Work Plan for the County
Manager.
G. Recommendation for the Board of County Commissioners to confirm their
direction regarding purchase authorization for Conservation Collier
properties within North Golden Gate Estates Unit 53 as property values
increase. (Alex Sulecki, Senior Envionmental Specialist, Environmental
Services)
H. This item to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Recommendation to approve the
attached 16 Impact Fee Deferral applications and approve the Permanent
Resident card as substantial proof of residency. (Denny Baker, Director,
Financial Administration and Housing)
I. Recommendation to award bid number 06-3996R to Akerman Construction
Company, Inc. in the amount of$18,330,133.00 for construction of the CR
951 Water Main from Davis Boulevard to US 41, and to approve the
necessary budget amendments, Projects 70151 and 70152. (Jim DeLony,
Administrator, Public Utilities)
J. Recommendation to award Work Order HS-FT-3785-06-10 under Contract
05-3785 for Construction Engineering and Inspection Services for the
"South County Regional Water Treatment Plant 20-Million Gallons per Day
Wellfie1d Expansion" to Hazen and Sawyer, P. C.; Project Number 708921,
for an amount not to exceed $1,835,000.00. (Jim DeLony, Administrator,
Public Utilities)
K. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution repealing all previous resolutions
establishing and amending parts of the Collier County Parks and Recreation
Department Facilities and Outdoor Areas License and Fee Policy and
establishing the policy effective October 1,2006. (Marla Ramsey,
Administrator, Public Services)
6
September 26, 2006
L. Recommendation to award Work Order UC-253 in the amount of$497,650
to Mitchell & Stark Construction Company to provide an emergency
generator, enclosure, well pumps and valves, Work Order UC-254 in the
amount of $1,884,000 to D.N. Higgins to install the aforementioned
equipment, both under Fixed Annual Term Contract 04-3535, and a
purchase order in the amount of $334,784 to TAW Control Systems &
Automation for instrumentation and controls, electrical equipment, and an
air conditioned electrical equipment enclosure for the South County
Regional Water Treatment Plant two new Mid Hawthorn Zone 1 and two
new Lower Hawthorn Wells 39S and 41S, and 40S and 42S, respectively, as
Project 71051. (Jim DeLony, Administrator, Public Utilities)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners give direction to
the Office of the County Attorney concerning the settlement offer required
by Section 70.00 1 (4)(c), Fla. Stat., in response to the purported Bert Harris
Act Claim asserted by R & S Development Company - the owner(s) of the
property that was proposed to be rezoned to Sandalwood Residential
Planned Unit Development.
B. Discussion concerning most recent correspondence received from South
Florida Water Management District in regard to joint meeting with the
Board of County Commissioners.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. (To be heard before Item 10D) Recommendation for the Community
Redevelopment Agency to approve a CRA Resolution to support the Collier
County purchase of the Forsyth homestead and six rental units to provide for
a S tormwater Management Pond in the Gateway Triangle Area (Gateway
Triangle Stormwater Improvement Project, Project No. 518031); to approve
a monetary contribution from the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Fund
187 to Stormwater Fund 325 in the amount not to exceed $529,000 to
complete the sale of subj ect property; and approve all necessary budget
7
September 26, 2006
amendments. (Companion to Item 10D) (David Jackson, Executive Director,
Bayshore/Gateway CRA)
B. Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency FY 2006
Annual performance appraisal review for the Executive Director; determine
the FY 2006 Merit Pay Award for lump sum payment from the FY 07
budget and authorize the FY 2007 Cost of Living Adjustment beginning the
first pay period in FY07.
C. Recommendation to approve a 10.0 percent ($9,299.05) merit increase
effective the first pay period in FY07 and a $5,000.00 bonus effective in
FY06 to the Executive Director of the Collier County Airport Authority,
Theresa M. Cook, and associated budget amendments.
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Heritage
Bay Unit Three, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
2) Recommend the Board of County Commissioners award a contract of
$200,000 to Van Buskirk, Ryffel & Associates, Inc. for development
of the Collier Interactive Growth Model for the East of County Road
951 Infrastructure and Services Horizon Study.
3) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Del Webb
at Ave Maria Phase One, approval of the standard form Construction
and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
8
September 26, 2006
4) Recommendation to award Bid #06-4026 Fencing Installation for The
Railhead Scrub and Watkins/Jones Preserves to Sunrise Fence and
Construction Co. ofS.W. Florida, Inc. in the amount of$31,758.80.
5) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase
with Diane Hutchison, Judy Jones, and Nancy Smith for 2.27 acres
under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program, at a cost
not to exceed $89,700.
6) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the County Manager or his designee to establish the budgetary and
financial mechanisms to prepay up to $6,200,000 of CDES capital and
information technology improvement debt and give approval for any
subsequent FY 07 budget amendments required to fund this debt
prepayment.
7) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Ave Maria
Unit 5, Bellerawa1k Phase lA, 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 Twin
Eagles, Phase Two B, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
9) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Via
Veneto, approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance
Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security.
10) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Ave Maria
Phase Two, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
11) Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Ave Maria
Phase Three, approval of the standard form Construction and
Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the
performance security.
9
September 26, 2006
12) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the water and sewer
utility facility for Verona Walk, Phase 1A.
13) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the sewer utility
facility for Hospice House of Naples.
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve and execute the attached Second
Amendment to Radio Tower Lease Agreement with Crown Castle GT
Company LLC, for an additional location upon an existing tower for
use by the Stormwater Management Department at a first years annual
cost of $3,000.
2) Recommendation to approve an amendment to Contract 05-3845
Consolidated Management Contract for the Collier County Fixed
Route and Paratransit systems.
3) Recommendation to award bid #06-4033 U.S. 41 Tamiami Trail
North Phase I & II Water Source Conversion to Hannula
Landscaping, Inc. with a base amount of $59,999.58 and alternates in
the amount of$44,195.00 for a total base bid of$104,194.58 with a
10% contingency of$10,4l9.45. (Project #601551)
4) To seek Board approval of a Locally Funded Agreement with the
Florida Department of Transportation for the design of the
Cocohatchee Bridge replacement project on Vanderbilt Drive in the
amount of $1 77,409. This represents half of the negotiated design cost
increase with the Florida Department of Transportation District One
office picking up the other half of the cost increase.
5) Recommendation to receive Board approval for the use of $25,000
from the previously approved Southwest Florida Expressway
Authority budget for expenses including the hiring of a Certified
Public Accountant on a part time basis to set up a financial system and
handle the finances for the Authority.
6) Recommendation to award Contract #06-3969 Annual Fixed Term
Professional Engineering Services to eight (8) firms
10
September 26, 2006
7) Recommendation to award Bid No. 06-4036 to Quality Enterprises
USA, Inc. for construction of Avalon School Drainage Ditch Project,
Project Number 511071 in the amount of$419,485.25.
8) Recommendation to approve a work order in the amount of $688,000
to Aquagenix for the 2006 Australian Pine Removal Project (Project
Number 51501) under Contract 03-3568 Annual Contract for
Countywide Exotic Vegetation Removal and approve the necessary
budget amendment.
9) Recommendation to award Contract 06-3950 Geographic Information
Systems Services for the Transportation Division to three professional
services firms for a two year term.
10) Recommendation to award Bid #06-4008, Immokalee Beautification
M.S.T.U/M.S.T.D. Roadway Ground Maintenance at CR846 (South
1 st Street) and SR29 (Main Street) Annual Landscape Maintenance
Contract, to Commercial Land Maintenance in the amount of
$172,006 (Project #630101).
11) Recommendation to seek Board approval of a Transportation
Regional Incentive Program (TRIP) Agreement with the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) to acquire a grant in the
amount of $4,950,000 for the widening of Collier Boulevard from
Golden Gate Boulevard to Immokalee Road (Project #65061).
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Approval of the annual rate resolution to set landfill tipping fees,
recycling center fees, residential annual assessments and commercial
waste collection fees for FY 2007. Total fees budgeted to be collected
from rates approved with this resolution are included in the FY 2007
budgets for solid waste disposal (Fund 470 -$20,336,300) and
mandatory trash collection (Fund 473 - $15,776,100).
2) Recommendation to approve the sole source reconditioning of a
Bellmer Winklepress used in the South County Regional Water
Treatment Plant lime softening dewatering process from Ashbrook
Simon-Hartley Corporation in the estimated amount of$111,707,
Project No. 710053.
11
September 26, 2006
3) Recommendation to reject the bid received for Bid No. 06-3946R and
to authorize the staff to re-advertise for the North County Regional
Water Treatment Plant Chemistry Laboratory Ventilation
Improvements; Project 700952
4) Recommendation to approve the Underground Conduit Installation
Agreement with Florida Power & Light Company and authorize
conveyance of utility easements in an amount not to exceed $500.00,
for the installation of underground electric service related to the
Reclaimed Water Aquifer Storage and Recovery, Project 74030.
5) Recommendation to accept a Grant of Easement from The Club
Pelican Bay to provide access to the Pelican Bay Utility Site at a cost
of $35.50.
6) Recommendation to approve a Lease Agreement for vacant land at the
City of Naples Airport for the County Collier Solid Waste
Departments Recycling Transfer Center at a first years cost not to
exceed $97,578.
7) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfactions of
Lien for Solid Waste residential accounts wherein the County has
received payment and said Liens are satisfied in full for the 1993
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments.
Fiscal impact is $30.00 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
8) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfaction of
Lien for a Solid Waste residential account wherein the County has
received payment and said Lien is satisfied in full for the 1994 Solid
Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessment. Fiscal
impact is $20.00 to record the Satisfaction of Lien.
9) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfaction of
Lien for a Solid Waste residential account wherein the County has
received payment and said Lien is satisfied in full for the 1995 Solid
Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessment. Fiscal
impact is $20.00 to record the Satisfaction of Lien.
10) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution to approve the Satisfactions of
12
September 26, 2006
Lien for Solid Waste residential accounts wherein the County has
received payment and said Liens are satisfied in full for the 1996
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Special Assessments.
Fiscal impact is $30.00 to record the Satisfactions of Lien.
11) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment for Work Order #
UC-034, Collier Boulevard (CR-951) 16 Sanitary Sewer Force Main
Improvements, WBS Element 730861 in the amount of $60,526.00 to
provide sufficient funds to enable final payment to be made to
Douglas N. Higgins, Inc., Project Number 73086.
12) Recommendation to Award Contract 06-3972 to Tele-Works, Inc. for
Purchase of the Utility Billing Interactive Voice Response Software
System and Approval of an Ongoing Maintenance Agreement in the
total amount of $230,400.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve Naples Wholesale Bait as a sole source
supplier of live bait for resale at Caxambas Park, with an estimated
Fiscal Year 2007 expenditure of $86,000, and approve a seven day
payment schedule.
2) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign the agreement
between Collier County Board of County Commissioners and the
Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. and approve
budget amendments to reflect an overall increase of$7,722 in the
Alzheimers Disease Initiative program.
3) Recommendation to award Bid # 06-4020 for printing of the Collier
County Parks and Recreation Departments Recreation Guide to
Sunbelt, Inc. at an estimated cost of $75,000.
4) Recommendation to recognize additional revenue in the amount of
$37,475 and approve a budget amendment to the Social Services
Administration budget.
5) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign the agreement
between Collier County Board of County Commissioners and Area
Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. and approve budget
13
September 26, 2006
amendments to reflect an overall increase of $83, 159 in the
Community Care for the Elderly program.
6) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign the agreement
between Collier County Board of County Commissioners and the
Area Agency on Aging for Southwest Florida, Inc. for the Home Care
for the Elderly grant in the amount of $104,787 and approve the
budget amendment.
7) Recommendation to approve Work Order No. CT -02-18 with The
Chris- Tel Company in the amount of $187,942.00 for restoration and
rehabilitation of the Church building at Roberts Ranch in Immokalee,
using County Contract No. 02-3349, General Contractors Services.
8) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$24,756 to recognize revenue received from the collection of co-
payments from the Collier County Services for Seniors program.
9) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of
$42,142.26 to recognize additional revenue in the Older Americans
Act Title III-B budget for FY 06.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Recommendation to award RFP#06-3983 to CBSA, Inc. for Group
Health Third Party Administration Services in the amount of
$392,875.
2) Recommendation to award RFP#06-3995 to The J. D. Allen Group,
Inc. for Employee Assistance Services.
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves
award of Bid 06-4032, Fleet Management -Sublet/Parts Bid for
Collier County as stated on the attached vendor award sheet.
4) Recommendation to approve and execute the attached First
Amendment to Tower Option and Lease Agreement Deed to Lessor
and Termination of Agreement from New Cingular Wireless PCS,
LLC d/b/a Cingular Wireless concerning the County-owned
communications tower at the County Barn.
14
September 26, 2006
5) Recommendation to approve and execute the attached Lease
Agreement with George Vega, Tom Brown, Larry Martin and Jack
Stanley, AKA Palm Lake Investments, for additional temporary office
space for the Office of the Public Defender at a first years annual rent
of$17,099, Project 52004-1.
6) Recommendation to approve the purchase of Property, Casualty,
Automobile, Workers Compensation insurance, and related services
for FY 2007.
7) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners approves
award of Bid 06-4024 Tire Services to Collier Tire & Auto Repair.
8) Report and ratify Property, Casualty, Workers Compensation and
Subrogation Claims settled and/or closed by the Risk Management
Director pursuant to Resolution # 2004-15 for the third quarter of FY
06.
9) Recommendation to spend $150,000 on the first stage of a multi-
stage, multi-year effort to standardize the processes involved with the
delivery of Capital Projects and to implement a computer system to
assist County Project Managers, Project Number 75006
10) Request that the Board of County Commissioners authorize the
disposal of assets no longer deemed to serve a useful function or to
have commercial value.
11) Recommendation to approve budget amendment for $362,263.14 to
cover expended funds for the Naples Jail and Parking Garage Project
No. 52008.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Recommend approval and authorize the Chairman to sign Tourism
Agreements with The Childrens Museum of Naples, Inc. ($175,000),
Naples Art Association, Inc ($38,000) and Naples Botanical Garden,
Inc. ($112,550)
2) Recommendation to approve the proposed changes to the Bylaws of
15
September 26, 2006
County Attorney to prepare an Amendment to Ordinance No. 02-39.
3) Recommendation to approve procedures for managing miscellaneous
receivables.
4) Recommendation to Authorize the Issuance of a $29,532.05
Reimbursement Check Payable to the Department of Community
Affairs for Excess Funds Received by Collier County in Response to
Tropical Storm Gabrielle.
5) Recommendation to approve an Agreement between Collier County
and Dr. Marta U. Coburn, M.D., Florida District Twenty Medical
Examiner dba District Twenty Medical Examiner, Inc. to provide
medical examiner services for Fiscal Year 2007 at a cost of $955,500.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1) Recommendation for the Collier County CRA Board to approve a
CRA Resolution to amend the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Site
Improvement Grant program for FY2007 funding cycle, and approve
the amended form of the CRA Grant Agreement.
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attend the
NAACP 24th Annual Freedom Fund Banquet on October 28th, 2006
at the Elks Lodge, Naples; $60.00 to be paid from Commissioner
Fiala's travel budget.
2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the
EDC's Excellence in Industry Awards Gala, Thursday, September
14th, 2006, at the Naples Beach and Golf Club; $150.00 to be paid
from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
3) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the
EDC's Excellence in Industry Awards Gala's Dessert Reception,
Page 16
September 26, 2006
Thursday, September 14th, 2006, at the Naples Beach and Golf Club;
$25.00 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the
Southwest Florida Workforce Development Board's Annual Awards
Dinner on September 15, 2006 at the Sanibel Harbor Resort and Spa;
$25.00 to be paid from Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) That the Board Authorizes the Transfer of Additional Funds Collected
in Fund (175), Juvenile Assessment Center, to the Clerk of the Circuit
Court to be used for the Operation of the Juvenile Assessment Center
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to
Respondent, Ali R. Ghahramani MD Investment Limited Partnership,
for Parcels 815 and 915 in the amount of$7500.00 in the lawsuit
styled Collier County v. Colonnade on Collier Blvd. LLC, et aI., Case
No. 05-l09l-CA (South County Regional Water Treatment Wellfield
Project #70892). (Fiscal Impact: $1750.00).
2) Recommendation to authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to
Respondent, Centrex Corporation, Ltd., for Parcels 716, 816, 916, 814
and 914 in the amount of$65,400.00 in the lawsuit styled Collier
County v. Centrex Corporation, Ltd., et aI., Case No. 05-1129-CA
(South County Regional Water Treatment Well field Project #70892).
(Fiscal Impact: $11,050.00).
3) Recommendation to authorize the making of an Offer of Judgment to
Respondents, Duffield W. Matson, III and Sarah Matson, for Parcels
717R, 917, 718R and 918R in the amount of $19,300.00 in the lawsuit
styled Collier County v. Duffield W. Matson, III, et aI., Case No. 05-
1054-CA (South County Regional Water Treatment Wellfield Project
Page 17
September 26, 2006
1054-CA (South County Regional Water Treatment Wellfield Project
#70892). (Fiscal Impact: $4,150.00).
4) Recommendation to approve a Mediated Settlement Agreement and
Stipulated Final Judgment for Parcel No. 804 in the lawsuit styled CC
v. James M. Brown, et aI., Case No. 06-0525-CA (Santa Barbara
Boulevard Project No. 62081). (Fiscal Impact $28,500.00)
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Approve
the Proposed Agreed Motion for an Agreed Order For Expert Fees
and Costs Relating to Parcel 26P in the lawsuit styled Board of
County Commissioners v. Collier HMA, Inc., et aI., Case No. 06-
0013-CA, CR-95 I Water Transmission Main Project #70152. (Fiscal
Impact: $38,636.25).
6) Recommendation to approve an Agreed Order Awarding Expert Fees
and Costs for Parcel 126 in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. North
Naples Fire Control & Rescue District, et aI., Case No. 02-1702-CA
(Goodlette-Frank Road Project No. 60134). (Fiscal Impact
$23,435.00)
7) Approve Special Magistrate Agreements and authorize payment for
Special Magistrate Services for Value Adjustment Board Hearings for
Tax Year 2006.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-
JUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
18
September 26, 2006
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to
approve Petition A VPLAT-2006-AR-9422 Louise Penta to disclaim,
renounce and vacate the Countys and the Publics interest in a portion of a 10
drainage easement lying within lot 1, plat of Lely Barefoot Beach Unit 2 as
recorded in Plat Book 15, Page 71 and 72 of the Public Records Collier
County, Florida.
B. Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt an
Ordinance amending Section 74-202 of Chapter 74 of the Collier County
Code of Laws and Ordinances (The Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Ordinance) by providing for a change in the time period allowed for
requesting an impact fee reimbursement, consistent with limitations set forth
by the Florida Statutes.
C. Request the Board of County Commissioners to set a public hearing date of
December 12, 2006 for consideration of a Development of Regional Impact
Development Order amendment for petition DOA-2005-AR-8543, Pine Air
Lakes, located along the west side of Airport-Pulling Road, parallel to and
approximately 1,600 feet north of Pine Ridge Road; and along both sides of
Naples Boulevard, in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County, Florida.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
19
September 26, 2006
September 26, 2006
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, would you please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the
Collier County Board of Commissioners. We're presently now in
session. If you'd all silence your cell phones and pagers.
At this time Reverend Stephan L. Nagy will give the invocation
and will be followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
Would you all rise.
REVEREND NAGY: Almighty God, our Heavenly Father, who
has given us this good land, this good land for our heritage that we call
Collier County. We humbly ask you this day that we may always
prove ourselves to be a people mindful of your favor and glad to
always do your will.
Bless our land, Lord, with honorable industry, sound learning,
and pure manners. Save us from all violence, discord and confusion,
from any pride or arrogance and from every will, and especially we
pray for you to defend our liberties and fashion into one united people,
the various multitudes brought here to this county from all races,
creeds, and tone.
In due, Lord, with this spirit of wisdom to those to whom in your
name we entrust the authority of government, this nation, this state,
this county, that there may be justice and piece and that through
obedience to the law, we may always show forth your praise.
In the prime of prosperity, Lord, lift up our hearts with all
thankfulness, and in the day of any trouble or calamity, especially here
at home, storms, hurricanes, fire, suffer not our trust, Lord, and you to
ever fail.
All this we ask through our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning, County Manager. Do we
have any changes on today's agenda?
Page 2
September 26, 2006
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Agenda changes, Board of Commissioners'
meeting, September 26,2006.
Item#2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA-
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED WITH CHANGES
Item 5C and 5D continued till October 10, 2006, and that's
basically recognizing Gary McAlpin and Allen Madsen for their
leadership, management and their perseverance during the 2006 beach
renourishment project. So both items 5C and 5D are continued until
October 10th.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: The next item is 8B. Executive summary on page
2 under fiscal impact, second paragraph, first sentence should read:
Developer has entered into a voluntary DCA with the county, which
the ben -- which the public benefit contributions consist of, and to
cross out -- and you need to cross out this phase -- you need to cross
out this phrase, a 40- feet by 100- foot raw water well easement. So
that's crossed out.
So the contributions consist of 20 feet of right-of-way and a
10- foot shared slope and construction easement along the Pine Ridge
Road frontage, up to five feet or right-of-way and a 10-foot shared
slope and construction easement along the Collier Boulevard frontage,
$25,000 contribution for the Collier Boulevard and Pine Ridge Road
intersection signalization and construction product and construction of
a CAT, which is Collier Area Transit, bus shelter, and that correction
is at staffs request.
The next item is item 9B. The backup material for this item was
Page 3
September 26, 2006
inadvertently left out of the packet but was given to each
commissioner yesterday. It was omitted from the agenda packet.
Copies have been made available, and there are ones in the board
office for your perusal if the audience so wishes to.
The next item is to add item 91. It is a recommendation to
approve a resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, in support of the amendment of the Florida Statutes
to require election of the governing boards of the Florida Water
Management Districts, and that add is at Commissioner Coletta's
request.
The next item is item lOA, and that's continued to the October
10th BCC meeting. It's a recommendation to consider a
recommendation from the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory
Committee to implement a Red-cockaded compliance plan. And that
continuance is at staffs request, and it had to do with jury duty
conflict. And I had one commissioner ask why, and that is the reason
that I've been provided.
The next item is item 10E, and that is continued indefinitely.
That is a recommendation to adopt a superseding resolution
authorizing a fee simple and easement acquisition of property by
condemnation for the purpose of constructing stormwater
improvements to alleviate flooding in the East Naples area known as
phase one of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Proj ect, which
we finally call LASIP. Again, this item is continued indefinitely.
Fiscal impact is $1,838,000.
The next item is 12A. Under the fiscal impact, delete the first
sentence and replace with the following sentence: No appraisal has
been received, but claimant asserts a diminution of value of
approximately $6 million. And that add is at -- and correction is at
staff s request.
The next item is to move 16E9 to 10M. This is a
recommendation to spend $150,000 on the first stage of a multi-stage,
Page 4
September 26, 2006
multi-year effort to standardize the process that's involved with the
delivery of capital projects and to implement a computer system to
assist county project managers. It's project number 75006. That item
is being moved at Commissioner Coyle's request.
The next item is to continue item 17B to the October 10, 2006,
BCC meeting, and 1 7B was a recommendation that the board adopt an
ordinance amending section 74-202 of Chapter 74 of the Collier
County Code of Laws and Ordinances, which is the Collier County
Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, by providing for a change in the
time period allowed for requesting an impact fee reimbursement
consistent with limitations set forth with the Florida Statutes. That
item is being continued at staffs request, and it had to do with an
advertising glitch.
And on the second page, there's just a reminder, there are time
certain items today on the agenda.
Item lOR, which is a recommendation to approve the attached 16
impact fee deferral applications and approve the permanent resident
cards as substantial proof of residency. Again, that's item 10H and it's
to be heard at 10 a.m.
Item lOB to be heard at 11 a.m., and that's basically a status
report from the mining industry about earth mining in Collier County.
And item lOA to be heard at one p.m., and that's a public hearing
for the Board of County Commissioners to consider and decide
whether Collier County should exempt itself from the provisions of
Florida Statute 316.2123, that generally permits the operation of
all-terrain vehicles used on unpaved public roads under special
conditions and restrictions therein, which takes effect on October 1,
2006.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. County Attorney, do you have
any additions or corrections to today's agenda?
MR. PETTIT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. No, there are no
Page 5
September 26, 2006
changes from the county attorney.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time I'll ask for -- if
there's any additions or corrections on today's minutes, or agenda,
starting with Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no ex parte on today's
summary agenda, and I have no changes on today's consent agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have no changes, no
corrections. And as far as the summary agenda, I have no disclosures.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
I, myself, have no ex parte on the summary agenda, and I have
no changes on the consent agenda.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I have no disclosures on
the summary agenda, and the rest of the agenda, I have nothing to
change.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, I have no further
changes on the agenda, and I have no ex parte disclosure for the
summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Sue, do we have someone--
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Actually I have two speakers
now on -- one on a continued item and one on the consent agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: The first one is Anthony Pires.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: He'll be followed by Bob Krasowski.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All right,
MR. PIRES: Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, good
mornIng.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good morning.
MR. PIRES: My name is Anthony Pires. I represent a number
Page 6
September 26, 2006
of individuals owning property on Keewaydin. The reason I requested
to be -- address the board on this item is that if the board's inclined to
grant the continuance request for item 7 A, we would request -- my
clients would request that the board condition any continuance upon
three things; one, petitioner conducting a new neighborhood
information meeting, because I understand that the concept has change
based upon news articles that I've read;
Number two, that the petitioner submit a new updated
environmental impact statement as the current EIS in this application
is dated December 2004, over -- almost two years ago.
And three, that any revised submittal application plan be
reviewed and considered by both Environmental Advisory Council
and the Planning Commission before it comes back to this body, it be
advertised, noticed, meetings with notice going out to property owners
as per the original process.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
MR. PIRES: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, members of
the commission. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bob Krasowski.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I agree that we -- if there's
any changes in the EIS, it should go back to the Environmental
Advisory Board. And also, if there's any substantial changes to the
continual use, it ought to go back to the Planning Commission, and I
think our staff could determine whether it's a substantial change or
not.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Right. Anything else? Commissioner
Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I appreciate the time. I just
want to know if it's really worth continuing this thing and we should
maybe face up to it. I don't know if we're ever going to bring
resolution to this. We're taking a lot of everyone's time. It doesn't
Page 7
September 26, 2006
seem like the parties are any closer now than they were before. And
even with the changes, I don't see where it will remove the objections
of the hundreds of people out there that have written to us. When the
time does come to make that decision, I'm going to bring up the item,
that we might want to even consider just going ahead with it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. What's the wishes of the board?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I prefer to just hear from the EAC
and the CCPC, being that the --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- papers are a couple years old.
Maybe there's some changes that would change people's mind.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So you want to make a motion
that we'll send this back to --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we'll get to that as the agenda gets
there, to 7. It's an item that you have to vote on to continue. It's been
advertised for this meeting, and you take it when it comes up, is what
we have done in the past. But we can decide it now -- but I think you
have one more speaker, and I have no idea what he's going to talk
about.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Bob Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Good morning, Commissioners.
I'm amazed that the manager doesn't know what I'm going to talk
about.
I'm here to ask that the consent agenda item 16C 1, which is
approval of the annual rate resolution to set landfill tipping fees,
recycling center fees, residential annual assessments and commercial
waste collection fees for 2007, and these are to cover costs that are
identified as $20 million for solid waste disposal and $15 million for
mandatory trash collection, that that item be taken off the consent
agenda and put on the regular agenda as is allowable under -- on the
agenda.
Page 8
September 26, 2006
Under number 16 it says that 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, so only one member of the board would have to
move to do this.
And the reason I'm requesting this is that this is a very large
amount of money. This does regard taxes, per se, the fees charged to
the public to operate the landfill, and the collection of solid waste is a
fee like a tax. We all chip in like any other tax.
So -- and you have recently denied the suggestion by your
Planning Commission to put a citizens' advisory board on top of the --
on top of -- excuse me. That wouldn't be appropriate -- to work along
with your public utilities department to monitor solid waste, in
particular, the management as well as other things.
So I'd like to see the presentation to the public so over the
weekend I can record this at home and put it in with the rest of the
stuff I have. But I think it would be very beneficial to the public to
know exactly what's happening with this money.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commission Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. While I had no particular
concerns about this particular agenda item, if I have one other
commissioner that would like to have this come before us as a regular
agenda, I'd be so willing to move. Other than that I'm not going to
drag out the day with information that you've read and heard many
times. But if there's one other commissioner that would like to hear it,
then I'll go ahead and move that we move it forward.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, this information has
been presented in workshops. We've gone over it and over it. It's had
plenty of public disclosure. It's been advertised. If anybody had a
concern with this, I think they should have presented their concerns
prior to this agenda, the agenda packet being distributed and
Page 9
September 26, 2006
advertised.
And I just don't like these last-minute changes just so somebody
can tape it at home. So I would suggest we proceed with the agenda
as it is.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. On the first item that was heard
then, we'll just bring that up at the time -- we'll discuss that when it
comes before us.
So at this time I will entertain a motion for approval of to day's
agenda, consent agenda and regular agenda, as was stated.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Fiala and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, 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?
(No response.)
Page 10
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
September 26. 2006
Item 5C continued to the October 10. 2006 BCC meetina: To recognize Gary McAlpin for his
exceptional leadership and management of the Collier County/City of Naples 2006 Beach
Renourishment Project. (Staff's request.)
Item 5D continued to the October 10.2006 BCC meetina: To recognize Allen Madsen for his
exceptional performance as the on-site representative of Collier County and ambassador to the
public for the Collier County/City of Naples 2006 Beach Renourishment Project. (Staff's request.)
Item 8B: Executive Summary on page two under Fiscal Impact, the second paragraph, first
sentence should read: Developer has entered into a voluntary DCA with the County which the
public benefit contributions consist of a 40 feet by 100 f.eet raw water well easement, 20 feet of
right-of-way and 10-foot shared slope and construction easement along the Pine Ridge Road
frontage, up to 5 feet of right-of-way and a 10 foot shared slope and construction easement along
the Collier Boulevard frontage, $25,000 contribution for Collier Boulevard and Pine Ridge Road
intersection signalization and construction project and construction of a CAT bus shelter.
(Staff's request.)
Item 9B: Backup material for this item was omitted from the agenda packets. Copies have been
made available. (Staff's request.)
Add Item 91: Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida, in support of the amendment of the Florida Statutes to require election of
the Governing Boards of the Florida Water Management Districts. (Commissioner Coletta's
request.)
Item 10A continued to the October 10 BCC meetina: Recommendation to consider a
recommendation from the Habitat Conservation Plan Advisory Committee to implement a Red-
cockaded Woodpecker Compliance Plan. (Staff's request.)
Item 10E continued indefinitelv: Recommendation to adopt a superseding resolution authorizing
the fee simple and easement acquisition of property by condemnation for the purpose of
constructing stormwater improvements to alleviate flooding in the East Naples area known as
Phase One of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project (LASIP). Fiscal Impact $1,838,000
(Project 511012). (Staff's request.)
Item 12A: Under Fiscal Impact - Delete the first sentence and replaced with the following
sentence: "No appraisal has been received but claimants asserts a diminuation of value of
approximately $6 million dollars." (Staff's request.)
Move 16E9 to 10M: Recommendation to spend $150,000 on the first stage of a multi-stage, multi-
year effort to standardize the processes involved with the delivery of Capital Projects and to
implement a computer system to assist County Project Managers, Project Number 75006.
(Commissioner Coyle's request.)
Continue Item 17B to the October 10. 2006 BCC meetina: Recommendation that the Board adopt
an Ordinance amending Section 74-202 of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances (The Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance) by providing for a change in
the time period allowed for requesting an impact fee reimbursement, consistent with limitations
set forth by the Florida Statutes. (Staff's request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 10H to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Recommendation to approve the attached 16 Impact Fee
Deferral applications and approve the Permanent Resident card as substantial proof of residency.
Item 10B to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. Report to the Board of County Commissioners by
representatives of the mining industry about the status of earth mining and specifically the
mining of hard rock within the limits of Collier County and the limitations that have been put on
those resources by Growth Management Plan and land development regulations.
Item 8A to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. Public Hearing for the Board of County Commissioners to
consider and decide whether Collier County should exempt itself from the provisions of F.S.
316.2123 that generally permits the operation of all-terrain vehicle use on unpaved public roads
under specified conditions and restrictions therein, which takes effect on October 1, 2006.
September 26, 2006
Item #2B and #2C
MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 28 & 29, 2006 BCC TROPICAL
STORM/HURRICANE ERNESTO MEETING - APPROVED AS
PRESENTED
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I need a motion to -- for approval for the
August 28, 2006 BCC/Tropical Storm/Hurricane Ernesto meeting; the
August 29,2006, BCC/Tropical StormlHurricane Ernesto meeting. I
entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion on the floor by
Commissioner Fiala, seconded by Commissioner Coletta.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Okay. I believe at this time we have --
MR. MUDD: Sir, there are no service awards and that brings -
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Proclamations.
MR. MUDD: -- that brings us to proclamations.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Item #4A
Page 11
September 26, 2006
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE TROOPS IN TOUCH
FOR THE HOLIDAYS CAMPAIGN TO MR. CORY ANDERSON -
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: 4A is a proclamation recognizing the Troops in
Touch for the Holidays Campaign to be accepted by Mr. Cody
Anderson.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Cody, will you come forward
please and stand up here while we read this proclamation.
Good morning.
MR. ANDERSON: Good morning, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whereas, on March 20, 2003,
American and allied forces began conducting military operations in
Iraq, marking the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom; and,
Whereas, more than one million troops have been deployed to
Iraq since the invasions began, nearly 133,000 American forces
continue to rotate in and out of the region, and countless will remain
deployed during this holiday season; and,
Whereas, with the holidays approaching, thousands of Americans
are seeking ways to show their support; and,
Whereas, Naples resident, Cody Anderson organized a campaign
to encourage people to donate 10,000 prepaid calling cards to our
troops in Iraq so they can call home and keep in touch with loved ones
and friends; and,
Whereas, as part of his campaign, Mr. Anderson developed a
website called www.troopsintouch.us to display donated collectable
items for auction to raise money to purchase the phone cards; and,
Whereas, Mr. Anderson is working with David Elliot of98.9
WGUF FM, local humanitarian Peter Thomas, and Renda
Broadcasting Corporation to raise awareness of this campaign in
hopes to reach his goal by November so that we can travel to Iraq to
personally deliver these cards; and,
Page 12
September 26, 2006
Whereas, over the last 30 years, Mr. Anderson has raised more
than $100,000, received 10 letters of commendation from governors,
and been awarded keys to 60 cities across America for his charitable
contributions; and,
Whereas, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
would like to express its appreciation to Mr. Anderson and all Collier
County residents who support our veterans and wish our veterans a
safe return home.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that September 26, 2006,
be designated as Troops in Touch for the Holidays.
Done and ordered this 26th day of September, 2006, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Frank Halas
Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we accept this proclamation.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You couldn't be in better company
working with those guys. You got a standing ovation.
MR. ANDERSON: I'd like to thank you all.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, just a minute.
MR. MUDD: Take a picture, and then come on over to the
microphone and get it recorded.
Page 13
September 26, 2006
MR. ANDERSON: Then do what?
MR. MUDD: Come on over to the microphone and then it gets
recorded and everybody out there can hear what you have to say, sir.
MR. ANDERSON: I'd like to thank you all. I appreciate very
much your applause and appreciation.
First I'd like to say I'm not a veteran. I've been wearing camo.
ever since our troops came under fire and went into military action as
a sign of appreciation for what they're doing against terrorism and for
our liberties, and I'll continue to wear camo. until they all come home.
Except on Sundays when I go to church, I wear a suit.
But the idea of calling cards for the troops came to me in prayer.
And it seems to me that it's -- the ideal thing for our soldiers to be able
to do is to call home to their families on the most important days of
the year, and the holidays are the most important days of the year. It's
when we all get together and when we miss our families a lot.
I don't have anybody over there, but I can sympathize with it, and
I hope you all can too and you'll contribute in any way you can to
buying international phone cards. They have to be international, and
they have to work from Iraq back to the United States. So make sure
when you buy them that they do.
And there's several drop-off points. There's Homer Health, there's
World War II Store, there's the Faith Lutheran Church over on
Goodlette, and then there's Mel's Diner on 41 as another drop-off
place. And I hope that you'll think of them these holidays, and I hope
you'll say a prayer for me that I get there and I get back safe. Thank
you very much.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you for -- thank you for your
dedicated service, Cody Anderson. We really appreciate it, and the
support you're giving for our troops over there. Thank you.
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you.
Page 14
September 26, 2006
Item #4 B
PROCLAIMATION RECOGNIZING THE UNITED WAY OF
COLLIER COUNTY AGENCY FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING
CONTRIBUTION TO THE COMMUNITY AND WISHING THEM
ANOTHER YEAR OF GREAT SUCCESS AS THEY KICK OFF
THEIR 2006/2007 SEASON - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next proclamation is 4B. It's a
proclamation recognizing United Way of Collier County Agency for
their outstanding contribution to the community in wishing them yet
another year of great success as they kick off their 2006/2007 season.
To be accepted by Ernie Bretzmann, executive director of United Way
of Collier County; Red Buxton, United Way campaign chairman; and
Georgie Foster, United Way campaign chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: And whoever else is involved, come on up.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. Anybody else that's involved in
United Way, this is great --
MR. MUDD: Come on Jennifer.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- a great organization that gets behind
the -- everybody in the community. And I'll wait till everybody gets
here.
I really appreciate all the help that we get through United Way.
Wow, my gosh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This is impressive.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Our government is solidly behind
United Way.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The only problem, after this
proclamation, we won't have an audience.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Wow. I'll wait till everybody's here.
And I want to thank everybody that's standing before us in regards to
Page 15
September 26, 2006
their dedicated service in trying to make sure that we take care of your
community.
Whereas, since 1957 the United Way of Collier County has
sponsored fund-qualified non-profit community agencies which
provide essential social and health services to our citizens; and,
Whereas, throughout the 49-year history of the United Way of
Collier County, the organization has demonstrated continued growth
and is currently funding 30 community agencies providing services to
all areas of our county; and,
Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners gratefully
acknowledges and supports the fine work of the United Way of Collier
County and its member agencies.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners that the United Way of Collier County Agency is
formally recognized for their outstanding contributions to the
community and wish them yet another year of grateful success as they
kick off their 2006/2007 session.
Done in order of this day, the 26th day of September, 2006,
Board of County Commissioners, Frank Halas, Chairman.
And I move that we approve this great proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do I hear a second? 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries unanimously, and thank
you so much for your dedicated service.
Page 16
September 26, 2006
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ifwe can get everybody together for a
photo session.
MS. ARNOLD: As close as you can get. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: George, did you want to say something,
a few words?
MR. FOSTER: I'll let Ernie.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. FOSTER: Ernie's the face of the United Way, and we'll let
him.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Rich, I should have known, if it was
something good, you'd be involved.
MR. BRETZMANN: Good morning, everybody, and thank you
so much for this proclamation and thank you for giving me the
opportunity to say a few words before you this morning.
Do I have till 10 o'clock? Is that when the next thing -- no.
The United Way was founded in 1957, so this is our 49th annual
campaign, and the keys to our success has obviously been each year
the hundreds of volunteers that support our efforts and make it work
and the thousands and thousands of donors in our community who
support United Way.
Like Mohammed Ali was the people's champion, United Way is
the people's charity, and we are truly for the people, by the people.
And one of the things I've been very proud of is the very good
relationship, working collaborative relationship we've had with Collier
County government throughout the years.
And I indicated earlier there are hundreds of volunteers, and
unfortunately I can't name them all, but I would like to acknowledge a
couple of them that are involved with the county campaign this year.
Dan Rodriguez, who heads up the solid waste department, is
chairing the campaign for the Board of County Commissioners' side.
Page 17
September 26, 2006
And amazingly, Dan did this before and he came back and
volunteered again, so that's terrific.
And supervisor of elections, Jennifer Edwards is heading up a
new division. It's combining all of the constitutional officers, working
with Dr. Colfer of the health department, and the City of Naples, so
we're getting great support from Collier County government, and we
appreciate it very much.
And another thing that's going on I want to talk about briefly, this
Saturday on the 30th at the new North Collier Regional Park, we're
having our Walk for the Way. And there are going to be a lot of
people there, and it would be a great opportunity for the community to
come out and learn more about United Way and our member agencies.
We'll have an agency fair with all 30 agencies, and folks will be
walking to raise money and to cultivate awareness in the community.
And this is another great collaborative effort with the county parks and
recreation department. They're a co-sponsor of this, and it's really
coming together well.
So let me just wrap it up by saying thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much for your service.
(Applause.)
Item #5A
RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE SCOTT BELANGER-
AS "EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH" FOR SEPTEMBER-
PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item on
the agenda, and it's under presentations, and it's 5A. It's to recognize
Scott Belanger as Employee of the Month for September 2006. If
Scott could come forward, please.
Scott recently accepted a new position within the irrigation
Page 18
September 26, 2006
quality reclaimed water control section. He has taken the lead in
identifying and implementing preventative maintenance measures for
the reuse water system.
Through his self-initiative and motivation, several outstanding
regulatory issues have been created in a timely and professional
fashion.
Scott has never taken the approach that something could not be
done, rather how he can make it happen.
Scott has stepped up to assist in organizing and implementing
several programs to increase productivity, manage time more
efficiently, and maximize his field time.
Scott volunteers to work overtime to ensure that necessary repairs
are made to minimize interruptions in service for Collier County
residents.
Scott takes personnel ownership of the facilities he maintains and
places the customers and county needs in front of his own.
Ladies and gentlemen, 1'd like to present to you, Commissioners,
the Employee of the Month of September 2006, Scott Belanger.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Scott, to start with, there's a letter of
commendation for you and a nice plaque to put on your wall and show
your fellow employees. Then, of course, we have a --
MR. BELANGER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- something of a little gratitude here for
you.
MR. BELANGER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank very much for your service.
Appreciate it very much.
HALAS: We need to get a picture.
(Applause.)
Item #5B
Page 19
September 26, 2006
PRESENT A TION OF AN AWARD BY THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR THE
EARLY CLOSURE OF THE W ASTW A TER CONSENT ORDER
SCHEDULED TO CLOSE IN 2016 - PRESENTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, the next presentation is a
presentation by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
for the early closure of the wastewater consent order originally
scheduled to be closed in 2016.
And I will tell you, this is no small feat. And I remember this one
painfully when we got this consent order, and some great deeds have
been done in order to get this early completion. But without further
ado, Mr. George Yilmaz, your Director of Wastewater.
MR. YILMAZ: Thank you, sir. Commissioners, for the record,
George Yilmaz, Wastewater Director. This morning I'm please to
introduce John Iglehart, our south district executive director for
Florida Department of Environmental Protection in regards to early
closure of a consent order that was issued back on April 10, 2001.
Since 2001, Collier County took this consent order and
recognized it as a challenge and opportunity to make all necessary
improvements that would lead to a compliant utility nearly 10 years
early to benefit and serve our customers for years to come.
With that, I will turn the podium over to Mr. Iglehart. Sir.
MR. IGLEHART: Thank you, George.
For the record, John Iglehart, DEP in the Fort Myers office.
I'm here before you today to express the department's pleasure in
working with the county's leadership and the county's wastewater
utility team.
In the late 1990s and into the beginning of the new millennium,
Collier County's growth was accelerating at a rate greater than the
wastewater infrastructure could keep up.
The result was wastewater overflows, discharges and other
Page 20
September 26, 2006
noncompliance issued at both the north and south plants.
We had to take a position of not approving new development in
Collier County. In other words, we had to refuse permits for
hook-ups, it got so bad.
Well, the scenario could have developed into the classic Old
West, high-noon stand-off, but clearer heads prevailed, Mr. Mudd
being one of them, and the Collier County Wastewater Department
and the Florida DEP entered into a consent order in 2001.
This was to address the issues through primarily major capital
improvements. It established time lines consistent with anticipated
growth with improvements scheduled all the way out to 2016.
In the time since that agreement was hammered out, Collier
County's made great progress towards completing these consent order
requirements. Examples of early completion are an inflow infiltration
study with the piping work associated, additional reliability and safety
improvements to the north plant disinfection system, development of
in-house wastewater forecasting models to plan for and to improve
operations, safety and efficiencies at both wastewater treatment
facilities, development of a five-year plan for wastewater collection
and network rehabilitation and maintenance including critical lift
stations, which played an important role in the hurricanes that we've
had in the last couple of years, and significant master planning for
future reliability and compliance.
All that remains now, essentially, is to increase the total capacity
of the facilities to 30,000 -- or 30.6 million gallons per day, and that
was forecast to be completed in 2016. It's now on target for 2010.
So given the substantial achievements and the extensive efforts
that have been done, your wastewater crew asked us, requested us, to
close out the consent order.
Well, I'm here today personally to deliver the case closure letter
from the department.
And, Chairman Halas, I present this to you right now.
Page 21
September 26, 2006
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I want to say that -- I want to say that
this is a welcomed letter, and there's been an awful lot of blood, sweat
and tears that were involved in making sure that we lived up to the
consent agreement.
And I want to thank Jim DeLony, Jim Mudd, and all the staff that
was involved in this, and thank you so much for realizing that when
we had a problem, we got behind the effort, and here we are today.
And thank you so much for this letter. We really appreciate it.
MR. IGLEHART: So do we. We appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Before you go, a picture?
Maybe get George up here, too.
MR. MUDD: Go ahead, George.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And Jim DeLony, come here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, by all means.
MR. DeLONY: I've got a lot of staff here. Could we have them
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, all the staff. Come on up here.
Bring them up here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Make it a party.
MR. DeLONY: And Mr. Mudd.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That might be going too far.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Come on up here. It's a lot of effort, by
everybody.
MR. DeLONY: Now get tight. Suck in your guts.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Don't all exhale at the same
time.
(Applause.)
MR. IGLEHART: I'll now turn the podium back to George
Yilmaz. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, sir.
MR. YILMAZ: Commissioners, thank you very much. County
Page 22
September 26, 2006
Manager and Deputy County Manager, thank you very much.
I don't want to take more of your time but I want two minutes, I
want to briefly recognize key team members that contributed to this
process.
J on Pratt, our North Wastewater Plant Manager.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: Dale Waller, our South Wastewater Plant
Manager.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: Millie Kelley, Analytical Services and
Wastewater Laboratory Supervisor.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: Steve Nagy, our Wastewater Collections
Manager, who has no life, who's working on it.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: Beth Johnssen, our Irrigation Quality Water
Manager.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: Grant Molly, our Operations Manager. With
him are Jerry Tharpe.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: Renee, our Operations Analyst.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: Judy Johnson, Administrative Assistant.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: And other -- two key members I want to make
sure we don't miss, our Department Engineering Director, Roy
Anderson, and Pete Schalt, Project Manager, representing our
engineering team.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: We could not get where we are if we couldn't
procure what we needed to procure on time; therefore, our purchasing
Page 23
September 26, 2006
department director is here representing our procurement team.
MR. MUDD: Steve Carnell.
MR. YILMAZ: Steve Carnell.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: And, of course, without real property, we
couldn't move as fast as we did, and therefore, from our real property
department, Toni Mott, representing our real estate team.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: And of course, we did have virtually a great
number of other team members that contributed to this process. We
also recognize all other staff, including our topnotch consultants and
contractors, and more importantly, without the vision, wisdom,
support and guidance from our county commissioners, this day would
not be possible.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let's give them a hand.
(Applause. )
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Just goes to show when the team gets
together, there's nothing that we can't accomplish here in Collier
County, and what a wonderful team that we had assembled to take on
this task.
Thank you so much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: George, are you going to introduce
somebody else?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: There's a gentleman who's still sitting.
He's our senior field supervisor, Jim Gammell, and he truly does not
have a life from working on this.
(Applause.)
MR. YILMAZ: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very, very much.
I thought you were done, George, that's why I jumped in there.
I'm sorry.
MR. MUDD: The next -- that finishes up with presentations.
Page 24
September 26, 2006
Again, 5C and 5D are continued until the 10th of October.
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY SHIRLEY ISON TO DISCUSS
TOWING CHARGE TO REMOVE CAR FROM ROCK ROAD -
DISCUSSED
The next item is public petitions, and we have one public petition
today. It's a public petition request by Shirley Ison to discuss a towing
charge to remove a car from Rock Road.
Ms. Ison?
MS. ISON: Good morning. I'm here to discuss this order of
having a car towed, and I understand it was on Collier County
property. My property joins Collier County. It's right in back of me.
During the flood, I was unable to get a vehicle out Rock Road, so
my husband talked to the people that are working back there. They
told me -- told him they had no say-so for sure, but they didn't see it
being a problem.
So my husband towed the car to the back of our property and
parked it on Collier County property for the night in order to be able
to get out. He pulled it back with an A TV.
The next day when I go to get the car, it's been towed away. I
had no idea where it was at, who towed it or anything.
So I talked to the people that are working for Collier County --
what, doing the well drilling or whatever they're doing back there.
They found out where my car was, gave me a number to call.
When I called, the person that he gave me the number of wasn't
in, so they gave me another gentleman.
He told me where my car was, what the charge was for having it
towed away, and I complained to him, and I asked him to help me
with the charge. I said, so you're telling me that in order to get my car
Page 25
September 26,2006
back, I have to pay $182?
The car belongs to my granddaughter, which is there with me.
He said, you or your granddaughter will pay if you want your car
back. I mean, I didn't like his attitude at all. So I came out, I talked to
Commissioner Coletta.
And I just didn't think it was right, considering the circumstances.
Now, had it been a -- Rock Road been dry, I could have got out that
way. The car would have never been there. It was only parked there
overnight in order to be able to get. Then I had to ride an A TV
through two foot of water to get to the car, and then it was gone.
So I didn't think it was appropriate to do that without even -- the
people knew the car that was parked there, that worked there, they
could have told them who it belonged to and everything, but they
didn't. I found out where my car was at, or where my granddaughter's
car was at. I had to go pay $182 to get it out, the towing. They
damaged the car, but that's beside the point. And--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commission Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. This is -- the reason
we're here today is that, you know, I think that Ms. Ison, just as any
citizen of Collier County, when they reach an impasse and they can't
receive what they believe to be a fair compensation or a fair judgment
from staff, always has the right to bring it before their county
commissioners, those people that can ask the questions and possibly
direct staff to do certain things.
As we all know, one commissioner by himself can never direct
staff. All they can do is ask questions, and that's about the extent of it;
however, with us sitting here together, we can weigh all the facts and
we can render decisions that staff themselves is not empowered to do.
And with that, I'd like to know if I could have somebody from
staff answer a couple of questions.
MR. STULLER: Ty Stuller, Water Distribution Manager.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you so much for being
Page 26
September 26, 2006
here this morning. And I don't think this will take too long.
What I'm trying to establish, the conditions that took place at the
time that this happened was later declared an emergency by this
commission and that situations were very hectic, to say the least.
People as always, when a disaster of this type comes by, are usually
left to their own resources at the beginning of the disaster with other
government entities coming in to help later.
As this took place and unfolded, was -- Ms. Ison, when they
came up and they asked permission, were they given permission or
were they given conditional permission to be able to use the county
property to park their vehicle on?
MR. STULLER: No, sir. They were not given permission.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could you tell me how the -- to
your best recollection, how the discussion went when the request was
made?
MR. STULLER: I have a presentation here, sir, if I could present
it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Thank you so much. I
appreciate that.
MR. STULLER: On Sunday, September 3rd, an employee for
Mitchell and Stark, the contractor installing the new wells for the
county in the North Reverse Osmosis Wellfield, was approached by a
neighboring property owner. The property owner requested
permission to park a private vehicle along the improved access road to
this wellfield.
The contractor's representative stated that he is not authorized to
provide this approval and advised the resident to contact Collier
County Water Department directly.
On Thursday, September 7th, Mitchell and Stark arrived at their
work zone and noted that a vehicle was parked at the end of the
improved access road, blocking their path to the fill dirt and other
supplies needed to complete their assigned -- their assignments that
Page 27
September 26, 2006
day.
A supervisor from Mitchell and Stark was called to the site by his
employees. When he arrived, he discovered that the vehicle was
parked in a work zone. He contacted the Collier County Sheriff's
Department.
The sheriff's department ran a check on the vehicle. Because the
vehicle was licensed in Kentuc~y, the sheriff's department could not
provide a local address for the owner.
Mitchell and Stark then contacted the county water department
and asked for the vehicle to be towed so the contractor could access
his supplies. The water department complied with his request and had
the vehicle towed at approximately two p.m.
At approximately four p.m., the water department received a call
from the grandmother of the owner of the vehicle, Ms. Ison, who
stated that she needed to know where the vehicle was. She stated the
vehicle in question was her granddaughter's and that she needed to go
to work.
Ms. Ison informed -- was informed of the location the vehicle
was towed to. The water department offered that in the future if she
needed to park a vehicle on county property, that she would contact
the water department so the vehicle could be placed in a safe location
away from the construction zone.
It should be noted that the contractor, Mitchell and Stark, a
locally owned and managed company, has suffered heavy losses on
the job site due to several large dollar value thefts and a number of
acts of vandalism. The area is posted no trespassing.
It should also be noted that the public water facility, and due to
Homeland Security concerns, any unauthorized activity or abandoned
vehicles in this area of public water supply facilities are taken very
seriously.
As an example, a well was vandalized on September 5th in
another one of Collier County's wellfields. In order to place the well
Page 28
September 26, 2006
back in service, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
required extensive and expensive testing of the well. The well is still
out of service today and unavailable for water production until all
chemical analysis is received from the contract laboratory.
The abandoned vehicle was towed because it was in a work zone
and because it was considered a security threat.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My questions have been answered.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Under the circumstances, I don't
think this commission's going to entertain reimbursement of the
money. And I can understand what staff is saying. I also understand
the fact that there was an extreme hardship at the time, but the
conflicting parts there and the fact that the car was registered in
Kentucky and action had to be taken to be able to clear the area to be
able to get to the area to be able to service the well.
Little choice was given as far as what -- should it be towed or
not, so I guess that comes down to whether reimbursement should be
asked for under unusual circumstances. Well, unusual circumstances
do exist; however, with that said, I don't think that this commission's
going to go -- even though it seems kind of small, 180-some dollars
compared to the millions of dollars we deal with every day.
Now, I'm not an attorney, and the only thing I can tell you is that
failing to get what you consider, you know, due recourse today -- and
one of the reasons I wanted you to come here today, so that all
avenues have been explored and exhausted one way or the other for
whatever outcome may come from here. You do have the opportunity
to be able to possibly go through the courts.
I'm not an attorney, but I can tell you that small claims courts
might be available to you for a small fee to be able to reach back and
try to be able to gain restitution if you still feel that the circumstances
Page 29
September 26, 2006
that were presented here today weren't true and factual to the point
that you understood it to be.
MS. ISON: Well, first of all, I disagree with some of what he
said because the car was not in their way. It was over to the side of
their road going through there. The people that were working there,
they did say they didn't have the authority to tell us that we could park
the car there, but they didn't see it being a problem just for overnight.
And some of the other stuff that he said there is totally wrong,
what he -- when I talked to the gentleman that was very rude with me,
he told me if I wanted my car back, I would pay the $182.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, and I understand what
you're saying. And there's never any excuse for any of us ever losing
our temper, but I do know that you were under all sorts of pressures
and so was the county employees that may have addressed it.
I, myself, had received hundreds of phone calls, and hundred and
hundreds of emails, and I'm still wading through all of them trying to
get answers back to everyone. Possibly, you know, everybody in the
human element entered this on all possible sides, and maybe
somebody was short with you, and for that, I apologize. You know,
there's no real excuse other than the fact that, you know, we do get
pushed to limits sometimes.
MS. ISON: I mean, that property back there, like I said, my
property joins it. We kind of watch after the property. As a matter of
fact, my husband has had the sheriffs department out there checking
out one of their heavy equipment -- pieces of equipment, the motor
running, nobody there, nobody around. I mean, we kind of watch out
for the place back there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And we do appreciate that
because, in all reality, as a taxpayer, you're an owner in part of the
whole thing and bear responsibility, too, to a certain degree.
MS. ISON: Well, I thank you very much. And again, I would
like to say thanks for everyone on Rock Road for what you did for us,
Page 30
September 26, 2006
putting the rock out there. It was greatly appreciated, on my part
anyway. Maybe some don't feel that, some did, as the meeting went
the other day. But I want to say thank you to all of you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The whole commission needs
the thanks. They're the ones that made that decision collectively.
MS. ISON: Okay. Then I thank everyone that had any part in it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. And I don't want to get into
your personal life, but I'd just like to caution you about one thing. I
don't know how long this car has been here from -- that's licensed in
Kentucky, but there is a requirement that if the car stays here a certain
period of time it must be -- it must be licensed in Collier County. So I
would be --
MS. ISON: Well, it's not even being driven now. I just --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it doesn't make much
difference whether it's being driven or not, but just be careful that you
don't get yourself in a situation where you might be faced with another
fine for failure to properly register the automobile. So it's something
you need to watch out for, okay?
MS. ISON: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, ma'am.
Item #9 A
RESOLUTION 2006-255: APPOINTING DEREK CHORL TON TO
THE CONTRACTOR'S LICENSING BOARD - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to paragraph 9,
which is the Board of County Commissioners. 9A is appointment of a
member of the Contractor's Licensing Board.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'd like to nominate Derek Chorlton,
since there was no --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to second, but I do have
Page 31
September 26, 2006
one question, if I may.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You -- is this person known to
you personally?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is not?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You know, that's it. I kind of
hoped that it would be a personal recommendation, but failing to get
anything else --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was impressed with Richard Gill,
in case you want me to throw something in there because -- I guess
because he was a Harvard Business School graduate and business
manager and labor council and deputy sheriff, so it sounded
impressive. But, you know, whatever you guys think.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I read the -- I went through each
one of the --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Me, too.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- the background, and I felt that this
gentleman was -- would fit the criteria. He was involved in a lot of
community things, and I --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I don't have any preference.
I don't know the man. I don't know any of them.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's why I just felt that the person gets
around here, and I felt that he'd make a good addition to that board.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's good enough for me. I'll
second it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So we have -- any other
discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner Coletta in
Page 32
September 26, 2006
regards to filling the Contractor's Licensing Board with Derek
Chorlton, Chorlington (sic).
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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item #9B
MOTION TO RE-ADVERTISE FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A
MEMBER TO THE BOARD OF BUILDING ADJUSTMENTS AND
APPEALS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 9B. It's appointment of a member to the Board of Building
Adjustments and Appeals.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I make a --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion we accept the committee
recommendations.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I'll second the motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Staff indicated --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: This guy name Pierre Bruno
sounded outstanding, too, but I hope he applies again. He sounded
like a really good guy.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Under B.
Page 33
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm C. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We're talking about -- the
committee recommendation was quasi-judicial. The staffhas
indicated that the applicant does not meet the criteria of a licensed
plumbing contractor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, and I second Commissioner
Coyle's motion on taking staffs recommendation.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And so we're going to put this --
we're going to -- my understanding is that we're going to put this out --
MS. FILSON: I will readvertise, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, to readvertise this position, okay.
Okay. So we have a motion on the floor by Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Coyle.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- Coyle and a second by Commissioner
Fiala.
Any further discussion?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No, I'm ready to go.
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?
Motion carries.
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2006-256: APPOINTING WILLIAM VARIAN TO
THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE -
Page 34
September 26, 2006
ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9C. It's an
appointment of a member to the Development Services Advisory
Committee.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I make a motion that we approve the
committee's selection of Bill Varian as the primary selection.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. There was a question that I raised
in regards to what district Mr. Varian is in.
MS. FILSON: And I got the memo back from the elections
office indicating the second district, but I looked it up on our map, and
it's district 5.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: District 5, okay. So that's --
MS. FILSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. That's what I wasn't sure of,
because the zip code didn't match up with the particular district, okay.
So we have a motion on the floor for the nomination of Bill
Varian.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And we have a second by Commissioner
Coy Ie on that.
MS. FILSON: Who seconded that?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Huh?
MS. FILSON: Who seconded that?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle.
Any other discussions?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. There's a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Fiala, second by Commissioner Coyle.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 35
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item #9D
A DISCUSSION REQUESTING FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION TO RESERVE 20 MILLION DOLLARS FOR
THE FUTURE FUNDING OF WIDENING DAVIS BOULEVARD -
STAFF TO SEND A LETTER OF COMMITMENT FROM
COLLIER COUNTY TO THE FDOT TO RESERVE $20 MILLION
AND BRING BACK AN AGREEMENT FOR THE BCC TO
REVIEW - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 9D, and this is a--
to discuss the potential merits of requesting the Florida Department of
Transportation to reserve $20 million of available future funding
outside their five-year work program for advancement for
reimbursements to the county for the Davis Boulevard widening
project, and this item was asked for by Commissioner Halas.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. This came up in discussion at the
MPO meeting in regards to, if we were going to lend the State of
Florida the $20 million in order to address the issues at Davis
Boulevard.
And I guess my concern is -- and this is probably a good time to
have open discussion on this -- if we lend the $20 million, will we get
the $20 million back? And that's my concern at this point in time, and
hopefully staff can give us some direction.
MR. SCOTT: The first part is that they requested that if we were
Page 36
September 26, 2006
still interested, to send a letter to the secretary of DOT.
The second part is obviously not an agreement yet that you have
for approval, and at any point down the road you can decide not to
approve the agreement or not.
As for promises, Johnny is in the audience -- Johnny Limbaugh is
in the audience from FDOT if you'd like to have him say something
on the record.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Hold onto your wallets.
MR. SCOTT: And I forgot mine today.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Johnny, can you enlighten us a little bit
on that -- in regards to the request here?
MR. LIMBAUGH: Yes, sir. Johnny Limbaugh, Florida DOT,
for the record.
This is a program that's set forth in Florida Statute. It basically
sets aside $100 million of future capacity money to basically allow
local governments to borrow against that capacity to advance local
priority projects and then get paid back in those future years.
To date, the Florida Department of Transportation has not not
paid someone back that we have under an agreement. So, I mean,
that's the first thing we do when we -- when we go into our new work
program cycle and we have to balance our work program, just like you
guys have to balance your budgets, first thing we do is look at
outstanding agreements, so we make sure we set that money aside to
make sure those obligations are paid for before we move forward even
with resurfacing, maintenance of existing facilities, and then future
capacity .
So I don't -- I'm comfortable saying, you know, there's -- we
haven't not paid anyone back to date, so --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. One of my concerns is, what is
the time line that you'd be paying the county back?
MR. LIMBAUGH: Well, that's what would be negotiated. Right
now what we need -- there's several other counties that -- of that $100
Page 37
September 26, 2006
million that's available, there's $20 million that is available to a given
jurisdiction. And right now Collier County is in number one position
to accept that capacity.
If you guys decide not to move forward with it, it will be released
and it will go somewhere. Another county or city in the State of
Florida will take advantage of that opportunity.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At the accel -- cost of the
project's being accelerated with the cost, Don, where does that leave
us as far as meeting our obligations to get this road completed at 20
million? I know that originally it was around 30 million?
MR. SCOTT: We -- we've been working closely with FDOT and
their design consultant on the issue of trying to get the project --
essentially donated right-of-way, donated pond sites, anything that we
can identify to lower the cost of the project.
At the moment, I believe the cost estimate's around $43 million
total. They have 20 million programmed out four years out into the
future.
We were looking at -- when we get to the final design cost
estimate, obviously you'd be looking at trying to raise that amount of
money because we're trying to make a project that will get
constructed.
One of the things that you asked about was when we would get
paid back. We would start getting paid back, I presume, from what
we talked about, in 2012 with our share of funding coming back to us
based on, right now our share is about 6 million a year, but obviously
we see what it is at that time, but over the, at least four or five years.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to
direct staff to bring back to the Board of Commissioners an action
item to reserve -- to request the Florida Department of Transportation
to reserve $20 million for Davis Boulevard improvements.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
Page 38
September 26,2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning for approval of the $20 million to be -- for
FDOT in regards to getting this project started, and we have a second
by Commissioner Coyle.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is there anything we need to have
clarified in the motion, County Attorney?
MR. PETTIT: I don't believe so, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Pardon?
MR. PETTIT: I don't believe so.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just want to --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: If I could -- yeah, as the seconder,
I'd like to clarify that Commissioner Henning said that -- bring the
agreement back to us for approval, so we're not approving the money
right now.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You're absolutely right -- you're
absolutely -- to bring this back.
MR. SCOTT: What FDOT was asking was that we send them a
commitment that we want to go forward with an agreement, so that's
all they're asking for at this moment.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is that the motion or--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. I'll amend my motion to
reflect a letter of commitment from Collier County government to the
Florida Department of Transportation for them to reserve that money
for Davis Boulevard improvements.
MR. MUDD: And staff will come back with the action item and
the agreement and everything for the board's approval.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is that in your second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And my second. Getting the
agreement back for review and approval by the board is very
Page 39
September 26, 2006
important, okay, as the final item of this process.
MR. SCOTT: Exactly. And we're still working with their
designer trying to get -- make sure we get all the portions done, make
sure we have a cost that goes with what we're trying to do.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The letter of commitment is in
the motion and to reserve the funds of the 20 million to be brought
back to the Board of County Commissioners; is that the understanding
we have here?
Okay. Motion by Commissioner Henning and second by
Commissioner Coyle. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item #10H
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE 16 IMPACT FEE
DEFERRAL APPLICATIONS AND APPROVE THE PERMANENT
RESIDENT CARD AS PROOF OF RESIDENCY - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 10H, and this
is a time certain item for 10 a.m. It's a recommendation to approve the
attached 16 impact fee deferral applications and approve the
permanent resident card as substantial proof of residency.
Page 40
September 26, 2006
And Mr. Cormac Giblin, your manager for affordable housing,
will present. And I probably didn't get your title correct.
MR. GIBLIN: Good morning, Commissioners. Cormac Giblin,
your Housing and Grants Manager.
We're here to ask for really two things today, and I have a small
presentation I'll guide you through. It's -- you made some changes to
your countywide impact fee deferral program on July 26th that would
require that all applicants be screened and only be allowed in the
program if they were either a U.S. citizen or a permanent resident, a
legal permanent resident of the United States. And so that was -- on
July 25th, you made that decision.
At that meeting the board approved four forms of documentation
that staff would have the ability to approve an impact fee deferral
application based on. Those are a U.S. passport, a certificate of U.S.
citizenship, a certificate of U.S. naturalization, or an original U.S.
birth certificate, and you also gave us direction that any applicant
using any other application to prove U.S. citizenship or permanent
legal residency would be heard on a case by case basis and decided on
by the Board of County Commissioners yourselves.
And since that July 26th board date, we have received affordable
housing impact fee deferral applications from 15 individuals who have
produced original -- an original permanent resident card as their proof
of legal U.S. residency, and these applicants are buying homes in
many different developments around the county built by several
different builders.
One correction I'd like to make to your executive summary is that
the original request was for 16 applicants. In the time since it was
prepared, one of those 16 did provide us with an original U.S. birth
certificate, so the request has been amended to only 15.
And those are -- this was included in your backup material.
That's just a listing of the 15 applicants, what their impact fees are or
what their deferral amount would be, and the documentation that they
Page 41
September 26, 2006
have provided.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner--
MR. GIBLIN: A little bit of background on what is a permanent
resident card. It is an official card issued by the U.S. Government, the
identification for a legal permanent resident of the United States who
doesn't have citizenship. In a sense, it is one step before citizenship. It
is proof that the holder has permission to permanently reside in the
United States.
The card is a hard plastic card similar to the new Florida Driver's
Licenses. It is embedded with certain security and anti-counterfeiting,
anti-duplication enhancements, and it is difficult to make a counterfeit
copy.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Actually on that subject -- so
I'm glad you called me right this moment. I just want to make sure
that, you know, it isn't -- it hasn't become a business to make those
things, and so I talked to Lieutenant Mike Nelson over at the sheriffs
office, and he said -- he agreed. He said that they're just very, very
difficult to duplicate.
And in fact -- and, of course, he's a lieutenant here in East
Naples, so that's where we would have most of it. And he said, he's
never found an instance. So I just wanted to confirm that everything
you've said is correct.
MR. GIBLIN : Yeah. The enhanced features of the card make it
very difficult. It's a good document now.
So that is our recommendation, is that the board consider the
approval of these 15 applicants who have produced original permanent
residency cards.
And number two, that the board expand a list of documentation
that staff has the authority to give approvals on to include the -- an
original U.S. permanent resident card, and I'll be happy to answer any
questions.
Page 42
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would just like to say that
I reviewed the detailed applications and all the paperwork for each of
these people, and I was pleasantly surprised that every one of them
included a federal income tax return, they are legally paying taxes,
they're submitting all of their income for verification, that they seem
to be people who are really deserving of this housing.
And I would make a motion that we approve these applications
and to make the permanent residency card one of the recognized
methods --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- of verifying this.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- do you want -- would you like to hold
off your making your motion till we hear from the public? I think we
have three public speakers.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: He can still make it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, yeah. But one final thing.
In reviewing the documentation, it is very clear that the applicants are
not the ones in many cases filling them out or signing them. Someone
else is putting the names on some of these documents.
Now, I can tell that in some cases it is the spouse who is putting
the other spouse's name on this. And there's probably absolutely
nothing wrong with that. I can understand why maybe both of them
can't be there at the same time.
But it would be good if we were -- exercised a little tighter
control in making sure that the people who are actually applying for
this are the ones who've signed the forms. They might need some help
filling them out, and that's understandable. But I really would like to
see their signatures on all these documents. And a couple of them it's
very clear that that was not the case. But that's a relatively minor
matter here.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
Page 43
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: My question goes a little deeper.
What we're doing now, what we see before us, is this a standard that
we've been following prior to this commission asking for this other
information, or you're limiting the amounts of documentation they
would accept?
MR. GIBLIN: No. The full application package that
Commissioner Coyle referenced, that has not changed since your July
26th meeting. We've always required the people give us their full
income tax verifications, income disclosures, that kind of
documentation.
Your recommendation on July 26 was that you limit the program
participation to only U.S. citizens or legal residents.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. And it was just how you
come up with the documentation for what a legal resident is. I
understand that.
My other question is, is related to the process that you're going
through to get there. The -- if someone fabricated every piece of
information, income tax, found a way to -- income tax returns, found a
way to be able to duplicate this card in a fashion through technology
that doesn't exist today and went down the whole list and they did
manage to beat the system -- probably unlikely -- but if they did, when
they were found out, I mean, it's a long-term venture they're going to
be in; am I correct?
I mean, you don't buy a home and then turn it in six months.
Generally you go into it with the idea you're going to be there quite a
long period of time.
If they were -- if they were -- if they provided erroneous
information, then the contract would probably be null and void, and
they would be liable and possibly even prosecuted for what they did;
am I correct?
MR. GIBLIN: That is correct. Every one of these -- these are
not grants. These are loans or deferrals.
Page 44
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So there are safeguards over and
above what we see here to be able to protect the taxpayers of Collier
County and the United States of America.
MR. GIBLIN: If at a later time we were to find that someone in
your example produced an entire fraudulent application, we do have
that authority to go and foreclose on that lien.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I noticed in two of the
applications -- I, too, went through all of them -- and I noticed two that
the wives didn't have permanent residency cards, but that's nothing
that we ever stipulated. And so I guess that by marriage they become
legal; is that correct?
MR. GIBLIN: Not exactly. The -- our requirement is that one of
the owners -- or one of the homeowners be a legal resident or a
citizen. If the wife or the spouse is not legal, we're limiting the deferral
to just the person who is -- who does meet the criteria. They may be a
resident of the home, but we're not assisting -- well, we're not putting a
lien in their name.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And before -- we never insisted on
the permanent residency card before, did we?
MR. GIBLIN: No, we did not.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We'll have the--
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, we have three speakers.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Chris Straton. She'll be followed by Mary Ann
Durso.
MS. STRATON: Chris Straton. I'm a member of the Affordable
Housing Commission. I'm here if there were any questions. I like the
Page 45
September 26, 2006
motion that's tentatively on the floor, so I won't waste any more of
your time. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Mary Ann Durso. She'll be followed by Sister
Maureen Kelleher.
MS. DURSO: My name is Mary Ann Durso. I'm the executive
director of Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, the main provider
of affordable housing for the last 28 years for those making 60 percent
or less of the median income in Collier County.
Habitat for Humanity does not build houses for illegal residents
of the United States. We require documenting -- documentation
proving legal status, we require birth certificates, passports,
naturalization papers or permanent resident cards. We sell our houses
at our cost with no profit and provide a zero interest mortgage to our
homeowners.
We require social security cards for all family members. We
verify these numbers with the Social Security Administration. We
require employment verification and copies of three years of income
tax returns.
We do criminal checks and credit checks on all our potential
homeowners. Weare a financial institution and take our fiduciary
responsibilities to our donors very seriously.
It should be noted that Habitat homeowners, once they attain
simple, decent homes at a price they can afford, are able to become
United States citizens with the money they save by being a Habitat
homeowner.
Habitat for Humanity has built almost 1,000 homes in Collier
County over the last 28 years. Habitat homeowners last year paid
more than $500,000 in real estate taxes to Collier County.
Over the last five years, Habitat has built 100 homes per year at a
cost of about $10 million per year. The majority of these funds are
raised from generous donors in Collier County. They contribute to
Page 46
September 26, 2006
SISTER KELLEHER: My name is Sister Maureen Kelleher.
I'm a religious of the Sacred Heart of Mary, and I have been an
attorney in Immokalee, Florida, for over 20 years.
My duties are predominantly in immigration, and I would love to
serve any of your staff who have questions about this matter, because
it is a very developing field and very complicated.
I do want to just raise two answers, because I see I like the
tentative motion the floor. I want to point out that if you just write this
in absolute, there is a little class of persons who will not be served not
because of their fault, but because immigration itself is overwhelmed
and underfunded for its task, hence the crisis right now throughout the
country.
One form of proof a person might furnish, which I recognize, as
does the government, is when they go for their permanent resident
interview and they have aU. S. -- I mean their country passport, the
government will stamp in the passport that they have been approved
for a 551. It is proof, for all purposes, that they are a legal permanent
resident.
The card which you have addressed is something that comes in
the mail. It could be in three weeks; it could be in a year and a half. It
is an incredible arbitrary thing as to when the card actually arrives.
But what has arrived timely is, Welcome to the United States, on
a piece of paper that would be very hard to duplicate because it has all
this embedded wavy lines on a certain stock of paper. And I don't
know whether you're ready for this, but if I were queen of the world,
there would be one more form of proof, and it would be an up-to-date
passport with a CIS stamp saying, approved for 551. That's the
permanent resident card number.
And basically, you're just dealing with a person who's going to
hit a delay. And you should know at this point, because of terrorism,
our government runs every name through several databases, an
incredible amount, so that by the time Joe Blow gets approved as a
Page 48
September 26, 2006
permanent resident, he has had such an up and down check through all
sorts of intelligence databases.
Last of all, I wanted to raise the question, what about the wife
who's not documented who might be in the household. I would say
that the overwhelming pattern is, he is petitioning for her and it is a
matter of time, if she hasn't already been approved, waiting for her
card. It's just a matter of time when she'll be approved usually.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, ma'am.
MS. FILSON: Final speaker is Bob Krasowski.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Hello again. Bob Krasowski. I am a
27-year resident of Collier County; 59-year resident of the United
States, veteran, taxpayer, worker, all that stuff.
I would think we should prioritize these subsidies or -- to people
that are buying these homes or participating in these programs.
And I'm very much alarmed that a husband can have a wife or
bring in other families members that are undocumented. So what
you're doing today is allowing for lawbreakers to have -- operate safe
houses so that illegal immigrants can come into the country and
undermine the workforce that's here already.
The illegal immigration issues has always been one of economics
and the use of the business class or the people who profit off of the
low wage, undermining unions and working class that's been going on
since the beginning, and it is one element we should consider.
So I think until all the veterans returning from various places
have housing, adequate housing and are financed for this, there should
be no undocumented illegal people residing, and you should make that
a stipulation in the contract to purchase these homes, and if anybody
violates that and operates in the safe houses, that they should not
benefit from these deferrals which defer traffic -- funds going to
traffic, so we all have to go into heavier traffic, library, schools.
They're all postponements on their contribution to these other things.
I think overall this program is a great program. It's good stuff
Page 49
September 26, 2006
you're doing to try to help people, but it should be concentrated on the
needs of people who are legitimately here.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That's your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Public hearing's closed.
Any discussion from our commissioners? I think Commissioner
Coyle, you've got a motion there?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I thought I made a motion, but I'll
try to make it again. I would recommend approval of these applicants,
all of whom, I believe, have evidence of permanent residency
authorization.
I do agree with Bob Krasowski that there should not be any
illegal aliens afforded housing by this program. But I will also make
the recommendation that we change the list of docu -- we add to the
list of documents the permanent residency card as a means of
verifying that people are authorized to be here as full-time residents.
And that's the end of my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: For both husband and wife?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: For both husband and wife, yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to second it, but I'd also
like to see you add to that motion, because safeguards that are in
place, that other document, the CIS stamped passport.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not going to do that. I'm not
going to burden Collier County with the inefficiencies of our federal
government and the Immigration Naturalization Services.
I think it's in absolute shambles. I don't have the same level of
confidence in their ability to screen, and I'm going to wait until I see a
document. And it might cause somebody some difficulty and delay,
but I'm not going that far. I'm going to stick with something I can put
my hands on, and that's the permanent residency card, and I'm not
going to start taking shortcuts.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So I understand your motione
Page 50
September 26, 2006
such that we won't have to have it come before us again if they have
the --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Permanent residency card, that's
right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- permanent residency card,
and the other birth certificates and whatever that we mentioned
before?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that someone that has this
particular passport, they would have to come before us for evaluation.
I can go along with that, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah. They always can
come back. If you've got some valid reason that the staff thinks is
supportable, it can always come back for our review.
But I think our entire immigration system is a mess. I think it's
way too complex. I think there're way too many categories. And if
local governments don't start getting a little more strict about what
they permit, the federal government will never change. So I -- this is
the bottom-up push.
MR. GIBLIN: Commissioners, just to clarify the motion. I
thought I heard in there, both -- if it's a married couple, both would
need a permanent resident card; was that in the motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion maker?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Anyone who is entitled to sign
those documents and who creates an obligation must be a legal
resident.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is that in your second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I don't have a problem
with that because we already require that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney, is there anything we
need to add to this motion?
Page 51
September 26, 2006
for.
MR. PETTIT: No. That clarification is what I was going to ask
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, great. Is there any other
discussion by the board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
Hearing 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Why don't we take a lO-minute break
and be back at lO:36.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, County Manager.
County Board of Commissioners is now back in session.
Everyone take their seats.
Item #9E & 9F
REQUEST TO RECONSIDER THE CREEKSIDE COMMERCE
PARK PUD AMENDMENT RECONSIDERATION REQUEST
AND NAPLES DAILY NEWS PUDZ-2005-AR-8833; TO BE
Page 52
September 26, 2006
HEARD AT THE OCTOBER 24,2006 BCC METING-
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 9E and 9F,
and I believe they're together, at least the petitioner representative or
counsel, Mr. R. Bruce Anderson in his request that he sent to me,
wanted to have both items reconsidered.
9E is the Creekside Commerce Park PUD amendment
reconsideration request. I had two commissioners respond in the
affirmative that they would like to have that item reconsidered and the
next item is 9F, and that's the Naples Daily News PUD,
PUDZ-2005-AR-8833, and that's a reconsideration request, and I
received that from Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a question from the county
attorney, and that is why do we have to bring back the first issue?
Because it passed 4-1, I believe.
MR. PETTIT: Mr. Chairman, that's a question I'll have to direct
to the petitioner. I mean, that actually has been approved --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah.
MR. PETTIT: -- and has been sent up to the -- sent up to the
Secretary of State for the ordinance amendment.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: There's been a request to bring it back by the
petitioner and by a commissioner voting in the majority.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Because it was passed, so I'm not sure
where we are on that. So if the petitioner could enlighten us a little
bit.
MR. ANDERSON: Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. For the record, my name is Bruce Anderson, from
Roetzel and Andress on behalf of the property owner.
The request for the reconsideration of Creekside as well as the
Naples Daily News Business Park PUD was because they are
Page 53
September 26, 2006
companion and interrelated petitions, and what might or might not
occur on one could or could not have a bearing on the other. And it's
only appropriate that they be considered and readvertised at the same
time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But one was already approved, the one
that we're talking about 9F.
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, and we--
MR. MUDD: 9E, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Or 9E, excuse me.
MR. ANDERSON: It was approved with a contingent effective
date, and our request is that both items be readvertised and reheard.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Since I asked -- I put this
on the agenda, I want to speak about it a little bit.
I don't know if the Board of Commissioners have read Laurel
Lytton's column on why I was -- object to the rezone. And as I stated
in the business park district, it is -- the zoned height is 35 foot, and the
request was -- far exceeds that to around 100 percent. That is why I
voted no on it.
Now, prior to -- and I disclosed this information. I talked to Paul
Marinelli of the Barron Collier Company. And I told him I have no
problem with rezones as long as they fit the intent of our zoning laws.
So I did call him afterwards and stated again why I voted against
it. And his response was, well, if we have our attorneys and our
planning staff show you that it is not a deviation from your code and it
does fit the spirit of the intent of the law, would you reconsider it?
And I told him that if -- if I know that there's a reconsideration
that may come forward, then I think it's appropriate that I ask the
county staff on where I was flawed in the -- in this particular case,
Land Development Code. And our staff did a good job, and we went
over several issues.
Commissioner Halas brought up the fact that in the zoning
Page 54
September 26,2006
district of business parks it was 35 feet and they were asking for 75
feet. This was brought up four times during the public hearing. I
didn't see that properly addressed.
And now that staff has answered my questions properly, I -- and I
was wrong in the assumption. And if you look in our zoning district,
section 2, it clearly states that a PUD is its own separate animal and
can and may deviate from height and setbacks and so on and so forth.
And so with that said I'm going to make a motion that we
approve the reconsideration for the rehearing of PUDZ-2005-AR-8833
and PUDZA-2005-AR-8832, and for this item to be heard on October
24, 2006. That is my motion.
I also want to state one other thing to make it clear that nobody
from the Naples Daily News or Scripts Howard has spoken to me
except for the reporter that was reported in the Naples Daily News
during this process.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second your motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I believe we have some public
speakers.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I have two speakers and Bruce
Anderson already spoke, and the other one --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, under reconsideration -- unless it's
the wish of this board, under reconsideration the board can ask
questions of the petitioner and of staff and they vote on the particular
action for it to come back at a time in the future and it goes through
the full advertising and the public vetting issue, so --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: -- you don't take speakers on reconsideration, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh, okay.
MS. FILSON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I guess that solved that problem.
Page 55
September 26, 2006
Any other further discussion?
(No response.)
MR. MUDD: Do any commissioners have any questions of the
petitioner and/or staff at this time?
(No response.)
MR. MUDD: Hearing none.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I guess not. Okay. We have a motion
on the floor by Commissioner Henning for reconsideration of both the
items, and they are to be heard on October 24, 2006, and the second
by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS. (No response.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What was the count?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: 4-0, I sub stained (sic). Okay?
MR. PETTIT: Sir?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Abstained.
MR. PETTIT: I would need to understand what your reasons for
abstaining were, Mr. Chairman. I believe it's -- generally under the
Florida Statute, you're required to vote.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Then I vote in favor of it then.
MR. PETTIT: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay? 5-0.
Page 56
September 26, 2006
MR. MUDD: That was both items 9E and 9F --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's correct.
MR. MUDD: -- and Commissioner Henning was quite explicit
as far as those particular items.
Item #9G
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FOR THE COUNTY
MANAGER - APPROVED
That brings us to the next item, which is 9G, which is the annual
performance appraisal for the county manager, and as typically done,
the executive summary is signed by the chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners, and that's why Commissioner Halas's name is
on this. But it's normally a dialogue amongst the commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it clearly shows by the
average of the Board of Commissioners that the county manager is
due, under the contract, a merit increase, a one-time bonus, so -- and
I'm in favor of that. I don't know if the county manager feels
uncomfortable to give the board direction.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, in my contract it says it can be
added to my pay. In the executive summary I made it quite clear that I
choose not to do that. That it's a one-time issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. MUDD: And I believe that's only fair with the standing
policy of the Board of County Commissioners as far as one-time
bonuses to directors and administrators, and I should be treated no
differently than they are.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And no further direction for the
board?
MR. MUDD: It was a great year. Thank you very much. That's
Page 57
September 26, 2006
it, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And so it should be, in my
opinion, above average as far as a bonus.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commission Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. If I may suggest, the
overall rating the county manager got from four commissioner
averaged out, came to 83 percent, and that if we use that as a
guideline, 83 percent, against the amount of $1 7,486, it would be the
maximum if he received a 100 percent rating, that the 83 percent
would equal $14,513, and that would be my recommendation to this
commiSSioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Fourteen thousand what?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Fourteen thousand, five hundred
thirteen dollars.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I have a motion on the floor in
regards to this raise of83 percent, $14,513, by Commissioner Coletta
and a second by Commissioner Henning.
And Commissioner Fiala has something to say.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I just wanted to say -- and
you didn't see it in this backup material, which I would have loved to
have been in here, but I didn't do my job correctly -- most of you
typed your stuff out. I wrote mine in between the lines.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I read it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, did you?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. I got a copy.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, good. And so I just wanted to
state on the record the great achievements he's made throughout the
year with, my goodness, so many things. And I noted them all on
there.
I think CDES has really done a great job of coming forward, and
Page 58
September 26, 2006
I'm glad that the county manager hired Kim Grant to help with that
process.
I think that with our -- with our stormwater management, I think
we've exceeded everything we could even hope for.
With our water and Wastewater Treatment Department, well, we
saw this morning how we've topped everything we had before and
we've overcome some obstacles that we were blessed with when we
took office, and I always credit Jim for that because he's got such a
strong background in all of that stuff with the Army Corps.
And I just wanted those things said on the record because he's
done a great job. Yeah, I put a couple suggestions in there too. But I
just wanted to go on record as saying those things because most
people won't be able to read it in here.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The other thing that I would like to say
in regards to this is that we've accomplished an awful lot in this county
in the last five years with the leadership that we have, not only our
county manager, but in other staff people, and there's times when I
think there's undue criticism. Everybody, I believe, works very, very
hard in regards to getting things done.
I can also say that I hope, Jim, that next year in your performance
evaluation, that you won't include as much material. Obviously this
took away from your family life, putting together this huge book that
was presented to all of us in regards to the accomplishments and
graphs and all this others stuff.
I went through every one of it -- every bit of it, but I feel that
there was an awful lot of time that was spent by yourself in regards to
taking care of these issues after the work hours, and I believe that was
above and beyond the call of what needed to be presented to us.
I felt that the -- your performance area that you wanted us to
grade you on was adequate, and I felt that that was the areas that we
were really needed to address. And I felt that the other stuff, it was
well intended, but I believe that it was way above and beyond the call
Page 59
September 26, 2006
of duty.
But I also want to say that I think we're very blessed in this
county with the leadership that we've got, and I'll throw this out at --
when we had the Florida Association of Counties here and we took
them on a tour, other commissioners, they were very much impressed
of what we've accomplished in a short period of time.
Because a lot of those same commissioners were elected, and
they had been here in Collier County, I believe, in the year 2000. And
what they saw from 2000 to 2006 when we had the conference again
in June, they were flabbergasted, and all of them said that they would
like to have the leadership in their counties -- and a lot of these were
big counties. They weren't rural counties -- for instance, Orange
County .
And they were very much impressed of what we've accomplished
here in a period of time. So it reflects on the commissioners and it
reflects on staff. And I want to say, thank you very much for all your
hard work.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just want to add, didn't you warn
them, don't you dare come near our county manager because you're
not taking him away? I think I heard that.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I have a speaker on this.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle, and then
we'll hear the speaker.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I would just like to make
one observation. I, of course, echo the comments of the other
commissioners. I think Jim Mudd has done a wonderful job for us.
It's not perfect, but he got pretty darn close. We're not perfect either,
in case you haven't noticed.
Each of us had certain comments to make concerning
performance last year and expected performance and achievements for
next year. In some cases, perhaps, our comments don't necessarily
agree.
Page 60
September 26, 2006
I would like to -- for the board to give Mr. Mudd the latitude to at
least sort through that and do what he can with respect to
accommodating our various recommendations concerning
improvements for next year.
But there is one I would like to bring to your attention and ask
you to support, and it's something a little different.
We have a lot of really major projects going on in Collier
County, and some of them are behind schedule, and there are reasons
why they're behind schedule, but seldom are they discussed at these
board meetings in the public.
I would like to propose that the county manager schedule updates
-- maybe one update each board meeting, brief, 15 minutes at most --
provided by the contractor himself who would come before this board
and -- and make a presentation about where they are with respect to
the schedule, what anticipated delays they might have, what problems
they might have and how we can go about solving those problems,
before it results in a major delay.
And we seldom, if ever, have a contractor here talking to us
about those things, and I think it would provide an additional incentive
for the contractor to perform, but it would also give the public and the
board some additional information and insight into potential problems
associated with these very, very complex contracts.
And if we did one every board meeting, we would get six every
quarter. That would probably cover our most -- most critical projects,
the really major ones.
And, of course, I'm not suggesting that staff be shut out of that.
They should be here to be ready to respond to our questions about it,
too. But it gets the staff and the contractor who is responsible for the
job right here in front of the board, in front of the public. We can all
talk about any problems and assess where we are.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think a lot of times that it doesn't --
staff doesn't have any control over what's happening now.
Page 61
September 26, 2006
I believe that what's been taking place recently -- I know -- and I
broadcast this out to my constituents -- we get a weekly update in
regards to the large road proj ects that are presently going on.
And I think that's one way of communicating to the constituents
out there, the citizens, in regards to what's going on with our road
projects.
Now, I think you've got a great idea of having the contractor
come in. But as far as staff being involved, I think staff tries to whip
on the contractor as much as they can, but a lot of times it's not the
contractor himself where the holdup is. It's in support staff such as
utilities and whoever -- the other subcontractors that may be involved
in moving the utilities or putting the new utilities in, and the road
builder is at the -- is at the -- beholden to the person who's supposed to
move all the power lines.
Now, a good instance is, we've been having this ongoing
situation on Immokalee Road from I - 7 5 west to Livingston, and this
has been going on for almost over two years. And what's taken place
is the fact that we've had two hurricanes, and as soon as we've had
hurricanes in the State of Florida, all of those assets that were there to
move the power lines and everything were then immediately dispersed
to other areas that needed to be addressed as far as the critical needs of
establishing power, communications and whatever else. And so that
left the road builder basically there holding onto a sack, and he
couldn't do nothing with it.
So I think it's a great idea, Commissioner Coyle, but I'm
concerned that it's tying up staff on even more stuff, because they try
to keep us informed. But I think bringing the contractor here -- and
maybe we need to bring people like FP&L, Sprint and ComCast, all
these other people that are involved in helping us move the utilities.
And if they end up in a mode where -- I think we have a lawsuit
right now pending where the road builder in regards to this Immokalee
project is looking for about 200 days of restitution in regards to how
Page 62
September 26, 2006
we're going to -- because he's been tied up that long extra to get this
road building project done.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you know, you see, that's the
intent of this. Imagine how much faster we would solve those
problems if we had the contractor and any other party related to that
contract standing right here in front of us giving a presentation and
saying, we're tied up because, because FP &L, because staff hasn't
responded to something, because of something else. We will be in a
position then to take immediate action as a board.
I can't recall the time -- the last time when someone came before
the board and said, we are at an impasse. We've got a problem.
We've been struggling with it for months and months. We now need
the board to get involved and do something to try to resolve it.
That's a waste of time for the staff and everybody else to struggle
with it. If we understand that, and we've got all the -- we have all the
people in the room at the same time, I think we can resolve a lot of
these problems much quicker.
Now, here's another point. In other states, for every construction
project, there is a sign, whether it's a road construction project or
anything else, there is a sign that says, this proj ect is being constructed
by, and they put the name of the contractor there. If you have any
questions or comments, call this number. It puts the contractor right
out there in front and assures that they will get telephone calls if
people aren't happy with what's going on, and we will get telephone
calls, too.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We get them now.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm trying to get the contractor to
get some disability here not only for the purpose of helping us resolve
any problems and delays, but also to provide additional motivation to
them to proceed.
I watch contracts -- road contracts that are way behind schedule
now. Nobody's working late out there. It closes down at five o'clock
Page 63
September 26, 2006
on the dot. They're not working on Saturdays. The overpass isn't __
there's no rush to get the overpass done on Golden Gate and Airport
Road. It's just going along as if it's normal, and we're already into a
three-month delay. We don't know whether or not it's going to get
done even then.
So there's no sense of an urgency, is my point. And I think if we
get people right here in this room and -- that it would solve some of
those problems.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's all I wanted to say. I don't
want to get into a big discussion about this. If the board doesn't agree,
then, you know, we can try to deal with it some other way. But it
would be good if we were to instruct the county manager to schedule
one briefing per each Board of County Commission meeting.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I guess we'll have to make sure,
too, that we've got a full-time contractor and not a part-time
contractor.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, what he's saying is, he doesn't
want them to remain invisible but he wants them to be accountable for
the problem.
You know, as you were talking also, you were talking about
delays, and I was thinking about CDES. And we had a vote the other
day, and the vote -- we were talking about funding, I think it was 14
positions or something in CDES, I don't remember, but--
MR. MUDD: It was nine, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Nine positions. And I had a talk
with Joe Schmitt the other day, and Joe said how disappointed he was
because those are the same positions that we authorized a few months
ago, and now he had the funding in place to fund the positions that we
authorized. And, of course, those funds don't come from taxpayer
dollars. They come from fees.
Page 64
September 26,2006
And then we told him he couldn't use them. And, of course, then
we complain about the fact that they are a little slow on some of their
jobs. And he says, this would have solved our problem. And -- where's
Joe? Would you --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: He's hiding.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sorry about putting you on the spot,
Joe, but maybe --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It's a great idea.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- maybe you could talk about that
just a mite, if you wouldn't mind. We might want to think about that
again, and I don't know if we do it at this meeting, but __
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's bring it up -- no. Let's
bring it up on a separate topic.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, good. But as long as he's __
could we just hear what he has to say?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is the county manager's
evaluation, not Joe Schmitt's.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I know, but --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: This is the county manager's evaluation,
too, some of the areas --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And this is part of my evaluation
was talking about CDES doing a little bit better and needing
encouragement. And could you just hit it a little bit.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioners, good morning. For the record,
Joe Schmitt, Administrator of the Community Development
Environmental Services Division.
Actually, I was getting ready to introduce the next topic if you
wanted to delay this but --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: And we can discuss it later this afternoon.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, let's do that then.
MR. SCHMITT: But it was 10 positions, and I can go over
Page 65
September 26, 2006
those, but -- and we can delay that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And then you'd have a little
time to prepare; is that okay?
Okay. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So the motion is on the -- oh, I'm
not the chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Getting carried away here.
Commissioner Henning?
We have a public speaker on this?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. I have one public speaker. Bob
Krasowski.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yep, and I'm going to speak.
I don't see why anybody would not support what Commissioner
Coyle is suggesting. It brings it out in the public. The board has a
better understanding what's going on, and the public would have a
better understanding.
And like he has stated, if there's something that we can do
publicly, as servants of the public, we should do it.
So Commissioner Coyle, I think you put it eloquently on what
we should do to better serve the public. And, again, I can't understand
why anybody wouldn't support that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't think anybody's not supporting it.
I just was -- I just basically brought up the fact that we are out there
getting the message out plus the other problems that not only staff is
running into -- they're just as frustrated as the rest of us are -- but I
think the fact is that bringing the contractor in might be the way to go.
But staff, I'm sure, works very diligently trying to browbeat the
construction crews out there to get the proj ect done. So I don't think
anybody's in a disagreement. I think it was just the idea that
everybody's working as hard as they can, but there are __
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm just trying to bring the item
Page 66
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- circumstances that happen--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- on the agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- that we don't have any control over.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I think you have three nods
right there, no?
MR. MUDD: Yeah. Commissioner, I've seen at least three nods
to bring back a presentation -_
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, wait. I'm not -- I'm not
there yet.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, it doesn't make any
difference. We've got three nods.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, wait. Hold on. I think
you're on the right track. You're totally on the right track; however,
there's a couple things we need to be cognizant of. One, we've got a
report that goes out weekly, and I thank you so much for that report.
Please don't ever give it up. And we also ask -- I share it with about
3,OOO-some people on a mass mailing list--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's what I do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I know you do the same,
because an informed public is a more responsible public, and they can
come in at the right times when things don't go right. However, with
that said, there's more people that aren't on my list and your list than
are on it.
I would also suggest that we have on that sign that we're talking
about who the road builder, everybody is, the contract completion
date. The misconception out there, in some cases where they're
actually ahead of schedule, is that they're not working on the roads,
the road's behind schedule.
And then when they come to me and I look it up, nope, they're on
schedule for this particular element of the road. Everything's going
fine.
Page 67
September 26,2006
Then there's reasons why some of the places are not. In the case
of the overpass, they ran into some loose soil and whatever. Now, is
that a good reason? It may be, it may not be. But if you had it on the
signs, completion date, and then underneath it, actual adjusted date or
something to that type, so people when they're driving by, they can
look at it.
They know not to expect this thing to be done in two months. It's
going to be two years. I mean, roads take a long time to build. They're
exorbitantly long. Especially here in South Florida where you don't
have enough human resources to get it all done, and our program is
very ambitious.
So if you had that up there on that sign, the public is going to be
totally aware, they're not going to be second guessing it, they're not
going to say, well, you moved the date because the date will be up
there forever. And if that thing comes in a full year late, they'll be
able to see it up there, and they can tell us, the elected officials who
are the ultimate responsible people, what went wrong, and we'll be
able to tell them at that time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So we've got three nods.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, with that added, yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
and --
MS. FILSON: We have a speaker, too.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- and that's in regards to -- huh? And
one speaker, okay.
And one speaker, if you'd come forward, sir.
MR. KRASOWSKI: Bob Krasowski, for the record. I have
some comments regarding the county manager's contract or
evaluation.
First let me precede my comments with the statement that it's a
Page 68
September 26, 2006
great country where a common citizen can come up and speak to a
board about the manager's operation.
I will not try to detract from anything that anybody has said in
regards to their valuation of the county manager.
I would just like to make the statement that in the category __
category number six, the last of all the categories, there's an element
regarding public participation.
And as I looked through the document, I didn't find how you
evaluated. There was quite a lot of material there, as you referred to,
Mr. Halas.
But I personally have been very involved over the years on a
number of issues, specifically recycling, solid waste management and
efficiencies in those operations, and I've found of late that the county
manager and his staff have not been very good at bringing in the
community on this issue to discuss these topics.
And as a result, some of their actions have been very much
misplaced. The awards to -- the school district on the recycling plan,
which was created by Zero Waste for the school system, bypassed us,
even though your award -- we were nominated for that award in the
previous cycle that was interrupted by a hurricane.
And I'm not standing here being upset that I didn't get -- or we
didn't get an award. I'm just saying what was done was inappropriate,
misplaced, and actually wrong.
So it doesn't build a sense of working together in the community.
Actually what it develops is a perception that there's a closed group
here of bureaucrats who are trying to lay claim to work that other
people have -- in the public have brought forward as participants in
our great democracy, and it's insulting to have that.
So however you rated on the public participation element, I think
at least 12 to 15 dollars should be removed from the bonus to the
manager because he did not live up to whatever your perception are
(sic), because I'm telling you what the reality of it was.
Page 69
September 26, 2006
Also, you're about to give an award for the beach renourishment
project, which was admittedly well managed, a good job, but it went
into turtle nesting season. And in this community we've always prided
ourselves on the value of the environment here, that's why people
came here initially. Maybe things are going to switch over, we'll get a
new brand of people, which we've seen already, their entries in the
road (sic), you know, many of them, but our whole paradigm will shift
possibly.
And -- but it could be that you and the manager are killing the
goose that laid the golden egg. There are a lot of very unattractive
places in Collier County. It's downright ugly. So I think if we're
going to get back on track, we better improve the look of things, and
that falls to the manger as well.
So, you know, you give yourselves a lot of awards __
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MR. KRASOWSKI: -- and some of them are misplaced. Thank
you for your attention to comments.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
for an 83 percent raise, which equates to $14,513. The motion was
made by Commissioner Coletta, and I believe it was seconded by
Commissioner Henning.
And is there any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I would like to point out that
the county manager has asked that it not be added to his salary.
MR. MUDD: So it is not a raise.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It is not a raise. It is merely a __
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Bonus.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- performance bonus this year
only and it is not an across-the-board increase to his salary, which I
think is a very generous and professional position by the county
manager.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. When you realize that the county
Page 70
September 26, 2006
manager up in Lee County just got a bump, a raise, full-time raise of
$236,000 (sic).
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Huh?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, a raise to that much, not the
raIse --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The county manager up in Lee County,
his salary now is $236,000.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item # lOB
STATUS REPORT FROM THE MINING INDUSTRY OF HARD
ROCK WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY AND LIMITATIONS DUE
TO GROWTH; MOTION TO BRING BACK WITH DETAILS _
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to a time certain item
at 11 a.m., and that's item lOB. It's a report to the Board of County
Commissioners by representatives of the mining industry about the
status of earth mining and specifically the mining of hard rock within
the limits of Collier County and limitations that have been put on
Page 71
September 26, 2006
those resources by growth -- by the Growth Management Plan and
land use development regulations.
Mr. Joseph Schmitt, the Community Development's
Environmental Services Administrator, will present.
MR. SCHMITT: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, good morning.
We're going to change gears a little bit.
We were before you about a year ago to talk about rock mining
in Collier County. In a report of the industry, you gave further
direction to have the industry do a further assessment and to come
back to you and report. Mr. Stan Chrzanowski of my engineering
services staff is here, and Joe Bonness. Joe, he's behind me now.
Yeah, I think he already did his run this morning, so he's in good
shape.
Anyways, we're here today to talk to you about a further study.
And Stan -- I'm going to turn the microphone over to Stan who's going
to basically give you an introduction as to where and how this thing
matured, and then Mr. Bonness will give his report.
Stan?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm
Stan Chrzanowski with the engineering services department.
If you remember the presentation a year ago June, what we tried
-- the point we tried to get across was that a lot of our pits that were
active for so long were nearing completion.
Florida Rock had turned -- was turning their large pit into a
Heritage Bay, now the Quarry. We had other -- Willow Run was
nearing completion, but I think they want to go deeper now. We had
quite a few projects nearing the finish of their run, and we had very
few new pits opening up.
We -- since that time we've had, I think, Jones Pit, which
originally started out as being a lake within a -- it was first a rezone,
and they were going to dig a lake within the subdivision, and the price
of fill had gone up so much that they now are going to actually turn it
Page 72
September 26, 2006
into, I believe, more of a commercial quarry than was originally
intended.
We have a -- an expansion of a pit. The one square mile AP AC
pit down at the bottom of 5th and Golden Gate, they came in for
another quarter square mile. A lot of these pits have problems.
They're close to residences, the neighbors don't like them. They have
problems getting the transportation, the trucks in and out.
I want to clarify a couple things before I start. We do have
different kinds of pits in Collier County. There's Stuart Mining just
started mining sand up above Immokalee. They're dredging the sand,
and it's a hydraulic dredging. They don't have to blast. All that comes
out of there is fine material for use in beach renourishment or
drainfield sand. That whole area around there is probably the similar
type of material.
We started noticing a pattern when we were permitting
containment areas in the back yards of Golden Gate Estates' lots. In
the northeast corner of Golden Gate Estates, you can let a person dig a
pond in their back yard if they have two and a half to five acres. They
can go 12 feet down. All they hit is sand. We don't worry because
you're not blasting, you're not disturbing your neighbors.
But when you get down south of Randall Boulevard, you start
getting into areas where the rock is practically at the surface. Those
people can't dig containment pits.
So we noticed throughout the county that the character of the
material under the ground is different. It's kind of like oil. It's where
you find it.
And the character in a material actually varies quite a bit. Hard
rock, when you go to make asphalt, or concrete, you want the hardest
aggregate possible. They have new varieties of cement out. You all
know that Portland Cement concrete is a mixture of cement, sand and
stone, and the harder the stone is, the easier it is to achieve a high
breaking strength.
Page 73
September 26, 2006
And it's good to have a high breaking strength or a very abrasive
-- a hard rock when you're doing asphaltic concrete, which is sand and
stone with an asphalt binder, which is the standard -- what you use on
roads.
You're going to hear some terms in here today, and I want to just
put a little information out there. Rock, to get any kind of hardness,
has to have what they call a high specific gravity. A specific gravity,
you all remember, is how you relate to the weight of water. And your
hard rocks are like 2.5, 2.7, specific gravity.
Well, water is like 62 pounds a cubic foot. So two and a half
times that is like 150 pounds a cubic foot you're talking for this
material.
Now, a cubic yard is 27 cubic feet, three by three by three times
150 is about 4,000 pounds. A cubic yard weighs about two ton.
When the mining industry talks, they're going to start talking tons.
We always talk cubic yards.
When you pull 10 cubic yards out of a pit and load it onto a
truck, it's 10 cubic yards when it's in the pit. You load it on the truck,
you get maybe 13 cubic yards because of what they call bulking.
You take it out of the truck and you put it back down on the
ground, and if you compact properly, you're going to get back to your
10 cubic yards, hopefully.
The item we're talking about really is hard rock mining. It's the
kind of rock that you need to build buildings. It's the kind of rock that
you need to make concrete and asphalt.
And the one thing we've noticed, one of the reasons that we
started bringing this up and the only exhibit I'm going to show you __
because you went through the whole presentation before the last time,
we noticed that the price of rock -- the price of all fill -- I think that
starts at 1984. And if you look over to the right, maybe around the
year 2000, it starts rising rapidly.
The price of it is going up because we're running out of a lot of
Page 74
September 26, 2006
pits to mine the stuff in. And we feel that if we had more area to mine,
we could hold some of these costs down. And at some point, the fill
we have, minable area, we're going to run out of it. And we just
figured we wanted to sound the alarm now.
I'm going to turn it over to Joe Bonness, and he's going to give
you a little presentation just about the hard rock.
MR. BONNESS: Good morning, Commissioners. Happy to be
here, here with you to talk about this. It's something that's been very
dear to me over the years. I've spent my whole life in Florida
basically --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hold on a second. I think Commissioner
Coyle has a question for Stan.
MR. BONNESS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, just a question to see if it's
possible. You know, this is a complex process, and we can probably
spend the day talking about this.
We understand the problem, I think. Can you concentrate mostly
on proposed solutions? Is that possible?
MR. BONNESS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. BONNESS: Well, you know, we have gone through and
done a lot of investigation as to -- probably have got to come up with
where our problem is as to where we -- what has gotten us to this
point.
In Collier County, of course, we developed our rock pits along
the coast close to the urban areas, and we preceded the urban area out
in towards the eastern parts of the county.
You've got a lot of pits that were started right on the fringe of
urban development. You have like where Naples Grand Golf Course
is is one of the earlier pits that was out. You have -- and that on 41
and 951. And then eventually as we needed bigger rock sources and
that, we moved farther out into the county. We thought we had rock
Page 75
September 26, 2006
everywhere as we were going along, and it appears that we really do
not.
As the rock mining basically moved on out towards the eastern
parts of the county, at the same time the preserve areas moved towards
the western part of the county.
What it -- we felt that tying into soil maps would tell us pretty
much where the material is. And through the geology and that, that
has proven to be pretty accurate.
The -- what we have come up with from the -- the soils mapping
standpoint, is that basically we have a layer of stone that starts within
the top foot, two feet of the surface and will proceed down several
feet. It's a unique deposit to Collier County.
It's separate from what we have up in Lee County, and it really
encompasses the area that starts at Immokalee Road and runs south
down towards 41 in areas, but a lot of times there's -- where we have
the mining -- or where we have the farming areas, Six L's Farm and
that, it kind of misses that area completely.
And there's a reason for that. Our farming tends to be in clean
sand where we've got good drainage and that. These rock deposits are
fairly close to the surface, and so the farming industry always stayed
away from that.
Of course, where we had gone with the farming industry and
cleared and that, was a less desirable habitat area, so it was obviously
less wanted by the conservation, and to be able to put into
conservation and proper habitat.
Collier County does have a lot of aggregate underneath it. We--
looking at the soils map, we're close to 2 billion -- 2 billion tons of
material that could possibly be excavated in the county.
Yeah, basically there's only three areas in Collier -- in the State
of Florida where you're able to pick up material from. Lee/Collier
area, you have the Miami Rock Belt, and -- which is called the lake
belt, and then you have Brooksville.
Page 76
September 26, 2006
The rest of Florida is supplied basically from these three
locations. We have a tremendous amount of material here, and we're
seeing the price -- because we're not able to mine in this county, we're
seeing the prices dramatically go ahead.
And -- well, let's see. If I'm really going to shorten it up, I can go
-- I'll lay out the --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: At this time I'd like to ask the county
attorney, I believe there's something -- some pending litigation in
regards to an area that may produce rock. Can you give us -- kind of
fill us in what's going on in that aspect?
MR. PETTIT: Yes, Mr. Chairman. For the, record Mike Pettit,
Chief Assistant County Attorney.
There is a Bert Harris claim that has been filed by Dr. Francis
Hussey and Mary Hussey. They have a contractual relationship, I am
told, with Mr. Bonness or a company in which Mr. Bonness is
involved.
It relates to about 813 acres, that's the acreage I have right now,
in one of the rural fringe areas. They would like to mine
approximately 360 acres of that area.
They have -- we have had at least one meeting in which I invited
members of environmental groups, as well as county staff, as well as
the DCA, to attend, and we discussed -- discussed the proposal that
they have come forward with as a way to try to resolve any litigation
claims.
Subsequent to that, I have received an additional -- or additional
or a streamlined proposal from the Husseys which staff has looked at.
I'm not sure you want to get into the particulars of that today. But
what I would say is that staff certainly has some concerns about a few
of the things that they're proposing as a way to resolve this.
I'm looking to meet with the staff again on Monday and then try
to respond to that proposal with some questions, particularly out of the
transportation area.
Page 77
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: And that's -- I've got more information if you
need more. I've got other specific questions, but that's where that is.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So that's a source that's possible
through litigation through the courts; is that correct?
MR. PETTIT: Yes. There's a -- it's going to be -- it's a complex
situation. What I would tell you is that I think it will be difficult to
resolve it amicably. Absent participation by the DCA, certain
interested environmental groups, the Husseys and the county staff, it
will be very difficult to resolve it amicably. I mean, everybody's
going to have to work to try to bring back a proposal to this board, and
I would hope that DCA would also be in support of that. The DCA is
a party to this issue.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I think where we're trying to go
here is, if you could tell us the areas that we could locate rock at this
point in time. I think we --
MR. BONNESS: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- through our -- all the material that was
given to us, we, I think, are all junior geologists now. So if you could
tell us how we can --
MR. BONNESS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- approach this.
MR. BONNESS: Yeah, what -- you know, the Hussey situation
is one thing that's out there, and that's obviously a very good rock
deposit that's in there. It's being -- you know, we're going at it from a
couple different directions. The Florida Rock proposal that's out is in
that same strand of material and it's very good.
But I'm also trying to get towards an overall problem that we
have in that Collier County uses about four million tons of hard rock a
year. Currently it looks like we're going to have -- even if you put
Hussey on-line, you're probably going to have about 70 million tons
that's available. By the year 2030, we will have -- we will be needing
Page 78
September 26,2006
somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 million tons to be able to
supply the needs of Collier County, and then it continues on from
there at a need of about 10 million tons a year coming through.
So what I'm trying to do is get us set up so that we can start going
ahead and taking care of these problems before they get to us. The
national average right now is close to 10 years to be able to permit a
rock mine. If you take a look at what's going on with Florida Rock
when Jim Brown of the East Naples Land Company first started
working on that and proposing that was probably back in around 1999,
2000. So you see that it has taken -- and they're going through Corps
of Engineer permitting at this point. They're probably a year away or
more from actually being set up, so seven, eight, nine years, in that
direction.
So what I'm trying to do is get us set up so that we will be able to
meet these needs in the long term.
Through our investigation we did several hundred -- or took a
look at several hundred wells all over Collier County. We marked off
where we had rock and where we didn't have rock. They tried to __
tied in pretty close to what we had seen as far as soils maps.
What I have on the digitizer there is basically showing the soils
map of where we expect to find hard rock throughout Collier County.
The overlays of -- where we have come from the zoning standpoint,
we've had, you know, three major things that have affected our zoning
for hard rock mining.
The first one, of course, started out with the Belle Meade and
Southern Golden Gate Estates buy-out by the state for Everglades
restoration, followed by the rural fringe amendments. All the sending
lands of the rural fringe basically tied up all of -- you know, put a
no-mining on that standpoint, then we had the urban lands come
through. That did not have that big of an effect on the mining because
really there's -- the rock deposit does stop fairly far south of that.
There is just a couple of little nodes of rock that are in that area.
Page 79
September 26, 2006
What we're down to on the bright red section shows where there
is rock deposit that is legally mined at this point, or zoned as to be
mined.
What I'm proposing is that we take a look at all of the sending
areas that we have underneath the rural fringe, possibly open them up
for mining, and that would open up a tremendous amount of land that
would be feasible for it.
To be able to mine, you're going to have to have -- there's -- you
have to stay away from humans, you need to take a look at a lot of
ecological things as far as mining wetlands and that, the geology has
to be right. Of the areas that are shown, probably only 10 percent of
them are really going to pan out to have good rock underneath them,
and then last of all, you're going to have to have a willing owner. Of
the southern -- southern section of Belle Meade, you probably are
looking at a landowner that -- which is the state, which is probably not
going to be open to that.
My proposal at this point would basically be, from a -- well,
we've been able to go through from a rock mining standpoint and
really take a look very closely at how rocks -- you know, mining has
been developed.
Early mines oftentimes were just mined from edge of property to
edge of property. What was left over is basically your plant site. As
we developed through the mining, we saw that there was much better
value as to what would feasibly happen, and so the rock mines
basically turned into housing development, leaving enough residual
land to be able to leave housing development.
Of course, with the constraints that we have with mitigation and
everything else these days and wetlands and as we're getting into more
sensitive lands, we have had to come up with better designs and better
utilization. This is about a 300-acre mine that worked with all the
wetlands and that and compacted all the housing into just one very
small node. Very popular place for all the alligators, birds and
Page 80
September 26, 2006
whatever that are in the area, and having very little impact on the -- or
having as minimal impact as you possibly can on the habitat.
You know, the animals all do congregate, and they go after these
water bodies. They think that they're great. In our Willow Run mine,
as we've been going at it, we had to go out and put in panther habitat.
We had to work with the fish, game and wildlife to be able to protect
the animals.
We're currently out there with three different panthers that have
occupied our little 560-acre property. We're just a piece of what their
habitat is. But having three panthers that visit the same property over
a one-year period is fairly rare, and that's an extremely high density
for the panthers.
We have also gone on out and did some work as far as putting in
other protected species, building mounds for gopher tortoises and that
and controlled berms to be able to inhabit the -- improve their habitat,
then came forward and released dozens of gopher tortoises that had to
move out from development areas in other parts of the county.
We can work very closely with the environment and we can
come up with a -- you know, if we're forced to, we will come up with
a very good plan that has minimal, if negligible, impact as far as
mInIng goes.
My recommended action is going to be to list the mining
restrictions that you have on the sending lands in Belle Meade, use the
existing Land Development Codes which retain between 80 and 90
percent of the native vegetation, use the TDR program to be able to
compensate owners for -- and to really push the land when it is
finished with mining into conservation areas, and coordinate with
South Florida Water Management to interconnect the various lakes
and various mines to be able to supplement the drainage coming out of
Golden Gate, to redirect that flow so that it does flow down into the __
into its historical areas of North Belle Meade and back into the
Everglades restoration area.
Page 81
September 26, 2006
So that's pretty much what I'm after and asking for.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: As I was going through the material--
and you brought up a good point that we're going to need over 200
million tons a year eventually. I would hope that the State of Florida
and highway department, FDOT, would get involved in maybe
looking at this rail link that we presently have and put that on the SIS,
because I don't think that we can even supply all the rock that we're
going to need, and I think that we need the rail link that comes into the
North Naples area as a possibility of transporting rock for future
growth. I think that that would be one way of also getting a lot of
trucks off the highway. So I think that's a possibility.
And I'm not sure how else we're going to address this because
obviously we're going to have to import rock from not only Florida,
but I think other areas of the world to sustain our -- what our growth is
in what we feel that is going to be adequate supply.
MR. BONNESS: Yeah. In Collier County you do probably have
the resources that are necessary to be able to get there. The -- we have
hauled quite a bit with using Seminole Gulf in hauling materials down
here.
That rail line that exists right now would have to be improved all
the way on up to Tampa. It's about a 15 mile an hour line. If you go
on up and do the dinner train, you'll have a hard time keeping your
drinks on the table. It's a bad situation. Of course, it ends in Fort
Myers, and they would never have enough land in that area to be able
to off road -- off load all the trucks that we do need. We have let that
form of transportation just kind of fade away.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, I think that needs to be put back on
the SIS for the State of Florida -- from the State of Florida.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Bonness, what you're
proposing, I'm not sure that it's going to fit the needs in the future. So
if you could, either through electronic correspondence or whatever,
Page 82
September 26, 2006
make sure that we hit the target. I don't want to start something that
we fall short in later on.
But I think one thing that's very important, when you talk about
in the fringe area, especially the sending areas of having mining, I
think -- and I hope to see something when it comes back -- is some
sort of compensation as far as government lands in restoration or
enhancement of habitat for listed species.
I think there's a lot of opportunities out there, whether it be in
parts of the southern Belle Meade or in Picayune where we can and
should assist in building that habitat for the species and maybe do
something for the species in general, is trying to build that stock.
Plenty of land out here in Collier County . We ought to utilize it.
We ought to work with our partners through the state and federal
agencies to enhance that.
And then I think through that that we can probably hit our goal.
But I'm very supportive. And we all have to recognize the needs, not
only of habitat and animals, but also the human beings.
MR. BONNESS: Yes. You know, and that -- from the mining
standpoint, that is probably the future as to the direction we're going to
have to go.
When we've been working on the Hussey property, Cockaded
Woodpeckers is one of the bigger items that we have there. And we
saw right away that we'd have to stay away completely from the
Cockaded Woodpecker habitat as if we had a -- you know, similar to
if you had Bald Eagles, you'd have to stay away from those areas.
And then we looked forward as to what we could do to improve
their foraging areas and actually put in a continuous management plan
that would facilitate them being able to survive and actually be able to
reproduce and possibly move into other areas.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me just say that you
touched on it about the needs of Northern Golden Gate Estates and as
far as stormwater storage. The area that you're talking about, I think,
Page 83
September 26, 2006
would hit the target. But, you know, I think it's also important that we
recognize any potential loss of habitat, you know, just because of the
activities going on there. And is that -- is it an appropriate place to
relocate that habitat in other areas, that's all. And I won't repeat
myself.
MR. BONNESS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. I think we've
got a lot of great ideas here. How we put them into practice is going
to be another thing. But as you know, we do suffer from an
inadequate drainage system in Collier County, being that it's flat and
no one ever put the kind of money into it that it would take to correct
it, and we all know that to be able to correct that would require us to
buy numerous lots throughout Collier County to turn them into water
retention areas.
So with that said, I think that if you can marry the need for rock
with the need for stormwater management and come up with a plan
that would allow excavation in places that -- certain areas that would
benefit from lakes created, make it user friendly for the industry to do
so, all pits would be dug and engineered so as to accommodate
stormwater and that all lakes would be given to the county with the
adequate right-of-way at no cost after the completion of the
excavation. Just some thoughts that I've had on this whole thing.
As far as the environmental end of the whole thing, lakes are not
a negative. They're a positive. They add something to the landscape.
They help to retain water. I can see a lot of positives. I kind of hope
-- I don't know what the next step is, to be honest with you, but I really
do think this is worthy of consideration.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: One of the things that I think we need to
look at, too, is once there's a mining permit, that that land can't be
used for anything other than to be put in conservation and that that
Page 84
September 26, 2006
land -- that pit needs to make sure that we extract as much rock out of
it as possible.
When you look at -- when we approved Heritage Bay, I'm sure
there were many, many acres of rock that could have been extracted
from that, and the person that owned it decided to sell it to
development. And I think that short-changed us in regards to getting a
lot of rock that could have been taken out of that area.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, it's almost
impossible to assess the relative benefits of these relatively broad
recommendations. As good as they might sound, we're not going to
be able to reach a decision until we get very specific.
Somebody's going to have to come to us with a proposal that
says, here's a source for rock, this is the current zoning of that, we
need to change it, and here's going to be the impact.
We've got a rural fringe land preservation program. We have the
stewardship area program. We need to understand how this is going to
impact all of our existing land development procedures, and you can't
do it in a blanket way . You have to really start with something.
And what I would like to suggest is that we charge the staff with
getting together with South Florida Water Management District, the __
all of the stakeholders in this process --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: DCA too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- and -- aw.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Was that a bad name?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Did I say something bad about
DCA? I'm sorry if I did. If I didn't, I will.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Give you heartburn, did I?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. What -- and if we could just
get with the stakeholders here and try to come up with some specific
recommendations with pros and cons so that we can assess its
potential impact and we can make a decision. I don't think we can
Page 85
September 26, 2006
give you a decision. I can't give you a decision today, and I don't
think you're looking for one today.
But this is a good assessment of the kinds of things we need to
consider. But it, of course, is not complete. We need to get
everybody together and talk about it and see what we're going to --
what's possible. So that's what I would suggest we do.
I know we have some speakers, but we can't make a decision on
this today. The most we can do is suggest to staff you get all the
stakeholders together in the same room, and just like we have done in
the past on things, work out some recommendations for us and advise
us of the potential advantages and disadvantages of each alternative,
and let's see where we are.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Ms. Filson, I think we'll open it up to
public comment.
MS. FILSON: Bruce Anderson? He'll be followed by Lauren
Melo.
MR. ANDERSON: Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. For the record, my name is Bruce Anderson from the
Roetzel and Andress law firm. I represent Florida Rock Industries.
Sometime in the next two weeks Florida Rock will be filing for
an excavation permit and for approval of a developer contribution
agreement to build a haul road that can be used by the public as well
as the mine operator. The road follows the alignment that is depicted
in the Growth Management Plan for the North Belle Meade overlay.
I'm here to ask you to please direct your staff to expedite review
and action on the excavation permit and the developer contribution
agreement to try to have them brought before this board on or before
January 31 st.
This request is simply to facilitate mining on lands that are
already zoned for mining. No comprehensive plan amendments are
necessary. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Lauren Melo. She'll be followed by Heather
Page 86
September 26, 2006
Henning.
MS. MELO: Good morning, County Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Lauren Melo. I'm an independent truck driver,
owner, operator, and I also serve on the board of directors of the
Southwest Florida Truckers' Association.
Part of the mission of our association is to represent the
commercial trucking community with a united voice and to positively
promote governmental construction and quarry industry actions.
Our association is present today in support of our mining
industry, road building contractors, and the taxpaying citizens of
Collier County.
We are all aware that fill and rock have been imported from Lee,
Charlotte and Dade County for quite some time now.
Our local mining representatives and our county staff have
presented us today with factual information regarding our material
needs and mining location options that we can no longer ignore or
continue to place in a holding pattern.
Allowing our road and building contractors to utilize local
mining sources will benefit all of our taxpaying citizens. It is evident
that by reducing the cost of the building materials, we, in turn, reduce
a total price of transportation infrastructure.
Local mining sources reduce the cost of material hauling. Local
mining sources will reduce the amount of dump truck traffic on 1-75.
Utilizing local mining sources reduces diesel fuel consumption,
thereby reducing air pollutants. And local mining sources keep
truckers purchasing fuel in Collier County, increasing our county --
Collier County's tax revenue.
Commissioners, the Southwest Florida Truckers' Association is
asking you to vote in favor of the Collier County taxpaying citizens by
approving and fast tracking quarry operations in the rural fringe and
sending areas. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Page 87
September 26, 2006
MS. FILSON: Heather Henning. She'll be followed by Darryl
Fales.
MS. HENNING: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is
Heather Henning, for the record, and I am not related to
Commissioner Henning. I get that question all the time.
And thank you for allowing me to address you this morning. I'm
addressing you on behalf of the Collier County Building Industry
Association, and I am a board of director there, and I have a simple
statement.
As you know, we have many hard working citizens and taxpayer
members in Collier County. Anytime we utilize our own natural
resources and provide the needed infrastructure to the community in a
more expedient and fiscally reduced cost, it is good public policy and
use of taxpayers' money.
Please support a review of responsible mining options within
Collier County. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Darryl Fales.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: He'll be followed by Nicole Ryan.
MR. FALES: Thank you, Commissioners. My name is Darryl
Fales, for the record. I'm the general manager for Rinker Materials
here in Southwest Florida. Rinker Materials is a concrete producer.
In Collier County we have two operations. We employ 50 to 60
employees that live in Collier County.
I think the information Joe put -- and the engineering gentleman
brought forth as far as the rock needs in Collier County are there. I
can tell you that the cost structure is increased when we're having to
truck or import materials from other parts of the state.
The three places where the rock is of construction grade, Lee and
Collier, Miami-Dade and Brooksville or Central Florida are the only
places in Florida where the rock is available currently. And so
anything that we can do to help reduce those costs and reduce that
Page 88
September 26, 2006
transportation will be a good thing in the county's interest.
So I'm here today to let you know that we support the county
looking forward -- or looking at the issue related to mining in the
fringe area. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Nicole Ryan. She'll be followed by Brad Cornell.
MS. RYAN: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Nicole Ryan, here on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
The discussion up until now has really been on supposed
limitations to rock mining through the Growth Management Plan and
the Land Development Code, but I think that we need to look at this
from a different perspective, and that perspective is the obligation that
Collier County has to protect natural resources, to protect habitat, to
protect wildlife, to protect wetlands, flowways, and to be compatible
with different restoration projects that the state and federal
governments have within Collier County.
And the county's doing this specifically in the rural fringe area
through the transfer of development rights program. This program, if
it's followed as adopted and as approved by the Department of
Community Affairs, will allow more incentive uses in developments
in the receiving areas, but it will put limitations in the sending areas,
and these limitations do not allow mining in the sending lands.
The key issue as a rural fringe program can only work if it is kept
intact, if the intent of the program is maintained, which in this case is a
protection of environmental resources and directing incompatible land
uses away from the sensitive sending areas.
The point is not just about where a minable rock is and in what
quantity and quality. It's also about ensuring the integrity of
environmental resources within the rural fringe areas.
And I understand comprehensive plans and land codes can be
changed several times a year; however, if it's changed in either a
piecemeal fashion or in one fell swoop to where the intent is
undermined, this is something that the Department of Community
Page 89
September 26, 2006
Affairs, I believe, will step in and have a lot of concerns with.
Collier County has spent a tremendous amount of money
defending the rural fringe program and defending the fact that sending
lands are not areas for mining.
We're asking that the intent of the program be maintained and
that you not go down this path of exploring uses of mining in the
sending areas. We believe it's incompatible. And we'd also ask that
you talk to DCA about this if you do have a question or concern,
because I think that they will have a lot of concerns about this. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Brad Cornell?
(No response.)
MS. FILSON: Sean Mahoney? He'll be followed by Barbara
Goodenough.
MR. MAHONEY: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, Sean Mahoney. I'm the president of American Specialty
Contractors, a trade organization, which we have over 150 business
owners and members. And we support less restrictions on mining.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, sir.
MS. FILSON: Barbara Goodenough. She's your final speaker,
Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MS. GOODENOUGH: Good morning. Thank you for having
me here this morning. The reason I'm here is to state, as past president
of ASCF, which is the subcontractors' association, we do less
restrictions on mining. Compromises can be made and intents can be
followed, and hopefully everybody can win in the end.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you. Okay.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker.
Page 90
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
Is there any further discussion by the board in regards to --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may? I don't think we did
give clear directions; did we, Mr. Mudd? What do you have from
what we've given so far?
MR. MUDD: Sir, I do not have direction.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We don't have any directions.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I made direction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I--
MR. MUDD: Well, I have one commissioner that mentioned
what the direction should be, but I don't believe I have --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Two, he and Coletta.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who's the other one?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You. Oh.
MR. MUDD: I didn't see consensus. So if I could get some
clarity on that, that would help.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, no. It's Commissioner Henning
first. He was already there. I'll put this back on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Who did you get clear
direction from?
MR. MUDD: I just remember -- I just remember Commissioner
Coyle's statements. That's what I -- that's what I got, and then there
was a discussion amongst the other ones on different alternatives, but I
didn't get clear direction.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Where do we want to go with this?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. Then I'm willing to
listen and bring back what Mr. Bonness proposed, and hopefully that
will hit the target for the future. Is that clear enough?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It's basically on his recommendations
that he put on that slide, A through D.
Page 91
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And also I think it's important,
since we are at a shortage of limerock, is we expedite getting Florida
Rock on the Board of Commissioners agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Some of the directions -- and I
totally agree with them. Commissioner Henning had said to get an
environmental and habitat plan together as we plan forward;
Commissioner Coletta said, make sure when we plan the mining, we
have stormwater retention in mind; and Nicole Ryan said to make sure
to work with the DCA, and I think they were all excellent
recommendations as we move forward.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My suggestion was that what was
before us was too broad for us to make a decision today and you
needed to come back with specific recommendations.
You identify sites, you get the stakeholders together, you assess
the impacts, pro and con, about each site, bring it back to us, and then
we can try to act on it. That was my proposal.
So I wouldn't want to try to act on anything that hasn't been
properly vetted with all of the stakeholders, because we're only going
to wind up in controversy, and it will merely delay things.
So there's a good amount of work to be done with respect to
getting that accomplished.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I think we're getting some
wonderful directions here. And, of course, Rome wasn't built in a day.
I think it took six.
What I will also keep in mind is the fact that the concerns, that
whatever takes place is going to enhance the immediate environment.
You've got to remember the lakes itself that are left behind are a plus,
but meanwhile, all sorts of restoration could take place around there to
move exotics, the planting of certain types of vegetation that will
Page 92
September 26, 2006
encourage wildlife to be present, and the public benefits have to
outweigh the public problems that are going to arise from this.
Another thing that we have to keep in mind is the necessity to __
for these rock haulers to be able to provide for a transportation system
that will not, I repeat, not suppress the existing residents that live out
there, and I'm talking about Golden Gate Estates, and the fact that the
-- these should be roads that are interconnected to -- through new
territory, like they're talking about with Florida Rock, that will get out
to 951 or to 75, and that we do not put this on the backs of the people
that live in Golden Gate Estates as far as the transportation system
goes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'd like to also think -- I'd also like to add
that I believe we need to work with FDOT and see if we can't get rail
line from Tampa down to this area of Florida re-established, because I
don't believe that we're going to meet all the demands in the future for
the rock needs, and I believe that we need to look at other avenues of
bringing rock in, whether we have to export it or import it from other
countries throughout the world. And I think that -- we need to look at
that proposal, too.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Possibility.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yep. So now that we've got
smorgasbord on the table here, can we basically limit it and give
direction here to staff?
I think we've had some very good proposals by Commissioner
Henning and also by Commissioner Coyle and the other
commissioners. So if we can put together a caveat of items that -- to
look at, and I think this is the direction we need to go. Right now I
think we've got way too much on the table, so I think we __
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I don't think so.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, when you look at--
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, here's what I've got so far. Bring
back to the board Mr. Bonness's recommendations, A through D.
Page 93
"." ...-"-..-, --". , "',~.>~ '
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Bring Florida -- yeah, they were A through D. Get
Florida Rock's quarry and proposed road DCA back to -- on the
agenda as soon as -- for the Board of County Commissioners; make
sure no matter what happens, it comes back to the Board of County
Commissioners; that you talk about a habitat's last restoration plan on
that particular site; make sure that when we have the site, we also
integrate stormwater and drainage in the -- their surrounding area into
that particular site because it does have some synergy as far as
additional benefit that can be had; get specific sites and make sure
they're vetted as far as Mr. Bonness's recommendations are concerned
and bring those back and make sure that they're vetted so that you
have a consolidated -- and you have something that's actionable, that's
specific to an area in front of the board; take a look at the road
networks and the alternatives that are there to make sure that we don't
basically bring in a mining operation and have to put it on the backs of
just one neighborhood and that there's some alternatives out there; and
last but not least, at least investigate the railroad alternative as far as
expansion, slash, restoration with the Florida Department of
Transportation to see if that is a viable alternative. That's what I've
got on the table.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Two more things. Coyle wanted to
make sure that you got the stakeholders together, properly vet with
them; and also Nicole suggested, and I second, to work through DCA,
or with DCA.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the -- I think it's very
important to have a vetting process before you bring it back.
Commissioner Coyle was just right about that. But I think about--
restoration of habitat was, basically we don't want a net loss of habitat
-- correct me if I'm wrong -- in Collier County . You're going to have a
loss if you dig a hole in the ground. So would it be a -- if that's
Page 94
September 26, 2006
appropriate, relocate that habitat.
MR. PETTIT: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Coletta.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. Stan, could I call on you
just for a moment? You heard a whole lot of great ideas and some
direction we're giving. What have we missed here that we should be
cognizant of?
. MR. CHRZANOWSKI: I think what I've heard is what we
thought we were going to end up with when we started with this item.
We originally -- we originally tried showing you that we have a
problem coming up. You said you weren't sure because staff really
wasn't sure and the rock mining industry should do the study to show
that there's a problem.
I think they've done the study, and it's exactly what we thought it
would be. Now you know there's a problem, and now we have to
solve it, and I think all the solutions you came up with are the
direction to solve that problem.
I wish there was a shorter way to do it. And we're going to run
into certain things, like your rock mining in the Estates is impossible
because you can't blast in the Estates, things like that. But, you know,
these are minor things that can be worked out.
But, yeah, you're heading in the right direction.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think the other thing we need to do is
whatever we come up with, that there's stipulations put that once you
start rock mining, that you've got to continue to rock mine until you --
of course, you get all the material out of there so we don't end up with
situations like we did with Heritage Bay where there's acres and acres
and acres of rock that was left over.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Well, we went through that with the fill
pit -- with the fill pad, and I explained to you that, you know,
Page 95
September 26, 2006
sometimes the property values are higher, sometimes the fill values
are higher. And these guys, they stopped digging and they built
subdivisions because all of a sudden the one value went higher.
I don't know whether the attorney can word something that __
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, let's--
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: --limits the use of the land.
MR. PETTIT: Well, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to comment.
I'm not sure I can address what you just asked, Stan.
But what I was going to comment is that the issue of the Hussey
claim is parallel to all the things that have been discussed today but is
on a different track and is likely to come back before this board in the
next several months.
What I can commit to you as to what Mr. Tripp and I have
already done is, the Conservancy will be involved in the discussions,
the Audubon Society will be involved, the Wildlife Federation will be
involved, and the DCA will most certainly be involved because we
view them as a party to that claim. And we've already had a first
round of discussions.
But we are hopeful that we will bring back a request to give
direction to make our written settlement offer to the Husseys.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: So that may be in advance of the broader project
you're asking staff to accomplish.
MR. SCHMITT: I have one thing to add, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Coyle framed the argument perfectly in regards to
the other issue that's going to come up, and, of course, that's what
Nicole talked about, if, in fact, mining will be allowed in sending
areas. That's going to be a critical issue. Of course, that takes a compo
plan amendment.
And I -- as Commissioner Coyle recommended, we're going to
have to bring the parties together, we're going to have to look at pros
and cons, weigh the alternatives, and we're going to have to bring it
Page 96
September 26, 2006
back to you.
But ultimately if we move in that direction, regardless, it's going
to be a compo plan amendment. DCA will be involved certainly in a
compo plan amendment. But that's probably going to be the -- much
further down the road. There will be some site specific analysis, then
there's going to be this more general issue regarding sending lands in
the rural fringe.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: But that, I believe, we've got enough
information there to direct staff, and you've got enough nods here.
And at that, if there's no further discussion on this topic, we're going to
recess for lunch, and we'll be back at 12:05 -- or excuse me, 1 :05.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much, County Manager.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner -- I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The Board of County Commissioners is
now back in session from our noon recess.
Item #7A
PETITION: CU-2005-AR-7181, BASIL STREET PARTNERS,
LLC, REPRESENTED BY CLAY BROOKER, ESQUIRE OF
CHEFFY, PASSIDOMO, WILSON & JOHNSON, REQUESTING
APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A PASSIVE
RECREATIONAL FACILITY IN THE AGRICULTURAL (A)
ZONING DISTRICT, AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 2.04.03 OF
THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE -
PETITIONER WITHDRA WL
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item on our agenda is a
Page 97
September 26, 2006
time certain, but before we get to that, item 7 A -- and I know there are
people waiting for 7 A. The petitioner has withdrawn this particular
petition and requests a continuance.
So he is -- and Mr. Brooker is representing the client, but he has
withdrawn this particular petition. And I believe, Mr. Pettit, that with
a withdrawal, you do not need a vote.
MR. PETTIT: I would agree.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And we have one speaker on this.
Does the speaker still -- the speaker waives, okay.
Item #8A
RESOLUTION 2006-256A: EXEMPT COLLIER COUNTY FROM
THE PROVISIONS OF F.S. 316.2123 THAT GENERALLY
PERMITS THE OPERATION OF ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLE USE
ON UNPAVED PUBLIC ROADS UNDER SPECIFIED
CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS THEREIN, WHICH TAKES
EFFECT ON OCTOBER 1 ~ 2006 - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is a one p.m. time certain, and this is a public hearing for Board
of County Commissioners to consider and decide whether Collier
County should exempt itself from the provisions of Florida Statute
316.2123 that generally permits the operation of all-terrain vehicle use
on unpaved public roads under specified conditions and restrictions
herein which takes effect on October 1, 2006.
And for the board's edification, if you'd just permit me, I will get
that section of the statute and put it on the overhead. And this is
House Bill 7079, which was signed by the governor. And, again, it
takes effect on 1 October.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any discussion from our
commission?
Page 98
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, sir. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I think the intentions were
solid. I believe when they put this together it was to address issues in
other parts of Florida, more so than in Collier County; however, with
that said, the issue is, is that under this particular house bill, it
addresses the roads in Golden Gate Estates. I mean, they would fall
underneath this, and -- being that they're unpaved, they are county
roads, and they have a speed limit under 35 miles an hour.
The reason why I can't support this and why I have though asked
this commission to please consider exempting us from this is, due to
the fact that this -- the people that will be on these roads will most
likely be unlicensed and uninsured. It's residential roads that have
been traditionally residential roads and the people bought there with
that understanding.
Due to the shortage of recreation areas for A TV s in Collier
County, these roads will become a mecca for the whole county for
people to recreate on, which will not only be a hinderance to the
residents that live there and bought there in good faith, it would
deteriorate the roads at an accelerated rate, and it would also add noise
and dust to the situation.
However, with that said, I asked the county attorney if there was
any possibility we could be able to exempt out of it with the exception
of some roads in the Big Cypress where this bill would fit them to aT.
And I'd love to have a Wagon Wheel, Burton Road, Turner River
Road to be under this particular house bill and be made available for
ATVs.
And I'll let the county attorney address that. But from what he
said is that, it's either all or none.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But my thoughts were that if we
go ahead and we make sure this exemption takes place, we can always
Page 99
September 26, 2006
come back to our local legislative delegation and ask them to exempt
those roads in the Big Cypress area in the future --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- to be able to include them,
excuse me, in a house bill.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I believe at this point in time we need to
have everybody sworn in, don't we? This is item 8A.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do we have to have people sworn in on
this?
MR. PETTIT: Not necessarily, no.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, all right. I just want to make sure
that we are following protocol here.
County Attorney, can you give us some guidance on what
Commissioner Coletta was bringing forth here?
MR. PETTIT: I can -- Mr. Chairman, let me give you an
overview of some work we've done on this statute. Obviously it's a
new statute. There's no case law construing it.
We believe, and it's our best opinion, that you either have an
option of allowing the law to take effect and make no change and,
therefore, as Mr. Coletta indicates and as the plain language indicates,
people would be able to use A TV s under the conditions set forth in the
statute where the road was posted for less than 35 miles per hour in the
daytime, or you have to opt out or exempt yourself from the operation,
in which case you would be under the laws that exist today.
And my understanding of that law is that A TV use on roadways
is greatly restricted and certainly would not allow for this kind of
usage.
We looked at some other counties that have had these debates.
The four that we were able to locate, Columbia County, Putnam
County, Pasco and Walden, have all exempted themselves.
Page 100
September 26,2006
There was debate in at least several of those counties about
whether there was an all-in, all-out, or whether they could exempt
certain roads or not. Generally speaking, they all determined that it
was an all-in or all-out statute.
Obviously -- and it's interesting in Pasco County, the county
attorney -- that issue didn't really get addressed. The county attorney
was going to advise that she felt it would be unwise to attempt to
exempt out only certain roads without a traffic study. And I know
Bob Tipton's here, and he may want to address that issue from traffic
-- from transportation.
But I think that the only way that you would have any exemption
issue that would allow any of this operation to exist if you exempt
yourself out from the operation of statute would be to change speed
limits. And, again, I think that it -- in that instance you might want to
have a traffic study.
So to make a long story short, our view is that your vote today is
to either allow the law to operate which would allow A TV use as
specified in the statute, or to exempt yourself out from its operation,
which would keep things in the status quo.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you for your guidance.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sure we have public speakers --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- but I'm going to make a motion
to exempt Collier County out. I think this is another example of
ill-advised state legislation that doesn't seem to understand the
difference between counties in Florida and another attempt to remove
home rule from the county governments.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I second that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second. Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle, a second by Commissioner Coletta.
Page 101
September 26, 2006
And how many speakers do we have?
MS. FILSON: We have five speakers.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Jeff Moscardelli. He'll be
followed by Eric Kimmel.
MR. MOSCARDELLI: Hi. I'm Jeff Moscardelli. I'm a Collier
County resident of 16 years. Moved here when I was 13.
When I got here, Collier County was great. You could go
boating, fishing, A TV riding, everything. N ow it seems like
governments gotten bigger and bigger, and they're taking everything
away from us. It's getting a little more ridiculous.
And this morning, we've already had to hear that a woman had to
hop on an A TV off Rock Road just to make it all the way out to the
road because her house was flooded. This is really weird. The
hierarchy of our government's really taking everything away from us.
It's getting to be a little too ridiculous. We've already had the
Florida Sports Park taken away from us. It felt like someone stabbed
us in the back and basically told us, we're taking this out from
underneath you and we're going to give to big-time developers like
Toll Brothers. This is getting worse and worse day by day, year after
year.
Recently Donna Fiala told a news reporter, I guess, that I guess a
deal for Sabal Bay fell through. This is where you can start to seize
the opportunity to at least do something better for people, either build
a sports park there or maybe use it for public housing, something, but
at least start to turn the page towards something brighter towards
people.
Because the common, average blue-collar Joe that puts in 40-plus
to 50-plus hours a week has to have some sort of recreation to go out
and blow off that steam by the end of the week. And when you take
that away from him, where do you think he's going to take his
frustrations? Best of luck when they come towards you.
Page 102
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I need to address a couple of
things that -- misconceptions. One, we're not taking away anything.
It's never been a right that's been granted. It wouldn't be fair to the
people that live on these roads to grant these rights. And I think if you
lived on those roads, you would also agree that it would be demeaning
of your property.
Number two, Florida Sports Park has not taken away anything.
They're in the process of negotiating with Toll Brothers. And the
reason I know is I used to be the past president. I put together one of
the original deals for them to be able to stay where they are, Florida
Sports Park. And they're well on their way to being able to secure the
place and keep it where it is. And that's misinformation that you have,
and it needs to be corrected just so it doesn't go out there to people
with the impression that they're not going to have Florida Sports Park
anymore.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker Eric Kimmel. He'll be followed
by Brian -- it looks like McMahon.
MR. KIMMEL: Good afternoon. I'm Eric Kimmel. Thank you
for this opportunity to speak.
I ask that you please support FS316.2123 in suitable areas of
Collier County. This is one of the very few bills that have been passed
that recognize our traditional uses in South Florida. South Florida is a
multi-cultural and highly diversified population, and our particular
folk culture, while accepting of all the many folks, cultures and
lifestyles, have come our way, has steadily -- has been steadily pushed
aside and given up nearly all of our freedoms we grew up with due to
pressure of population growth and prejudice towards our culture and
heritage.
Our family grew up driving swamp buggies, airboats, dirt bikes,
ORVs, minibikes, riding horses, you name it, on South Florida roads
and trails, mostly on roads in rural areas, on public land such as the
Big Cypress, Everglades, and in and around homes on dirt roads on
Page 103
September 26, 2006
acreage on the outskirts of the main populations.
Collier County is an outdoor paradise, and folks from all over
have both moved here, and many visit regularly. This puts pressure to
satisfy desires of masses resulting in the homogenizing of South
Florida. These actions result with adverse effects on South Florida's
traditional folk culture and heritage.
Given this, we must recognize that there are many areas where
ORV use may be disturbing or offensive to those who have not grown
up in our culture. Very importantly, we also do not wish to turn rural
areas of Collier County into racetracks for those who wish to abuse
the statute. We advocate passive use in order to reach our
destinations. This can be accomplished with responsible ORV
operators following the rules and operating this equipment, as we have
our farm equipment for generations, on the roads.
I ask that rather than dismiss this statute in its entirety, that
Collier County inventory the area and roads where this use is suitable.
I will name a few that I know personally, you know -- and I don't want
to limit myself to just these, but basically you've got everything east of
Picayune State Forest, the Fakahatchee. I live on Loop Road part
time. That would be a great road for this statute to be allowed.
And I like to -- this is a good statute if you put to use common
sense guidelines, and I greatly appreciate your consideration of my
comments.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Brian McMahon. He'll be followed by Frank
Denninger.
MR. McMAHON: Hello. I'm Brian McMahon. I certainly
support Commissioner Coletta in his concern for some of the
residential areas of Northern Golden Gate and -- with the dust issues
and other things that we certainly don't want to make those people
suffer anything that they don't have to.
I would certainly like to see the county take a second look at
Page 104
September 26, 2006
allowing this activity in an area which would be south of 1-75 and east
of 29, which would include Burton and Turtle River Road and Wagon
Wheel Road.
We've taken -- the county attorney, nothing personal, but we're
looking at what other counties have done. I would strongly urge us to,
let's go ahead and do that and see what the state interpretation is. If
the state interpretation comes back that we can't do it, at that point
then we come back and we go ahead and take the exemption. But
unless we try, we'll never know.
So please, there are some nice areas out there. The county
spends money on these roads. It would provide a lot of good use to
these areas out there. Please, let's try to do the sectional exemption
and see what the state comes back and says.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Frank Denninger. He'll be followed by Rick
Varela.
MR. DENNINGER: Hello, Frank Denninger here representing
the -- or a delegate to the Everglades Coordinating Council.
I'd like to echo Mr. McMahon's remarks and also add that I think
the state did respect home rule, because they put an absolute
exemption in there so that the home counties could rule and do what
they -- which I think is a good thing. You know, it gives the local
people the say-so, and -- but in that, there's an old saying, nothing
ventured, nothing gained.
You know, it's very easy to take the easy way out here and b.e
done with it and the people associated with these machines. But really
what you're doing when you just throw it out, you're throwing those
people's concerns and their -- what they like to do out with the
exemption.
And we need to remember, every time someone buys an ATV,
they're plopping down 6 to 7 percent of 5 to $10,000 in the reasonable
revenue that probably filters back to Collier County, on top of the little
Page 105
September 26, 2006
teeny $39 fee -- title fee that got dropped on them by a state law -- I
think this is the state law -- that generates -- is supposed to be
generating money to give them somewhere to go. Well, I don't know
anywhere -- anybody that's got anywhere to go yet off these millions
of dollars sitting in forestry's grant fund.
And also, I was at an OHV meeting in Dade County last week, a
working group, inner agency working group, because our organization
helped forestry get a grant to Miami-Dade to find a place. And in that
meeting there was a gentleman there from Florida Trail Riders
association, a big A TV group. And I asked him about any of the other
counties, what are they doing on this, and his remark was, Broward
County is going to let it ride, see what happens.
And as far as I can tell in Dade County -- I don't know yet that
they're going to snap up and kick it out, but a lady there promoting
A TV use, kind of the central figure on this issue, is meeting with
Miami-Dade police officials to go over what county roads in South
Dade County, near Homestead, et cetera, might be usable to try and
get some of the illegal activity that's happening now. There's some
happening in that little -- give them a little road to run up and down or
whatever, you know, just to get rid of that energy, you know.
And these are people -- they're good citizens. They've been
biased. And I can consider the whole group has been slandered by
documents and EISs and government documents produced on
environmental issues in the last five years around here. I mean
slandered.
And the people I talk to in agencies on the phone, I can't even
repeat the things that they say that these people do in a general sense.
And it might well be one person did something 10 years ago, but it
sticks. You know, they do something bad, everybody remembers it
for the rest of the time.
But anyhow, I appreciate your time, and thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, sir.
Page 106
September 26, 2006
MS. FILSON: Rick Varela.
MR. VARELA: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Thank you for
the opportunity to come here in front of you.
I share the same thoughts about letting people ride A TV s in
residential areas. I think it will not be fair to the residents, like
Commissioner Coletta said, that bought there for the piece and quiet,
and all of a sudden have a racetrack in front of their house.
However, saying that, I think this is the first opportunity in a
long, long time that county has not been actually told what to do by
either state or federal agencies as to the recreation of the county
citizens that they're responsible for. I would, again, like to -- if you
could, look and inventory the lands that the county has. I think if you
could somehow find a way to exempt a certain piece of the county,
that would be a win-win situation for everybody.
That's my comments. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much. Jim Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta, excuse me.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You can call me Jim.
Yeah, what you're hearing is true, the fact that -- I'm glad -- I
thank you very much for the leadership out there recognizing the
rights of the residents who live on these roads.
It was a right that's never been granted before. Let's face it, they
do ride on those roads all the time. It's one of those things, it's not
accepted, it's illegal. But also for the same note, it's been illegal to be
able to ride on the roads in the Big Cypress, and they held that over
me many, many times down there at the Big Cypress, trying to get me
to give up the road there, saying, well, if you don't give up the road,
we might come down on the ATV riders and the people that are
driving the swamp buggies. Not the present administration, but the
one before.
Page 107
September 26, 2006
The one that's in there now, they're great to work with, it really
is. Karen's been a wonderful person. But they have come through
with some pretty clear threats, either give up these roads or we're
going to start enforcing the law of the land, which. is, you can't ride on
these roads because they're county roads and you're not -- there's no
provision for it.
Now, I've asked the county attorney several times how we could
possibly manipulate this to be able to cover that entity so we could be
able to get on those roads and make it legal to be able to drive on the
Turner River Road, Big Cypress, Burton Road, Loop Road, in that end
of the county.
And I'm going to ask him again now, and I'm going to ask the
question very clearly. And he is our legal counsel, and we're going to
be careful what we do, because I don't want to do something that's
going to suddenly jeopardize our ability to be able to protect the
integrity of the residents that live in Golden Gate Estates.
So County Attorney, is there any way that we could put it
together so we could float this out there to see if it would work where
we opt out for the Estates roads and in for the roads that are in the Big
Cypress and be able to wait to see what happens at that point in time
and not endanger our ability to be able to enforce the laws of this
county for the Estates?
MR. PETTIT: Thank you, Commissioner Coletta. My
recommendation is that there is flexibility here by raising speed limits
on those roads where you want to preclude this activity.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Never going to happen. I'm not
going to take a 30-mile dirt road and raise it to 35 or 40 -- what would
it be, 35 or 40?
MR. PETTIT: Thirty-five.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay -- 35 miles an hour just to
prevent somebody from riding on that road. I take one danger and I
substitute it for another. I mean, I grant you, people are driving on
Page 108
September 26, 2006
those roads probably 40, 50 miles an hour. Legal speed limit is 30
miles an hour, and it's that for a reason.
And Mr. Feder might want to comment on that just so there's no
public perception of -- or I'm sorry. Mr. Tipton?
MR. TIPTON: Sir, Commissioner. Bob Tipton, for the record,
director of traffic ops. We would have to go to 40 miles per hour
because we have to exceed the 35. You can't use increments less than
five, so we would be posting at 40 miles per hour on roads with the
canal at one end and a paved road that you would have to cross at the
other.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's not practical. That's not
going to happen. That's not for consideration.
So going back to the original question. What would happen if we
went -- this time this commission took it on their own to say that with
the exception of roads within the Big Cypress or the particular areas
like that? What could happen with the rest of it?
I mean, could we possibly lose out on the fact if somebody -- a
law was challenged with people driving on Estates roads and coming
back and saying, you know, that we didn't legally make a
determination?
MR. PETTIT: You certainly could. I mean, I think -- there is no
case law on this. This is a brand new statute that doesn't even come
into effect until, I guess, the end of this week or the beginning of next,
like a Saturday.
MR. MUDD: Sunday.
MR. PETTIT: Sunday, okay. I look at -- we base our
recommendation on what we think is the plain language of the statute,
not simply what other counties have done.
And when you look at subsection 2 in the statute, Commissioner,
it says, a county is exempt from this section if the governing body of
the county by majority vote, following a notice of public hearing,
votes to exempt the county from the section.
Page 109
September 26, 2006
And you read the statutes as a whole. I realize that's one
subsection. It seems to suggest that it's dealing with the county as
opposed to sections of the county or roads of the county.
Now, what Mr. Tipton said -- maybe I misunderstood. I read the
statute to say that if the speed limit is less than 35, you can -- if you
allow the law to operate -- use an A TV on an unpaved road. So it
would seem to me that if you posted a road at 35, that would preclude
or disallow if you decided not to exempt yourselves out from the
statute.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, let's address the safety
issue on it. Once again, I know that all the roads in Golden Gate
Estates are 30 miles an hour; am I correct, Mr. Tipton?
MR. TIPTON: Yes. They're by statute.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, by statute. So we've
already got a statute in place that sets the speed limit. If we're to
increase it, what dangers would the people out there have to endure? If
we go to 35, people, instead of driving 40, are going to be driving 45, I
assume.
MR. TIPTON: Well, one of the problems we do have out there is
we get constant complaints of speeding, and I'm afraid you'd be back
in the same situation. People would be driving at the same speed
they're driving now or greater.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They might be able to justify it,
too.
MR. TIPTON: Even if you were to raise it to 35, they can't ticket
anything less than 40, so you'd be having people having 40 with
impunity .
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, and I'm not buying into
this as an answer. To me it's one of the worst solutions I could hear as
far as that goes.
Let's go back to the original question. Suppose Mr. Coyle,
Commissioner Coyle, redid his motion to just recognize the roads
Page 110
September 26, 2006
within Golden Gate Estates, and I don't know, whatever else we're
missing out there, that are county maintained, but excepting the roads
-- exempting the roads from what we're doing here today that are in
the Big Cypress and -- I'm not too sure where else. Big Cypress.
Yeah, it would just be the Big Cypress where we still have roads. We
gave them up in the south block. What would happen? Do you think
we can try it at least? I mean --
MR. PETTIT: Commissioner, I think -- you're the policymakers
and you could vote that way. I think it would be certainly subject to
being overturned if somebody challenged it.
I'm trying to think on the fly here whether there would be other
negative consequences. It could be that somebody would argue if
there were, for example, injuries out there, that there was -- in some
way or another this was an improper act of the board and somehow
we've exposed ourselves to damages.
I'm -- I can't give you an answer because I don't know whether
someone would challenge it or whether the challenge would be
successful. I can only tell you that at this point we've read the
language of the statute, and we think that it generally would seem to
mean that it's either all or nothing, other than by changing speed
limits.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, motion maker, how do
you feel?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I wouldn't change my motion
to do that because I don't think we can identify properly all of the
roads where this restriction should apply or not apply.
I agree with the county attorney. It should apply to all county
controlled roads. And I think that's the way we've got to vote.
Now, County Manager, tell us when we have to make this
decision. By the 1st of October, if I remember correctly, right?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if you do not take any action, on 1
October A TV riding, based on what you see in front of you on the
Page 111
September 26,2006
display, will be a legal entity in Collier County on the dirt roads.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we don't meet again before
that deadline as a Board of County Commissioners.
MR. MUDD: To give -- to take an action with the motion, you're
absolutely right.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We've got to take action today, and
we don't have time to sort out which roads should be permitted and
which roads should not be permitted.
Ifwe exempt ourselves from this particular law, we can come
back at some future time and say, well, we're changing our mind. We
want to be included in this process for certain things, if we wanted to
do that, and see how the state felt about it.
But we don't have time for that now. We've got to act on this
law, and based upon what legal counsel is telling us, we've got to do it
on the basis of the entire county.
And I would suggest that we not get involved in trying to work
our way around the intent of the law because I think it will get us into
potential legal difficulty, particularly from the standpoint of liability.
So I think we just face this head on. We're working hard, we're
willing to go to -- to sue the state, we're willing to take them to court
to get the A TV land they promised us for the people to recreate on.
We're still committed to that fight. Let's not get ourselves in trouble
here. Let's exempt ourselves from this law and proceed.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
MR. MUDD: I need one little bit of clarification on something
you said. You said county owned.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County owned.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no. I'm talking about for the --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County owned.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm talking about what it says
specifically in this statute. It says, votes to exempt the county from
this section. It doesn't say anything, it just says, we're going to vote to
Page 112
September 26, 2006
exempt the county from this section, end of story.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We don't need to get into
identifying roads or anything else. We don't have time.
MR. MUDD: I just want to make sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we shouldn't.
MR. MUDD: You combined two words, and I just wanted to get
some clarification.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Is that in your second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, a couple things. Ijust
want to make sure that we're not going the wrong way.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, we're getting it clarified before we
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, this is dealing with county
maintained roads that aren't paved.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're going the wrong way now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, it's not all road. You have
no jurisdiction over unpave -- I mean private roads.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. All we're saying is, right there,
that last sentence, we have to vote to exempt the county from this
section before October the 1 st. That's all I'm saying.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's exactly what we're
dealing with. I want to make sure we don't try to refrain (sic) what the
house bill actually is.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, we're not.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're only going to say, we're
exempting ourself from this section, end of story.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You made some very good
suggestions and very good points, that this commission has been very
Page 113
September 26, 2006
proactive, and we are taking Florida -- Southwest Florida Water
Management to court -- if we can ever get past the mediation part of it.
That's another story -- over the very same issue, and we are looking at
some -- some places out there that maybe the county can run as far as
parks go, and they're very preliminary at the moment. Not worthy of
discussion. But there is actions taking place.
Now, what I'm going to propose -- and this is just shortly down
the road -- that we start, as part of our legislative initiative, we're
working with our delegates when they come before us, to recognize
this shortfall and to start the dialogue going about the roads in the Big
Cypress to be a separate entity to be included in this house bill this
coming year so that they can -- people can recreate on there without
fear of legal reprisals.
I kind of hope when that time comes I get the support of the
commission to be able to go forward with that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: My question to you is, does your second
reflect the motion that Commissioner Coyle has put out on the table?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, exactly the way this reads.
I don't want anything read into it about private roads or anything, but
just the way the house bill itself reads.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So your second still holds?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It still holds.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, good. Any other discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I just want to hear that
motion one more time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: My motion is that the Board of
County Commissioners exempt Collier County from this section of
House Bill 7079.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
Page 114
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We've got a motion on the floor
by Commissioner Coy Ie and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
Hearing 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2006-42: PUDZ-2005-AR-8337, SEMBLER
FLORIDA, INC. REQUESTING A REZONE FROM THE ESTATES
(E) ZONING DISTRICT TO A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) ZONING DDISTRICT FOR A
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER KNOWN AS
BROOKS VILLAGE CPUD - ADOPTED/STIPULA TIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 8B. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and
ex parte disclosure be provided by commissioner members.
It's petition PUDZ-2005-AR-8337, Sembler Florida, Inc.,
represented by -- Dwight Nadeau ofRW A, Inc., is requesting a rezone
from the Estates zoning district to the commercial planned unit
development, CPUD, zoning district for a proposed commercial
shopping center to be known as Brooks Village CPUD.
The subject property consisting of 22.7 acres is located on the
southwest quadrant of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and Pine
Page 115
September 26, 2006
Ridge Road in Section 15, Township 49 south, Range 26 east, Collier
County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
All those that are going to give testimony on this, would you
please rise for the court reporter to swear you in.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle, do you
have any ex parte on this issue?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. I have received
correspondence, emails, and I have met with representatives of the
petitioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Myself, I've just received emails
and have not met with anyone else on this, just emails and phone calls.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've met with county staff,
with the County Attorney's Office, I've received correspondence, calls,
emails, and had meetings with the petitioner's agent.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, and I have something for the
file.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have phone calls, meetings and
emails in my packet if anybody wishes to review. I also received an
unofficial survey from the Sembler Company, and that's all I have to
disclose.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I have received emails,
phone calls, and have had meetings.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. If the petitioner would proceed.
MR. ANDERSON: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of
the commission. For the record, my name is Bruce Anderson from the
Roetzel and Andress law firm, and I'm here representing Sembler
Page 116
September 26, 2006
Florida, Inc., which is the contract purchaser.
With me today is Joe Filippelli, the Vice-President of Sembler
Inc. Also present is Bob Mulhere, the Planning Director for RW A,
Inc.; and the project's transportation engineer, Reed Jarvi of Vanasse,
Daylor and Associates. Also with me today is Mrs. Amber Overby of
Sembler, who is responsible for community outreach, which Sembler
did a lot of in the process of this PUD.
This is an application to rezone to a commercial PUD property
that's located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Pine Ridge
Road and Collier Boulevard, which is a designated site in the Growth
Management Plan for a neighborhood center commercial development
in the Golden Gate Master Plan.
Most of this corner property was originally approved nine years
ago in the Growth Management Plan for future commercial use.
The purpose of locating commercial at the intersections of major
arterial roads such as these is to provide goods and services and
amenities to Estates residents so that they don't have to drive all the
way in further west to obtain the everyday necessities of life.
I'm going to ask Amber Overby of Sembler to come up and tell
you a little bit about the Sembler Company and the meetings and
surveys that they conducted, and after she finishes, then I'll go through
the major changes that have been made to the project as a result of
meetings with the neighborhood and the two Planning Commission
hearings, which were conducted on this PUD.
MS. OVERBY: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Amber Overby, and I'm the director of public relations and
community affairs for the Sembler Company.
Since established in 1962 by Mel Sembler, the Sembler
Company has been at the forefront of retail development fostering
positive growth in communities around Florida.
The Sembler name is synonymous with excellence, integrity and
innovative thinking. It is one of the leading shopping center
Page 11 7
September 26, 2006
development companies across the southeast.
Mr. Sembler himself has also served as a role model for all of us,
having served his country twice as a U.S. Ambassador, first to
Australia, and most recently to Italy. His dedication to public service
is reflected in how our company works with our residents and
communities all over.
To date Sembler's burgeoning portfolio includes more than 200
successful ventures. In Naples specifically, Sembler recently
developed the new Naples Center at the Promenade anchored by a
Wild Oats and many others.
Additionally, we currently have three other districts under
development in Naples, including Brooks Village and Hammock Park.
So as you can see, Sembler is in Naples to stay, and we look forward
to being a good neighbor and a corporate citizen.
The Sembler name also means quality award-winning projects.
We've been honored with awards such as outstanding new building by
the Florida Redevelopment Association, the Downtown Contribution
Significance Awards by the City of St. Petersburg, and the Best Retail
Dealer Finalist for Community Impact by the Tampa Bay Business
Journal.
And in keeping with our corporate philosophy of integrity and
respect, it is my job to ensure that Sembler's fully engaged with
nearby residents and potential customers in every community where
we develop. We do this in a number of ways. Through direct mailing,
surveys, emails and, of course, resident meetings.
In the case of Brooks Village, Sembler has held four meetings
with residents of 11 th Avenue Southwest beginning in November of
2005. The most recent meeting was July 27th, just days before our
Planning Commission hearing.
These meetings have progressively been more productive and
have yielded significant and positive changes to the site plan which
Mr. Anderson will review later.
Page 118
September 26, 2006
We also sent out a direct mailing with an attached reply card
which was meant to introduce our company and our concept to those
who may shop at the center. The mailing was sent to the targeted
trade area, which includes about 5,000 households within one or two
miles of the project, depending on the location -- on the direction.
On the reply card we asked the question, would you generally be
in favor of this type of development at this location? So far we've
received back 251 responses, or about 5 percent, which is actually an
above average return for a direct mail piece. A hundred eight-five
responded yes, or 74 percent.
Last week you were each sent a copy of these replies, along with
other support letters and emails, and we hope you've had a chance to
read through some of those. Furthermore, many residents emailed you
directly to voice their support for our project and have recognized how
Sembler has been working with them to address their questions and
concerns.
The best example of this partnership can be seen in the outcome
of the school bus stop issue. Given the widening -- the DOT widening
of County Road -- or Collier Boulevard, 951, the future location of the
bus stop on 11 th Avenue was in jeopardy, and the neighbors expressed
dire concern that their bus stop might be relocated to another street or
moved further down 951.
Once this issue was raised to us, it then became a priority of
Sembler's to figure out a resolution. We played an active role in
directly meeting with the school board and working with the county
DOT to come up with a plan that was safe and suitable, given the new
road expansions.
It was so important to Sembler that the bus stop remain on 11 th
Avenue that we've committed to adding sidewalks, a parking area, and
a covered bus shelter for the students.
So after many weeks of phone calls with neighbors, the DOT and
the school board, finally the school board confirmed on September
Page 119
September 26, 2006
16th that the new location for the bus stop would be on the southwest
comer of 11 th Avenue. And I actually have a copy of the email
confirming this by Jeff Stauring, Director of Transportation for the
Collier County School Board, which I will submit.
This is an exceptional result for everybody. The neighbors are
satisfied, the school board is relieved to have a developer working
with them on an issue like this before the fact, and Sembler's proud to
give the community what they need and deserve, a safe bus shelter for
their school children.
And as this project moves forward, we'll continue to play an
important role in residents -- with the residents in ensuring Brooks
Village has a positive impact on the community. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, ma'am.
MR. ANDERSON: A number of items were discussed at the two
Planning Commission hearings and the three neighborhood -- three or
four neighborhood meetings, and I want to highlight the major items
on which progress was made.
There has been a reduction in intensity. The normal or typical
ratio is 10,000 square feet of retail commercial building for every one
acre of land. This PUD is 22.7 acres, so that would equate to about
220,000 square feet.
This PUD has been downsized several times and is now proposed
to allow only 105,000 square feet of retail commercial uses. That is
less than half of the typical commercial intensity for a parcel of this
SIze.
As a result of feedback from area residents, the anchor tenant
with the two outparcels at the south end of the project have been
moved to the north about 45 feet in order to allow for a park-like green
space area to be installed all along 11 th Avenue.
In addition to sidewalks on both sides of 11 th Avenue that my
client agreed to install, the green space area will feature a meandering
sidewalk, benches, decorative lighting and shade trees. The sidewalk
Page 120
September 26, 2006
in there will connect to a sidewalk along 951.
And as Ms. Overby told you, my client is committed in the PUD,
section 5. 8A, to build a new school bus stop shelter to serve the
residents of 11 th Avenue Southwest.
There is a slight modification to the language in this section to
make clear that the facility is to serve 11 th Avenue Southwest, and
that language is on page 104 of your agenda materials for this petition.
Both sides of 11 th Avenue for the full 640 feet of commercial
frontage on 11 th Avenue will be landscaped and irrigated with palms
and shrubs, which are in addition to the Land Development Code
required 25-foot perimeter landscape buffer around the project.
Palm trees would be installed on both sides of the three entry
drives of the shopping center in order to create a palm-lined boulevard
effect. And after the preserve area is cleared of exotics as required by
the Land Development Code, Sembler's committed to plant 100 new
trees in the preserve area.
As recorded by the Golden Gate Master Plan, a 75- foot buffer is
provided as a minimum along the western edge of the property;
however, that buffer increases and it ranges -- including the water
management retention pond, it various from 80 feet to 280 feet, a
five- foot wall, the maximum allowed, would be installed along the
eastern boundary of the preserve area next to the shopping center.
My client has agreed to limit delivery and customer operation
hours. After my client obtained the consent of its perspective tenants,
customer operating hours are six a.m. to midnight, and delivery hours
are limited to six a.m. to 10 p.m.
With regard to affordable housing, my client has agreed to donate
to the Collier County Housing Development Corporation 50 cents per
square foot of commercial building for affordable housing.
On the bottom of page 5 of your agenda materials, we propose to
clarify that language to include that payment would be made at the
time of building permit, and we want to add recognition, as we stated
Page 121
September 26, 2006
at the Planning Commission, that the amount due under this
contribution for affordable housing, would be credited against any
later adopted fee for affordable or workforce housing.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of this proj ect
with a unanimous vote, for which we are grateful; however, there are
two areas of principal disagreement with two of the conditions that
were placed upon -- recommended by the Planning Commission to be
placed upon this PUD. Both of them are transportation related.
One area of disagreement concerns access from 11 th Avenue
Southwest.
The Planning Commission recommended no access from 11 th
Avenue Southwest to tract 114. They chose an unusual method of
doing that by using the phrase, there shall be no impervious surface on
the south 100 feet of tract 114. That's another way of saying, no
access.
As a compromise, my client is proposing an entrance only access
from 11 th Avenue, which does have some neighborhood support.
A little bit of history on this particular neighborhood center and
its transportation considerations is in order.
Most of the property was first designated in the Growth
Management Plan for commercial use in 1997. Specifically tracts 109
through 113 in the east half of 107 were approved for future
commercial project, or projects, in 1997.
At that time the board added language that does require internal
circulation between the parcels, which we have provided for in this
PUD master plan.
An important point to be remembered is that even though this is
one developer for all of the parcels, all of the various lots, that is
certainly preferable to what could be a series of separate,
uncoordinated lot by lot rezones by the various different property
owners.
In 2002, the Growth Management Plan was amended to add tract
Page 122
September 26, 2006
114 here at the end. At that time the transportation staff added
language to the Golden Gate Master Plan that access to tract 114 was
limited to 11 th Avenue Southwest. I read that language as
guaranteeing that tract 114 has access to 11 th Avenue because it's
prohibited from having its access from Collier Boulevard. The
property has to have access to one of the two public streets it abuts.
Very clearly, twice, during Growth Management Plan
amendments over the last nine years, 1997, and again in 2002, the
county commission has stated that the county wants people who shop
at this neighborhood center to be able to shop there without the
necessity of having to drive through the intersection of Pine Ridge
Road and Collier Boulevard, and that is provided in the PUD master
plan.
Sembler's proposed entrance only language is on page 104 and
105 of the agenda to -- of your agenda materials to replace the
language in PUD sections 3.3C and 3.3I, which are found on page 82
of your agenda materials.
Unfortunately the no impervious surface language that the
Planning Commission used to restrict access to 11 th also impacted the
public open space language which Sembler seeks to clarify by
prohibiting only building and parking within the south 100 feet of tract
of 114.
Indeed, two-thirds of this tract 114 is set aside as usable open
space. Related to that access issue on 11 th Avenue, is a change to the
signage prohibition on 11 th Avenue to allow county transportation and
commercial identification or direction signs if access is permitted from
11 th Avenue as we request.
The other area of significant disagreement with the Planning
Commission concerns the phasing language in section 3.3 of the PUD.
This language would require phasing by limiting certificates of
occupancy to 60,000 square feet until Collier Boulevard was widened
from two lanes to six lanes between Immokalee Road and Golden
Page 123
September 26, 2006
Gate Boulevard.
Golden Gate Boulevard is north of the proposed PUD, and
Collier Boulevard and Pine Ridge Road are both four-laned at this
PUD location.
Now, phasing mayor may not be an appropriate consideration
for a given residential proj ect that involves many homes, but it is
really a misplaced strategy for transportation management of
commercial development on Collier Boulevard at this location.
The phasing compromise offered by my client can alleviate
traffic problems while construction on Collier Boulevard between
Golden Gate Boulevard and Immokalee Road is ongoing, as Reed
Jarvi will explain in his testimony.
Sembler's proposed compromise phasing language would allow
for issuance of a certificate of occupancy for 60,000 square feet
following zoning approval, and the remaining 45,000 square feet
would be allowed to obtain their certificate of occupancy within 15
months of the date of zoning approval.
I want to emphasize that with regard to transportation solutions,
in connection with this PUD approval, the county Department of
Transportation has negotiated a developer contribution agreement with
my client that calls for an estimated $500,000 in transportation
donations without any impact fee credits.
This developer contribution agreement would be executed by
Sembler rather than all of the current owners as currently reflected in
the agenda. That would be executed by Sembler after they close on
the property in the next 30 to 45 days.
At this point I'd like to ask Reed Jarvi to come up and talk about
the transportation issues associated with this project.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner, did you want to ask a
question?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I was --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala's first, then
Page 124
September 26, 2006
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I just wanted to ask a fast
question of Bruce. I've got a number of other questions, but just one
fast one. Do you happen to know why the Planning Commission
removed the wellsite?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There doesn't seem to be a reason
for it. And I know how badly we need them, and here the developer is
offering them. I just -- I just thought maybe you'd have an answer for
me.
MR. ANDERSON: I'll defer to staff on that.
MR. SCHMITT: Joe Schmitt, your Administrator of Community
Development/Environmental Services.
I believe the Planning Commission may have thought that it was
an exaction that was being placed upon the developer that they had not
agreed to, and they voted to remove it.
Actually, I would have to defer to the attorney, but I believe it is
beyond their authority. They can recommend that it be removed, but
it's up to the board if you decide to remove it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Maybe -- Jim DeLony, can you give us
some insight? I know that you're always working on wells. Okay, I'm
sorry .
MR. GRAMATGES: Yeah, good afternoon, Phil Gramatges,
principal project manager, public utilities engineering.
I was not present at the meeting with the Planning Commission,
so I cannot speak to their motivation to remove the well, but I can tell
you that we do want that well very much. I'd like to put something on
the monitor, if I may.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Joe, don't go too far, because I think
another question we need to know is what the motivation was by the
Planning Commission for this removal of the well once we get this
other issue taken care of.
Page 125
September 26, 2006
MR. SCHMITT: Again, I can't -- I really don't know other than
my assumption was they might have felt it was an exaction unfairly
being placed upon the developer. That's the only thing I can state.
Since I'm up here, can I make another correction? Mr. Anderson
made a comment that the developer donation would be given to the
Housing Development Corporation. We note in the executive
summary that the contribution will be given to the Affordable Housing
Trust Fund --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: -- which, if it is given to the trust fund, then we
can deal with credits later on. And I explained, certainly they can, if
they choose, give it to a third party, the HDC, but our
recommendation is that -- it's on page V -6, page 90 of 200 of your
documents, paragraph C under paragraph 5.8, subparagraph C, say
Affordable Housing Trust Fund in lieu of the Collier County Housing
Development Corporation.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you for that clarification.
MR. ANDERSON: And perhaps before we delve too deeply into
the well issue, my client's willing to grant a well easement.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I just -- we're trying to -- I just to
get this cleared up, and I think that's what Commissioner Fiala was
interested in.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, I was just curious.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's not anything that, you know,
there was -- they found alarming, then I -- and that's mainly what I
was going for. If it was just a feeling about something, then -- and I
know how badly you need the well -- then I would just as soon go
with it, you know. But I first wanted to find out. But if that's all it is,
then that's all I need.
MR. GRAMATGES: Okay. Well, thank you. Any more
questions?
Page 126
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning has a question.
I'm not sure what it relates to here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Anderson addressed my
question.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I wanted to remind this
commission that receiving space for wells is something we've been
doing on a regular basis for the good of the community. And it's not
something that this is the first occurrence where it's ever happened.
I'm a little surprised by the Planning Commission's direction on this.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, me, too.
MR. GRAMATGES: I'd like to add if I may, Commissioners,
that we have been talking to the developer since the beginning of the
PUD, and they have been very receptive to this well. The only request
that they made is that we place the well to the west of the access road
from 11 th Avenue, which we agreed to do. And we are certainly
willing, as we always are, to work with our architect to make sure that
this is an appropriate location and it properly reflects the architecture
of the place and is safe and secure for the neighbors.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. GRAMATGES: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Go ahead, Reed, proceed. Sorry to hold
you up.
Good question.
MR. JARVI: I think that's -- Reed Jarvi, Professional Engineer
with Vanasse, Daylor, for the record, and I believe this is in the same
orientation the master plan was just in so I can talk about it.
MR. MUDD: North is going--
MR. JARVI: North is still to the right.
I'm going to talk about several points. The first one being access
on 11 th Avenue. That was one of the major discussions at the
Page 127
September 26, 2006
Planning Commission and has been a continual discussion with the
residents and the staff.
We have met with Nick Casalanguida from transportation
planning staff and have come up with alternatives looking at access
for this site. The first one you see here is what we call alternative
access A, which is basically showing a left-in access at 11 th Avenue
and right-in access in the middle -- right-in, right-out access in the
middle of the property, and then a right-out to the -- in between those
two, which is similar to what the master plan had that you previously
saw.
You may note that currently 11 th Avenue is a full access, but we
have been assured by county staff that as Collier Boulevard in this
area is expanded, that that full access will become a directional access.
So we have looked at it that way.
We have done the analysis showing this, and we feel that this is
the best solution for the access for both the project and the community
that they -- the people -- the residents that live along 11 th Avenue will
still have a left-in access, northbound left-in, still have a right-in,
right-out access.
The project will have a left-in on Collier Boulevard and won't
have to go to do U-turns everywhere to make -- to access the shopping
center.
The second alternative, or the first alternative, is very similar.
From talking to staff, once again, it would appear that the shopping
center would be the -- is the higher user of the access and that an
access could be done such that there be a northbound left-turn access
for the shopping center. This is located basically where the left --
excuse me -- the right-out was in the previous slide, and you'd have --
it would close the access at 11 th Avenue, so it would be a right-in,
right-out only.
So we feel that although this would work for the shopping center,
we feel that it doesn't work as well for the residents on 11 th Avenue.
Page 128
September 26, 2006
Also in this situation, that if the residents on 11 th Avenue would
want to use the shopping center, which I would certainly think they
would and certainly would encourage so they don't use Collier
Boulevard, they would have to do a right-out at 11 th Avenue, go down
approximately another quarter mile for aU-turn to the north, travel
north on Collier Boulevard to do a left turn into the shopping, which is
a very circuitous route for something that is basically a couple yards --
or several 100 feet away at best.
So it would seem that from a network standpoint, that would not
be a good idea, from our perspective, and county staff has agreed that
we would be causing people to use the network unnecessarily.
So we believe that from an access standpoint, the use of 11 th
Avenue -- 11 th Avenue for the northbound left turn would be the best
situation for both the proj ect and for the residents to keep their access
as best it can be done.
Second thing I want to talk about briefly is phasing. As Bruce
mentioned, that was a Planning Commission recommendation to phase
the proj ect. I've done the calculations and have worked them with
county staff, and the phasing -- there is nothing transportation-wise to
support phasing for this proj ect.
Ifwe were in today with an SDP, there is capacity on the
roadways in this area, so it would meet the concurrency requirement if
we did concurrency today. Likewise, we have done a consistency
evaluation five years from now, and it does meet consistency. So we
feel that from a transportation perspective, there is no reason that I can
see to phase the proj ect.
Also, it is important to note that this is a commercial PUD.
Bruce mentioned this before. And that it's very important to note that
as a commercial PUD, that this will attract traffic. It doesn't generate
traffic. It attracts traffic.
There are several thousands of homes east of here and in the
market area of this area that will be attracted to this project. Those
Page 129
September 26, 2006
trips, or those shopping trips, are already out on the network. They're
going to the Sweet Bay at Vanderbilt Beach Road, they're going to the
Publix at Immokalee Road, the Publix at Vanderbilt Beach Road --
excuse me -- Pine Ridge and 1-75. They're out on the network now.
What we do by putting this commercial center in this location is
we can shorten those trips pretty substantially. The closest center is
about 1.9 miles from this location. So if we can shorten trips by 1.9
miles times two, going and coming, that's a lot of trips that will come
off the network. It will add -- it will put them in this general area, but
it will be off the overall road network. So I think that's important to
note as being a commercial attractor versus a generator.
Also, as mentioned, Bruce talked about the widening of Collier
Boulevard to the north. That will happen soon and will cause a
disruption to the traffic in that area. There are currently two lanes of
traffic, one north, one south, and we're going to six lanes. That's a
very good thing, but for the two years or so that that's under
construction, there will be added pressure to that area.
And having an alternative shopping center so you don't have to
travel to the Sweet Bay at Vanderbilt Beach Road or don't have to
travel to the Publix if you so desire Publix versus Sweet Bay at
Collier, you don't have to travel in that two-lane section that will be
under construction.
So actually this area which has four lanes in each direction will
benefit the network, the overall county network by taking the traffic
away from the construction zone.
Lastly, I want to talk about just briefly -- if I could go to the site
plan, please. There has been -- there was discussion at the county --
excuse me -- at the Planning Commission about a connector road or a
bypass road on this particular project between Pine Ridge and 11th,
and I would submit to you that the way the driveways are set up, that
this would work as a connector road for 11 th Avenue people, but
realistically we cannot do a connector road, as it was mentioned about
Page 130
September 26, 2006
Wolfe Road and Pristine Road to the north of here that are on a half a
mile spacing. This particular road is about 660 or so from Collier
Boulevard. And realistically, it doesn't work as a bypass road because
the depth of the project is just not adequate to provide a connector
road.
And the only thing it could possibly do really would be taking
people that would be going on eastbound Pine Ridge Road that are
taking a right on Collier Boulevard, and then running -- instead of that,
they'd be running through the shopping center to 11 th and then turning
right on Collier Boulevard, which would make the situation on 11 th
worse than it does -- worse than will be and really provides no
effective bypass.
So I would submit to you that this is -- works for the 11 th
Avenue people, but it wouldn't work for the general populous.
Oh, I'm sorry. I did -- I misspoke, apparently, on 11 th Avenue
that I talked about people coming out there, that it really is, as
proposed, a right-in from Collier Boulevard and a left-in from the 11 th
Avenue people, that it's an ingress only. No people leaving. Sorry I
misspoke there.
That ends my portion of the presentation. I'll be happy to
entertain any questions if you have any.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much.
Do we have something from staff?
MS. ZONE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Melissa Zone,
principal planner with the department of zoning and land
development.
Everyone before me has been so thorough, it just seems that it
makes my presentation less. It is -- this proposed project is within the
neighborhood center of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan.
And the proposed uses, the size of the location, everything is
consistent with not only the GMP, but also the LDC.
Staff has reviewed this petition several times, having to go in
Page 131
September 26, 2006
front of the Planning Commission twice, and has found it consistent
each time we re-reviewed the application.
The -- as Mr. Schmitt mentioned, that the linkage fee should go
to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. And if you vote for this
petition in favor of it, I will make a point that that gets added to the
developer's commitments before we send it for approval to
Tallahassee.
The only other issue that would be on the access for 11th
Avenue, some of the residents are opposed to it, some of the residents
who are in favor of it. I do know with the wellsite being there, that the
county themselves would also need access on 11 th Avenue to get to
the wellsite.
If you have any additional questions from staff or the executive
summary or the PUD document, I'd be happy to address them.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ms. Zone, did you participate in
the neighborhood meetings?
MS. ZONE: The very first one, I was not the planner assigned,
but I did participate in the other ones.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And what's you walk-away
from those discussions?
MS. ZONE: Well, the applicant was very willing to work with
the residents as a third party looking on. There was more animosity
between the residents than there was with the project in the county
itself. That was the resounding event of the meetings that I attended.
But the concerns of the residents on both parties was -- they were
both very valid. And unfortunately for the ones who are opposing
this, our GMP is encouraging access onto 11 th Avenue, we're
encouraging this to be a neighborhood center because these are
services that we have to provide for the whole community as opposed
to maybe four or five residents.
And it's a tough decision for you to make, but then the other
Page 132
September 26, 2006
residents who were in favor of this want this close to home. They
don't want to have to travel. And so it was very difficult as a third
party to watch that because there was the animosity amongst each
other.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any other questions? Commissioner
Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I do, I have a few questions. With--
it was very interesting to learn about that access, especially that if
somebody that wasn't there, somebody living three doors down that
wanted to jump in their car and go up to the comer would have to
travel all the way down and do a U - ie and come back and then do
another U-ie in order to get in there.
And I thought, boy, that's really a long way. And I, for one, if I
were using the shopping center and I didn't live on 11 th, there is no
reason I would want to be traveling down a street and taking a long
route when all I had to do was go out the exit there. I mean, why
would you do that? That wouldn't make any sense. People just don't
take a joy ride, I think. That's in my opinion.
Bruce mentioned something about multiple owners, and luckily it
isn't. It's all one owner, and he wanted to phase one. And I just
thought of our Towne Centre, and I'm thinking, oh, these people don't
know how lucky they are that it's just one owner, because we have
eight owners at Towne Centre, and you all know what a shambles that
is. Sorry for anybody that I might not make happy with that.
With the five-foot wall, one of the things I was a little bit
concerned with is the deliveries at six in the morning and, say, at 10 at
night when they finished their delivering and they have to back up,
they have that loud beeping noise.
MS. ZONE: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is there -- will that wall absorb that
noise? And also the -- and the distance? I realize you have a lot of
Page 133
September 26, 2006
distance in between. But just to make sure that people aren't bothered
by that.
MS. ZONE: Well, there is the 75-foot wide preserve area that
buffers the property adjacent to the west. For the noise wall-- and I
hear it often, but a noise wall really is a 20-foot high wall, and this
isn't something we would want to have in our county.
So would it buffer? I mean, I'm not an engineer, but from my
planning training, I've always been told that, you know, if they're not
20- foot high, they really aren't as effective as we would like them to
be.
The six a.m., the noise, I mean, that's subjective. I, you know,
don't want to comment on that. But it was very clear that the
deliveries would be where -- most businesses in Collier County also
have that time frame, so to restrict them even more so, you know,
you'd have to question on fairness there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wasn't trying to restrict.
MS. ZONE: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I was talking more the absorption of
sound.
MS. ZONE: Well, then the properties would need to be farther
away and the wall should be 20- foot high.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have just one concern that was brought
up in the discussion about the amount of access or ingress/egress from
staff if they needed to address the well issue.
How much travel would you have into that well once it's
established? Is this an ongoing, every day, three times a day, or --
MR. GRAMA TGES: Yes. Commissioner, Phil Gramatges,
Public Utilities Engineering. We need access to the well on a weekly
basis. Once a week we send an inspector to take a look at the well. It's
typically a pick-up tnlck. He's there for a couple minutes to take a
look at it.
Page 134
September 26, 2006
Every once in a while, I would say once a year, more
maintenance is required, so we have a bigger truck with a crew
looking at the site and doing repairs. And at even less frequency we
may need to replace pumps, and then we need to have a small crane to
pick up the pumps and take them out, and that should be the limit of
the access that we will need.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So it wouldn't be something that
every day you'd be going to this well unless it was a scheduled
maintenance event; is that correct?
MR. GRAMATGES: That's correct, Commissioner, yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All right. I just want to get clarification
because I'm concerned about how much traffic would be going in and
out of this from the county's aspect in regards to the well.
MR. GRAMATGES: Very little.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you. I believe we have
some public speakers on this.
MS. FILSON: Yes, Mr. Chairman. We have seven speakers.
The first one is Karen Devine Leiti. She'll be followed by Beth Lamb.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And then what we'll do is after
the public speakers, we'll probably -- we'll take a 10- or IS-minute
break. Okay.
MS. LEITI: Good afternoon. Originally I was not in favor of
this. I felt as though I needed to concede to -- in the interest of
fairness to everybody. My main concern was that they leave tract 114
out of it. That's the tract directly abutting 11 th Avenue Southwest.
That's the street I live on.
I came here today with just one mission, and that was to ask that
you not grant access off of 11 th Avenue Southwest. To me it's a
safety issue and it's also a traffic issue.
I asked myself why I and so many other people have moved to
the Estates. Basically it wasn't for the shopping and not for the
amenities and certainly not for a town center. I have other
Page 135
September 26, 2006
organizations that I can go to if I want to associate with friends.
I know I can't stop progress and I really wouldn't want to, but if
it's determined that we need a town center there, so be it. I can,
however, try to protect my neighborhood from the additional traffic
and, more importantly, our children from the dangers that the
additional traffic and the relocation of their bus stop might cause.
I've attended every single Planning Commission meeting as well
as the neighborhood meetings, and I've always requested the same
thing, no access to 11 th Avenue. I'd like my street to remain
untouched, unaltered, unscathed by this development of the proposed
shopping center.
At the last Collier County Commissioners' (sic) meeting, the one
that was chaired by Mr. Mark Strain, it was recommended that the
shopping center be approved only with stipulations, one of which is to
prohibit access to and from 11 th Avenue Southwest. I applaud that
decision, and I'm begging you guys to please uphold those
stipulations. I moved to the Estates to be away from business,
commerce and development.
And while some may feel that the corner of Pine Ridge Road and
Collier Boulevard would warrant a shopping center and be deemed
commercial, I don't think utilizing the small residential 11 th Avenue
Southwest, which is currently zoned residential, is what anybody had
in mind.
It's home to many families, children, pets, friends, and I don't
think putting commercial roads or properties on 11 th Avenue is what
anyone had in mind when they were considering making that develop
-- commercial.
I have nothing against the Sembler Company. I think that their
other shopping centers and strip malls are fine, but they're all located
in commercial areas, like the one that Ms. Overby referred to at
Airport Road and Naples Boulevard. That's a commercial area. It's
not on a small residential street like mine.
Page 136
September 26, 2006
And as to Ms. Overby's referral to the 200 responses from her
survey, I just wonder how many of those people actually live on 11 th
Avenue Southwest.
So, again, I'm just asking, please deny access to 11 th Avenue
Southwest and keep the children and the streets safe. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, ma'am.
MS. LEITI: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Beth Lamb. She'll be
followed by John Lamb.
MS. LAMB: Commissioners, for the record, my name is Beth
Lamb. I live within 500 feet of the proposed neighborhood center at
the corner of Pine Ridge and 951, and we were not notified of the
change of the Golden Gate Master Plan, that this was going to be a
neighborhood center at the time it was. When we bought our
property, there was no such intention.
First of all, I'd like to thank the Planning Commission for their
due diligence. They listened to us, they listened to the majority of
residents on 11 th Avenue Southwest. I spearheaded a group of people
who collected over 70 signatures from the residents who oppose the
access on 11 tho
Coming into the last commissioner planning meeting, we
proposed not to use 114 at all. Because of that, what Mr. Anderson
referred to as the interconnection between the proposed shopping
neighborhood center and 11 th Avenue Southwest -- so coming into
(sic) here and seeing that access on 11 th still after our Planning
Commission recommended that they didn't do that, is an insult.
Possibly as we've said before, Sembler doesn't agree with
Planning. Maybe they shouldn't be our developer for our
neighborhood center or maybe we shouldn't rezone at all.
Also, according to the same amendment off the Golden Gate
Master Plan that Mr. Anderson referred to, the neighborhood center
can be residential. It doesn't have to be commercial, so maybe we can
Page 137
September 26, 2006
just leave it residential.
We all bought on a residential street and we want to stay on a
residential street.
I want to refer to what Melissa said, Melissa Zone, about the
neighborhood meetings. There was no animosity between the
neighborhood. There are about five people, maybe there's more now,
that have changed their minds, but 70 people did say they don't want
this access on 11 tho Most of those people began saying they don't
want any shopping center at all.
We all live here, our neighborhood's built out. There's no
developing land there. All we have is this one last comer, and most
people want to get out to their homes out further east. They don't
want to stop there at that corner. And as they said, it's only 1.9 miles.
You know, I don't know about y'all, but I had to go 20 miles to go to
high school. You know, 1.9 miles to go to the grocery store, you
know, you plan your life. That's why you live in the Golden Gate
Estates area, to be away from that, not to be right next door to it.
I also thank the Planning Commission for eliminating the --
limiting the sizes and the uses of the neighborhood center if it happens
to come in. We're going to get more green space, and they did
recommend a 100- foot buffer to protect our school bus stop.
Right now 11 th Avenue Southwest is a dead-end street, doesn't
go anywhere, and there's several home-based businesses on that street,
and a lot of those businesses have four to five commercial vehicles
coming and going all day long from our street. That's going to add to
the traffic that our kids already have to walk past to get to the bus
stop.
We want to make sure our bus stop is not moved to the south side
of 11 th Avenue Southwest. Right now there's a little pool off area, as
every street has, for parents. The sun running -- I also represent
several people who couldn't be here, if I could have a few more
minutes.
Page 138
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, ma'am. Three minutes.
MS. LAMB: Okay. I'd just like to say that the sun runs east to
west. That's a science lesson on top of our geology lesson from this
morning. And when you're coming up there in the morning, the sun is
in your eyes. If those kids are forced to walk on the south side of the
street, people are not going to be able to see those children standing
there. They need to leave the bus stop alone, leave the access off 11 th,
if that means not using 114.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. LAMB: And my husband also -- and I will also donate 50
cents per square foot for our home to the Affordable Housing Trust
Fund if you don't put access on 11 tho Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you, ma'am. I think one
of the commissioners had a --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I had just a question, but you
kind of answered it. I was wondering, the extra traffic, if they took
11 th, where would it lead, but then you said it's a dead-end street,
right? I mean, why would somebody want to turn out of there to go
down a dead-end street if they don't live there?
MS. LAMB: We can't anticipate what the people want to do.
We don't want any more traffic on our street. It's a --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I agree.
MS. LAMB: -- residential road, we don't want commercial
access. And the children's bus stop, if it's moved, it will jeopardize
their lives. I mean, the sun is going to be in their eyes so you have to
go east in the morning
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a question.
MS. FILSON: The next--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: What if we had left-out of that shopping
center so that nobody would travel in your direction, a left-out?
MS. LAMB: We would really not like any traffic from the
Page 139
September 26, 2006
shopping on our street. And if it means eliminating tract 114, which is
what we petitioned for --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. LAMB: -- we'd really like that to happen. We're a
residential street and that's commercial property.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Thank you very much, ma'am.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is John Lamb. He'll be followed
by Fred Leisse.
MS. LAMB: Hello. My name is John Lamb. I am absolutely
shocked that we're sitting here considering this access on 11 th
Avenue. I did not necessarily agree with the Planning Commission. I
didn't agree with the Sembler Group. I don't think that they're a bad
developer.
But I think that, you know, through the efforts of the Planning
Commission, that they really did do due diligence to have a win-win
situation for the majority of the residents on 11 th Avenue, and that
was not to have access and to have a 100- foot buffer with a 75- foot
setback for signage, because we don't want people thinking that our
street is the entrance to a shopping center either, okay? We want our
street to be residential.
When I bought two-and-a-quarter acres out there, I expected to
look out my windows and see trees, not a shopping center, okay? And
this is what you're doing to our property, okay?
I feel that the Sembler Group, you know, they're motivated by
business, and I don't blame them. You know, that's their job. Their
contributions to traffic, I think, influences what they say is going to
happen. I personally do not believe that the alternative is going to be
to drive down and make a U-turn to come back up to go into the
shopping center, right? Those have all been assumptions and not
factual evidence of what's going to happen there, and I think that that's
a misinterpretation of what's going to happen if access is on 11th
Avenue.
Page 140
September 26, 2006
I am asking you, you know, to respectfully agree with the
Planning Commission, which was a unanimous vote with those
stipulations. And you have put them in there as volunteers to
represent your best interest before it gets to you, and I feel like they
have honestly done that. And I'm asking you to respectfully agree
with that.
We have made enormous concessions as residents, and I'm
talking the majority of the residents, to get to this point, and now we're
really asking you to uphold what the Planning Commission has
unanimously recommended.
I don't -- I feel like that is a fair and equitable resolve of moving
ahead with this particular project. If that's not able to be done, I would
ask for it to get kicked back to the Planning Commission and have
more due diligence to resolve the issue, rather than letting it go any
other way. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm waiting for the speakers to
get done.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And then I have some questions
for our staff.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't have any questions for
the speakers.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I saw the light go on. I thought
maybe you had a question.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Frederick Leisse. He'll be
followed by Beth Davis.
MR. LEISSE: Frederick Leisse, 17-year resident, 11 Avenue
Southwest. Prior to 11 th Avenue Southwest, Palm Drive, Glades
Country Club, walking distance to Naples Towne Centre. Needless to
Page 141
September 26, 2006
say, I didn't move to 11 th Avenue Southwest for convenience to a
shopping center. I ran away from it.
Never in the 17 years that we've lived here have my wife or I felt
any need or desire for a neighborhood shopping center. We have
many neighborhood shopping centers. Maybe they're 1.9 miles away,
but for us that's far away where we're insulated from all the negative
impact of them, and there is a lot of negative impact.
If this access from 11 th Avenue Southwest is left in this plan and
it is approved, all northbound traffic wishing to access this shopping
center, all northbound traffic on 951, is going to be turning into 11th
Avenue Southwest. And that impact, if this is a successful shopping
center, which I'm sure every -- every one of the owners who are going
to go in there and try to make it a successful shopping center -- if it is,
we are going to see a tremendous amount of traffic ingress onto 11 th
Avenue Southwest.
Now, in terms of the problems the developer and the potential
tenants in this center are going to have in regard to this northbound
traffic being inconvenienced in terms of getting into this center, that's
a problem. And if the center isn't attractive enough to make them
basically suffer the inconvenience to resolve that problem, I say that's
too bad. But save 11 th Avenue Southwest from all of this traffic
which is going to be piling into our neighborhood.
And Commissioner Fiala asked about -- it's a dead-end street.
Well, it is, but you know very well it's human nature, people who turn
into streets for some other reason frequently can continue down them
just to go exploring.
We have enough transient traffic on 11 th Avenue as it is. And
this situation, in addition to all the concerns about safety, especially of
the children -- we're looking at basically this entry becomes an
attractive nuisance. In addition, there's going to be a retention pond.
Retention ponds are notoriously attractive nuisances. All of these
things are basically going to have a significant negative impact on the
Page 142
September 26, 2006
residents of 11 th Avenue Southwest.
Ms. Overby said that the neighbors are satisfied. Well, maybe
the neighbors within a one-mile radius are satisfied, but the neighbors
on 11 th Avenue Southwest are not.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MR. LEISSE: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Beth Davis. She'll be
followed by Kelly Huff.
MS. DAVIS: For the record, my name is Beth Davis. I live
within 500 feet of the proposed shopping center with my husband and
three children.
I'd like to keep this short and sweet by saying, when I first
became aware of the project, I didn't want it at all. I still don't want it;
however, I quickly realized that I can't stop the crazy growth in Collier
County and began focusing my efforts on a plan that included no
access on 11 th Avenue Southwest.
I have worked very hard with many neighbors to get us where we
are today -- excuse n1e -- and that is a unanimous decision from the
Planning Commission that includes a plan with no access on 11 th
Avenue Southwest.
As stated, I have worked closely with my neighbors and have
spoken with many of them as recent as this week. The majority of
residents on 11 th Avenue Southwest still do not want access to a
shopping center on our residential street.
I find it outrageously arrogant that Sembler can call this a
win-win situation when the consensus at every meeting, whether it be
their own or a meeting in this room, has been the majority of the
residents do not want access on 11 th Avenue Southwest.
I'm here today to ask that you vote no to a shopping center with
public access on our residential street. Please support the residents
and the Planning Commission by keeping Golden Gate Estates
residential.
Page 143
September 26, 2006
I would also like to add that people who bought their homes in
Golden Gate Estates bought them knowing that they would need to
drive a bit further to shop. I don't believe driving 1.9 miles to the
Publix at Vineyards or to Sweet Bay is outrageous. If this
neighborhood center is designed to serve the neighborhood, I believe
it is a disservice when you are adding noise and traffic and putting our
children in danger. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Kelly Huff. He'll be followed by Blaise Bohall.
MR. HUFF: Hi, thank you. Kelly Huff, for the record. I've been
a resident of 11 th Avenue for 22 years.
I support this project with access off 11th Avenue 100 percent. It
makes no sense to be out on six -lane highways to try to get back to a
project that you had access to at the end of your street.
This is the type of project. We have a chance to get it right the
first time and not be dealing with strip malls like the rest of some
places in Golden Gate looks like.
I think people have been mislead from Sembler -- about Sembler
working with us residents. They have from the beginning. Every
option you see in tract 114 was the residents' ideas, from making it
wider to sidewalks, and they offered to make it a one-way entry-only,
no exit back out on the street because of the concern with the traffic
on 11th Avenue.
They took -- they've taken all of our ideas from the park-like
settings, offered the school bus shelters, which, my opinion, on the
south side of the road, will be safer than they are now with the parking
they're going to provide. Right now if you're coming down 951, to
turn onto our street -- you're trying to get off our street on traffic, and
as soon as you hln1, there sets all the cars and the kids are waiting for
the bus stops running back and forth.
I would like the project, if it's approved, to be completed on a
timely manner, not drug out.
Page 144
September 26, 2006
Again, I hope you support this proj ect with access on 11 tho
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, sir.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Blaise Bohall.
MR. BOHALL: Hello. My name is Blaise Bohall. I've been a
resident on 11 th Avenue for 30 years, since 1976.
I think the main issue here is coming down to this access onto a
street. It has been said several times that the majority of our street is
opposed to that access. We did a petition, and we have it. I can
submit it to you if you want. We have 46 names signed. They're
saying they want access off of 11 th Avenue. How do I get that --
MR. MUDD: I'll take it.
MR. BOHALL: I also have two letters from other residents that
have signed the other petition where they keep saying they have 70
signatures, stating that that petition was misleading. I, myself, signed
their first petition, and it was so I wouldn't have a bar at the end of
their (sic) street, not anything to do with access. If you looked at their
one petition, it had seven different items. Ours has one idea. We want
access on 11 th Avenue Southwest.
That's it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, sir.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is Jack
Visgaitis.
MR. VISGAITIS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm a
14-year resident of 11 th Avenue Southwest. And over the past six
months, I'd say I knew three of my neighbors. Now I know a lot of
them, and I'm not sure it's for the right reasons.
I'm not sure there are any winners here. It's just a difficult
situation where progress is coming upon us. There's been petitions
that have been a little misleading. There's -- I'm for it for many
reasons, but I do feel bad for son1e of the residents that are closer to it
that are obviously going to be affected and impacted more than we
Page 145
September 26, 2006
are.
But I never used to get road noises off of Pine Ridge Road. Now
I have it. When I moved there 14 years ago, I didn't. When -- you
have to look at that big piece and know that something was coming.
And I am in favor of the development on the comer with access
on 11 th Avenue. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: That was your final speaker, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Henning, could you hold your questions till after
the break?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure. I just want to say before
we go on break, I don't believe the last speaker was sworn in to give
testimony.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. You were?
MR. VISGAITIS: I was not.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You want to stand and get sworn in?
And also -- go ahead and swear him in and then I'll --
(The speaker was duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I believe -- wasn't there a policy that
once we start the proceedings that -- after swearing in, there will be no
more taking of those --
MS. FILSON: Yes, we do have a policy like that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'd like to keep that in force, if we
could, so we don't run into situations like that.
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. At this time we'll take a
12-minute break. We'll be back at 2:53.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your
seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
Page 146
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. If
you'd take a seat. We're back from recess. And we're starting off with
Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have some transportation
questions, if our staff can address, please.
The first question -- and there's so many things that we dealt
with, I just don't remember. When the planning -- when the compo
plan amendment came through for this project, the last update, was it
transportation's request to connect to 11th?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record, Commissioner, Nick
Casalanguida, Transportation Planning. I was not here for that
amendment, so I can't answer that question, at the time that it was
done. I don't know if anybody on staff could answer that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. I think it was updated in
2002, 2003.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I can't answer that. I wasn't here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I guess we have a wide turnover
in our staff.
MS. ZONE: Melissa Zone --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Also I have more questions.
MS. ZONE: Melissa Zone, principal planner with zoning and
land development.
Commissioner Henning, it -- tract 114 came on during the 2001
-- they looked at the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, and then it got
adopted in 2002. In 2003, it was amended, updated again.
How -- what happened was, throughout -- from 1991 through
present day, the neighborhood center, each time comprehensive
planning departn1ent went and worked with the local residents and
those who were on the -- Golden Gate area master planning, they kept
expanding the neighborhood center. Tract 114 was kind of out there
on its own, so they went in and -- it was a private amendment. It
wasn't county staffwho amended that.
Page 147
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MS. ZONE: When it came in, talking with compo planning
department, that because it was a private amendment, that they felt
that access onto -- onto 11 th Avenue was warranted because it could --
could theoretically be developed separately, or if it was assembled
similar to here where they've assembled all the land and made it one
parcel.
So it was a -- it was from my understand -- or from my dialogue
with comprehensive planning that transportation requested the access
there in case it could have been developed separately or if it's
developed, you know, as a whole.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The next transportation
question I have, the Planning Commission's recommendations to
phase the project in with the Collier Boulevard project between
Golden Gate Boulevard and Immokalee Road.
Do you see if that's a benefit to phase it in? Because it's -- my
thinking is, and like it was stated, that area has two shopping centers.
And if this one is outside that area, I would think it would be better to
not phase it in and let it go so the, you know, people have a choice.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, with respect to what
Mr. Jarvi said, he's correct. And usually they're a little liberal in their
comments and we're more conservative. You will get, you know, the
benefit, if you have an attractor in that area that will take trips off to
the north. So you are correct in that statement. To the extent of how
much that will be, I can't quantify that, but that is a true statement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Next question. The bus shelter
or bus stop, was it being proposed to be relocated?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We talked to the school department
several times. They don't pull into turn lanes. And when we widen
951, there will be a deceleration lane for 11 th put in, so they would
most likely put it to the south, and that's what they've told me.
What they did say to me is, if we don't have a turn lane at the
Page 148
September 26, 2006
south side beginning for the next commercial development, which is a
model home, that they will pull up at the south side of that street, so
that would change regardless of Sembler being there. It would get
moved to the south corner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Now, I know eventually
you're going to widen Collier Boulevard in this area, and, in fact, it
might be through the second phase of Collier Boulevard. What would
happen to that median access? Do you have any idea? I mean, you
have a full median opening now.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It would be directional, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It would be --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Northbound directional. That would
be the only movement allowed at that median.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Northbound directional?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: As you're traveling north on 951,
you'd be able to Inake a left into either 11 th or the shopping center.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What about if -- on the
median? You know, the median cut. Will there be a median cut there?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: As only a direction. In other words,
coming out of 11 th, you'd only be able to make a right-out.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right-out. That would be south
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Correct, correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- believe it or not. I thought
you said north.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No. You have it northbound, left-in.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Northbound left-in, yes.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that was being proposed no
matter what.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And taking into account both
scenarios, I think they presented option A and option B. And when
Page 149
September 26, 2006
we looked at both of those options, we would accommodate that
strongest movement that was there to take as many trips off U-turns.
So we have most likely moved that directional median opening
slightly north to accommodate the shopping center, and that would
still provide access to the people at 11 th but in aU-turn fashion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, okay. So whether the --
do you -- would you agree on a transportation basis that on 11 th, it
would just have an entrance?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Our recommendation, sir, is -- when
we've looked at it from many different operational views is that it
should be a northbound directional left into 11 tho Now, when
discussing with Sembler, they wanted a full access off 11 th in the
beginning, in other words, to be able to come in and come out on 11 tho
They, in turn, compromised and said, well, we'll take the in only,
basically the only traffic using 11 th would be a 200- foot strip.
MR. MUDD: It's here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay. The only additional traffic
coming in from the shopping center there. There would be no egress
traffic coming out that way. We thought that was a good compromise
to work with that. It allowed for access to 11 th for the residents, it
allowed access to the shopping center, and still allowed the residents
not to have to make the U-turns to get access to the shopping center
and to their development.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If the bus shop shelter or bus
shop is going to be on the south side of 11 th, how are the children
going to -- I mean, they still need to walk on the road like they do
today?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The Sembler group, I believe, is
committed to building a sidewalk for them all the way back to the
frontage of their property on the south side, if I'm not mistaken.
MR. JARVI: North and south.
Page 150
September 26, 2006
MR. CASALANGUIDA: North and south.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So, I mean, that's very
important on these Golden Gate Estates roads that we have, you know,
that kind of an impact -- sidewalks for the kids.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioners, I agree. And I think
last week we met regarding the LDC requirements and we talked
about shared access and interconnection. And now we've limited
some of the trips on the road by adding things like that. You've heard
from the residents talking about not wanting it and then you've heard
some of the other residents wanting it.
As far as operationally is concerned, anytime we can provide
shared access and interconnection, it's a benefit for -- circulation-wise
for the transportation division. So we recommend that limited access
only on 11 tho
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. One more -- a couple more
questions on that. I see that there's already an access right off 951 into
the shopping center; is that correct?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right-in, right-out, yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right-in, right-out. So in other
words, if they're traveling down -- and there's a deceleration lane
there, too, right?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Left-turn lane in.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That would be required.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So it would behoove people to turn
in there rather than go further, right?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Absolutely. You would get all your
northbound traffic entering off the middle entrance there that would
come right there. The only additional traffic would be the southbound
traffic -- I'm sorry -- northbound traffic from the south that would use
Page 151
September 26, 2006
11 th not--
,
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And they could always -- they could
always inform their delivery trucks that that is the entrance they must
enter, right? I mean --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: From the north they could, yes,
ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Now another thing, right after
that 11 th entrance that is proposed, could you -- could we, the county,
put up signs that said -- says, dead-end road?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You could.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I mean, in case people don't know.
One of the people said, well, they wouldn't know so they'd want to
kind of venture on down the street. But being that it's a dead-end road
and nobody can get to anything or connect to anything, if we put a
sign there telling them, you know, dead-end road, you're not going
anyplace, would that help?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am, but the egress, if I can --
I'll show you on the monitor here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: At this point right there, that would be
posted, you knovv, exit, do not enter, you know, entrance only. So
they wouldn't be able to come out that roadway.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, okay. Now, how will the
people on 11 th get out there to go back home?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: This way.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They'll come right back around.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. They'd even have to do that?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, that's comforting, too. Okay.
Let's see. I think -- I think I've asked all my questions. Thank you.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
Page 152
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any other discussions?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'd like to make one more comment.
And I don't want to surprise Sembler here a little bit. We'll ask as a
condition maybe, or something we'd like to ask from them if it comes
up, if they have additional water management capacity on the frontage
of951, that they will facilitate that into their project. Not a
mandatory. We would have some discussions prior to this meeting
that they would do that, but I'd like to see it as one of the things on the
table, that on the 951 stretch, that when we do our roadway widening,
if they have additional water management, they'll work with us to
accommodate for that water management.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And you -- somebody had
mentioned in this thing before something about interconnectivity into
Pine Ridge Road. Is that what this other exit over here is for on the
top of the --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am. That's a right-in,
right-out access on Pine Ridge Road.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any other further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I entertain a motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Chairman, if you're closing
the public meeting, the -- I do want to say that one of the residents
brought up they wasn't noticed about the designation of commercial --
of this commercial -- the Golden Gate Master Plan change. We have
changed that, recognize that we need to notice residents of that. It is
notified, but any particular neighborhood changes, requirements have
changed in our plan. So we're getting better.
And we do need more commercial to service the residents for the
greater good of the community, and especially in this area.
And I'm going to make a motion to approve, and the stipulations
Page 153
September 26, 2006
-- and, Melissa, would you help me, please? I like some of the
Planning Commission's recommendations -- they probably are staffs
recommendations, too -- except for number 10, the phasing, and --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the petitioner -- and the
well, and the petitioner will work with the planning staff on the
location of that well.
MS. ZONE: Okay. So you would like number 10 stricken?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ten stricken.
MS. ZONE: Okay. And add the well site into that
recommendation?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MS. ZONE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: On number 3. And number 1, to
change that on tract 114, there would be a right-in only on the project.
And now, do we have about the bus shelter and the sidewalks,
whether the bus shelter is located in the south or north?
MS. ZONE: Number 9 talks about the school bus stop. And if
you want, I can make it more -- have the development make it a little
bit more clear that -- where the location will be.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, they agreed--
MS. ZONE: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's up to the school
board, but they agreed to also put sidewalks on the north and the south
side of 11 tho
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, for the record, you
said right-in only on 11th. Did you mean right-in, left-in? You meant
full access ingress only? You didn't want to restrict the residents from
coming into the shopping center?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right into the shopping center.
MS. ZONE: But it would also be left-in as well for the residents.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It would be left-in for the residents, so
Page 154
September 26, 2006
it would be left-in, right-in, but no out.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Make sure we get that clarified.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, that's fine.
MS. ZONE: It would be ingress in, no egress.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. That's part of the motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Could I ask a question while you're
on this right now and you were talking about school bus stops. Could
-- just a question. Could ever school bus stops be right inside the
shopping center there where everybody has a place to park their cars
and it's a safe area?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well-- and I agree with that,
but I think the intent of the school board, or the school district, is to
stop all the traffic, and that's why they won't allow it in a turn lane.
They want to make sure that everybody knows, here I am and we're
going to load these kids in the bus. That's my opinion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, you're probably right. Thank
you.
MS. ZONE: Commissioner Fiala, they also had worked with the
developer on the location, so I think they're all in agreement on where
it is. So for number 9, I'll just make it more concise and clear as to
where the location will be for -- as part of your motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And then after you say
donated school bus stop, you mean school bus shelter?
MS. ZONE: Correct, shelter.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the sidewalks you need to
put in there, just to make that --
MS. ZONE: We can make the si..dewalks added as a separate
item, or do you want it with nun1ber 9 with the school bus?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Number 9.
MS. ZONE: Okay, very good.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: North and south on 11th.
MS. ZONE: Right.
Page 155
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, it continues to their
correct boundary line on the north and south.
MS. ZONE: Certainly.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What else am I forgetting?
Nick is whispering something or lipping something that I can't
understand it.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: If the developer has capacity, that they
will accept water management for 951.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, yes. Mr. Anderson?
MR. ANDERSON: Following closely Mr. Casalanguida's
words, yes, if we have excess capacity, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. You'll work with
them?
MR. ANDERSON: Yes, sir, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there anything else?
MR. ANDERSON: There were two items related to the access
on 11 th, one had to do with being able to have some signage and
sidewalks. That's on page 104 of your agenda packet, paragraph -- it's
section 3.3C and then F as well, that relate to signage.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Signage, concrete sidewalks,
egress/ingress, incidental traffic pavement improvements, yes. That's
part of the motion.
MR. ANDERSON: And then on F, it would allow both the
county to have a -- put a dead-end sign in and us to have, you know,
something to denote that this is an entrance only off of -- off of 11 th
Avenue. And then the only other thing was to -- the language that we
brought up at the Planning Commission that somehow didn't make it
in the PUD about being able to credit affordable housing payment. It
would be made to the housing trust fund and creditable against any
future fee. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's part of the motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And I also, outside the motion, I
Page 156
September 26, 2006
just wanted to say, maybe if somebody from the water department
would attend the Planning Commission's meeting to address any
questions about wellsites, we wouldn't have a problem. And you don't
need to comment on it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Is there a second on the motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle. He's been
waiting.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, I was just going to ask for a
clarification on a couple of the items that were just clarified, so I'm
okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So have we got everything
covered in the motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We did say with the wells?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, we got the wells.
MS. ZONE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We got that.
Okay. We have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Henning
and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
Is there any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries, 5-0.
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you.
Page 157
September 26, 2006
Item #9H
ANNUAL PREFORMANCE APPRAISAL FOR THE EXECUTIVE
MANAGER TO THE BCC - MOTION TO APPROVE $5,384 TO
BE ADDED TO HER SALARY UP TO THE RANGE LIMIT
WITH REMAINDER TAKEN AS LUMP SUM PERFORMANCE
BONUS - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 9H, and this is the annual performance appraisal for the
executive manager of the Board of County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If you'd please leave the room so we can
continue on.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you could leave the room, so we could
carry on. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: The next item is 9H, which is the annual
performance appraisal for the executive manager for the Board of
County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. It's open for discussion,
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you, I do appreciate
that.
Yeah, I went over the review, and I'll be honest with you, I think
that Ms. Filson has done an excellent job for this commission.
Through some trying times, she's pulled it off so we've been able to
accomplish our goals as far as the office staff goes.
And what I would like to recommend to this commission is that
-- her scoring average comes out to 80 percent approval rating against
the 100 percent. The 4.7 COLA is what is -- always goes through. I
mean, that's really not an item for discussion, and that should be --
that's there for what it is.
Page 158
September 26, 2006
The merit pay based upon the 10 percent, if it was full 100
percent score, which I doubt anybody in this county government could
ever achieve, including ourselves, it would equal something like --
well, it would equal $6,730.90. The 80 percent approval rating,
working it backwards, comes to $5,384, and that's what I recommend
is her merit pay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that motion.
MR. PETTIT: Commissioner, just -- I don't want to interject
myself. I believe that the difference between Ms. Filson's contract and
Mr. Weigel's contract and Mr. Mudd's contract is that there was
flexibility left for this board to decide whether that was to be a lump
sum payment or an add to salary. And I don't know whether Ms.
Filson has anything to add to that, but I just wanted to clarify.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'd like to hear from Mrs.
Filson on that.
MS. FILSON: My comments are, they increased--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: To the microphone, please.
MS. FILSON: Oh. They increased the pay plan for all the other
county employees, and also the lump sum bonus rate that has moved
up, and I'm not to that point yet.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So your recommendations
would be?
MS. FILSON: Would be to have it added to my salary until I
reach the same point as everyone.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that's my -- that's part of
my motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, my -- what percentage is this?
You got 4.7 COLA. And then what would the raise --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Eight percent.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Eight percent raise? I can't go along
with an 8 percent raise, sorry. I could go with a 5 percent raise on top
of the 4.7.
Page 159
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'm going to keep my
motion where it is because I think it's justified based upon the scoring
average that we use. We've done this with Mr. Weigel and Mr. Mudd
for the last couple of years and accepted it as the norm. Of course,
you know, you're more than entitled to go with your own opinion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I believe she deserves the 80.
In fact, I would give her 150 percent if I could. But anyway, I'll go
along with your motion. I think that that's a good one. She's always
there to help us, protect us, and guide us, and she deserves it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Did we have a second?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second the motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS : Pardon?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Was that a second?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I seconded, and I think
it's consistent with our plan.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those in favor of --let me get this
straight. Four point seven percent COLA, and an 8 percent merit
raise; is that what we --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, not -- well, 8 percent would
be it, but breaking it down to dollars, it would be $5,384.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that will be added to her
salary?
MS. FILSON: Not the entire amount, only till I get to the lump
sum amount.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, she can figure that out, what she
wants to add to her salary and what she doesn't want to add to her
Page 160
September 26, 2006
salary .
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if you -- her contract is just a little
bit different because she's treated -- she's treated like the other
employees in Collier County.
. So until they get to the lump sum merit point, if they get merit it
goes into the pay. Once they get above the lump sum merit point,
which is 110 percent of market, once that point is reached, then if
there's any meter, it turns into a bonus check and it doesn't get added
to the pay. And some of Ms. Filson's merit increase will go into the
pay until she gets to the 110 percent point, and then she will get the
difference as a lump sum.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me see if I interpret this
correctly. Part of the 8 percent merit increase will actually be added
to her pay, but because that amount will take her over that break point,
she will get $1,571.95 as a lump sum payment?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So if you subtracted $1,571 from
the $5,384, the net result, a little less than $4,000 is what will be added
to her pay. The remainder will be given to her in a lump sum. So
basically that's where it is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is that what you understand?
MS. FILSON: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
and we have a second. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those in favor, signify by saying
aye?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Page 161
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
Aye.
It carries.
Item #9I
RESOLUTION 2006-257: SUPPORTING AMENDMENT OF THE
FLORIDA STATUTES TO REQUIRE ELECTION OF THE
GOVERNING BOARDS OF THE FLORIDA WATER
MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next item,
which is 9I, and 91 was a recommendation to approve a resolution of
the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, in
support of the amendment of the Florida Statutes to require election of
the governing board to the Florida Water Management District, and
this item was added at Commissioner Coletta's request.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, and I thank you for that.
And we're doing a handout. I could -- I would appreciate the
assistance of my fellow commissioners in taking a look at the petition,
my white paper and position statement, and also, too, the resolution. I
wish I could have got this to you sooner, but it was still in the process
of being worked as we -- earlier today.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we continue this item? Is
this --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, you could, but if you
could take just a few minutes, we could read it out loud maybe. I'll
tell you why. I'm going before the Florida Association of Counties --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- to be able to deal with a
bunch of issues, and this is one I want to be able to carry this forward
Page 162
September 26, 2006
as an item from Collier County government of great concern.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner, can I ask you if --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- this -- have we gone down this road
before in regards to trying to address that the South Florida Water
Management be an elected board instead of appointed board by the
governor?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not this commission hasn't. I
don't know if any other one.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any other commissioners? Do
we have any history on this? All I'm doing is just trying to get some
background.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can give you some
background. It was added to the 2005 -- 2006, excuse me, legislation
to make it a -- all the water districts, not just Southwest Florida, an
elected body instead of an appointed body by the governor. And, of
course, that failed. It didn't have much community support. Whether
it will -- things will change, I don't know.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But it has been addressed on the
legislation side of it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Has it been before 2006?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It was, okay, before that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, it was even before that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. That's what I --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I think -- and let me just
say that my tax bill went up from the water district. So we hear
elected officials in Tallahassee complaining about property taxes
going up, then their own appointed advisory board raises taxes. That's
not -- it's not being consistent. And those taxes are being raised by
appointed people and not elected people.
Page 163
September 26, 2006
And Commissioner Coyle's statement that he felt that anybody
that is taxing the people ought to be elected, and I totally agree with
you, and I think that's -- the intent of our forefathers is to have
representation. After all, you remember the tea party?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have a water party.
MS. FILSON: Mr. Chairman, I have three speakers on this item.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Coyle's light's
on.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle? I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I just want to clarify
something. Who is going to be sending out this petition and gathering
these names?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If I may offer, that my
suggestion would be that I would be the one to gather them together
and to disseminate them either through other counties, the ones that I
receive, or turn them en masse. On that I haven't decided yet. But it
would be very difficult to have people on their own try to figure out
what to do with it.
The most impressive thing would be, if we could gather them all
in one site. This petition would be hopefully -- and we'll know very
shortly -- disseminated through the Florida Association of Counties
and, of course, through the Internet. I expect it to -- once it gets
released out there as an attachment to grow across the state in a very
expedient matter.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I guess my concern is, I
wouldn't want to take action as a Board of County Commissioners that
obligates Collier County government to start sending out and
gathering petitions for this process. I would -- I would strongly
suggest that if you want to do this as an individual, that you -- you try
to get somebody to create an organization like free the oppressed or
something like that, and that organization then could get -- incur the
Page 164
September 26, 2006
costs associated with this and then get the ballots or the petitions
signed.
I'm a little worried that if we try to do it on an ad hoc basis as a
commission, it's not going to get as far as you'd like for it to go. But
let me preface that by saying that my objective when I suggested that
we at least put this on a resolution is to do two things, put it on our
legislative agenda and make sure our legislators in Southwest Florida
understand this is something we as a commission support
wholeheartedly and unanimously, and hopefully they will go to
Tallahassee with the goal in mind of getting this done, but at the same
time, the petition effort could be -- could be happening in the
background in the event they don't do it, but I -- getting enough
signatures is a difficult problem and it requires a lot of --lot of
organization.
And you're right to be going to F AC, but I don't think F AC will
do that. I don't know that they will get involved in a petition drive.
They are very careful about, perhaps, alienating legislators with
respect to petitions. So I don't know if they'll do that.
But I hope that everybody on this board would help you try to get
that done, but I don't think we can do it as a board. But anyway, not to
detract from that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's why I'm bringing it
back here is for some feedback and some suggestions.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: How about if --
MR. MUDD: There is another resolution in your packet that I
gave you this morning, because I received two last night. I didn't
know which one, Commissioner Coletta, that you wanted to do, but I
knew you were involved in this and I knew you were going to F AC,
so I gave each commissioner the backup, the white paper, and I gave
them two petitions.
I didn't -- I was unsure about the petition drive issue and what the
board would do. So when I did the subject for this particular one, I
Page 165
September 26, 2006
did it as of the resolution whereby this board is in favor of changing
the statutes so that those water management districts would be elected
bodies, and that's what I did. And I left the petition off to the side, and
that's what the subject matter is on 91 and how it reads on the change
sheet.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, why don't we take this in
a couple of steps, if I may suggest. Why don't you take a look at the
resolution, see if it's something that the county commission would like
to back, and then we'll discuss the petition for whatever we want to do
with it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I've read the resolution. I
support it. I think it's a good thing. And if we send that resolution to
F AC and let them know it's our firm position, if we have contacts with
some of the other county commissions and they will do the same thing
-- we're frequently getting letters of support from other county
commissioners saying, will you please provide support in this area __
then we can get enough of those going to F AC that maybe we can
begin to get a lobbying campaign going and at least try to get it on the
ballot to the legislators.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Which resolution do you support?
There are two here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I could go for either one.
Whatever's going to accomplish the goals of the Collier County
Commission, I'll support. Both of them are well written.
MR. PETTIT: Mr. Chairman, the one I -- the one I passed out is
only the one approving the petition, but there is one as Mr. Mudd said,
which is sin1ply a recommendation, or a resolution that the Board of
County Con1missioners urge -- I don't know if the word urge is used __
requesting that the legislature amend the statutes to require election of
the governing boards of the water management districts. I think that's
the one Mr. Coyle was referring to.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes.
Page 166
September 26, 2006
MR. MUDD: That's the one I have on the visualizer.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The one that's in our packet.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, there was two of them,
but the one that doesn't reference the petition?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I want to make a motion that we
approve resolution -- the first one in there, and there's a reference. I
just want to Inake sure this reference is correct. No, they're both the
same. The one -- I'm going to make a motion to approve the
resolution, the one that does not have the --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Petition.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- petition in it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. May I read the whereas
on that so everybody's aboard on it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Whereas, the Board of County
Commissioners, after consideration of the above facts, support an
amendment to the Florida Statutes creating the Florida Water
Management District to provide for electing the governing board
rather than appointing of those members of the govern -- governor, by
the governor. So that's the one that you would like to see?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I second that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: I have three speakers.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know, we can all -- no, I
think at this late date, we can leave it. But there's a lot of factual
Page 167
September 26, 2006
information why it should be elected instead of appointed that it
doesn't capture, but there's no sense in spending a bunch of time on it,
so let it go as it is.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Can you call the first speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir. Frank Denninger?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: He's not here, I don't believe.
MS. FILSON: Eric Kimmel.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't believe he's here.
MS. FILSON: And Rick Varela?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, he's not here either.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: That's it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's the best public input session
we've had on all day.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion on the floor by Commissioner
Henning and a second by Commissioner Coyle, I believe.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: None.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, all those in favor?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can we address the petition,
because I need guidance on that, what I do with it, if anything at all.
Is it something that I can take --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, let's get done with the motion,
here, okay? Again -- you interrupted me here, so --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Forgive me.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Page 168
September 26, 2006
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: Okay, now.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Forgive me. I thought we took
the vote, and obviously I'm moving faster than the rest of you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, that will be the day.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Let's talk about the
petition. And the purpose of what we're trying to accomplish here __
there's a tremendous amount of distrust and unrest out there with
regards to water management. It's not just local. I mean, it goes across
a good part of the state.
When I talked to the policy committee for the Florida
Association of Counties, the majority of them immediately embraced
it and started telling me the horror stories they were going through. So
I suspect that once this -- if this got out in the public domain -- and I
wouldn't do anything without the permission of this commission or at
least knowing what -- the limits of what I should be doing. So I'd like
some guidance on this.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Am I okay? Can I talk?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure, yes, go ahead. You're on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What I would suggest is we take
this resolution and we ask the chairman to sign a letter and send it to
F AC and any other counties --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All the counties --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- maybe all counties in the State of
Florida --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- in Southwest Florida.
Page 169
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Or all -- everywhere, all over
Florida, if you want to.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And ask them for their support.
And in that letter explain why, like Commissioner Henning says,
explain why we think this is important, and you know, make it brief
enough so they'll read it rather than tossing it in the trash can, and that
way you get it out to everybody, okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'd be glad to sign that letter.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then we could each
individually lobby people we might know somewhere in each of those
commissions, if you've got some personal contacts.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Any of the commissioners could
call and ask them to support this process. But I think the letter should
come from the chairperson to make sure it is the --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- unanimous will of this board to
proceed with this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But I'm still looking for some
direction on the petition. I agree with you on that. It's a wonderful
idea. Then I have one more question I need guidance on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think you need a grass-roots
organization to pick that petition up and move with it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I don't think you should get involved in
it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't think we can do that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: This by itself without an
endorsement from Collier County or anything, if this was released to
the public, you'd have problems.
Page 170
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think you can send anything out
you want to personally, individually.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'm going to do it without
this commission knowing about it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney, can you give us some
guidance here so we're within the laws.
MR. PETTIT: At your workshop last week, my understanding
was we had at least three people approving the notion of the petition,
but to take into account, I think, what Commissioner Coyle is saying,
is I believe that Commissioner Coletta could -- could be involved in
finding, as Commissioner Coyle refers to, a grass-roots organization
or just grass-roots folks, folks who are interested in this, to assist him
in the circulation and collection of these petitions and take it upon
himself individually to provide these to our legislative delegation
and/or the F AC as the petitions are collected.
So I don't see any legal impediment there, and I think you
endorsed the petition last week at the workshop.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And to add to that, you can do this
thing, dissen1inate it over the Internet to people, and you can
disseminate the form, they can print it off, sign it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What do they do with them?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's a problem. I think if you
send it to Tallahassee, you're going to lose it. I think the important
thing is that somebody's got to consolidate --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Someone's got to organize this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if I may suggest, it
wouldn't incur any cost for the county if they returned them here at
their own cost for mailing, and they would all be assembled right here,
and we could turn them back into F AC -- so whatever process you
deem best at that time.
There needs to be son1e central point, I agree with you. I kind of
Page 171
September 26, 2006
wonder where that grass-roots movement would come from. It might
appear out of no place. But if it wouldn't offend the commission, I
have no problems with them coming here and I can make reports to
you what I'n1 receiving.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: One of the things we could do is
approach son1e of the civic organizations and see if any of them would
support it and provide their organizational support. But I wouldn't
have a problem with them coming in here, and they can be assembled
and held or something. Poor Nancy probably is not going to like it,
but it's --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And let's do this. Let's start that
process, and then there will be people out there in the public sector
who are going to be stepping forward with great interest, and then we
can incorporate them into the program as we go forward.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's one other issue that I've
really got to get to, and that's dealing with the Florida Association of
Counties and the policy that they're going to be coming up within the
coming legislative session.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Why don't we cover that after the -- after
we get done with the meeting? Can we do that then?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It ties into this, but that's fine.
We can do it then.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, I think we ought to do that. Stay
on track, okay?
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted to ask two things, or
suggest one and ask one. How n1any petitions do you need to have
signed; do you know?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. I don't think this is so much
asking for a -- what do you call it, a change to the constitution of __
MR. PETTIT: I think my -- I don't think that this is a -- has any
Page 172
September 26, 2006
technical nUlnber requirement. I think the motion was to show that
there is substantial support for this kind of change in the law and to get
that information to the legislative delegation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And then the other thing I
was thinking is, I was going to mention civic associations, which
Commissioner Coyle did. Also there are places like the taxpayer
action groups and, like, League of Women Voters, different groups
that are --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure, excellent.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- active in the community, and you
can find a whole litany of them if you just look up groups, you know,
and maybe they'll --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're absolutely correct. I
think you've got the right idea. Let's start them coming here, and then
we'll all -- I'll make reports back to you, because whatever takes place,
whatever direction this is going to go, I'm going to come back to this
commission for direction.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You can have the clerk of the courts
handle all the petitions.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We couldn't afford it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I vote for that.
MR. JOHNSSEN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. So I guess where we're going
with this is that we're going -- you're going to approach -- or someone
on the board here is going to approach some of the civic groups to see
if they'll get involved in this effort such as the League of Women
Voters or taxpayers' groups, ask what's -- we're getting excited here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I am, I am excited, because
whenever I delegate, I get very excited. If there's one person that has
the ability to outreach to these groups and a strong, strong contact that
goes back n1any years, it would be Commissioner Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I knew that was coming.
Page 173
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, and God bless you. I've
never seen you refuse one of these things.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a
minute. You're the one that started this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know, but --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Wait a minute. You started this thing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're right, I did.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, Frank.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You've got a better friend here
than you ever thought.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think so.
MR. MUDD: Just to make sure that I've got this right. The
chairman's going to write a letter and send it to every one of the
county chainnen and to F AC and he's going to explain what our --
what our intent is and why we think it's appropriate and attach our
resolution that you approved just a second ago to that particular thing.
And the rest of the stuff is going to happen with a certain
commissioner as far as getting the petition out.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Be sure in the letter to throw
around the term taxation without representation.
MR. MUDD: Oh, I plan to.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We'll get that in there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mention boss in there too while
you're at it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I think we beat that horse pretty
good.
Item #10C
Page 174
September 26, 2006
RESOLUTION 2006-258: APPROVING COLLIER COUNTY'S
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG),
HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME) AND
FEMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (ESG) CONSOLIDATED
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND EV ALUA TION REPORT
(CAPER) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 AS REQUIRED BY THE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (HUD) AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN OF
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO CERTIFY TH
CAPER FOR SUBMISSION TO HUD - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that would bring us to our next
item, if you're finished with this one.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: And this would bring us to 10C, and that would be
a recommendation to approve Collier County's Community
Development Block Grant, CDBG, HOME Investment Partnership,
HOME, and emergency shelter grant, ESG, consolidated annual
performance and evaluation report, which is the CAPER, for fiscal
year 2005/2006, as required by the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development, HUD, and authorize the chairman
of the Board of County Commissioners to certify the CAPER for
submission to HUD.
Susan Golden, Grants Administrator Manager, Housing and
Grants Department, will present.
MS. GOLDEN: For the record, Susan Golden.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, could I ask a
question first?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes. I've got to ask a question, too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Aside from the fact that we
are -- have authorized an audit of the CAPER, is there any reason we
can't go ahead and approve this report without prejudicing that audit?
Page 175
September 26, 2006
MR. PETTIT: Commissioners, Mike Pettit, chief assistant
county attonley. My answer is no. I think you can go forward and--
to address some questions that the chairman may have. I have some
other thoughts if you want to --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah, because I'm going to ask you -- I
was going to go on that same --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Then I'll let you pursue that
line of questions then. I just wanted to see if -- you know, we're going
to have to approve this report. I mean, we've got to approve the
report, but yet we've got some concerns about some things that we
want to have audited or questioned, and I just don't know where we go
with that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: My question to the county attorney is, I
need guidance in regards to, if I sign this, what obligations am I
under? I don't like to wear handcuffs in case there is some problem.
MR. PETTIT: I understand your question, Commissioner. And
we have gone back and we're going to recommend some changes in
language both in the documents you signed independently and also in
the resolution. And the resolution has been redrafted, and we are
recommending that paragraph 1 -- and I believe that's the only point of
change.
MS. GOLDEN: Yes, that's correct.
MR. PETTIT: -- read now, based upon --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Paragraph 1 of the --
MR. PETTIT: Paragraph 1 of the resolution. We're going to
recommend a change, and I was going to read it to you in the record.
MS. GOLDEN: The resolution's behind tab 6.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is it different than the one we have
in our packet?
MR. PETTIT: Yes. Paragraph 1 has been changed.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: You can -- you can follow along with the copy
Page 176
September 26, 2006
you have in your packet. The change that we would --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: It's on page 4 of 5; is that correct?
MS. GOLDEN: The resolution is the first item behind tab 6.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Where's tab 6?
MS. GOLDEN: In your CAPER there's a tab numbered 6.
COMl'vlISSIONER COYLE: I'm operating off of --
MR. PETTIT: Yeah. See, I don't have that either.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, that's it.
MS. GOLDEN: Oh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mine's a resolution on Page 40.
MR. PETTIT: There should be a resolution behind your
executive summary.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. There's a resolution in the
packet. Is that the resolution you're talking about?
MS. GOLDEN: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMl'vlISSIONER COYLE: Okay. That's on page 4 of 5 of
your --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's on page 4 of 5 in our book with
our --
MS. GOLDEN: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And we're talking about paragraph
number 1.
MR. PETTIT: Paragraph 1, and we would change that as --
recommend changing the wording of that as follows. Instead of what
you have there in your packet, which says that the board approves the
fiscal 2005/2006 consolidated annual performance and appraisal
report, CAPER, for the Community Development Block Grant,
HOME Investment Partnership and emergency shelter grant programs,
we would change it to say, based upon representations from staff, that
the information contained in the CAPER is accurate and reflects the
activities actually accomplished during the reporting period. The
Page 1 77
September 26, 2006
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County approves -- and
then the language would follow.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So that means they have to wear
the orange jump suits if it goes --
MR. PETTIT: Well, I don't think anybody's going to be wearing
orange jump suits. But we're trying to address that issue that you've
raised.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: And we would make similar changes in the actual
certification document.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I feel more comfortable, thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then in that case, I would
recommend approval.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Got a motion the floor. Do I
have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is that recommending approval of
the resolution?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: With the change in the resolution.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: With the changes that have just been --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But we still ask questions about
some of this though, right?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, you can't ask any questions.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Then I'm not going to vote for it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's okay. We'll get three votes
on this side of the table.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Things we have to go through to
work on this commission, like Coyle, for instance.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Did you second the motion?
COMNIISSIONER FIALA: No, I didn't.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Who seconded it?
Page 178
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'll second it, but I want to
make sure there's room for discussion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: There's going to be room for discussion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. There's a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Fiala in regard to
this motion and the stuff that was just read into the record.
Commissioner Fiala, you had some discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. The motion is with regards to
the resolution, and I would guess that also the approval of the booklet
to send in, right?
MS. GOLDEN: Yes, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just wanted -- if you don't mind,
I'd like to ask a couple questions just -- it took me forever to read this
thing, I'm telling you, and with that big agenda it was tough, and I
think there's some parts that I missed.
But I was just going to ask a couple of questions. We were --
they were talking about -- let's see. This is on page 9 of this book
under tab 3, and they were talking about the different things that we've
done for the community, for community development.
And one of the things that they were talking about -- let's see --
was providing lighting in low-income neighborhoods, and they were
showing -- that's likes the third box down -- and they were showing an
800-percent improvement and a 900-percent improvement for
different years there, and then a 520. Can you tell me what kind of
lighting you're talking about in what neighborhoods?
MS. GOLDEN: That's street lighting, and streetlights, over the
course of the five years that this particular consolidated plan was in
place, streetlights have been installed in one area of Immokalee and in
a small area of Copeland. Those are the only two -- oh, and excuse
Page 1 79
September 26, 2006
me, and the City of Naples.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see, because I know that there
were people along Bayshore where, especially the heavy crime areas,
had been requesting lights years ago, the residents who live there, and
they were -- they were told at the time -- and I don't think this ever
came up for discussion actually, that they had to buy their own from
FP &L. They weren't told by you and weren't told by me, but this is
what I had -- I was told.
And I didn't even realize that this program existed, so -- and we
have -- oh, we did have -- oh, there he is. We have David here, and so
that's something he could take back to them if this program does light
crime-riddled areas.
MS. GOLDEN: Right. They would be able to make an
application -- the CRA could make an application to our office during
the annual grant application cycle.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And then another one down
here, public services, and here you were saying that you had -- the
burial of the water lines in Copeland. Was that done just recently?
MS. GOLDEN: Yes, just in the last nine months -- six to nine
months.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, that's just great. I know they've
had -- they \vere having problems there, and I was -- and it --let's see.
There was another one -- oh, and it says that -- the senior center. So
you participated in funding some of that senior center?
MS. GOLDEN: Yes. The CDBG program provided three years
of funding to the senior center addition at the East Naples Community
Park. That \vas just completed in June and July of this summer.
COMJ\;IISSIONER FIALA: And what part do you -- I mean,
three years of funding. Do you mean like for programs or for --
MS. GOLDEN: For the actual construction of the addition to the
senior center, to the East Naples Community Center.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And then also in that same --
Page 180
September 26, 2006
next one down, it shows, you know, thousands of percents here for --
but it doesn't say anything, just undertake needed social services
activities, and I was just --
MS. GOLDEN: Each year nonprofit organizations are able to
submit a grant application to our office, and some of those requests for
funding we are able to provide financial assistance for.
So we've done some things in the past to work with Youth Haven
for child abuse prevention. We do some vocational training in the
Immokalee area, some summer programs for youth in Copeland and
Immokalee and things along those lines. So it varies from year to
year, depending on the requests that come in.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I had a couple other
questions, but other people have already answered them, so let's see.
Okay. That's very good, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion? We have
a motion on the floor by Commissioner Coy Ie, a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item #14A
CRA RESOLUTION 2006-259: SUPPORTING THE COLLIER
Page 181
September 26, 2006
COUNTY PURCHASE OF THE FORSYTH HOMESTEAD AND
SIX RENTAL UNITS TO PROVIDE FOR A STORMW A TER
MANAGEMENT POND IN THE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE AREA
AND TO APPROVE A MONETARY CONTRIBUTION FROM
THE BAYSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE CRA FUND 187 IN
THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $529,000 TO COMPLETE THE
SALE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY AND APPROVE ALL
NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENTS - ADOPTED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 10D, but I'm
going to -- but we're going to do 14A before we do 10D. It would be
the board -- because they're both -- they're both the same action except
the board wears a different hat.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm going to close the Board of County
Commissioners' meeting and turn this over to the CRA chairman, who
is Donna Fiala, Commissioner Fiala.
MR. MUDD: And this is a recommendation for the Community
Development Agency to approve a CRA resolution to support the
Collier County purchase of the Forsyth homestead and six rental units
to provide for a stormwater management pond in the Gateway
Triangle area, Gateway Triangle stormwater improvement proj ect,
project number 518031; to approve a monetary contribution for the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA fund 187 to stormwater fund 325 in
the amount not to exceed $529,000 to complete the sale of the subject
property, and approve all necessary budget amendments. This is a
companion item to 10D.
Mr. David Jackson, your Executive Director from the
Bayshore/Gateway CRA will present.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do you need to read anything into
the record, David? Okay.
Page 182
September 26, 2006
MR. JACKSON: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We have a motion--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Good presentation.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further -- whoops. I'm sorry. It's your turn. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, that's all right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You're the CRA.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Motion to -- I forgot. I'm just sitting here
listening to you.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Item #10D
PURCHASE OF THE FORSYTH HOMESTEAD AND SIX
RENTAL UNITS BY A JOINT PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR
PROPERTY REQUIRED TO PROVIDE FOR A STORMW A TER
MANAGEMENT POND IN THE GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE AREA;
ACCEPTANCE OF A $529,000 CONTRIBUTION FROM THE
BA YSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE CRA FUND 187 TO THE
STORMW A TER FUND 325 FOR THE TOTAL COST OF THIS
PURCHASE - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, now we need to switch back to the
Page 183
September 26, 2006
Board of County Commissioners, and that is 10D. It's a
recommendation to approve the purchase of the Forsyth homestead
and six rental units by j oint purchase agreement for property required
to provide a stormwater management pond in the Gateway Triangle
area. Gateway Triangle stormwater improvement project number
518031, and to accept a $529,000 contribution from the Bay -- from
the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA fund 187 to the stormwater fund
325 for the total cost of the purchase. The fiscal impact is $1,260,500
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
MR. MUDD: -- and --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
MR. PETTIT: Mr. Chairman, I'll -- just so everyone's clear.
Again, this Inay be superfluous in light of the previous vote, but this is
a supermajority vote item.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And also that the Board of
County Con1lllissioners is now back in session from taking over from
the CRA.
And Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The three projects that the
money's coming from, C-l canal crossing, was -- is that correct --
leftover funds from --
MR. CALVERT: It is. That particular project was scaled back
to provide just a slip lining of the project, and that project was actually
completed in it for around 25,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: East/west Livingston, there's
just not enough money to do it?
MR. CALVERT: That particular project, we looked at major
improvement in the drainage area in that area and looked at -- had a
report done, and the report came back and said we really didn't need to
do it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, so this is a -- not building a
Page 184
September 26, 2006
road, it's for --
MR. CALVERT: It's a -- yeah, stormwater drainage.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Last one. Countywide swales.
Is that from last year's funding?
MR. CALVERT: That's from FY-'06. In fact, all of these are
from FY -'06, and that was a general fund for improvements to our
scale systen1s.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Was that '05/'06 or
'06/'07 fund?
MR. CALVERT: Oh five, oh six.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So that's going to be a
carryforward. It was going to be a carryforward?
MR. CALVERT: It was going to be a carryforward.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay, all right. Well, great.
Thank you.
MR. NIUDD: And the reason that this is a supermajority vote by
Board of County Commissioners is it's above the appraised value. The
county, as the Board of County Commissioners right now, you are
voting on $700,000 or thereabouts of the price, which is the exact
appraised value; however, the Forsyth's wanted above that price, and
that's the $529,000 that the CRA kicked in, in order to buy the
property .
And the reason that the Forsyth's wanted the money above and
beyond what the appraised value was is because they had rental
properties there that they were using basically for their retirement and
they wanted to be offset, and they wanted to be able to carry those
dollars forward into the fuhlre so they could have decent retirement.
So that's the whole story in a nutshell.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And County Attorney, we're
within guidelines of the law; is that correct?
MR. PETTIT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
Page 185
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, Coletta.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Coletta, I'm Sorry.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, the good looking one.
Six rental units by a joint purchase agreement. The six rental
units. What's happening to the people that live there? All of a sudden,
we find ourselves in the position of removing people from their units.
And we've been finding fault with other people out in the public for
doing that. Is there any provisions that have been made? Is there any
thought given to the people that are in those units?
MR. CALVERT: There has been no provisions as of yet. There
has been son1e thought on it. Certainly we are looking at considering
the option of building the smaller pond now, giving these other people
the option to -- when they get ready to move out, and provide them
some help with some of the -- finding affordable housing for them and
expanding on that later, but haven't taken any action.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do you have any authorization
to do that without prior direction?
MR. CALVERT: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. How would this come
back to us? I'm very concerned that all a sudden this is going to fall
off into cyberspace.
MR. CALVERT: One of the things that we'll have to be bringing
back to the board is construction -- authorization to proceed with
construction for the constructing of the pond. At that time we have to
address those rental issues as well.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Would you be so kind, when
this thing does come back, that this subj ect is brought back up again in
case we get distracted?
MR. CALVERT: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We get distracted?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What were we talking about?
Page 186
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
Hearing 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.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
MR. CALVERT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, IDE is continued as of -- you
know, and I read it into the record this morning.
Item #10F
REVIEW AND APPROVE THE FY2007 ANNUAL WORK PLAN
FOR THE COUNTY MANAGER - APPROVED
Brings us to 10F, and that's to review and approve the 2007
annual work plan for the county manager.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do we have any discussion on this?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, page 11 of 12. It says,
increase tourist tax revenue by 5 percent over 2006. Increase hotel
occupancy by 3 percent and increasing the tourism website by 30
percent.
Page 187
September 26, 2006
Now, we fell short, far short, of tourist tax revenue, and I believe
it was -- it was sold on the premise of having the extra penny, that it
would increase 20 to 25 -- 25 percent to 30 percent.
Does anybody remember that exact number that Mr. Wert said, if
I had this extra penny, this would bring in?
MR. MUDD: I don't know, but I can have Mr. Wert come back
to talk to the board about what was done and what was promised and
what he thought is expectations --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The -- maybe I can add -- shed a little bit
on this, that -- being that I'm chair of Tourist Development Council.
A lot of the contracts that were written were written a year --
during the tilne we had the three cents instead of the four cents. And
we're at the present time now, all those contracts have pretty much
been completed, and now we're in the four-cent mode.
The other thing that we discussed at the TDC meeting last week
was, we've noticed that there's been notable change in occupancy, and
we were trying to get a handle on that, whether it was the effects of
Hurricane Wilma, and also there was some discussion that it may have
an effect on what's taking place up in the northern latitudes as far as a
lot of people losing jobs in the automotive field up there. So that was
another iteln that was being discussed.
But we were also -- we asked Jack Wert to see where we are as
far as the revenue stream, and also in the discussion there was also
some talk about the amount of condominiums that were uninhabitable
at that point in time.
So I think that some of this all adds up into the equation of why
we didn't see the revenue strean1 as we thought.
MR. MUDD: Can we have Mr. Wert -- we can--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we just -- whatever
the board and the Tourist Development Council was told how much
this is going to raise in revenue, why don't we just hold it at that,
whatever that is? Is there a problem with that?
Page 188
September 26, 2006
MR. MUDD: No. I'll take a look, see what's there. Not a
problem.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So we can change that?
Is there any way that we can get more emphasis on the constant
change orders, get those under control?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I can do that a couple of ways, and
I will tell you, and it -- it disturbed me a little bit. And yes, change
orders -- some change orders are site specific and some change orders
are done at the discretion of the -- of the owner of a particular
property .
My fear, and the reason that disturbs me a little bit is, I craft a
contract that has no change orders in it, but you're going to pay for it,
because you're now risk -advertised, and if you're not willing to share
the risk with the contractor in a particular thing and he's going to take
all the risk, then he's going to -- he's going to basically quote you a
price that's higher than what you would normally get if you were
going low bid or whatever.
But I believe there's some things we can do to control those, and
I'm trying to get at those particular items. But you're never -- if you're
going to -- if you're going to share the risk with the contractor to try to
hold the price down lower, you're going to have some change orders.
But I can write a contract that doesn't have any change orders in it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What I'm concerned about is,
we have a design COlnpany that designs things, and all of a sudden we
need to change the design. I want to hold that design firm accountable
for whatever -- whatever we can.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I want to hold the employee
accountable for changes, say, whoops, I forgot something. I think
that's very in1portant.
Now, I understand there are some unforeseen circumstances.
And I think what Commissioner Coyle brought out of having a
Page 189
September 26, 2006
constant update is going to address some of those. You know, those
happen. But I see too many of them that I have concerns that it's not
holding the contract, the highest document. And we're always
forgiving contractors because whoops, I made a mistake. And I know
everybody's human, but a contract is a contract, an agreement is an
agreement.
And these -- I don't think these design firms -- and, in fact, Mr.
Feder mentioned to me one on Immokalee Road, the one that, the
design build, where a former person who designed that didn't put in
enough storage, and that's going to be another issue.
So -- and it was our impression that it did have enough storage,
water retention. Just, it's going on and on and on.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Being that you made your
little comment in IllY office about there -- you know, you reworded a
couple of things. I had to go back and compare everything. It was a
little game with me, and you did an outstanding job. You changed a
couple of them much to the better and you deleted one that wasn't
needed anymore, so I just wanted you to know your efforts weren't in
vain. I looked at them.
I think it's a very ambitious program, a wonderfully ambitious
program, let me add that. And I think you can get it all done. I love
the idea of a primary care clinic right on the site now and streamlining
the recruitment and selection process. I think that sounds really great.
I love the idea of beach access initiatives and moving forward
with that as well. And if you -- if you do as well this year as you did
last year, we should be able to see all of those at your next evaluation.
MR. MUDD: Yes, n1a'am.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any other discussion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
Page 190
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle and second by Commissioner Fiala.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, I'll call the question. All
those in favor of this, 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Motion carries.
MR. MUDD: So, Commissioner, I'm going to try to add -- I
think I stopped at N. I will go back with Mr. Weft and get exactly
what the request was and change that or add it to that objective.
I will also go in and try to work the change order, work order
business in there in order to add another goal on that one to try work
that out. So I took those note and we'll get those added, sir.
Item #10G
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO CONFIRM THEIR
DIRECTION REGARDING PURCHASE AUTHORIZATION FOR
CONSERVATION COLLIER PROPERTIES WITHIN NORTH
GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 53 -APPROVED
That brings us to item 1 OG, which is a recommendation for the
Board of County Con1missioners to confirm their direction regarding
purchase authorization of Conservation Collier properties within
Page 191
September 26,2006
North Golden Gate Estates Unit 53 as property values increase.
Ms. Alex Sulecki, your Senior Environmental Specialist for
Environmental Services, will present. Hopefully that job title is
correct.
MS. SULECKI: Very good, thank you very much. I want to pull
up a picture for you here.
Well, good afternoon. And for the record, my name is Alex
Sulecki. I'm the coordinator for the Conservation Collier program,
and I'm here today with some of our staff from real estate services.
And we're basically here to make you aware that property values
in the multi-parcel project, Golden Gate Estates Unit 53 have risen
beyond what we originally projected when you approved this as a
multi-parcel project.
So we're here. We like to keep you informed and we like to
provide you with updated information and an opportunity to look at
and confirm your previous direction to go ahead and continue buying
in this unit so -- beyond the approvals of each particular parcel that
come to you on the contracts for approval.
So I'm wondering if you have some questions, and I'd be happy
to try to answer them for you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: These are non-buildable lots?
MS. SULECKI: I wouldn't say that. They are classified as
wetlands by DEP, and they tell me that they may deny some permits
in there, but it's on a case-by-case basis.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What I've been
experiencing is buildable lots or dry lots or DEP approved lots in
Golden Gate Estates are actually going down in price. Last -- the first
of the year they were 114- for an acre and a quarter, and now you can
get -- I've seen a couple of them in the paper for under 80,000.
MS. SULECKI: These are still well below that though.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct. But you're saying that
Page 192
September 26, 2006
they're going up.
MS. SULECKI: They have been going up. And in fact, the
property appraiser just reappraised them up.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, you know, I don't know
whether -- if that's really justified if no activity's -- maybe we are the
one that are causing or reflecting the appraisal price of the property
appraIser.
MS. SULECKI: Well, I checked on that, and I'm not an expert,
but we have real estate people here who can speak to that. But my
understanding from my discussions with them is that we are affecting
the market there but we are not driving it. So we have some private
buyers, some people who've been flipping over properties, investing
there, that are achlally driving the value.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, and we bought some of
those flipping properties.
MS. SULECKI: We have.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And no building
activity's been going on.
MS. SULECKI: As of yesterday when I checked, there were no
permits.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I think if we say no
for a while, it would be sending a strong message to people that are
trying to benefit off the county taxpayers. And I n1ean, that -- that
land out there is just totally wet. I don't see how they can get a permit
out of there, and I'd say let's put it on hold for another year or two.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I couldn't agree more. I'm
convinced that we're driving up the price of land here. That's one of
the problems of trying to buy a group of contiguous lots. We will
never get all of these.
What we will really do, if we buy most of them, is create a
perfect reserve, preserve, for a handful of property owners who will
Page 193
September 26, 2006
then have wonderful, small lots in this magnificent preserve where
they're totally protected for life, very, very valuable. There are people
in the Golden Gate Estates area who would love to have that kind of
protection from future development.
I think it's the wrong thing to do. I was afraid of this when we
started. It's like starting out on a project in a piecemeal fashion, doing
little bits of the project each time but faced with ever-escalating costs
until you get to the point where you've invested so much money in it
you feel compelled to go ahead and pay these unreasonable prices or
else you'll consider your other investment to have been for nothing,
and it's a terrible situation to get into.
And I agree with Commissioner Henning. The best thing we
could do is just say, forget it. If any of these parcels that we have,
under contract or in negotiation, are higher than we think we should
we should be paying, we should just bailout right now and let that
property sit for a while.
And in the meantime, I think we need to develop land
development codes that will govern the size of pads that people can
build on wet lots and require that is be done by stem wall or some
other things like that, because whoever wants to build in there should
not be disrupting the natural flow of water through there. So let's, you
know, have some regulations about that.
And so I agree with Commissioner Henning. I would suggest we
just forget about Unit 53 and go on to something else where we can
get more bang for the dollar.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, I agree with both of you. A lot
of my notes were asking, can anybody even develop in wetlands, but
that's already been asked a couple times. I was wondering if these are
sending lands.
MS. SULECKI: No, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. But being that they're
Page 194
September 26, 2006
wetlands and they're adjoining CREW, so they've got to be pretty wet
and pretty environmentally sensitive and probably even have critters
on them, who knows, and we all know property values are estimated
to go down next year. So I agree with the other two commissioners.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the only way I could see
the property values go up, if Norm Feder keeps on maintaining those
roads or paves them, I would say, then the property will go up. And
this is in Northern Golden Gate Estates, so I have no interest in what
he has in mind.
MS. SULECKI: I asked them earlier, and it was 2012 when
these roads might be paved.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we're actually going to do
it, too. I mean, that's great. That's what --
MS. SULECKI: We actually need the paving.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Real -- the true sense of
government.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Are we really going to pave these
roads that have nobody living on them?
MS. SULECKI: There could be by then.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're smarter than that, aren't we?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They haven't finished with Mr.
Feder yet. I'll wait.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Feder's execution matrix has the roads that are
being paved that have people living on the roads, and the way he's got
them laid out for priority to get executed has to do with, the most
inhabitants on a road gets to go first, okay, as he nlns through the
thing. And I think he has no plans to pave a road that has no
inhabitants on it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Very good, Mr. Feder. I
Page 195
September 26, 2006
understood that perfectly.
MR. MUDD: It was the shortest presentation he's ever given.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That man can communicate
with the fewest words I've ever heard.
You know, and I agree, we are driving up the price. And you
know, would we be breaking any of our own laws and rules and
regulations if we held off on consideration of any of these wetlands
anyplace in the county as far as the purchase of them with the market
going as it is today?
And I do agree that we're running up the price ourselves. We've
got to be. We're probably our own worst enemy on this in the process
that we use. We can't sneak in there, buy it and suddenly own it. You
know, we have to go through a process that's as long as anything. I
imagine speculation runs very high based upon what this commission
does.
MS. SULECKI: The speculators seem to be paying more than
we are paying. There's a couple sales that have driven the prices up in
the unit, that we've paid less.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You know why they're doing that?
I would do the same thing. I'd go out there and I would grab one of
those lots between the lots we have bought and I would have a
wonderful estate that only I could enjoy, and nobody else would ever
be able to build near me. You bet, I'd pay a lot of money for that lot.
And so those people are going to do the same thing. And they're
going to expect you to create their estate for them. And I'm not in the
mood to use the taxpayers' money for that.
As a matter of fact, I would strongly suggest that we monitor the
sales of these things. And when we see it being turned over or flipped
very quickly, we just say, we're not going to even approach that
property . We're going to stay away from it for a long time so that
anybody who thinks they can go in there and buy a piece of property
and flip it and sell it to the government for a fast buck will know up
Page 196
September 26, 2006
front, we're not going to touch it. Unless you've owned it for five
years or more, I don't even want to talk to you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: A question I have is, this is Collier
County land acquisition. The group that sat down and went through
this process, what were their thoughts on this particular land?
MS. SULECKI: Well, this -- it was originally proposed, and it
was very well received. And throughout the whole process, I've been
enunciating risks, just as you have said, and the consensus has always
been to move forward with this project because of its value, ecological
value, and because time is running out and because a permit could be
pulled any day out there, and those are the reasons why they have
wanted this to move forward.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And you know, I want to
be a little bit careful here. I don't want this to be a putdown for
everything you've been doing. You've been following the direction of
this commission without exception since day one. Slight turn in
direction may be taking place as we speak today, but it's nothing you
have done wrong.
MS. SULECKI: I understand.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I can just sense a little bit
of tension, you know, where's this all going, and I done know for sure
where it is going other than the fact that we are uncomfortable with
feeding this feeding frenzy that's out there; however, hearing
Commissioner Coyle speak about how we make the lots between these
lots even more valuable because it becomes sort of a natural preserve
for somebody to be able to build a house, so maybe that's justification
for the prices to go up on son1e of these.
And is that going to be the future direction where somebody
builds in there? And as far as a flowway goes or a water storage area
being prohibited because of a couple houses in a 50-house setting
there, we might have a couple just in that whole place.
Page 197
September 26, 2006
So I'm becon1ing very nervous with this whole thing in both
directions, the fact that we should be able to get the very best for the
taxpayers' dollars and on the other hand, by waiting, are we only
going to do more damage to what the whole program's all about? And
I don't have the answers and I no longer feel comfortable enough to be
able to go forward on this. I'm not too sure. Help me.
MS. SULECI(I: I think it's a difficult question, and I think that
you've all raised some very important points. I would say that right
now we have about 30 percent of this whole unit in ownership. With
the properties that we have in negotiations and under contract now,
that brings it up to 41 percent right about.
So we're at that point where, I think, as you said, do we go
forward and pay the prices or do we stop, saying that we've done
enough? And I don't have the answer to that either except that these
multi-parcel projects have always been a problem because of that.
How are we going to consolidate what we own in them?
And we are bringing to you an amendment -- an amended
ordinance for Conservation Collier that has in it a provision that would
allow us to consoli -- trade parcels within multi-parcel projects __
hopefully we won't have other multi-parcel projects -- but to trade and
to restore the development rights that were lost when it was sold to us
originally.
So we could potentially move those government-owned lots to
the more remote end of the units. So we're thinking about these things
all the time.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Joe, did you have something to add to
this? I notice you're pacing back and forth like a long-tailed cat in a
room full of rocking chairs.
MR. SCHMITT: No. I just want -- well, I do. I wanted to
answer Commissioner Coletta's questions. This is the Estates. It's a
platted subdivision. These are buildable lots today.
As Alex said, someone could come in today, pull a permit. Now,
Page 198
September 26, 2006
of course, they're going to have to get a DEP permit through the state,
they're going to have to set aside the appropriate lands, mitigate for
any impact in wetlands.
In response to Commissioner Coyle's comment about stem wall
construction, that is part of the LDC amendments this cycle. And I
think Stan already briefed you -- you're going to be voting on that, and
I'm glad you brought that up so the public understands there are
measures to -- if anybody wanted to go in there, we're going to have
very strict development criteria, but they are buildable lots, and I just
wanted to make sure you were aware of that, that it's a platted
subdivision.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Didn't this all flood the last
time?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, it's a Winchester Head. It's been
identified as a -- very valuable from an ecological perspective as a
cypress head. It's -- yeah, I don't know if it flooded or not. I don't
know.
MS. SULECI(I: I haven't been out there, but I think some staff--
no, they haven't been out there. I am sure the Winchester Head is
flooded.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It does flood.
MR. SCHMITT: It floods. It's in the flowway.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And this is not Winchester
Head.
MR. SCHMITT: I was mistaken.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's adjacent to CREW lands.
MR. SCHMITT: CREW lands, right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, it wasn't too long ago that
we were told that the DEP hlrned down a request for a building permit
in the Winchester Head similar to property as this here.
And, oh, by the way, the last time I was down there, there
weren't any electrical poles on son1e of those streets, so I don't know
Page 199
September 26, 2006
how many people want to run their house off a generator or windmill.
There might be somebody out there, but some of those streets, it
doesn't have the service.
MR. SCHMITT: I understand that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's no electricity there.
MR. SCHMITT: I mean, they would have to coordinate with
FP&L to run power down there.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So this discussion has gone on
too long, and that information should have been brought to us in the
beginning.
So I'm going to make a motion that we cease and desist the
purchase of any property in Unit 53 for up to two years.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I wanted to ask, being that
CREW has started to buy a little bit of land in there, are they
interested in buying any of that stuff right around their property?
MS. SULECKI: I haven't spoken to them about that, but I'm
meeting with them tomorrow. I can ask them.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, yeah. That would be great,
yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Comlllissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I'm weighing the situation.
Two years is a definite time period, and we may lose an opportunity.
Land values fall. If any other sihlations change out there or possibly if
there's a land nlsh that takes place again and the demand for land
that's-- even that far out. I don't know. I'm just nervous about a fixed
period of time. Two years is -- might not be realistic.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it doesn't prohibit Alex
from coming back and saying, hey, things have changed, just like she
has done now. But the fact is, nobody's going to build in there, so
what's the rush, really?
Page 200
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, you're probably right. But
if we can give staff enough latitude that if they see an unusual
opportunity develop, not to stand on the sidelines and say, well, we've
still got another six months to go before the two years is up.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's part of my motion. If
county staff is seeing some dramatic change, I ask you to bring it back
to the board, dran1atic changes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTi\: Okay. I can support that.
MS. SULECI(I: In price, is that what you're talking about?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: All price.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Comlllissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. On of the reasons for
specifying a definite time period is that you put people on notice that,
hey, don't expect us to come around next month and make you
another offer. You know, you're going to be ShICk with it for a while,
so -- and maybe even then we're not going to buy anything. So we
can change our mind anything we want to -- anytime we want to, but I
think we ought to put the message out that, hey, we're stopping this for
a while and then we'll reevaluate it, but don't expect anything soon.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, Commissioner Henning's
statement about dramatic change in the price gives staff that latitude.
Suppose somebody out there for reasons we can't comprehend now,
says, well, that golden goose is gone now. Let's sell this thing and get
out of Dodge.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep. They can always come back
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Cut the price in half, then
they've got the right to bring it back for consideration.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yep, they always have that right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTi\.: That's the whole thing.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
Page 201
September 26, 2006
MS. SULECKI: May I add something in here? I've just been told
that one of our parcels that was approved on consent today, one of our
1.4 acres that can1e in at the higher value -- and we have several others
that are waiting for -- 2.27 acres, okay. I guess I'm just looking for
some clarification as to the parcels that we have been in negotiations
with at this point in time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion stands.
MS. SULECKI: You said earlier to not go ahead if we thought
they were too expensive. We're cOlnmitted to paying 100 percent of
fair market value. So to us, fair market value would be fair, but I'm
not sure that that's what your direction is.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It is only fair if you don't have
speculators driving up the price and it's only fair if government is not
driving up the price, and that's exactly what we've been doing. We're
our worst enemy, and I think we just need to get out of the market in
this area for a while. I think, you know, we're supposed to be
accountable for the taxpayers' llloney, and I think this is pretty
accountable direction that we're trying to give.
MS. SULECKI: So you're asking us not to go forward with
anything that we have not already gone forward with?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes. My motion stands as
stated.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. And that -- as I understood
your question, you were asking what stahlS -- what's going to happen
to the ones that were in the consent agenda.
MS. SULECKI: You've already approved one today.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That have already been approved?
MS. SULECI(I: Yes. I wasn't asking about that one.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You were not asking about that
one?
MS. SULECKI: It's already approved.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You felt that one was overpriced?
Page 202
September 26, 2006
MS. SULECKI: No. I'm not sure how to evaluate overpriced.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MS. SULECKI: Because we're paying fair market price.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So you're assuming that the one
that was in the consent agenda is approved and we're past that one, so
you're not concerned about that.
MS. SULECKI: That's what I'm assuming; am I correct?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think that's probably right, unless
somebody wants to ask for a reconsideration on that, but -- so we're
looking only at the future?
MS. SULECKI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So anything that you have under
negotiation or even have an offer on right now is no longer valid.
MS. SULECKI: Very good. I understand.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What about the ones that have you
under contract? When you have them under contract, if you -- and it
looks like it's a very high price to pay, then do you have money on
that? I mean, do we lose money if we back out of the contract?
MS. SULECKI: Not unless you sign the contract, is my
understanding.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
MS. SULECKI: Right. The contract is subject to the board's
approval.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Not hearing any, call the question. All
those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
Pane 203
b
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
MS. SULECKI: Thank you.
Item #101
AWARD BID NUMBER 06-3996R TO AKERMAN
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF
$18,330,133.00 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE CR 951 WATER
MAIN FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD TO US 41 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 101. It's a
recommendation to award bid nun1ber 06-3996R to Akerman
Construction COlnpany, Inc., in the amount of$18,330,133 for the
construction of County Road 951, water main from David Boulevard
to U.S. 41, and to approve the necessary budget amendments. Project
number 70151 and 70152.
And Mr. Ron Dillard, senior project manager, public utilities
engineering, will present.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Anything you have to read into
the record, sir?
MR. DILLARD: No.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I have a motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Henning hit his
button but it didn't go on.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Mine's getting worn out.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Conl111issioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is this in the road right-of-way
Pa o-e 204
o
September 26, 2006
or is it --
MR. DILLARD: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's on the other side of the
canals?
MR. DILLARD: Part of it -- north and sound end is in the road
right-of-way. The majority in the middle is on the east side of the
canal.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, okay, right. Great. And I'm
sure you're going to work with transportation.
MR. DILLARD: Yes, we have been.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coy Ie and second by Commissioner Coletta.
Hearing no further discussions, 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries. Okay.
MR. DILLARD: Thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Item #1 OJ
WORK ORDER HS-FT-3785-06-10 UNDER CONTRACT 05-3785
FOR CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION
SERVICES FOR THE "SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER
TREATMENT PLANT 20-MILLION GALLONS PER DAY
Page 205
September 26, 2006
WELLFIELD EXPANSION" TO HAZEN AND SAWYER, P. C.;
FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,835,000 - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: The next -- the next item is 10J. It's a
recommendation to award work order HS-FT-3785-06-10 under
contract 05-3785 for Construction Engineering and Inspection
Services for the South County Regional Water Treatment Plant 20
million gallon per day wellfield expansion to Hazen and Sawyer, P.C.
Project nun1ber 708921 for an amount not to exceed $1,835,000,
and Mr. Phil Gramatges, again, a Senior Project Manager in public
utilities --
MR. GRAMATGES: Principal.
MR. MUDD: Principal, I'lll sorry -- in Public Utilities
Engineering, will present.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: vVe've got a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle for approval and a second by Commissioner
Fiala.
And I believe Commissioner Henning has a question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And this is not a bid, correct?
MR. GRAlVIA TGES: Phil Gramatges, Public Utilities
Engineering. No, it's not. It's a \\fork order based on a fixed contract.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMJ-\N HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed, by like sign.
P8 ne 206
'='
September 26, 2006
.'
.
-;,;\
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Carries -- okay. 4-1 vote.
Item #10K
ADOPT A RESOLUTION REPEALING ALL PREVIOUS
.~ RESOLUTIONS ESTABLISHING AND AMENDING PARTS OF
THE COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION
DEPARTMENT FACILITIES AND OUTDOOR AREAS LICENSE
AND FEE POLICY AND ESTABLISHING THE POLICY
EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1,2006; MOTION TO CONTINUE TO
THE OCTOBER 10, 2006 BCC MEETING - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Next item is 10K. It's a recommendation to adopt
a resolution repealing all previous resolutions establishing and
amending parts of the Collier County Parks and Recreation
Department facilities and outdoor areas license and fee policy and
establishing the policy effective October 1, 2006.
And Mr. Barry Williams, your director of parks and recreation,
will present.
MR. WILLIAMS: Good afternoon, Commissioner. For the
record, Barry Williams, Parks and Rec. Director. I would like to
provide, for the record, if I may -- Commissioner Henning asked for a
strike-through version of the resolution, which I provided to you last
night, and I wanted to make that available for the record, and just
answer any questions, if you had any.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I have a couple of questions in regards to
some of the -- like parking citations, handicap parking. I think we
ought to look at probably bumping those fees up to make sure that
people don't take advantage of those handicap parking spots when
there is people that are in dire need of them. And loud music __
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, have they already been
Page 207
September 26, 2006
bumped up? We don't have anything that --
MR. WILLIAMS: These amounts -- these amounts are added to
our fee policy this year. Previously what we've had is a $35 fee for
parking citation, so all of these fees that we're adding are new to us,
that we've not had them in the past and we've not issued citations. The
dollar amounts and the way that we arrived at these, we benchmarked
with other parks and rec. departments in Southwest Florida and what
charges that they were charging people that violated these particular
ordinances.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: When you look at loud music for $30, it
seems to me it would cost you more to write the ticket by the time you
get somebody pulled over and addressing for loud music.
MR. WILLIAMS: One of the other provisions for this is, there
was legislation passed this year that allows us to use the special master
associated with code enforcement. So some of the processing costs
associated with what we used to do is much less than what it will be.
But if you wanted us to make an adjustment to that fee, certainly we
would do that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, parking violation is a
$250, and I'm sure that's according to state statutes, and it has to be
posted. But I just want to point out on the resolution, where you
reference Golden Gate Community Center --
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- it should be Q and not 0 through the
whole document. Because when you look at the fee schedules, it is
under Q. The citations for parks O. Fines and parks and beach
citations is O. So that needs to be corrected.
MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioner, we can make that correction.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It has to be -- if it's approved.
Now, the strike-through -- actually the document that you gave
us was not a strike-through and underline, it was -- and I just want to
Page 208
September 26, 2006
clarify, the red is the new language being added?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Let me address the old __
the old language just so I have an understanding, to where you have a
power to waive certain things under certain circumstances that are
really not clear.
MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioner, you're referencing item
three-two, I believe?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm referencing on page one of
the resolution. It's limitations, number two.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. Item two, the second paragraph.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes, sir.
MR. WILLIAMS: Rate and charges can be modified on a
case-by-case basis if approved by the director of parks and recreation
for special promotional sales and advertisements.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MR. WILLIAMS: That historically has been in our fee policy.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. And I just want to -- give
me an example, what -- I mean --
MR. WILLIAMS: Ifwe were to run a promotion, for example,
for Sun-N-Fun Lagoon--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. WILLIAMS: -- and we would -- one of the things that we're
attempting to do now is to target a specific population. We're looking
for folks 50 and older, and we think that since the kids have gone back
to school, the 50 and older crowd might enjoy Sun-N-Fun, so offering
them an incentive to come and visit to try it out, would be an example
of a special promotion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Well, what about if the
county manager declares himself a candidate for county commission
and he wants to hold a meeting there, would you give him a break?
MR. WILLIAMS: No.
Page 209
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. WILLIAMS: No, sir, especially with him shaking his head
like that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It only has the benefit -- to
benefit the parks, is that what it is?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir. It's meant to bring attention to our
parks, our programs. In particular, if we were looking to promote a
particular part of the system that we though was underutilized or that
people didn't know about or a specific population that we felt that we
wanted to attract.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I think it's on the
strike-through version, under rain check policy. Is there -- and it's
only valid for the person who holds the rain check. Is that really
necessary?
MR. WILLIAMS: We benchmark much of what we do by other
parks and rec. departments. The rain check policy is one that we got
customer feedback over the summer.
One of the things that we were doing -- our rain check policy was
where if you were in the park for -- if we had a thunderstorm at 2:00,
at 2:30, what we would do, we'd give you -- at 2:20 we'd give you
your money back if you'd been in the park within the last hour. So if
you came in at 1 :00, we closed at 2:00, at 2:20 we would allow you to
come back for another time.
What we were hearing from our customers was that that hour,
you know, needed to be expanded a little bit. So what we attempted to
do was to expand that a little bit. So we're giving an hour and a half.
If you've been in the park in an hour and a half time, 90 minutes, and
it rains in the afternoon -- and, of course, we know it's going to rain in
the summer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me just give you another
example.
Grandma and Grandpa have their teenage grandchildren come
Page 210
September 26, 2006
down, fly down to Florida, they get caught in the rainstorm. Well,
you know, the next day they're flying out or they have other plans, but
Grandma and Grandpa has another set of grandkids coming down, you
couldn't pass that on to them?
MR. WILLIAMS: No, we couldn't. We wouldn't.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that's what I'm saying. Is
there really a reason for setting a policy like that?
MR. WILLIAMS: It is something that we've heard from our
customers that they are expecting, in particular, for Sun-N-Fun for the
price that they're paying. But most people are making good decisions
about when they attend. If you know that you're attending at three
o'clock in the afternoon on a July afternoon, there's a likelihood that
you're going to get rained out. So when we looked at water parks
across the state, most do have rain check policies, so we adopted one
ourselves under that assumption.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. But it's just not passable.
The -- and I probably need the sheriff to help me out on this question.
Firearms on public property, is that a misdemeanor or a felony?
THE SHERIFF: Depending on the definition of public property
and whether or not the carrier has a permit.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Say he doesn't have a
permit.
THE SHERIFF: It depends on whether or not he's carrying it
concealed or in his vehicle or on his person.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What about public
nudity. Is that a misdemeanor?
THE SHERIFF: No, that would be -- a misdemeanor, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. And my concern, and I
don't know -- I might be the only one. It appears that we're trying to
raise money for the county, and I think if somebody has their name in
the paper about lewd and lascivious acts within the park, displaying
public nudity, is a heck of a punishment, and the only way that you're
Page 211
September 26, 2006
going to get that is if the sheriff arrests them and takes them through
the court system.
MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioner Henning, I would agree with
you. In our fee policy, we have set out these fine amounts and,
frankly, we don't anticipate issuing a lot of citations. I mean, most of
our encounters with the public involve us educating and correcting
behavior and them adjusting their behavior.
If there are instances, for example, the firearm, in that type of
instance, it's very likely the sheriffs office is going to be involved and
it's not going to be a citation that we're going to issue for somebody
with a gun.
We did look at how other park and rec. departments imposed
fines with these citations, and we've adopted based on that.
I can tell you, if we have staff in the parks and they encounter a
gun, we're going to call the -- we're going to call the Collier County
Sheriffs Office.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So why is that there?
MR. WILLIAMS: We can -- we can delete it. We can take that
out if you'd like.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. WILLIAMS: We added it, again, as a course of
benchmarking, looking out at other parks and rec. departments.
I would doubt very seriously though that we're going to issue a
citation for a handgun. If -- but there may be instances. This is new
ground for us.
I mean, if you encountered a teenager that had a handgun that
was unloaded in the back of their car, there may be an instance where,
you know, the person's not posing a threat, we wouldn't be calling the
sheriff, but we would encounter the gun maybe there at the beach or
somewhere.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What about if I was
somebody that had a gun and I found out about this ordinance, the
Page 212
September 26, 2006
special master ordinance, and this fine procedure, and he goes to the
Court and he says, you know, Judge, let the county special master take
care of it. Is that likely?
MS. WILLIAMS: I don't think -- state law, I don't -- you know,
county ordinances that we have in these things, it doesn't take the
place of state or federal laws. They still are in existence and would be
applicable, is my understanding.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I -- I don't know if
anybody else has any concern, similar concerns.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta, and then
Commissioner Coy Ie after that, then we're taking a break.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just want to touch upon a
couple of things here. Chumming and blood baiting. I take it that's
for, like, sharks?
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Where does this take place? I
mean, we don't have jurisdiction over the pier. I'm trying to -- I'm
trying to relate to how this really happens. I don't know if it does
happen, except out in a boat in the Gulf itself. And I'd hate to think
we're going to get to the point we're going to go out there and try to
enforce it. You're talking about the swimming areas?
MR. WILLIAMS: We do manage areas, Caxambas Pass, for
example, marinas. There's that potential where that might occur.
Again, I would have to agree with all of what you're saying. It's very
rare that any of these activities are going to be ones that we're going to
issue a citation. But we did want to have --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sure. No, that's understandable.
Now, suppose somebody does go out to one of the passes to fish
and they park their car and they walk back in. How do they know an
ordinance like this exists?
MR. WILLIAMS: As far as signage, it's a good question. I don't
know that our signage is reflecting that these ordinances exist and
Page 213
September 26, 2006
people are under them as they enter our parks. We do have some
signage in some of our parks that reference -- I believe the ordinance
related to concealed handgun is on some of our signage.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But have you had any
complaints about chumming and blood baiting?
MR. WILLIAMS: Not to my knowledge, no, sir, not in my --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. It seems like, you know,
something like that on the books could be one of those things that
could be there forever. If we don't have a problem or -- why even
create it, or why even give people an idea that this thing might work?
I don't know. I don't know how other commissioners feel. Maybe
that's a little bit of overkill on it.
And I agree with Commissioner Halas about the -- some of these
fines, such as loud music. I don't know, maybe it's our age, but I'd like
to see $75. Defacing county property, I mean, $100 is pretty dam
generous. I don't know if anything could be repaired for 100. Maybe
double that amount.
Soliciting? Nobody likes to be solicited when they're at a park.
You know, a heavier fine for that might be more in line.
Removing a live natural object like, I guess a tree if you try to
transplant it. I mean, that goes without saying. People ought to
realize don't take vegetation from park sites. I would expect more.
Removal -- removal of cultural resources. I'm not too sure what that
is, but $75 seems quite generous.
But on the other hand, since I've got the floor for just a moment,
you know, a couple things. One, do we still have it on the books
about an exemption for recognized civic associations for space that
they have? I couldn't find it in here.
MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir, we do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, good. That--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Where is it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That still exists. So I mean, if
Page 214
September 26, 2006
it's a recognized -- if it's a civic association that's serving a public
purpose, they can use a facility for their meeting once a month at no
charge.
MR. WILLIAMS: I'll find it for you in just a minute. We do
have that in here though.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Other local not-for-profits, is that
what you're referring to?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I mean, every organization
practically that uses the place is not for profit, but a civic association's
serving like a government process, so I think that's where we decided
some time ago in not charging them to use the facilities.
Some of these other ones like the non-profit one there, indoor,
3,100 square feet and over non-profit. Twenty to $50 is a big jump. I
mean, could we live with something a little bit less?
The non-profit indoor rooms, 1,500 square feet, all the way from
$25 dollars to $40. You know, possibly $30 might be more in line.
Concession fees. That -- these organizations trying to cover the
cost of the grounds go to great ends to try to raise the money,
especially through the concession.
You know, I'd like to try to give them every opportunity I could
give them to be able to make their profits. Instead of going 25 to 40,
I'd like to see it cut back to 20 and forget the idea of sharing on the
profits. You know, let them use it to cover the cost of the field
because we charge them to use the field, and I've got nothing but
complaints on that -- on the charges, especially some places in
Immokalee. And I believe you have in East Naples, too, if I'm not
mistaken.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, I do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Coming down, the North Collier
Regional Park pass. You know, $110 over 48 inches, $80 under 48, a
hundred dollars and 75 is still high.
Fun and -- Sun-N-Fun Lagoon, family pass, 190, up to four
Page 215
September 26, 2006
individuals. Each additional family member $40. I think 150 would
cover it, father, mother and all kids under 18 or -- yeah, probably
under 18. And then why do we want to penalize somebody for having
more than two kids? I mean, it doesn't sound right.
If anything, we need to be just a little more liberal -- excuse the
word -- compassionately conservative.
Sorry, Commissioner Henning. You okay? That's all right. I did
Commissioner Henning in. Come up -- breath. Breath through your
nose. You'll be all right.
Immokalee sports --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, while we're talking about that item,
about Sun-N-Fun Lagoon -- and look at -- what we're going to do--
it's obvious to me we're going to take your comments back, we're
going to grab them and try to get this document so it's -- it gets the
idea that you want, and then we're going to come back to the board
again because --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I like that.
MR. MUDD: -- at this particular juncture, there's no way we are
going to come to any kind of agreement on 13 pages worth of fees, all
right? I can tell you right now. But it would -- it's good that we're
getting your input.
The other piece that I would like to ask -- Commissioner Coletta,
I just -- I just heard that comment that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Compassionate conservatism?
MR. MUDD: Yes, that one.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I heard you.
MR. MUDD: And the question I have is -- and I agree with your
passion as far as families that are taxpayers of Collier County, but I
have real problems with the 12 kids and the two people that are
coming from Dade County buying the annual pass.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Or Lee County.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree with you, I agree with
Page 216
September 26, 2006
you. Collier County residents, first priority always, without a doubt.
MR. MUDD: So the real question is, do we give annual passes
to outside of Collier County?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no.
MR. MUDD: And see, right now there's nothing in your -- this
particular item that differentiates.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. We're here for Collier
County first. We accommodate our visitors wherever we can.
MR. MUDD: So annual passes are for Collier County residents.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Residents only.
MR. MUDD: Okay. Only, and anybody else pays the regular
daily rate, whatever that is.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Only right.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle? And then we're
going to take a break. I hope it's quick here.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I'll try to make it quick.
I want to support the idea that the fine for loud music simply isn't
enough. That's got to be one of the more common complaints, and,
quite frankly, loud music is more offensive to me than nudity. So I --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Depends upon who it is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Very cold it's all right, right?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. There are some
qualifications to that. But I think we need to do something with loud
mUSIC.
Now, I've got to take a minute to go over something that's really,
really minor.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I want to -- I've got to break for the court
reporter.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, can you strike all that stuff
about --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, no. My problem is, I promised her a
Page 217
September 26, 2006
break at 4:30, and here we are 4:47, so --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll be finished at 4:49, okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Four forty-nine, okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Four forty-nine. Okay.
Barry, now let's look at this very closely and let's go through it
because there's going to be a test when I finish.
Sea turtles, structure on the beach, no interaction, $250. When I
asked what that meant, you said, an individual who is guilty of
interaction is fined $250. This says a structure on the beach, no
interaction. Now--
MR. WILLIAMS: Commissioner, I've got a little bit more info,
and I brought something --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think that was a wrong
explanation that I got.
MR. WILLIAMS: Well, and our understanding of sea turtle with
no interaction -- we've got something on the visualizer that we've
taken that describes it. There is a distinction between that activity that
is a violation, fined a certain amount, versus the interruption.
And the way this was explained to me was that no interaction is
if somebody leaves a beach chair out on the beach --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
MR. WILLIAMS: -- there is not a false crawl where a sea turtle
is either trying to make it to the ocean or to the nest. There's not a
false crawl that exists. The fact that they left that beach chair on the
beach is an offense that's -- that we would cite with that fine of $250.
The interruption is if the same thing were to occur, the beach
chair was on the beach, and the sea turtle -- there was a false -- there
was a false crawl, it interfered with the sea turtle's nesting habit.
That's an interruption and that would be fined at a different amount.
So I hope that explains it. I was close.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, it's close but now I
understand it more clearly --
Page 218
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- but your explanation to me in
writing was not correct, okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We're going to take a 12-minute break,
and then we'll have you come back for additional questions if you
have them.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm not going to have any.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Five oh one we get back, 12
minutes?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Five oh one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Take your seats, ladies and gentlemen.
We're back from recess.
And I believe we're going to give staff direction on this item that
we were discussing, and that's 10K.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to continue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Take it back and get it right.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We've got a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coletta and a second by Commissioner Henning.
And all those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (Absent.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed--
Page 219
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And there should be a sliding scale
on the nudity thing.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That goes with age, right?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, are we fining or giving money
out?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sliding with age.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, what we'll do is we'll get -- we'll
garner all the comments the commissioners had, get that back,
basically say, this is what it was, this is what it is right now, try to grab
all that, get it to you as soon as we can even before the executive
summaries get printed out and print copies so you get a chance to look
at it, and then we'll try to get around -- the 10th of October meeting.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us -- did we take a vote
on that continuance? We did? Four oh?
MS. FILSON: Four,oh.
Item # 10L
WORK ORDER UC-253 FOR $497,650 TO MITCHELL & STARK
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY TO PROVIDE AN EMERGENCY
GENERATOR, ENCLOSURE, WELL PUMPS AND VALVES,
WORK ORDER UC-254 IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,884,000 TO
D.N. HIGGINS TO INSTALL THE AFOREMENTIONED
EQUIPMENT, BOTH UNDER FIXED ANNUAL TERM
CONTRACT 04-3535, AND A PURCHASE ORDER IN THE
AMOUNT OF $334,784 TO TAW CONTROL SYSTEMS &
AUTOMATION FOR INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROLS,
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, AND AN AIR CONDITIONED
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE FOR THE SOUTH
COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT TWO
NEW MID HAWTHORN ZONE 1 AND TWO NEW LOWER
Page 220
September 26, 2006
HAWTHORN WELLS 39S AND 41 S, AND 40S AND 42S -
APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Okay. Brings us to 10L, it's a recommendation to
award work order UC-253 in the amount of $497,650 to Mitchell and
Stark Construction Company to provide an emergency generator,
enclosure, well pumps and valves, work order UC-254 in the amount
of $1 ,884,000 to D.N. Higgins to install the aforementioned
equipment, both under fixed annual term contract 04-3535, and a
purchase order in the amount of $334,784 to TAW Control Systems
and Automation for instrumentation and controls, electrical
equipment, and air-conditioned electrical equipment enclosure for the
South County Regional Water Treatment Plant two new mid
Hawthorn zone one, and two new lower Hawthorn wells, 39S and
49S, and 40S and 42S, respectively, as project 71051.
And Mr. Pete Schalt, senior project manager for public utilities
engineering, will present.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do I hear a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is -- this was bid. You got
two companies that responded?
MR. SCHAL T: This was done under the fixed annual term
contract. It was competitively procured. The first package, three
responses came back, and I list those in the executive summary. That's
to supply the equipment.
On the second package to install equipment, four responses came
back competitively, and we chose a low successful bidder.
And the third package, which is the purchase order, they're the
only supplier that can provide this equipment within the allotted time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What does it mean,
Page 221
September 26, 2006
waive the work order threshold requirements?
MR. SCHAL T: The fixed annual term contract has a threshold
of $750,000.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. SCHAL T: So we're asking for that to be waived because
this is such a fast-tracked project.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And this is $2.2 million total,
correct?
MR. SCHALT: The total of these three items are $2,716,434.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Why is it an emergency?
MR. SCHAL T: It's not an emergency. It's a fast-track schedule.
These four wells will be utilized to start up the new South Water
Treatment Plant expansion that's coming on-line, and that will be in
February of '07.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So that doesn't give you enough
time to go out to bid?
MR. SCHAL T: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Did you know that this
work had to be performed?
MR. SCHAL T: No, sir. When -- the wells that were being done
as a part of the expansion project, they've been delayed by permitting
issues, and that's when this all became known to us.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, okay. And then so you
didn't want to go out to -- go out to bid until you had the permits?
MR. SCHAL T: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Well, that's -- I mean, I
think that's smart. Did that happen on the previous item that public
utilities had, too, it was a bid but there was only one person? And I
probably shouldn't go back. I could ask that question later on.
MR. DeLONY: We could answer it later on or I could answer it
now, if you'd like.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
Page 222
September 26, 2006
MR. DeLONY: On the previous item -- for the record, Jim
DeLony, Public Utilities Administrator. One the previous item, we
went back after the first round of bids, and we felt that we did not have
as much competition or we arrived at the market price, for whatever
the reason. And we've recommend to the board, and you approved,
that we reject those bids and ask to go back out once more, and that's
exactly what we did on the previous item. That was the item, I
believe, that -- let's see. That was the one that Ron was up here on
earlier.
MR. MUDD: That's 101.
MR. DeLONY: 101, thank you.
MR. MUDD: I believe the commissioner is asking the question
about 10J --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. MUDD: -- and that had to do with the CEI services for
Hazen and Sawyer --
MR. DeLONY: No, that--
MR. MUDD: -- when he asked, was this competitively bid, and
he voted against it because of the answer that staff gave him. But I
believe that Hazen and Sawyer is on a fixed term --
MR. DeLONY: That's right, yeah, that's correct.
MR. MUDD: -- engineering contract with us, and that was
competitive -- we went out for proposal, and there's a listing of those
folks that won that proposal, and this is work that's granted under that
proposal, Commissioner, and you didn't get the full answer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you know, maybe if the
executive summary was different, similar to this one here --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- maybe I wouldn't have had a
problem with it.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm comfortable with the
Page 223
September 26, 2006
question.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir. I understand. Okay. I just want to
make sure -- I'm sorry I was confused on the item. Mr. Mudd did a
great job outlining the 10J item.
Sir, any other questions for us on this item?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm comfortable with it.
MR. DeLONY: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further questions from the
commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
Hearing 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries. Thank you very much.
MR. SCHAL T: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item # 10M
EXPENDITURE OF $150,000 ON THE FIRST STAGE OF A
MULTI-STAGE, MULTI-YEAR EFFORT TO STANDARDIZE
THE PROCESSES INVOLVED WITH THE DELIVERY OF
CAPITAL PROJECTSAND TO IMPLEMENT A COMPUTER
SYSTEM TO ASSIST COUNTY PROJECT MANAGERS -
APPROVED W/CHANGES AND STIPULATIONS
Page 224
September 26, 2006
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is item 10M. This
used to be item 16E9. It's a recommendation to spend 150 -- I'm
sorry? Okay. I'll start again.
This item is 10M, used to be 16E9. It's a recommendation to
spend $150,000 on the first stage of a multi-stage, multi-year effort to
standardize the process involved with the delivery of capital projects
and to implement a computer system to assist county project
managers. It's project number 75006.
And Mr. Ron Hovell, from your facilities management
department, will present.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I think Commissioner Coyle had
questions.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. So I may as well just get right
to them.
Here's my problem. You're asking us to approve the first stage of
a project, and we're really not sure how much it's going to cost, how
long it's going to take. There's really no schedule here.
We've talked about, the implementation phase of the proj ect has
been funded at $760,000. There still isn't any indication as to what the
total cost is going to be.
Now, I understand that you want to do the first stage for
$150,000 and then evaluate where you go from there, and I'm willing
to do that, but I'm not willing to authorize you to begin a multi-year
effort without having some assurance about the schedule and the cost.
So I would be willing to support a demonstration proj ect for
$150,000, and then when you've got that thing ready and you can
reach some conclusions and give us more information, we can talk
about the rest of the project. But I'm not in the mood to say, hey, go
do a multi-year proj ect at some unknown cost over some unknown
period of time at some unknown risk, you know. I'm not into that kind
of thing, okay?
Page 225
September 26, 2006
MR. HOVELL: For the record, Ron Hovell, principal project
manager in facilities management department. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Recommendation to
approve a single stage, $150,000 project, that will be a demonstration
project, and then the staff will come back to us with conclusions and
recommendations with respect to extending the project.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I second that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Okay, we have --
MR. HOVELL: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle and a second by Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, 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.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to paragraph 11,
which is public comments on general topics.
Ms. Filson?
MS. FILSON: I have no speakers on this issue.
ITEM #12A
DIRECTION TO THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY
Page 226
September 26,2006
CONCERNING THE SETTLEMENT OFFER REQUIRED BY
SECTION 70.001(4)(C), FLA. STAT., IN RESPONSE TO THE
PURPORTED BERT HARRIS ACT CLAIM ASSERTED BY R & S
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - THE OWNER(S) OF THE
PROPERTY THAT WAS PROPOSED TO BE REZONED TO
SANDAL WOOD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT; MOTION FOR COUNTY ATTORNEY TO
SEND A WRITTEN SETTLEMENT OFFER TO THE
PETITIONER WITH PHASING OF 10% OF C.O.'S UNTIL LOOP
ROAD IS COMPLETED - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: That brings us to paragraph 12, county attorney's
report. The first item is a recommendation that the Board of County
Commissioners give direction to the Office of the County Attorney
concerning the settlement offer required by section 70.001.4.C,
Florida Statutes, in response to the purported Bert Harris claim __
excuse me -- the Bert Harris Act claim asserted by R & S
Development Company, the owners of the property that was proposed
to be rezoned to Sandalwood residential planned unit development.
MR. PETTIT: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
Mike Pettit, chief assistant county attorney.
We have, of course, discussed the Bert Harris Act procedure
before. Let me give you a little background.
This matter arises out of denial of a rezone petition back in
February of 2006. I'm not sure it's made clear in your executive
summary, but you should be aware that there is a lawsuit now pending
in circuit court pursuant to which the disappointed petitioner is
seeking what's called certiorari review. That lawsuit is also part of the
settlement discussion here today.
In addition -- and I can tell you what the status of that lawsuit is.
The parties have each filed their responses. And as I understand it, the
decision is ripe for a decision by the Court, and we simply have not
Page 227
September 26, 2006
received the decision yet.
That lawsuit would not involve a claim for damages. Should the
Court agree with the board's decision, that would be the end of it
unless the petitioner sought to take it to a higher court. Alternatively,
the Court could remand the matter back for a second hearing before
this board.
A companion item though is the Bert Harris Act notice of claim.
We received that on July 26, 2006. As you know from dealing with
these in the past, there is a 180-day period for this board to make what
I believe to be a mandatory written settlement offer in response to that
claim.
Obviously any settlement offer that you would direct us to make
would presumably and would necessarily include a resolution of the
pending case that's now in court, the certiorari matter.
As you know from your executive summary, there are a number
of things you can direct us to do today in response to this Bert Harris
Act notice.
In particular, number 11 in the statute provides that you can
direct us to advise the claimant in writing that you are going to make
no change to your previous decision. What happens then -- what
happens then is, I presume that at some point they would file a law __
the petitioner would file a lawsuit and we would litigate that issue in
court, and they would have a claim for damages, I presume.
A couple things you need to know here that is -- we have a Bert
Harris Act claim. We do not have what is required by the statute,
which is a bona fide appraisal. I tell you this, but I also tell you, I
have brought this forward -- Ms. Student and I have conferred and
we've brought this forward not only because there is a separate
lawsuit, which you may wish to resolve today, but because the time
frames are such, and because I know that the petitioner's represented
by counsel knowledgeable in Bert Harris procedures, that that defect,
if you will, could be cured in a timely fashion; in other words, an
Page 228
September 26, 2006
appraisal could be brought and provided to us before the time frame
runs out to provide us with an appraisal. So I bring it here today to get
some direction.
I think that's all I have by way of introduction. I don't know
whether Ms. Student has anything to add.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Marjorie?
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Thank you. For the record,
Marjorie Student-Stirling, assistant county attorney.
I just wanted to state that we had received, I guess you would
say, an offer on the offer to settle from the applicant's counsel, and
that would include approval of the Sandalwood rezone. We would
need clarification as to whether or not that would include the Planning
Commission's stipulations that were brought forward when that matter
was initially heard by the board back in February.
And most particularly, there was a change of units from the 67
proposed to 60 that was part of the Planning Commission
recommendation.
Also, the petitioner would waive all claims under Bert Harris.
That's silent as to also filing a release in the Bert -- or not the Bert
Harris -- excuse me -- in the certiorari claim. So we would also be
looking for settlement to be filed in that, and that would need to be
clarified.
And furthermore, the applicant offered -- and this was part of the
proposed rezone -- to contribute $1,000 a unit to the County
Affordable Housing Trust Fund, and we would need clarification there
as to whether that would include a credit against any future linkage or
impact fee.
So that's all I wanted to add is what they brought to us.
MR. PETTIT: Let me just add one more thing, Commissioners.
Weare looking for some direction as to how to respond to the Bert
Harris Act claim and the proposal advanced by the
developer/petitioner/claimant; however, I would caution you that
Page 229
September 26, 2006
should it be decided that you're going to make no change in your prior
decision or should your proposal not be accepted, we will be in
litigation. So I just want you to keep that in mind as we discuss the
matter this afternoon.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Mr. Chairman, we have until
January the 22nd of next year to respond to the Bert Harris claim.
And the certiorari decision is imminent. I believe that we should wait
for the decision from the Court in the certiorari decision before we
start trying to make a counteroffer for the Bert Harris claim.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I agree with you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And the reason I say that is, that
based upon what the legal staff has told me, if the judge finds that we
acted properly, then that's one set of facts we'll have to deal -- we can
deal with. If the judge finds we really need to reconsider this and he
sends it back to us for reconsideration, then, perhaps, there won't be
any need for the Bert Harris claim.
So I would -- I would not like to rush into a response on the Bert
Harris claim until such time as we have seen the results of the
certiorari case.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: If I may, I'd just like to clarify that.
I believe my co-counsel here indicated that it was ripe for decision,
and imminent is a little bit different than ripe for decision.
I've handled just about all the cert. cases for the county since
1995, and in my experience they may take almost a year to receive a
decision from the Court on, and that -- as time's gone by, with the
courts having more cases before it, it's taken even longer. I'd say 10 to
11 months in the past.
And we filed our -- I'm just trying to -- we filed our response
back in -- in the summer. It was sometime in June, and then opposing
counsel has time to file a reply to that response. So let's say that was
in July. So that's only been -- if you want to call it pleadings closed or
Page 230
September 26, 2006
whatever before the Court, that's only been before them for just a
couple of months.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. When do you expect them
to -- the Court to make a decision?
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: The longest could be 10 months
from now, so I'm just saying --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: From now or 10 months from July?
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Ten months from now if you go on
the theory of a year from July, nine or 10 months.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then we've got until January 22nd
of next year to deal with the Bert Harris.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: I just wanted to clarify that for
you. It's hard for me to predict when the Court -- they might do it
tomorrow, but I'm just going on my past experience, that these take
some time.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Then my position still stands that
we wait until we get a little closer to the deadline, and then we do
something with the Bert Harris.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You make a motion on that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I'd make a motion that we
wait until a little later this year before we start providing any guidance
on a Bert Harris claim settlement.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'll second that.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, some of the issues about,
you know, do we do the Planning Commission's recommendations or
what?
I mean, it's been so long ago, I don't remember what the original
motion that the Board of Commissioners did not pass.
And Mr. Y ovanovich, you represented the client. I think I made
the motion, but I can't tell what you it is. It's been so long ago.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: If I can, actually I didn't represent them
Page 231
September 26, 2006
at the time of the motion, but I do represent them now.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: You're -- the motion was to approve, with
the Planning Commission recommendations, addressing the 23-foot
setback, making sure that it was 23 feet back from the sidewalk, so
that was -- that was the motion, was to approve the project, and there
were three votes in the affirmative for the motion, two votes in the
negative, and that was the motion.
And I guess, is it appropriate now for me to respond to the
questions by the -- or the clarifications by the county attorney, or
when do we get to speak? I don't want to go out of order.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I don't know when it's appropriate for us
to speak, so I'm just -- I don't want to --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Give us some guidance, County
Attorney?
MR. PETTIT: Well, I -- you didn't submit a slip, but I mean, I
think because it's in the nature of a settlement discussion, that I would
give him some leeway to respond or answer any questions the board
may have.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: We have always handled these in the
past, Mike -- and that's the reason I didn't sign a speaker slip.
MR. PETTIT: I agree, I agree, there is a history of that.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: That we just usually present and then
there's a motion, so that's why I didn't submit a slip, but I'm happy to
submit a slip if I need to.
MR. PETTIT: Go ahead.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Okay. Thanks, Mike.
And for the record, Rich Y ovanovich on behalf of __
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If you'd submit the slip when you get
done.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I will -- on behalf of the petitioners. Brit
Page 232
September 26, 2006
Svoboda and Mark Rasmus, the owners of the company, are here as
well; and Tim Hancock, who was the planner on the project who made
the presentation, is also here.
The reason we think it's important that we go forward is that
there are ongoing expenses being incurred by the property owner with
regard to this project. It is costing 40,000 a month in interest for these
particular individuals to carry this property.
They're not a big company, unlike some others, so the financial
impact to them mounts every day and makes it more and more
difficult for them on this proj ect.
Needless to say, we think the denial was not proper, and what
we're proposing is a Bert Harris claim that basically makes a claim of
over $6 million go away. We're talking about a project that is a
60-unit PUD on a little under 20 acres, so you're talking about three
units per acre versus four units per acre.
We are proposing an ASR wellsite for the county of 1.2 acres, so
it's a county benefit there. We are providing water management for
three lanes of the east/west Livingston Road project that's going to be
in front of our project, and we are agreeing to the payment of $1,000
per unit to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund.
We think there's ample public benefit in the proposed settlement.
And, yes, we would expect that if the fee -- it's a minimum
$1,000 payment for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, so if you
adopt a linkage fee of $500, we would pay $1,000. If you adopted a
linkage fee of $5,000, we would get a credit of the $1,000 against that.
So that's a minimum fee that will be paid for affordable housing.
We think that this project is, you know, a -- it's a
three-unit-per-acre project up on Livingston Road north of Immokalee
Road where the current level of service for Livingston Road is
operating at a level of service B.
We were surprised at the denial. There was no indication during
the discussion of any issues for the basis of the denial, and we're
Page 233
September 26, 2006
requesting that you accept our settlement proposal and that we move
forward and end both the Bert Harris claim and the petition for writ of
certiorari, we would give a full release as has been customarily done
in claims. So there will be a full release of any Bert Harris claim, and
I guess we would have a joint dismissal of the petition for writ of
certiorari to make that lawsuit go away, so you would be avoiding two
potential lawsuits.
And we think under the circumstances it's really not fair to
continue to make these two individuals carry the property, and we
would like -- we'd like a quicker resolution to this issue than being
strung out just because the county can string us out.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: I have one more speaker. Do you want to hear
him?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Sure.
MS. FILSON: Thomas Harruff.
MR. HARRUFF: Good evening, Commissioners. Tom Harruff
from Imperial Golf Estates Homeowners' Association. I'm the
president of the association. Also my wife and I live within 500 feet
of this project.
We have been discussing the proj ect with the developers and
with their previous builder, Longo Construction, although Longo is no
longer involved in this. We have a couple of issues that came up at
the last time we met dealing with a wall between the two properties to
be built on their side, and that was also included in the discussions
before the Board of County Commissioners back on February 14th,
along with the CPCC (sic) recommendations.
We're very happy with the proposed development to go next to
our property. It is the most compatible use that we can think of to be
next to our properties. It will be single-story, single-family homes.
The density is very good. It is very compatible with what we have
here in Imperial Golf Estates.
Page 234
September 26, 2006
So both as a homeowner impacted by this development and also
as the president of the association, I'm in support of all of the planning
that I've seen from the developer and the builders. The decision, of
course, is your decision as it deals with the rezoning.
But as a resident who is involved, as well as the president of the
association, I am supportive of their actions that they have shown us in
the past.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think Commissioner Coletta was
firs t.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Oh.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but thank you. I'll put my
button back on.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Go ahead, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Who are you talking about, me
or Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, I don't want you to talk.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. In that case, I'll feel free
to talk.
I'll be honest with you, when this proj ect came before us before,
if I remember correctly, it had the endorsement of the Planning
Commission, and it had everything right about it, and that's the reason
why I voted for it.
I didn't see anything wrong with it at the time, I don't see
anything wrong with it now. It was one of those things that seems to
fit into with what we're trying to accomplish in that part of the world
for fill -- you know, infill.
I don't know why we have to go through a lawsuit, but I'll be
honest with you. It's not the threat of the lawsuit that makes me think
the way I do. Of course, that's the only way you can get it back before
Page 235
September 26, 2006
us.
I think it's extremely regrettable that Mr. Longo's not still with
this. I feel very bad for what happened to him. He's no longer in that
business. He had everything banked on this one project for the most
part. I mean, he's still going, but not at the level he was before. It was
unfortunate, you know, that it came down when it did, the timing on
that. I wished I could have got a continuance, but that didn't happen.
However, with that said, you know, be it as it is -- it is what it is.
I have no reason not to re-support it, in ever -- any fashion. I take it
that we're supposed to actually make a decision today; is this correct
or does it come back to us?
MR. PETTIT: What's before you today -- and I want to
emphasize this, Commissioners, is we are requesting direction to make
a written settlement offer.
The petitioner/developer has come forward with a proposal. You
can make your own offer and put in your own requests and
contingencies for them to consider within the boundaries of the
statute, and you have some broad latitude there.
So we're asking -- these are some of the things the developer -_
and you've heard what Mr. Y ovanovich said that they're willing to do.
These are some of the things the developer's willing to do. Do you
want to direct us to make a written offer back to them, which will take
care of your obligations under the Bert Harris Act, at least as far as
that goes?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I, for one, would want it
done. But I'm not too sure how the rest of my commissioners feel
about it.
MR. PETTIT: And I agree with Commissioner Coyle, that we
still have time to make that offer. This is up to the board.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. How many votes do you need
to bring it back or to make the next step?
Page 236
September 26, 2006
MR. PETTIT: It's my opinion this is a matter of three votes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. And I would just like to go
on the record -- and I hope I'm not out of line saying this -- but when I
voted for it before, the reason I voted for it was because the road that it
would be using is a B road. I'm very, very against high densities on a
failed road or even an overburdened road, but this is only 60 units and
it's on a Broad.
And we find very few people building single-family homes
anymore. I thought that sounded good. The neighbors were all in
favor. CCPC agreed that it was a good project. There was no one that
we heard from or came to the meeting that was against it. So my vote
stands firm.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I can't support the motion
and I'm not going to say too much about this because of the litigation.
I don't know what's going to take place if there's enough votes to
support the motion. I don't think a resolution by, well, let's wait and
see later on, is a good one, unless there is an assumption by some of us
that we should preserve this property or something. I just don't __
there's a lot of things I don't understand, and I can't support the
motion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I don't think there is a motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There is.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: There's a motion and a second.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: There is, a motion and a second.
Just to let everyone know where I stand on this is that because of
the amount of traffic that we've already burdened Immokalee Road on,
my concerns at the time were, this is going to impact that area again.
And I felt that because of the fact that we have uncertainties of
when the loop road is going to be put in -- and I'm hoping that -- I
don't see any -- well, we've got Don Scott.
We had gotten a commitment from the developer in regards to
Page 237
September 26, 2006
land in a loop road. And then we find out that FDOT was going to be
involved in this loop road. And I don't believe we're going to even get
started on that until -- the loop road is the loop that goes around to
have northbound traffic heading from the easterly direction of -- in the
eastern direction of Immokalee Road be able to enter into the 1-75
northbound via a loop that will be off to the right.
So that's my -- my biggest concern because of the fact that we
have that -- that intersection there is failing.
And I think, Don, if you can give us some direction in regards to
when you think that loop is going to be in.
MR. SCOTT: Don Scott, transportation planning. Yes, FDOT
took over the project and they are planning on starting -- as part of
1-75. They're planning on starting 1-75 next April. It is a design build.
It's -- that loop itself is not designed yet. It would be starting at that
point, too.
Our projections are -- you know, obviously, we've asked them to
have that in the front end of that project. I think at the MPO you heard
the response. It's not guaranteed, and we probably would presume that
it would be done mid 2009.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You want to call for the vote?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Restate the motion, please.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle -- or
Commissioner Coyle, if you'd restate the motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think we've got three votes
against the motion. I mean, we've already got three people who say
they won't support it, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sounds like it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- in that case, I'll withdraw my
motion and somebody else can make another one.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'll withdraw my second then.
Page 238
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It looks like there are three people
who are going to vote for this thing. I'd just like to remind you that
this issue goes to the heart of the Board of County Commissioners'
right to disapprove a rezone.
And I understand that we don't have an unreasonable right
forever to deny somebody a rezone, but I believe the schedule is ours,
and you're essentially saying it's not, that anybody who wants to have
a rezone can get a rezone --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that's not true at all.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that's really what we're
saying because --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, we're talking about ifit makes
sense.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let me talk, let me talk. You
know, I've waited for everybody else to talk about their positions here.
We know that we have a huge backlog of infrastructure in Collier
County to deal with but yet we keep rezoning more and more and
more property. And as we rezone property we create an expectation
that people can build on that, and that fuels speculation and it keeps us
further and further behind.
Why do you want to rezone more property if we know we can't
keep up with the pace now? And we know we can't do that.
So why don't we approve rezones whenever we think rezones are
appropriate? The law says we cannot permanently deprive people of
economic value of their property, and I wouldn't ever intend to do that.
But the law doesn't say that I as a county commissioner have to do it
on the developer's schedule.
I'm trying to do it on a schedule that makes sense for the
taxpayers of Collier County and our ability to address infrastructure,
and we cannot do that as long as we got -- have rezone after rezone
after rezone coming before us and we're obligated to approve it.
And we're never going to get that resolved until we decide that
Page 239
September 26, 2006
we're the ones who are in charge here and that you're going to do it on
our schedule, so basically that's where I am.
So rather than arguing about it, if those who want to approve the
rezone want to give guidance to the staff, then make a motion about
what that guidance will be, and then we will set the precedent that
anytime you want a rezone, you just threaten us with a Bert Harris Act
suit.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And believe me, it's not
the Bert Harris Act that bothers me. It's the fact that I don't think we
would win it.
What I witnessed in what took place during that, if I was called to
testify -- and I'm not going to testify now -- I don't think I could be
able to support what took place. I mean, there was a whole bunch of
examples that I seen that I'd hate to ever see repeated again.
Now, I'm not going to go into that to any great depth, but I felt
that this was a very justified project, and I'd make a motion that we
instruct the county attorney to go forth and work a settlement offer
with the petitioner that follows the parameter of what we originally
were working with when the vote came down 3-2.
I don't know how to elaborate on that past that point, but that's
the direction I would like to give the county attorney.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: County Attorney?
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Yes, thank you. If I may, the
motion that was before the board before, I think as you heard, was 3-2
and because it required a supermajority it didn't pass, but there was
some conditions that I have here to read that the Planning Commission
made, and I have those conditions from the staff report for the item
when it came to you back in February and I'll read those.
First off, the applicant will make a $1,000 donation per dwelling
unit to the Collier County Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The credit
language against a future linkage or impact fee, or whatever you wish
Page 240
September 26, 2006
to call it, was not included in there, and I believe I heard Mr.
Y ovanovich say that they would be willing to include that; is that
correct? Okay.
Secondly, the PUD language that allows the applicant to obtain
access to the ASR wells provided within the PUD will be reviewed to
ensure fair distribution of reclaimed water.
Three, any wall constructed between the future elementary
school and the east side of the subject property will be paid for and
maintained by the developer.
Four, the front setback will be changed to 23 feet. And then
there's a little note here under the Planning Commission
recommendations that the developer would prefer to have the
flexibility of limiting the front setback to 23 feet only for the garage
and allow the remainder of the home to have a 20- foot front yard
setback. Staff could support this request even though it is contrary to
the Planning Commission recommendations. So there's an issue there
about the setback.
Five, language in the transportation section of the PUD document
regarding drainage from the future Veteran's Memorial Boulevard will
be revised to allow transportation to retain additional water on site if
necessary .
Six, the developer will provide a six-foot high wall atop a
two-and-a-half foot tall berm with a type B landscape buffer along the
western boundary of the subject property where development occurs.
Seven, the PUD will be reduced from a maximum of 67 units to a
maximum of 60 units.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think there was something written in
there that there was an eight-foot wall, not a six-foot wall.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: I had -- now, there's another note
here. The stipulation regarding the wall on the western side of the site
reflects a commitment made to neighbors by the developer during an
independent meeting. Although provision of the wall would exceed
Page 241
September 26, 2006
the LDC buffering requirements, staff feels that it is important to
adhere to commitments made regardless of where or when they are
made. All of the other stipulations have been incorporated into the
PUD document.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Didn't we also, when we were
working on the original proposal that got beat down 3-2, didn't we put
additional stipulations, this commission, over and above the Planning
Commission? I don't recall. That's what I need you for.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: If this does pass, I'd like to phase the
homes in because of the fact that we've got a serious issue on
Immokalee Road. So however this goes, I'd like to write in there that
we phase in 20 homes, and additional homes be built upon the
completion of the loop road.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: So they would have the right to
build 20, and then the other 40 upon completion of the loop road, is
that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's still my motion. I'd like to
call the petitioner up to ask him about phasing in and the practicality
of it. I wish to God I could recall the whole conversation from when
we dealt with this issue back, what was it, six months ago.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I have the minutes, if you'd like to see
them but--
,
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Regarding phasing, we understand a
phasing schedule when you have a project that's 200 units, 300 units,
but you're talking a 60-unit project. Phasing makes no sense to us.
And I understand Commissioner Halas's comment regarding the
need for the northbound loop for trips to get on Immokalee Road.
Keep in mind where this project is located. This project is located--
let me get the exact distance. This proj ect is located approximately
2.2 miles north of Immokalee Road.
So trips who are going to -- people who want to go north on 1-75,
Page 242
September 26, 2006
which, I guess, is what the northbound loop is going to do, travel a
mile -- 1.9 miles north to Bonita Beach Road, then .8 miles east to get
onto the interstate.
If they were to go south, they would have to go 2.2 miles south to
Immokalee Road, .8 miles to the east to Immokalee Road, and then
4.1 miles north to get to the same place they would have been if they
had gone north in the first place.
So I don't think anybody's going to make a 7.1 mile trip to get to
the interchange on Bonita Beach Road in lieu of going 2.7 miles by
going north in a direct route.
And that's the purpose of the northbound ramp. And the purpose
of that northbound ramp was to get trips off Immokalee Road that are
heading north. And we submit that we aren't going to have any trips
using Immokalee Road to get north that will be the purpose of that.
And that's why we don't think a phasing schedule's appropriate in the
first place for this project. The overall -- and this is all in your backup
information. I mean, we're talking about a, p.m. peak. P.m. peak
hour, 49 trips. And -- I'm sorry, a.m. peaks of 49 --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I won't back this if you don't put phasing
into this thing, I'm going to tell you right now.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I understand that, and I'm just -- I was
asked the question, would I agree to phasing, and I'm explaining why
we would not agree to phasing, because we don't think it's necessary
or appropriate, and that's -- and that's what I'm simply trying to do is
respond to Commissioner Coletta regarding the phasing. It's a small
project, minimal trips. We don't think there's a need for phasing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. So if we put -- if we do
-- if I did include phasing in my motion and if it did pass, it still has to
go to you for negotiations, and it doesn't mean that you're going -_
they're going to accept it, your client's going to accept it, which means
we're right back to where we started from.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Well, we certainly can't accept a phasing
Page 243
September 26, 2006
schedule where we only get 20 units until 2009.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, could you accept
something on the higher end of the scale?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: You know, I think if we had to accept
anything, we would be willing to hold back -- and we think no more
than 10 percent of our trips are going to go east anyway.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How about 15 percent?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Well, I think 10 -- you know, I was going
to come out, Commissioner, and say five and then hopefully get to 10,
but 10 percent would mean we're holding back 10 percent of our
project until that interchange. We would like to say until January 1,
2009 because, with all due respect, we were hopeful that you guys
were going to be building the loop when we -- when Target entered
into this deal in the first place. But we would -- 10 percent of the trips
I think we can give this; 10 percent of the units.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then I include 10 percent
phasing in my motion.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I haven't received a second
yet.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: What's -- County Attorney?
MR. PETTIT: The only thing I was going to try to inquire of Mr.
Y ovanovich, Mr. Chairman, is whether there would be a possibility of
holding back the project -- holding back the project in total until
January 1, 2009.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: That, I can assure you, would meet no
receptiveness. We are already losing 40,000 a month.
MR. PETTIT: It's my -- but it would be my understanding -- and
you probably know this better than me given the work you do -- that
when I say hold back, I'm wondering if we would hold back on pulling
building permits until that time.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: No. Mike, I understand what you're
Page 244
September 26, 2006
saying. We would hope that we would be able to start probably going
vertical in -- certainly within the year on the units, going vertical. I
mean, we're going to do our horizontal. We'll be in for a plat.
I don't know -- let's be honest with each other. The market's been
doing a pretty good job of a phasing schedule for all of us right now,
but we don't want an artificial phasing schedule, and we certainly can't
agree to holding off on building permits for another two -- two-plus
years. We certainly can hold -- agree to no COs on the last 10 percent
of the units.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's fine, and I got my
motion, but I don't even have a second at this point in time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second your motion for
discussion, excuse me.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yep, that's fine. And I was
going to second it anyways. The -- but I want to address
Commissioner Coyle on going back to the motion or the reason why
you voted no. It was, it didn't fit a valid public purpose.
And if that's why you're voting for it, I mean, I don't have a
problem with it. If it's said, I did not support it because it did not fit
our policy, 5.1 or 5.2 of the transportation element, I could understand
that because we're always told if you're going to deny a rezone, you've
got to base it upon the law. And the problem is, in our law, we don't
have, it doesn't fit a valid public purpose.
But I understand your concern about always constantly
approving these and having the development community have control.
Now, I think you have a thoughtful process that you had to get to
the goal where you want to get, and I think it's everybody else -- and
that is through the capital improvement plan where you said, let's pull
out the construction -- correct me if I am wrong -- within the
three-year.
Now, we can approve them all day long, and as long as we
always pull out the capital construction part of the three-year program,
Page 245
September 26, 2006
they can't build anyways; am I right?
And we need to have this conversation, Mr. Chairman.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I understand, that's right, you
do.
No, it's not entirely right. I mean, conceptually you're right, but
you have to remember that whatever we do with respect to that is
going to be short-term because DCA is going to block it, and we'll be
left then with nothing. We might get away with doing that for a year
at best. We might not even get away with doing it this time because
DCA clearly intends to remove the ability of local governments to
control the pace of development in the counties.
So they sat right across the table from all of us, Don Scott, others,
JeffKlatzkow, and said to us, if you want to control the development,
don't rezone the property. Very clearly. That was the message to us;
is that true, J efr?
MR. KLATZKOW: That's true, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So whatever we have
devised to try to cling to a concurrency management system is purely
short term. It's stopgap. They're going to slam the door on us as far as
they can in Tallahassee. And then where do we go?
We have got to establish our right to grant rezones on a schedule
that makes sense for our community. And I don't know how to do that
in any other way than to get a court order or the Court to make an
interpretation on these kinds of things.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so we can debate that until
hell freezes over, and we're probably never going to solve it until
somebody interprets the law and says, yes, you have the right to
determine the timing.
And I know I can't refuse a rezone forever, but I'd like to be able
to refuse some of them for a year or two to give us a chance to get
caught up.
Page 246
September 26, 2006
And basically that's -- that's where I am. If I had a permanent
solution otherwise, I wouldn't be here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if that's your goal and you
-- and I haven't -- we haven't heard anything negative about the A UIR
and capital improvement plan from Tallahassee yet, so -- but if you
are under the assumption it's just a short-term gap, we have to deal
with those on our daily lives, day-to-day. It doesn't work. We need a
shift. And that's the time to shift.
But here's where I'm coming from. To put the taxpayer at
jeopardy is not the way to do it. If we need to make Growth
Management Plan amendments to get where you want to go -- and I
think we all do -- that's fine, but if we're going to turn something
down, let's do it legally, okay? And to where we all feel comfortable
with.
But in the meantime, you know, whether we approve them or not,
if you don't schedule construction, you've accomplished your goal.
And by the way, if we feel like we want to put those projects in
sooner, we can, just like you stated. And guess what? We have the
ability for the developer to pay 50 percent up front at that time to pay
for the capital -- for that capital improvement instead of the taxpayer.
And I know that's where you want to go. You don't want to have the
taxpayer pay on the backs for the improvement of future growth. So
let's get there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's get there how you want to,
but let's -- let's not test the taxpayers' wallet. That's all. That's where
I'm coming from.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I think that's our only
disagreement here. You see, I don't believe there's a risk here at all. I
believe that the law does grant broad latitude to the Board of County
Commissioners on zoning issues.
And right now, as a result of our action today, we are now doing
Page 247
September 26, 2006
what the developer wants us to do rather than vice versa. They're sort
of dictating the terms now to us. And that's -- that's not really the way
this process should work.
And whenever -- whenever we get afraid that someone might win
a court case and we don't stand up for the principle that we believe in
-- and I believe in it -- then I think -- I think we really put the taxpayer
at risk because then some bad things happen as a result of that.
But it's hard to rationalize continuing to build up this vast pot of
rezones at a time when we are struggling just to deal with what we've
got right now. And once you rezone for somebody, it gets flipped, the
new developer, new owner, is going to want to proceed, they're going
to want to maximize density, it has inflated the cost. It's also created
additional density problems. It puts us into an entirely different ball
game. So -- well --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If you could demonstrate on
these rezones that it doesn't fit policy 5.1 or 5.2, I'll support it. But to
say it doesn't fit a valid public purpose, that I know that's not in our
growth management plan, it scares me, all right?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Well, here's the situation,
and I know why it's confusing with this particular one because it's a
small one, and it's really, really hard for me to deal with this one
because it's not a developer with deep pockets, okay. I don't want to
punish people in this process.
But there's a very important principle. And once you have this
huge bunch of rezoned properties, we don't really know what their
schedule is for beginning construction. There's no limit on them. You
could go to one extreme, they could all come in next month. We
know that won't happen, but that's an extreme.
So if you get everybody coming in next month or even six
months or even next year, then we're going to be faced with an
infrastructure problem we can't ever catch up with.
So all I'm looking for is some breathing room so that we can
Page 248
September 26, 2006
catch up, and then we can start doing these things right. But you're
telling me that I cannot -- I don't have the right to disapprove a rezone
based upon those considerations, and I also don't have the right to
disapprove it on the basis of concurrency considerations because the
last argument you made was that, you know, you can't do that at
rezones and we're not going to agree to hold up rezones to meet a
concurrency problem. You do that later on.
So you remove all those opportunities to influence the process,
and we don't have much left and then --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Commissioner, I did not
say that. What I -- policy 5.1 and 5.2 deals with our transportation and
transportation concurrency. So if it doesn't fit that, I'll support you on
it. But that isn't -- that isn't what was stated. It was stated that it
doesn't fit a valid public purpose.
And you work so very hard to have a transportation concurrency
system to get it implemented. Now you don't trust it. And you know,
we want to get -- we want to get at the same place. You and I and all
of us want to get at the same place. How do we get there legally,
defensibly?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I think we can't -- we have
gotten there, but I do trust the concurrency system. What I don't trust
is the state government pulling the rug out from under us. That's what
I don't trust. I trust our concurrency system.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And if we could use our
concurrency system, I'd be a lot happier about it, but I don't think
we're going to be permitted to do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And we're back to the
proportionate fair share and all that stuff.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're getting into trouble here
if this goes into a lawsuit. I would stop that kind of discussion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
Page 249
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Boy, I agree with everything
you all have said as far as we should never feel bound to approve any
rezone, especially when we know that it's not good for the roadway
right there. I mean, we just did three of them recently. Like, for
instance, we just approved that one over on Estey and Airport where
the transportation department told us that the people cannot even
move out of there to go to work in the morning because it's already a
failed road and it's not going to be fixed, and we approved it.
And we did the same thing with 400 units right there by the
hospital on already an overly congested road, 951, and we approved it,
not that we wanted to do it. We all felt -- I think -- I'll speak for
myself. I felt guilty because I felt pushed in a corner because it
contained affordable housing and yet, as we've said repeatedly, we
should never approve a rezone on a failed road or a congested road.
And the reason I voted for this one initially, even though I was
firmly implanted in not approving any rezone on an overimpacted
road was because it was 60 units and the road outside of it was a B,
and that was why I approved it.
So Commissioner Coyle, I've been -- I've been with you solidly
on that other than this one vote. And I just wanted to state that we
should always be concerned with the rezones and we should always
make sure that we protect roads. Right now we're planning for the
future, and if we don't do it right, nobody's going to be able to move
on these roadways. So I totally agree. I just didn't think 60 units
would make a difference, really.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's the problem, we end up with de
minimis traffic. It ends up building all the time on us and -- yeah, so.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But then how would we ever --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Why don't -- you know,
we've had this discussion. I think it's been beneficial, but we need to
get this to a conclusion. Why doesn't somebody make a motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There is a motion.
Page 250
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There is? What is it?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And a second.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Can somebody clarify what the motion
is?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Marjorie, would you read back
the conditions that was in that particular motion?
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: Well, what I was--
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, no. We--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's a motion --
MS. STUDENT -STIRLING: I was going to offer a clarification.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There's a motion to provide
guidance to the staff to proceed with a settlement discussion with the
plaintiff, end of story, and you've given a whole bunch of parameters,
okay?
MR. PETTIT: It is, in fact, to make a written settlement offer.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The parameters that are there
were necessary to have because I wouldn't want them to make a
settlement for any less.
MS. STUDENT-STIRLING: What I wanted to give you was the
conditions from the minutes of February 14th when you had the
rezone before you so you would know what they were.
And it was up to 1.2 acres for the ASR well; 23-foot setback for
the garages; accept drainage for Veterans Memorial Boulevard for the
three lanes adjacent to the project; there would be an eight-foot wall
with type B buffer along the westerly boundary of the property;
reduction of 67 units to 60; and then what was in the Planning
Commission recommendation about the wall for the elementary
school. And that -- those were the conditions for approval -- the
motion for approval of that rezone back in February, so I wanted to
put them on record.
Page 251
September 26, 2006
MR. PETTIT: And in addition, the $1,000 credit toward any
linkage fee and in addition, at this point as I understand it, it would
include a holding back on CO for 10 percent of the units --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
MR. PETTIT: -- until the loop road's completed.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Just 10 percent?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Ten percent.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's six units.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's only what, 56 to begin
with.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Remember who's in the driver's
seat now, right? It's not us. It's not us.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm not in favor of 10 percent. It's got to
be greater than that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, they've got three votes.
Doesn't make much difference yet.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, we haven't taken the vote
yet.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And who made the second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I did.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. We have a motion on the floor.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coletta and a second by Commissioner Fiala.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 252
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now, if I understand correctly,
you will come back for a final decision?
MR. PETTIT: No. That is a direction for us to send a written
settlement offer. If they accept those terms, we'll come back with a
settlement document to be signed by the chairman as long as those
other terms don't deviate.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If they flinch, my vote changes.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just want to make an observation.
A rezone requires four votes. We just experienced a procedure where
you can bypass the four votes and get it done with three. Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Did you want elaboration on
that? I can give it to you. The reason --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't want one.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The reason it was done was very
simple. A lawsuit that was over us that I feel, in my heart, that we
would lose, based upon what I know.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you're a lawyer, right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm not a lawyer, but I do know
what I seen. And if I'm called to testify, being that I was -- that I am
the kind of person I am, with the Scout background, it would be
exactly the way I seen it that I'd testify. We made the right decision.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: When it comes back to me, I'm going to
tell you right now it's going to -- we're going to have to address the
phasing of the --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It doesn't. No, you can't, Frank,
because they've got three votes. They have bypassed the four vote
requirement for a rezone, okay?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Majority rules.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Majority rules. So you -- neither
Page 253
September 26, 2006
you nor I can stop this. They can do anything they want to do.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That's great. I love the way that -- so
we'll go through this all the time as far as if we don't do something
right --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, guys. Come on, let's quit the
sarcasm.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is non-productive.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Then I think that we're going to run into
a problem like this all the time.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is propaganda.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, it's not. It's -- I think we're
circumventing the real issues here.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Well somebody going
south to get on a congested road to go north on 1-75 is a bunch of
hooey, okay? I don't see how you can justify that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I justified it and I said -- because of the
fact that Bonita Beach Road already is failing, and that's in Lee
County.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's six lane.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No, it's failing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's six lane to 1-75. You
know, I travel it.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good, glad you do. Okay.
Item #12B
DISCUSSION CONCERNING MOST RECENT
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED FROM SOUTH FLORIDA
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT IN REGARD TO JOINT
MEETING WITH THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS _
MOTION FOR A MEETING JANUARY 10TH OR 11TH, 2007
PENDING BOARD ROOM AVAILABILITY AND IF SFWMD
Page 254
September 26,2006
CANCELS; MOTION TO SEEK LITIGATION - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next item is 12B. It's a
discussion concerning most recent correspondence received from the
South Florida Water Management District in regard to a joint meeting
with the Board of County Commissioners.
MR. PETTIT: Commissioners, what -- I've simply brought this
forward. This is a letter we received in response to your direction to
provide a letter requesting dates when the boards would meet to
attempt to mediate a resolution to a dispute between the South Florida
Water Management District and the county over the agreement related
to the Southern Golden Gate Estates roads and the providing by the
district of 640 acres more or less for recreation, including A TV use.
As you know, what they are telling us is that their whole board
will be in Collier County on, I believe, the 10th of January and again
on the 11 th, and they would be available to meet then.
Now, what I will also tell you is that we had an opportunity to
meet; Mr. Ochs, Mr. Weigel, Mr. Mudd, and I met with Tom Olliff,
and Ms. Carlson, who's one of the board members of the South Florida
Water Management District, and several other staff members, and we
were given, once again, oral commitments -- two things. One is that
they were going to look hard at the Lake Trafford property and work
with us to explain how that property could be made suitable and what
amenities they might be willing to provide and pay for.
And in the interim, they have offered to look hard for an
alternative site until that property can be remediated from any -- the
construction activity there is completed, the property could be
remediated and prepared for an R V park.
That meeting was -- I don't have the date off the top of my head.
It runs in my mind it was a couple weeks ago. I have not heard from
any of those folks. And according to Mr. Ochs, he has not either. So I
don't know whether anybody else has any information at this point.
Page 255
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think the meeting was scheduled for the
19th.
MR. PETTIT: The original-- the original meeting between the
boards was on the 19th, and that was cancelled and -- in light of those
discussions and in light of this response that we received where their
board would offer to be available now. So, I mean, our office is
prepared to take any direction you wish us to give today.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, let me make sure you're perfectly
clear on this. The 19th of September was not going to be made by the
South Florida Water Management District. There was nothing in the
discussion that Mr. Pettit, myself, Mr. Ochs, had with the South
Florida Water Management District, their one commissioner, Clarence
Tears, Tom Olliff -- and I believe even John Dunnuck was there -- that
influenced that date.
They just weren't going to make that day and it was coming to
you as far as, we can't be there. So they were trying to figure out a day
where they could have a joint meeting with their commission and this
board. And the only thing we could get out of them and -- during that
meeting was, they'd be in town on the 10th of January.
Then they basically started talking about ways to settle this
particular case. And I basically told them, I said, the expectation
when this settlement agreement for the roads was contemplated
several years ago was, you know, you had Bad Luck Prairie out there.
I think that's what they call it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: Bad Luck Prairie out there. And I believe in
people's mind's eye, they believed that 640 acres of that Bad Luck
Prairie someplace was going to be fenced off and people would
continue to be able to do what they were doing on that particular
property.
And I said, that wasn't done explicitly, but I believe that was the
expectation at the time. And what we have right now is, we don't have
Page 256
September 26, 2006
the land, it didn't come to us on 1 October as it should have, in 2005,
and right now this board is sitting there with nothing, okay? And you
have a contract that you were supposed to at least execute.
And I said, that's something that they need to have. What are we
going to do for the citizens of Collier County so that they can use their
A TV s in between the time that this property, okay, that they're using
right now as a spoil site, is remediated and is good enough to use as an
A TV park -- let's say that that's the alternative -- what are they going
to do in between for the A TV users?
And that -- and that is a big issue that they're trying to solve.
And I said, hey, you need to talk about some things. I mean, it was
supposed to be fee simple. When are they going to get fee simple to
that particular property? Who's going to pay for the remediation?
Who's going to build the park? Are you going to pay for the park? I
put that on the table.
Oh, by the way, in the discussions for the roads, the South
Florida Water Management District said that they were taking them
over for the county, this board talked about freshwater consumptive
use permitting, and would they get any freshwater out of that
particular project. And at that time, their representative, Pam
Mac'Kai, said that wasn't on the table. Well, guess what--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Can we get to the date we're going
to be meeting? Can we just come up with a date without getting a
history lesson?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. But Ijust want to make sure, based on
Michael's -- on Michael's statement that they weren't coming on the
19th and --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, when are they coming?
MR. MUDD: The 10th of January.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The 10th of January. They don't know.
MR. PETTIT: They are available either on January 10th or
January 11 th as a board. I mean, their entire board will be here and
Page 257
September 26, 2006
can meet with you as an entire board on one of those two days.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're required in order -- before
we could ever bring a lawsuit against them, to meet as part of the
state's laws for mediation?
MR. PETTIT: That is my understanding.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So I mean, they've kind of got
us over the barrel. They can drag this out for how long before they
run out of time? When is it from the time we served notice on them
that they have to -- have to meet with us?
MR. PETTIT: Well, the -- if I recollect the statute, there's no __
there is no express time for that joint meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm getting madder by the
minute.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I can go on forever and ever.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let's meet January the 10th
and 11 th, okay? That's the date they've given us. You don't have an
alternative date, then let's meet January 10th or 11 tho What's wrong
with that?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Give direction to--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll tell you what's wrong with it,
that we lose that many more months before we get to a point that we
even start discussions. They're going to drag this thing out till the end
of the world.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, we've got the option to start a
lawsuit.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, we don't. You can't do it
until after you have this meeting.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: See, they've got you in the
shorthairs. They could cancel the meeting, then move it up again.
They've done that before, too.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: January 10th or II? Is that okay
Page 258
September 26, 2006
with you?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's make it both days.
MS. FILSON: That's a Wednesday and a Thursday.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Make a motion.
MR. PETTIT: That's the day after a board meeting. Starting--
the 9th is a board meeting.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: This board meeting.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Good.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: There won't be one brain between
us by that time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That'd be more than we've got
right now.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Do we have a motion by __
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll make the motion.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. I'll second it.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And the motion is that we're going to
have the meeting on January 10th?
MR. PETTIT: Tenth.
MS. FILSON: Or the 11 th, and I'll have to check to see if the
chambers is available and check everyone's calendars.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: And I'll work with Mike to do that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. And a motion's on the floor by
Commissioner Coletta and a second by Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, if the district cancels this
meeting, we've got to get the governor involved in this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I mean, it's __
Page 259
September 26, 2006
MR. PETTIT: I don't want to get out in front of our litigation
counsel, but I feel if we write back and say, this is the meeting and
they cancel it, I'd go to court.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Go to court?
MR. PETTIT: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: I mean, there comes a point where we can't __ I
mean, I don't think you as a board, I can tell, do not want to continue
to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We don't want to continue this thing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Good. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, 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.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries.
Item #14B
BA YSHORE GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FY 2006 PERFORMANCE
APPRAISAL REVIEW FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DAVID
JACKSON; DETERMINE THE FY 2006 MERIT PAY A WARD
FOR LUMP SUM PAYMENT FROM THE FY 07 BUDGET AND
Page 260
September 26, 2006
AUTHORIZE THE FY 2007 COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT
BEGINNING THE FIRST PAY PERIOD IN FY07; AWARD $S,SOO
BONUS + 4.7% COLA - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 14B,
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency
FY -2006 annual performance appraisal review for the executive
director to determine the FY-2006 merit pay award for lump sum
payment for the FY -'07 budget and authorize the FY -2007 cost of
living adjustment beginning the first pay period FY - '07.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Are we meeting as a CRA or as a
commission?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Give us direction there.
MR. MUDD: Well, I'm trying to figure out--
David, are you here? David, how do they sign your contract?
Did they sign it as the CRA board or did they sign it as the Board of
County Commissioners?
MR. JACKSON: CRA.
MR. MUDD: So you're acting -- CRA.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The Board of County
Commissioners is now in recess, and we're turning this over to
Commissioner Fiala --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: As chairman of the CRA.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: -- CRA chairman.
Item #14C
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, thank you. And we have before us
a -- the executive director's annual performance appraisal and
recommendation for merit pay . We already have authorization for
COLA. That just comes naturally, right?
Page 261
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Really? On top of this?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yep.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wow.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I make a suggestion?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Please do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, seriously. You know,
everything should be on even footing. They do not go through a
detailed rating -- neither the CRA or the Airport Authority -_ that
follows the same procedures we do so we could come up with a
percentage of acceptance by the board members, some sort of grading.
Lacking that, in fairness to the county manager, the county
attorney, and to our own executive manager, I suggest we allow for 80
percent of the total, which would be -- get my glasses on again.
Eleven thousand dollars would be 8,800.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: As a bonus. Do I __
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I make that as a motion because
I don't know how else to be able to make judgment calls on something
like this other than bring some fairness across the board.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I hear a second to that motion?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor and a
second to give the executive director for the CRA advisory board his 4
percent -- 4.7 percent COLA and his merit pay at 80 percent, which is
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Eight thousand, eight hundred.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- $8,800. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Discussion?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that COLA, 4.7; is that
correct?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Four point seven plus __
Page 262
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Eight.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- 8 percent?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yep, eight.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So 12.7. Okay.
MR. MUDD: No, sir. I don't believe that's what the board __
what you are voting on. Maybe I'm wrong. I think you are voting on
a one-time bonus of 80 percent of the maximum amount that he could
receive, which turned out to be $8,800 __
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. MUDD: -- and that would be -- and that would be a bonus.
That would not be included in his pay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What about __
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This is percentage.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's 80 percent of __
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Or 8 percent, whichever you want __
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Ten percent was the full
amount. I'm grading it to the same level as the county manager and
the --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So like Commissioner Henning
said, it's an 8 percent bonus -- or 8 percent on top of 4.7 percent?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, everybody gets the COLA.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: One's a lump sum and the other
one is an increase in salary. There's a 4.7 percent increase in salary,
and then a lump sum payment of 80 percent of the total amount, okay,
or $8,000.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Does everybody understand that one?
Okay, fine. I see that their board had recommended 100 percent,
or 10 percent, whichever you want to use, and this is our
recommendation.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Page 263
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That's a 4-1. Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to 14C, which is a
recommendation to approve aID percent __
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The Board of County Commissioners is
now back in session.
MR. PETTIT: You would want to -- yeah. You'd want to
adjourn the CRA -- or adjourn the CRA and go back into session as
the BCC.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll adjourn the CRA and turn it back to
our chairman to go back into the BCC board.
******
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. The Board of County
Commissioners is now back in session.
Item #14C
AWARD A 10% ($9,299.05) MERIT INCREASE AND A $5,000.00
BONUS TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY, THERESA M. COOK;
AWARD $5.000 BONUS + 8% ($7440) MERIT PAY - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: This is 14C. It's a recommendation to approve a
10 percent, $9,299.05 merit increase effective the first pay period of
FY-'07 and a $5,000 bonus effective in FY-'06 to the executive
director of the Collier County Airport Authority, Theresa M. Cook,
and associated budget amendments.
Page 264
September 26, 2006
MR. SCHMIDT: Good evening. Gene Schmidt, for the record.
I recall standing here a couple of times before when I was the
executive director, and now I'm here representing the new -- the
executive director, Theresa Cook.
I'd like to describe some of the progress that she's made since she
took over in December of 2004, when I retired back to the board.
She has acquired a -- five federal grants this past year, totaling
over $2 million. She's received an Army Corps permit for the
Immokalee Airport development, and we now have three respondents
to our RFP at Immokalee totaling four buildings and two
developments, and 300,000 square feet of building facility space.
And I would encourage you to approve this as recommended by
our board.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, and it isn't mentioned in here,
but she would also get CO LA, right?
MR. MUDD: It's not in her contract, ma'am, best I can tell.
Theresa, you can tell me if I'm wrong.
MS. COOK: You're correct.
MR. MUDD: Okay. So she does not have a COLA clause in her
contract.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh. Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: So it's 10 percent merit raise.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There's two different raises
they're calling for here, I believe, aren't they? A $5,000 bonus, then a
10 percent raise?
MR. MUDD: No.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Recommended $5,000 bonus for FY-'06.
MR. MUDD: And, Theresa, I can't tell if the 10 percent of merit
increase, is that a one-time bonus, or is that in your pay?
MS. COOK: Ten percent would be in the pay.
MR. MUDD: In the pay.
Page 265
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, help me with this. The
total amount is 10 percent or it's 10 percent plus 5,000?
MR. SCHMIDT: Ten percent plus 5,000.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's a $14,300 increase.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, the bonus wouldn't be added
to her salary though, right?
MR. SCHMIDT: That's right.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: May I make a suggestion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sure. I'm not the chairman.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I know. I'm looking at him.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I'm sorry. I'm just sitting here figuring
out some figures. I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What -- a suggestion. I think
they've got very good reason to offer the $5,000 bonus. I'm not going
to argue with that. She's come across exceptionally well; however,
with the 10 percent increase, once again, that's the maximum the
county allows, and I'd like to see them come up with a scoring system
very close to what the -- we do for the county manager, the county
attorney, and our executive director, that we can get a real feel across
the board next year for the grading of all different aspects of the work
there.
At this time I would recommend SO percent of that, 9,300, just to
round it off, which would be $7,440, plus the 5,000. That would be
my motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But she doesn't get COLA.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, she doesn't, but she's got a
$5,000 bonus.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I just want to point out the
-- that's a gift that keeps on giving. The merit pay that we give the
county manager is a one-time thing. So the SO percent, approximately
Page 266
September 26, 2006
7,000?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Seven thousand four hundred
and forty.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It adds on to her salary. You
understand that?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but doesn't she have to reach
a certain level before it must become a lump sum? No, not in her
case?
MR. MUDD: She's a contract employee with the Board of
County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, I see. I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What -- she's a director, right?
MR. MUDD: No. She's a contract employee that has a separate
contract with the Board of County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: All right. Mr. Smith (sic),
please help me.
MR. SCHMIDT: Her title is executive director.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Director, okay.
MR. SCHMIDT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So does her salary compare to
directors of the county, or does it exceed?
MR. SCHMIDT: I can't answer that. Jim could.
MR. MUDD: In some cases it's above, in some cases it's below.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The salary?
MR. MUDD: Depending on the rank. I mean, I have directors
that are paid more than other directors in a particular issue. But she's
-- she's comparatively ranked with the other directors that I have.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: The other directors --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Presently?
MR. MUDD: Presently.
MR. SCHMIDT: We felt that the results that she was achieving
within a relatively short period of time, was certainly -- she was
Page 267
September 26, 2006
deserving of what we're recommending here. And we feel very
strongly, and I certainly do, that this is the proper way for her to be --
to be -- for this problem to be approached, or not a problem, but this
procedure to be approached.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Schmidt, would you be
open to looking at possibly even changing the contract to kind of
simulate what we do in the county as far as merit and bonuses and
increased salary?
MR. SCHMIDT: I'd certainly be willing to consider it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You think the board might be
open to that?
MR. SCHMIDT: I can't speak for the board, but personally I
would be -- certainly take a look at it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And, you know, I agree with the
board. Theresa's done a fine job, but we as the Board of
Commissioners have to take a look at the effects on the other
employees.
MR. SCHMIDT: Right, I understand that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So if you would do that, I could
probably -- I could support the motion.
MR. SCHMIDT: I'd be happy to do that for you. I'd be happy to
study it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What do we do with this pay
increase then?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: There's a motion on the floor.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Do you want me to repeat it?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Please do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. The motion is--
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Seventy-four forty, if I remember
correctly.
Page 268
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, it's for the 5,000,
recognizing the $5,000 bonus in its entirety and recognizing SO
percent of the recommended $9,300 for 7,440.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And the total would be 12,440?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, if you want to combine
those numbers.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: And I believe you made the motion and
Commissioner Fiala seconded it. Okay.
Further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hearing none, 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?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Motion carries. Thank you.
MR. SCHMIDT: Thank you.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to staff and
commissioner general correspondence.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Would you start off, County Manager?
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, I'd like to thank the Board of
County Commissioners today on my annual evaluation. I didn't get a
Page 269
September 26, 2006
chance to do that because we were trying to move the agenda along,
and I didn't want the day to go by that I didn't show the appreciation.
I believe that evaluation not only showed what the manager does,
but it also shows what the staff does too, and it also shows the
direction that you give. And I believe it was a very successful year,
and I thank you for that.
I believe the conversation with Mr. Schmitt --
And you're going to talk about that, ma'am, when you get to your
communications. That's all I have, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. County Attorney?
MR. PETTIT: Yes, Mr. Chairman, two things. One is, on the--
just to give you an update on Mr. Weigel. He is -- his surgery went
well. He is at home recuperating. He's available by telephone, and
I'm sure he listened to this entire meeting, knowing him. So he
probably knows all the mistakes I made and everything that everybody
said. So -- but I just wanted to let you know because several of you
have asked.
And the second thing, I will prepare a very short resolution
memorializing your vote on the A TV issue. I think we probably want
to have a resolution so that it shows that we opted out of the
legislation, and it simply will have maybe one or two whereas clauses
for the chairman's signature, if that's okay with the majority of the
board.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Start off with Commissioner
Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'm kind of waiting to see
what Commissioner Fiala has to say because I think it's the same topic
I want to clarify, what Commissioner Coyle's motion was. So it might
be a moot point for me to even bring it up at this time.
Page 270
September 26, 2006
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, then ifit isn't, then you can go
back to him.
Well, the first thing I was going to do was ask how David is
doing, so you've answered that for me. Thank you very much.
The second thing is, earlier I brought up Joe Schmitt and the
request that he had for employees and for funding -- the hiring of the
employees, and I'm afraid I was -- I was under a misconception. I
thought these were 14 more employees from the time that we
approved them before, and, indeed, they're one and the same, and I
was not aware of that.
And I didn't learn that until I talked with Joe. And he said, no.
He said, those are the ones you employed -- or you approved before.
This was the funding mechanism to get them hired. And I was
wondering if we could discuss that a little bit. I would -- I would
really like to talk about that.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We said that we would approve
those people for hiring, but at least Commissioner Henning and I said,
we're not going to approve any money for that until you come up with
an organizational solution that makes the organization more efficient,
and that's where it was left. And the county manager was charged
with giving us an organizational solution.
We got a budget amendment -- or we got money in the budget for
hiring the people first. That's backwards. If you're going to make
organizational realignments, why don't you do those first and then
decide what people you need to hire and where you're going to put
them, rather than trying to do it in the reverse manner?
So, you know, we've talked about the complexities of this
particular department. Beach renourishment, turtle monitoring, you've
got environmental services, plan reviews, building inspections. You
can just go on and -- affordable housing. What's affordable housing
Page 271
September 26, 2006
doing there?
You know, I'll tell you the honest truth. Not on my best day
managing a large corporation could I handle something that complex.
It is unfair, in my opinion, to ask one person to have to deal with that
range of activities.
And we've been talking about that for three years or more. And,
you know, we're not making any progress getting it resolved. And if
we don't insist that it get resolved, then we're not going to have a
resolution. We're going to have -- we'll add 20 more people next year
and 20 more people the year after that. So that's what this is all about.
It is do the -- lay the foundation. Determine what the organization
should look like, and then come to us with positions you need to staff
it, and that's where I am. When I see an organization that is structured
to achieve maximum efficiency, that's where I want to start allocating
money to hire some people, and that's why I am where I am.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I just want to say that I think that one of
the people -- or one of the positions that he wanted to fill was an
assistant deputy to help him in regards to moving along some of the
projects that he's been criticized for, and I believe that he needs
additional help in regards to environmental issues.
And I think that's one of the big hold-ups as far as the
development community. And I believe that's what we have to look
at, is making sure that we address those issues so that the product that
comes in his front door gets analyzed and gets taken care of in an
expedient manner and then is put out to the development community.
And so I felt that when I looked at what is -- what his needs were
-- we've heard a lot of problems, that it's time-consuming, that the time
that the product goes in the front door, by the time that it goes out the
back door, that there's too many days involved, and felt that we really
needed to address some of those issues, and hopefully we can help
him and his staff in regards to this.
And I think that reorganization is one thing, but I think in the
Page 272
September 26, 2006
interim period here, he's got the money, the funding, and I believe that
we need to see if we can assist him.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I don't -- I think it's
improper for us to take any action today. We took action at a budget
meeting. If somebody wants to bring it back, I'm all in support of
hearing it. And, in fact, the reason I was delaying it, one of those
positions I want to bring back, but I think it's my obligation to put it
on the agenda.
But, you know, I also want historical information on the
employment within that department over the last six years --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think it's --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- because it just grows.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: You know -- and Commissioner
Coyle is absolutely right, is, sometimes reorganization takes care of
those issues. And, you know, growing government is not something
that we want to do, and obviously we had enough money to payoff a
debt for the community development building. So, yeah, we've got
plenty of money. But, you know, the right thing to do is to give that
back if you can't justify holding it. It's not justified to hire more
employees. I can't support that. That's what that money's there for.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think it's good to have this kind of
dialogue. I think we can get everything out in the open and find out
what's really happening, and I really appreciate your input in this.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. I'll be honest
with you, when I looked at the budget, I thought something was
around the corner, that it was just a matter of a day or two and we
were going to get back the final report and Joe would be able to tap
into that money that -- his user fees that are paid at his department to
be able to supply a service. The service can't be supplied if there isn't
Page 273
September 26, 2006
the people and the personnel in place to be able to do it.
I never realized that it was going to be so top heavy that it was
going to cause everything to fall on the back burner.
This commission's been extremely supportive in the past of
supplying people for the community development department. We
know that they're user fees. We know that the work has to get done.
We put on extra inspectors when we had to right now, then there's
been times when we couldn't fill positions.
But we do know that there's a shortage of manpower. I don't
know if you've taken the tour through that building, but I have, and
I've seen how they really stretch it to try to make everything work.
How the work just piles up to the point where people get frustrated.
You know, they're looking at the clock waiting for five o'clock to roll
around. The workload is tremendous.
Will the workload drop off soon? Possibly will. But meanwhile,
we recognized there was a need. N ow we're finding a reason not to
fulfill that need. Yeah, true, reorganization's got to take place, but I
think we need to get that -- the personnel in there to make it work.
And I'm not too sure where we go from this. We bring it back.
Wait till the next meeting. We have another two weeks to go and then
be another -- well, I'll tell you what. And I know he's going to hate
this, but if we ever want to get to where we really are on this -- Mr.
Schmitt, would you mind coming up front, please?
The severity of this situation might be escaping some of us.
Where are we, where we going? And, how do we get out of this?
MR. SCHMITT: And I have to ask what you mean by situation?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The situation of your manpower
situation, trying to meet the needs that you contracted to do with the
public by taking their money in the first place to be able to provide
services in a meaningful manner with a staff that's adequate.
MR. SCHMITT: Could I -- let me offer just an alternative, since
you brought it up for discussion.
Page 274
September 26, 2006
Monday we have a workshop. Why don't I include in part of my
read-ahead for that a description of the positions that were asked for
during -- when we did the budget hearing, and then we came back.
And, of course, the budget hearings laid the framework.
We did approve two and a half personnel in the budget under
fund 111. The others were out of fund 113 and 131, which are
building and land review fees.
Probably rather than debate it, why don't I just present a rundown
of what those positions were intended to do? And I think that way
you'll all have the same information, rather than me get up here and
give a long explanation.
And Monday is the permitting workshop. I think members of the
industry will probably express their, I don't know, support or
whatever, but I think that way you at least have the information of
what the positions are. And this does not in any way derail any
initiative from what Commissioner Coyle says, and to look at the
organization and do what needs to be done, assess that organization,
define if it needs -- what needs to be changed, and is it cost effective
and cost efficient.
So I think that's something that certainly needs to be done. I
think that may take a little more time, but it's something that needs to
be done. But I will include a description of these 10 positions, what
they were meant to be for, and, frankly, they're exactly what
Commissioner Halas referred to, are positions that are needed to
provide the services that are expected when people come to that
organization. And I think that will be a -- given the hour and given
the time, at least I'll give you that description. Is that -- would that
work?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good for me.
MR. SCHMITT: Would that work?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's fine by me.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Yes.
Page 275
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're still missing the point. If
you have an organization that isn't designed in the most efficient
manner, adding people to it is not going to buy you anything. It's
going to spend money, but it's not going to buy you anything.
The first thing to do is to take a look at the organization and see
what should be in that organization so that you can focus on the really
important tasks. If you look at the work flow management analysis
that has been performed internally, you'll find people who are
spending -- whose 18 to 23 percent of their time is non-productive
time. Why is that? They're loafing on the job? No. It's just that the
complexities of doing this thing don't let them focus on getting done
what we expect them to do.
And the longer we avoid that, the worse it's going to get and the
further away we're going to be from getting a solution.
Now, I have absolutely no problem whatsoever authorizing
additional positions and money. But I'll tell you the honest truth. I
can't make heads or tails out of the data that is produced. Can anyone
of you tell me how the permits this year, permit applications this year
compare with the permit applications that were submitted last year?
No, you can't? You don't have the slightest idea whether those
permits are for a shed in the back of the house, renovation of a garage,
putting on a roof or building or 10,000-square-foot house. You don't
have that historical comparison. You've got gross numbers in most
cases.
There has been a change in reporting which makes it even more
difficult to do year-to-year comparisons. There are -- there's data
reported that simply doesn't make sense. It doesn't -- it doesn't tally
out.
So what I'm suggesting to you is, just to get a report on what the
volume of permits is, is not going to give you the whole story . You
Page 276
September 26, 2006
have to dig deeper than that.
And so that's what I'm concerned about. I see there is a
tremendous amount of resistance to requiring anybody to do anything
about it, so I'm going to quit talking about it and I'm going to go home.
So you guys do whatever you want to do.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: You can't go home until we get this
resolved.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, yes I can.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Hang in there.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, yes I can.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Cheryl, don't let him out the door.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So I am finished with this
discussion. I have gone over it and over it and over it and over it. If it
is more important for you to spend money and hire some more people
to throw at this problem, then, by all means, do it. Don't take up any
more of my evening. You can do that without me, okay?
CHAIRMAN HALAS: I think that we also have a lot of
positions that are open and have been open, and I think this is some of
the areas of concern that we're trying to fill.
MR. SCHMITT: Can I correct the record on that? There are 31
vacancies. I have 300 FTE right now. There's 31 vacancies. Fourteen
of those 31 are open positions. Ten of those 14 were the 10 that were
listed, we were advertising pending approval of the Board of County
Commissioners. So just to correct the record on that.
MR. MUDD: So you have four vacancies?
MR. SCHMITT: Four vacancies. The other vacancies all have
personnel designated to fill them.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Wait a minute. I've got a few
things to say I want you to hear.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll stay for your things.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Well, I agree with most
Page 277
September 26, 2006
everything that's been said. I don't think we can settle anything
tonight. It certainly has to be brought back, and possibly not only at
that workshop but then at a commission meeting.
Secondly, I agree with Commissioner Coyle with -- regarding a
reorganization plan, and I think there must be a drop-dead date. I
mean, we can't just keep saying we need to plan ahead.
We have people on staff and volunteers. Jim Van -- what is his
name? Jim VanFleet or something from productivity. I guess he was
specialist at this, and Kim Grant, whom we hired, to do the same
thing. They should be -- they should -- you know, maybe Mr.
VanFleet would -- would donate his time to helping us, but it
definitely should be done, and we ought to have a date like the first of
January that this is completed and we have a reorg. plan.
I've heard before that they combined two departments into one. I
think environment and code or something used to be different
departments. I can't remember, you know. But they said that they had
combined these two. Well, maybe we need to get them parted again,
you know, so it functions better.
I don't know how the industry itself who donates the money, or
through fees -- they don't really donate it, they pay through fees. I
don't know how they feel. I'd like to get what their -- what their
concerns are, if they feel they want to spend this money. I think that
we should take that into consideration as well.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Very well put.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, just like one of your
employees said, I'm going to take the gloves off. And let me just say,
last year -- was it 18 inspectors that we approved last year, additional
inspectors?
MR. SCHMITT: No, not all inspectors, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
Page 278
September 26, 2006
MR. SCHMITT: I'd have to go back and look. It wasn't all --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But the majority of them were
inspectors.
MR. SCHMITT: The -- you approved, in June, a 12 employee
addition, in this past June.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
MR. SCHMITT: Seven of those were for the additional
inspector staff.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But last year we approved more
inspectors, but just -- my point is, right after that is, a policy was set to
limit the amount of inspections. So we threw bodies at the problem
only to have less results, okay? And I think that's where
Commissioner Coyle's coming from.
I don't know if anybody sees the same thing that I do. But, guys,
growth is slowing down. Traviso Bay is not coming forward, and I'm
sure we're going to see some --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sabal Bay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sabal Bay?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, the other know VK (sic).
They got a CDD.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Sabal Bay's not coming
forward.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So with all that said and the
concern from some of your colleagues that there needs to be some
reorganization, do you really want to address this again? Don't you --
I think where Commissioner Coyle is trying to get at is trying to put
pressure on the county manager to bring back some reorganizations.
And, you know, it's been going on long enough--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: In other words, to see if we need all
of those people after the reorganization?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it's been going on long
Page 279
September 26, 2006
enough, and this is saying okay, we're going to -- we're going to stop it
here. We're going to demand that the county manager comes back
with a reorg. And then at that time I think it's appropriate to address
staffing issues, okay?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I'd like to clarify. I want to
be very cautious. I'm not sure I have the right to tell the county
manager or anybody else how to organize government. I am really
only saying that I want some efficiency solutions that might include
reorganization rather than just throwing money at the problem.
And so, I don't want to be in the position of trying to tell the
county manager how he's got to organize, but I do want to encourage
some out-of-the-box thinking from the standpoint of achieving greater
efficiency with the way we do business.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Would you want to discuss it at this
workshop on Monday?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't ever want to discuss it
again. There is nothing I can tell you that I haven't already said a
dozen times.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Count me out of that workshop.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I don't want to -- I do not
want to participate in it and I will not participate in a workshop to
discuss this again.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Tomorrow's workshop, what are
we discussing?
MR. SCHMITT: It's a workshop you all asked to schedule. It's
Monday, nine a.m. It was a committee workshop --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's an EDC workshop.
MR. SCHMITT: No, that's -- tomorrow is an EDC workshop,
Commissioner. This is Monday . You had directed the county
manager months ago, it was Commissioner Coletta --
Page 280
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, let Commissioner Coletta go.
MR. SCHMITT: He was approached by Brenda Talbert, CBIA,
and asked to have a permitting workshop, and that's scheduled for
Monday. Now, if you want to cancel that -- but we were coming to
talk about permitting issues, number of inspections per day --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I want to hear what's going on.
MR. SCHMITT: -- per inspector, the growth and workload. The
industry was going to come and talk -- this was a task where you all --
you placed on the manager.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, let me help a little bit. If -- the
question at hand on the new positions. I plan to come back to this
board the last meeting in November, first meeting in December to give
you the results of the study that we're doing, taking a look at Joe's
organization as far as efficiencies, whatever reorganization issues need
to be done.
After that is over, this board made it perfectly clear at the budget
workshop that they would hold Joe's fees in abeyance because it
wasn't -- it wasn't a general fund or a 111 type, an MSTD type fund,
that you could -- you could allocate those positions as soon as you saw
the reorganization, if we, indeed, believed that they're necessary. I'm
prepared to do that. We've been working on it. It isn't something we're
just --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I guess that's what
everybody's --
MR. MUDD: And we've been working on that particular issue in
order to get it done.
The workshop on Monday, okay -- and I believe this workshop
on Monday is important because we always talk about the problem.
And I've heard -- and I've been listening, Leo's been listening, and
we're hearing the problem. We need to define that problem, okay?
We need to know what it is or what it isn't anymore.
It's kind of like the landfill stinks, but does it really anymore?
Page 281
September 26, 2006
We need to figure that out, okay? And I believe that workshop is
important to try to figure out exactly what the problem is and make
sure it's still the reality that it was maybe eight months ago, and maybe
it's not that today, and that's all that that workshop was supposed to be,
and I would suggest we stick to that particular issue and not add more
stuff to it, like these positions. And I believe I will have something to
you the end of November, first meeting in December, and we can get
after it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I think that solves the whole
problem.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Yeah, if that's the purpose, I
agree with you. I don't have a problem with it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And he's got all --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just don't want to go through this
again. You know, there's no point in doing this again.
MR. MUDD: Nope.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But let me ask you -- it would be
very, very valuable to all of us if at that workshop on Monday you
could present to us consistent information that says we have received
X number of permits for single-family homes last year, the year
before, and this year, give us a historical trend of single- family homes,
apartments or condos, however you divide it up; commercial square
footage, and then ancillary things like, you know, adding on to a
garage or a little building in the back, and repairs, like roofs and things
like that.
If we could have it broken down into those categories, we could
-- we could try to reconcile what we intuitively seem to know; growth
is slowing down, but permits keep going up.
How many of those permits were because we had damage from a
hurricane in the latter part of last year? You know, that's an aberration
that doesn't keep going, I hope. So we need that kind of data so we
can get an understanding of how all of that relates to what we know
Page 282
September 26, 2006
we see happening here.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner, when you say single-family,
you mean new starts?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. SCHMITT: Yeah, new starts, okay. I got you. I mean,
because there's single-family that comes in for --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Renovation and --
MR. SCHMITT: I have 46, 47 different categories --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. SCHMITT: -- that we track.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, that would be nice to even
have them -- could ultimately absorb them. But let's take new starts --
MR. SCHMITT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And then we can take those other
things in single categories and lump them together, but --
MR. SCHMITT: Just in a snapshot.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But historical data for the last
couple of years, and then year-to-date.
MR. SCHMITT: This year, just a snapshot, 43-, 44,000 permits;
about 25,000 are those other type of permits. But we'll get all that
data.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay, good. That will be helpful.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Have we beat this horse?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think so, and I think we've come
out to a great solution.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Okay. Do you have anything to bring up
for discussion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll have nothing if
Commissioner Coyle will have nothing to add.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Well, you were going to have that -- you
had one item that you wanted to bring up and discuss that we were --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Help me. My mind's starting--
Page 283
September 26, 2006
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I had one more, but I think I'm
going to wait till another meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think so, too.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. Timing is everything
CHAIRMAN HALAS: That was with the FAC. You were
looking for some additional backing.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Uh--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll be at home.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, that's all taken care of. I got
my direction on that. We're getting it from staff. We're picking up the
agenda --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: No. You had one more item you said
you wanted to bring forth on that, and I told you at that point in time
to wait until -- obviously it wasn't that important. You forgot it
already, so --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, what was --
CHAIRMAN HALAS: Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. I would just like to talk a
little bit about why you need to have an organization established
before you start staffing it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Go ahead. I'll finish -- finish
without me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: If you don't mind, we'll wait in the
other room.
CHAIRMAN HALAS: We're adjourned.
***COMMISSIONER COYLE MOVED, SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER FIALA AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY,
THAT THE FOLLOWING ITEMS UNDER THE CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDAS BE APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED***
Item #16Al
Page 284
September 26, 2006
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF HERITAGE BAY UNIT
THREE, APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY
Item #16A2
CONTRACT OF $200,000 TO VAN BUSKIRK, RYFFEL &
ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE COLLIER
INTERACTIVE GROWTH MODEL FOR THE EAST OF
COUNTY ROAD 951 INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES
HORIZON STUDY
Item #16A3
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF DEL WEBB AT AVE
MARIA PHASE ONE, APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY- W/STIPULATIONS
Item # 16A4
BID #06-4026 FENCING INSTALLATION FOR THE RAILHEAD
SCRUB AND WATKINS/JONES PRESERVES TO SUNRISE
FENCE AND CONSTRUCTION CO. OF S.W. FLORIDA, INC. IN
THE AMOUNT OF $31.758.80 - TO PROTECT THE PRESERVES
Item #16A5
Page 285
September 26, 2006
AN AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE WITH DIANE
HUTCHISON, JUDY JONES, AND NANCY SMITH FOR 2.27
ACRES UNDER THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND
ACQUISITION PROGRAM, AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED
$89,700 - LOCATED WITHIN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, RED
MAPLES SWAMP PRESERVE
Item # 16A6
COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO ESTABLISH THE
BUDGETARY AND FINANCIAL MECHANISMS TO PREPAY
UP TO $6,200,000 OF CDES CAPITAL AND INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY IMPROVEMENT DEBT AND GIVE APPROVAL
FOR ANY SUBSEQUENT FY 07 BUDGET AMENDMENTS
REQUIRED TO FUND THIS DEBT PREPAYMENT
Item # 16A7
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF AVE MARIA UNIT 5,
BELLERA WALK PHASE lA, 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 TWIN EAGLES, PHASE
TWO B, APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - W/STIPULATIONS
Page 286
September 26, 2006
Item #16A9
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF VIA VENETO, APPROVAL
OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY -
W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16Al 0
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF AVE MARIA PHASE TWO,
APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE
AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY-
W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16All
RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF AVE MARIA PHASE
THREE, APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE
SECURITY - W/STIPULATIONS
Item #16A12
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITY FOR VERONA WALK, PHASE lA - W/RELEASE OF
UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
Item #16A13
Page 287
September 26, 2006
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF
THE SEWER UTILITY FACILITY FOR HOSPICE HOUSE OF
NAPLES - W/RELEASE OF UTILITIES PERFORMANCE
SECURITY
Item #16B 1
A SECOND AMENDMENT TO RADIO TOWER LEASE
AGREEMENT WITH CROWN CASTLE GT COMPANY LLC,
FOR AN ADDITIONAL LOCATION UPON AN EXISTING
TOWER FOR USE BY THE STORMW A TER MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT AT A FIRST YEARS ANNUAL COST OF $3,000
- TO BE USED WITH A GPS BASE STATION AT PORT OF THE
ISLANDS, ALLOWING THAT FACILITY TO BE
INCORPORATED INTO THE EXISTING COUNTYWIDE GPS
NETWORK
Item # 16B2
AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT 05-3845 CONSOLIDATED
MANAGEMENT CONTRACT FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY
FIXED ROUTE AND PARA TRANSIT SYSTEMS - FOR AN
ADDITIONAL RESERVE VEHICLE
Item #16B3
BID #06-4033 U.S. 41 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH PHASE I & II
WATER SOURCE CONVERSION TO HANNULA
LANDSCAPING, INC. WITH A BASE AMOUNT OF $59,999.58
AND ALTERNATES IN THE AMOUNT OF $44,195.00 FOR A
TOTAL BASE BID OF $104,194.58 WITH A 10%
CONTINGENCY OF $10,419.45. (PROJECT #601551) - TO
Page 288
September 26, 2006
CONVERT THE WATER SOURCE FROM POTABLE WATER
TO EFFLUENT WATER ON U.S. 41 NORTH PHASE I & II (PINE
RIDGE ROAD TO V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD)
Item #16B4
RESOLUTION 2006-246: A LOCALLY FUNDED AGREEMENT
WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FOR THE DESIGN OF THE COCOHATCHEE BRIDGE
REPLACEMENT PROJECT ON V ANDERBIL T DRIVE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $177,409. THIS REPRESENTS HALF OF THE
NEGOTIATED DESIGN COST INCREASE WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT ONE
OFFICE PICKING UP THE OTHER HALF OF THE COST
INCREASE
Item #16B5
THE USE OF $25,000 FROM THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY BUDGET
FOR EXPENSES INCLUDING THE HIRING OF A CERTIFIED
PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT ON A PART TIME BASIS TO SET UP
A FINANCIAL SYSTEM AND HANDLE THE FINANCES FOR
THE AUTHORITY
Item # 16B6
CONTRACT #06-3969 ANNUAL FIXED TERM PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERING SERVICES TO EIGHT (8) FIRMS AWARDED
TO CH2M HILL,AGNOLI BARBER & BRUNDAGE, TBE
GROUP, PBS&J, WILSON MILLER, Q. GRADY MINOR,
STANLEY CONSULTANTS, INC. AND
PITMANOHARTENSTEIN & ASSOCIATES
Page 289
September 26, 2006
Item #16B7
AWARD BID NO. 06-4036 TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA,
INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AVALON SCHOOL DRAINAGE
DITCH PROJECT, PROJECT NUMBER 511071 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $419,485.25 - LOCATED SOUTH OF
THOMASSON DRIVE AND NORTH OF HOLL Y AVENUE IN
NAPLES
Item #16B8
WORK ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $688,000 TO
AQUAGENIX FOR THE 2006 AUSTRALIAN PINE REMOVAL
PROJECT (PROJECT NUMBER 51501) UNDER CONTRACT 03-
3568 ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR COUNTYWIDE EXOTIC
VEGETATION REMOVAL AND APPROVE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT - IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE DRAINAGE SUB-
ELEMENT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
Item #16B9
AWARD CONTRACT 06-3950 GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
SYSTEMS SERVICES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION DIVISION
TO THREE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRMS FOR A TWO
YEAR TERM - AWARDED TO DATA TRANSFER SYSTEMS,
JONES EDMUNDS & ASSOCIATES, INC., AND WILSON
MILLER
Item #16BI0
Page 290
September 26, 2006
AWARD BID #06-4008, IMMOKALEE BEAUTIFICATION
M.S.T.U/M.S.T.D. ROADWAY GROUND MAINTENANCE AT
CR846 (SOUTH 1ST STREET) AND SR29 (MAIN STREET)
ANNUAL LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT, TO
COMMERCIAL LAND MAINTENANCE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$172~006 (PROJECT #630101)
Item #16Bll
RESOLUTION 2006-246A: A TRANSPORTATION REGIONAL
INCENTIVE PROGRAM (TRIP) AGREEMENT WITH THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) TO
ACQUIRE A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,950,000 FOR THE
WIDENING OF COLLIER BOULEVARD FROM GOLDEN GATE
BOULEVARD TO IMMOKALEE ROAD (PROJECT #65061)
Item #16Cl
RESOLUTION 2006-247: SETTING LANDFILL TIPPING FEES,
RECYCLING CENTER FEES, RESIDENTIAL ANNUAL
ASSESSMENTS AND COMMERCIAL WASTE COLLECTION
FEES FOR FY 2007. TOTAL FEES BUDGETED TO BE
COLLECTED FROM RATES APPROVED WITH THIS
RESOLUTION ARE INCLUDED IN THE FY 2007 BUDGETS
FOR SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL (FUND 470 -$20,336,300) AND
MANDATORY TRASH COLLECTION (FUND 473 - $15~776.100)
Item #16C2
THE SOLE SOURCE RECONDITIONING OF A BELLMER
WINKLEPRESS USED IN THE SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL
WATER TREATMENT PLANT LIME SOFTENING
Page 291
September 26, 2006
DEWATERING PROCESS FROM ASHBROOK SIMON-
HARTLEY CORPORATION IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF
$111,707- TO ENSURE THE RELIABILITY OF SCRWTP TO
PRODUCE WATER AT FULL CAPACITY
Item # 16C3
REJECT THE BID RECEIVED FOR BID NO. 06-3946R AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE STAFF TO RE-ADVERTISE FOR THE
NORTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT
CHEMISTRY LABORATORY VENTILATION
IMPROVEMENTS~ PROJECT 700952
Item #16C4
AN UNDERGROUND CONDUIT INSTALLATION
AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
AND AUTHORIZE CONVEYANCE OF UTILITY EASEMENTS
IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $500.00, FOR THE
INSTALLATION OF UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC SERVICE
RELATED TO THE RECLAIMED WATER AQUIFER STORAGE
AND RECOVERY, PROJECT 74030 - LOCATED AT 15694
LIVINGSTON ROAD
Item #16C5
A GRANT OF EASEMENT FROM THE CLUB PELICAN BAY
TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE PELICAN BAY UTILITY SITE
AT A COST OF $35.50 - TO REDUCE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC
CROSSING THE CLUB'S MAINTENANCE FACILITY
Item # 16C6
Page 292
September 26, 2006
A LEASE AGREEMENT FOR VACANT LAND AT THE CITY
OF NAPLES AIRPORT FOR THE COUNTY COLLIER SOLID
WASTE DEPARTMENTS RECYCLING TRANSFER CENTER
AT A FIRST YEARS COST NOT TO EXCEED $97,578 - THE
CURRENT LEASE WILL TERMINATE ON OCTOBER 31~ 2007
Item #16C7
RESOLUTION 2006-248: APPROVING THE SATISFACTIONS
OF LIEN FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS
WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND
SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1993 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS. FISCAL IMPACT IS $30.00 TO RECORD THE
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
Item #16C8
RESOLUTION 2006-249: APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIEN FOR A SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNT
WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND
SAID LIEN IS SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1994 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT. FISCAL IMPACT IS $20.00 TO RECORD THE
SATISFACTION OF LIEN
Item # 16C9
RESOLUTION 2006-250: APPROVING THE SATISFACTION OF
LIEN FOR A SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNT
WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND
Page 293
September 26, 2006
SAID LIEN IS SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1995 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT. FISCAL IMPACT IS $20.00 TO RECORD THE
SATISFACTION OF LIEN
Item #16CI0
RESOLUTION 2006-251: APPROVING THE SATISFACTIONS
OF LIEN FOR SOLID WASTE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS
WHEREIN THE COUNTY HAS RECEIVED PAYMENT AND
SAID LIENS ARE SATISFIED IN FULL FOR THE 1996 SOLID
WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS. FISCAL IMPACT IS $30.00 TO RECORD THE
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN
Item #16Cll
A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR WORK ORDER # UC-034,
COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR-951) 16 SANITARY SEWER
FORCE MAIN IMPROVEMENTS, WBS ELEMENT 730861 IN
THE AMOUNT OF $60,526.00 TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT
FUNDS TO ENABLE FINAL PAYMENT TO BE MADE TO
DOUGLAS N. HIGGINS~ INC.~ PROJECT NUMBER 73086
Item #16C12
CONTRACT 06-3972 TO TELE-WORKS, INC. FOR PURCHASE
OF THE UTILITY BILLING INTERACTIVE VOICE RESPONSE
SOFTWARE SYSTEM AND APPROVAL OF AN ONGOING
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF
$230,400 - TO PROVIDE MORE EFFICIENT CUSTOMER
SERVICE TO THE WATER, WASTEWATER, IRRIGATION
Page 294
September 26, 2006
QUALITY WATER~ AND SOLID WASTE RATE PAYERS
Item #16Dl
NAPLES WHOLESALE BAIT AS A SOLE SOURCE SUPPLIER
OF LIVE BAIT FOR RESALE AT CAXAMBAS PARK, WITH AN
ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2007 EXPENDITURE OF $86,000,
AND APPROVE A SEVEN DAY PAYMENT SCHEDULE -
TO CONTINUE TO OFFER LIVE BAIT SHRIMP FOR RESALE
TO THE PATRONS OF THE PARK
Item #16D2
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE
AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC.
AND APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO REFLECT AN
OVERALL INCREASE OF $7,722 IN THE ALZHEIMERS
DISEASE INITIATIVE PROGRAM - TO PROVIDE CASE
MANAGEMENT AND FACILITY RESPITE SERVICES TO
COLLIER COUNTY'S FRAIL ELDERLY
Item #16D3
BID # 06-4020 FOR PRINTING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENTS RECREATION
GUIDE TO SUNBELT, INC. AT AN ESTIMATED COST OF
$75,000 - TO PRINT THE RECREATION GUIDE, THREE (3)
TIMES A YEAR
Item #16D4
Page 295
September 26, 2006
RECOGNIZING ADDITIONAL REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$37,475 AND APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO THE
SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION BUDGET - TO
PROVIDE CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, COMMUNITY
OUTREACH AND SUPPORT OF THE HUD CONTINUUM OF
CARE PROGRAM IN IMMOKALEE
Item #16D5
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND AREA
AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC. AND
APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS TO REFLECT AN
OVERALL INCREASE OF $83,159 IN THE COMMUNITY CARE
FOR THE ELDERLY PROGRAM - FOR UNINTERRUPTED
SUPPORT SERVICES
Item #16D6
CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE
AREA AGENCY ON AGING FOR SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC.
FOR THE HOME CARE FOR THE ELDERLY GRANT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $104,787 AND APPROVE THE BUDGET
AMENDMENT - REQUIRES NO LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS
Item #16D7
WORK ORDER NO. CT-02-18 WITH THE CHRIS-TEL
COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $187,942.00 FOR
RESTORATION AND REHABILITATION OF THE CHURCH
BUILDING AT ROBERTS RANCH IN IMMOKALEE, USING
Page 296
September 26, 2006
COUNTY CONTRACT NO. 02-3349, GENERAL
CONTRACTORS SERVICES - AT THE IMMOKALEE MUSEUM
Item #16D8
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $24,756 TO
RECOGNIZE REVENUE RECEIVED FROM THE COLLECTION
OF CO-PAYMENTS FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY SERVICES
FOR SENIORS PROGRAM - TO PAY FOR ADDITIONAL
SERVICE HOURS
Item # 16D9
BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $42,142.26 TO
RECOGNIZE ADDITIONAL REVENUE IN THE OLDER
AMERICANS ACT TITLE III-B BUDGET FOR FY 06. -
ADDITIONAL REVENUE FROM IN-HOME SERVICES AND
TRANSPORTATION TO SENIORS IN COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16El
RFP#06-3983 TO CBSA, INC. FOR GROUP HEALTH THIRD
PARTY ADMINISTRATION SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF
$392~875 - TO BEGIN JANUARY 1. 2007
Item #16E2
RFP#06-3995 TO THE J. D. ALLEN GROUP, INC. FOR
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE SERVICES - ANNUAL COST BASED
UPON 2100 PARTICIPATING EMPLOYEES AT $1.46 PER
EMPLOYEE PER MONTH IS $36~792
Page 297
September 26, 2006
Item # 16E3
BID 06-4032, FLEET MANAGEMENT -SUBLET/PARTS BID
FOR COLLIER COUNTY AS STATED ON THE ATTACHED
VENDOR AWARD SHEET - COSTS ARE EXPECTED TO
EXCEED $200~000 ANNUALLY
Item #16E4
FIRST AMENDMENT TO TOWER OPTION AND LEASE
AGREEMENT DEED TO LESSOR AND TERMINATION OF
AGREEMENT FROM NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC
D/B/A CINGULAR WIRELESS CONCERNING THE COUNTY-
OWNED COMMUNICATIONS TOWER AT THE COUNTY
BARN - TERMINATION DATE IS SEPTEMBER 1,2006 WITH A
$26~595.20 PENALTY FOR EARLY TERMINATION
Item # 16E5
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH GEORGE VEGA, TOM BROWN,
LARRY MARTIN AND JACK STANLEY, AKA PALM LAKE
INVESTMENTS, FOR ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY OFFICE
SPACE FOR THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER AT A
FIRST YEARS ANNUAL RENT OF $17,099, PROJECT 52004-1 -
DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE
ANNEX
Item # 16E6
PURCHASE OF PROPERTY, CASUALTY, AUTOMOBILE,
WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE, AND RELATED
SERVICES FOR FY 2007
Page 298
September 26, 2006
Item #16E7
BID 06-4024 TIRE SERVICES TO COLLIER TIRE & AUTO
REPAIR - ANNUAL EXPENSES ESTIMATED TO EXCEED
$30,000 FOR TIRE SERVICES AND $19,000 FOR NEW TIRE
PURCHASES
Item # 16E8
REPORT AND RATIFY PROPERTY, CASUALTY, WORKERS
COMPENSATION AND SUBROGATION CLAIMS SETTLED
AND/OR CLOSED BY THE RISK MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR
PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION # 2004-15 FOR THE THIRD
QUARTER OF FY 06
Item #16E9 - Moved to Item #10M
Item #16EI0
THE DISPOSAL OF ASSETS NO LONGER DEEMED TO SERVE
A USEFUL FUNCTION OR TO HAVE COMMERCIAL VALUE
Item #16Ell
A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR $362,263.14 TO COVER
EXPENDED FUNDS FOR THE NAPLES JAIL AND PARKING
GARAGE PROJECT NO. 52008
Item #16Fl
TOURISM AGREEMENTS WITH THE CHILDRENS MUSEUM
Page 299
September 26, 2006
OF NAPLES, INC. ($175,000), NAPLES ART ASSOCIATION,
INC ($38,000) AND NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN, INC.
($112~550) - TO PROMOTE TOURISM IN COLLIER COUNTY
Item #16F2
PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE BYLAWS OF THE
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES ADVISORY COUNCIL
AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE
AN AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 02-39 - TO A REPORT
TO THE BCC EVERY FOUR YEARS
Item # 16F3
RESOLUTION 2006-252: PROCEDURES FOR MANAGING
MISCELLANEOUS RECEIVABLES
Item #16F4
ISSUANCE OF A $29,532.05 REIMBURSEMENT CHECK
PAYABLE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
FOR EXCESS FUNDS RECEIVED BY COLLIER COUNTY IN
RESPONSE TO TROPICAL STORM GABRIELLE - FOR
REPAIRS TO A GASOLINE DISPENSER PUMP AT CAXAMBAS
BOAT LAUNCH
Item #16F5
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND DR.
MARTA U. COBURN, M.D., FLORIDA DISTRICT TWENTY
MEDICAL EXAMINER DBA DISTRICT TWENTY MEDICAL
EXAMINER, INC. TO PROVIDE MEDICAL EXAMINER
SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 AT A COST OF $955~500
Page 300
September 26, 2006
Item #16Gl
(CRA) RESOLUTION 2006-253: AMENDING THE BA YSHORE
GA TEW A Y TRIANGLE CRA SITE IMPROVEMENT GRANT
PROGRAM FOR FY2007 FUNDING CYCLE, AND APPROVE
THE AMENDED FORM OF THE CRA GRANT AGREEMENT
Item #16Hl
COMMISSIONER FIALA REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT TO
ATTEND THE NAACP 24TH ANNUAL FREEDOM FUND
BANQUET ON OCTOBER 28TH, 2006 AT THE ELKS LODGE,
NAPLES; $60.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S
TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #16H2
COMMISSIONER FIALA REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT FOR
ATTENDING THE EDC'S EXCELLENCE IN INDUSTRY
AWARDS GALA, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2006, AT
THE NAPLES BEACH AND GOLF CLUB; $150.00 TO BE PAID
FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #16H3
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT
FOR ATTENDING THE EDC'S EXCELLENCE IN INDUSTRY
AWARDS GALA'S DESSERT RECEPTION, THURSDAY,
SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2006, AT THE NAPLES BEACH AND GOLF
CLUB; $25.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Page 301
September 26, 2006
Item #16H4
COMMISSIONER COLETTA REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT
FOR ATTENDING THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT BOARD'S ANNUAL AWARDS DINNER ON
SEPTEMBER 15, 2006 AT THE SANIBEL HARBOR RESORT
AND SPA; $25.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
COLETTA'S TRAVEL BUDGET
Item #1611
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND lOR
REFERRED:
THE FOLLOWING MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE,
AS PRESENTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, HAS BEEN DIRECTED TO THE VARIOUS
DEPARTMENTS AS INDICATED:
Page 302
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
September 26,2006
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) August 5, 2006 through August 11, 2006.
(2) August 12, 2006 through August 18, 2006.
(3) August 19, 2006 through August 25, 2006.
B. Districts:
(1) Port of the Islands Community Improvement District: Minutes
of May 26, 2006; Agenda for May 26, 2006; Minutes of June 9,
2006; Agenda for June 9, 2006; Proposed Budget FY 2007.
(2) Collier Mosquito Control District: District Boundaries map;
Approved meeting scheduled, fourth quarter 2006.
(3) Tuscany Reserve Community Development District: District
map; Meeting schedule October 2006 through September
2007.
(4) Heritaae Greens Community Development District: Resolution
2006-5 designating Kenza van Assenderp as the District's
Registered Agent.
(5) Collier Soil & Water Conservation District: Proposed District
Budget FY 06/07; District Map; Public Facilities Report;
H:\DA T A \FRONT DESK - 2006\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\092606 mise corresp.doe
Outstanding Bonds Report; Meeting Schedule for FY
2006/2007; List of Current Board Members.
C. Minutes:
(1) Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee:
Minutes of June 12, 2006; Agenda of September 22, 2006;
Minutes of July 10, 2006.
(2) Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Committee: Agenda
of August 7, 2006; Minutes of August 7, 2006.
(3) Lely Golf Estates Beautification MSTU: Agenda of August 17,
2006; Minutes of July 20, 2006.
(4) Emeraency Medical Services Advisory Council: Minutes of
March 22, 2006; Minutes of May 24, 2006; Minutes of June 28,
2006; Minutes of July 27, 2006; Minutes of August 23, 2006.
(5) Coastal Advisory Committee: Agenda for August 10, 2006;
Minutes of June 8, 2006.
(6) Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee: Agenda of March
27, 2006; Minutes of March 27, 2006; Agenda of May 22, 2006;
Minutes of May 22, 2006; Agenda of June 29, 2006; Minutes of
June 29, 2006.
(7) Domestic Animal Services Advisory Committee: Minutes of
August 15, 2006.
(8) Pelican Bay Services Division: Agenda of September 6, 2006;
Minutes of August 2, 2006.
(2) Budget Committee: Agenda of September 6, 2006;
Minutes of May 17, 2006.
(3) Clam Bay Committee: Minutes of August 2, 2006.
H:\DATA\FRONT DESK - 2006\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondence\092606 mise corresp.doe
(9) Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainaae MSTU: Agenda for
September 13, 2006; Minutes of August 9, 2006.
(10) Golden Gate MSTU Advisory Committee: Minutes of August 8,
2006; Agenda of September 12, 2006.
(11) Black Affairs Advisory Board: Minutes of January 23, 2006;
Minutes of February 27, 2006; Minutes of March 30, 2006;
Minutes of October 25, 2004.
(12) Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee: Agenda of
September 6, 2006; Minutes of August 2, 2006.
(13) Environmental Advisory Council: Agenda of September 6,
2006; Minutes of June 14, 2006; Minutes of July 5, 2006.
(14) Collier County Plannina Commission: Agenda of September 7,
2006; Minutes of July 20, 2006.
D. Other:
(1) Tax Collector's Recapitulation of the 2005 Tax Roll for Collier
County, dated August 25, 2006.
(2) Letter from Robert & Jean Blais dated August 28, 2006 re:
Waste Municipal Service.
H:\DATA\FRONT DESK - 2006\2006 Miscellaneous Correspondenee\092606 mise eorresp.doc
September 26, 2006
Item #16Jl
THAT THE BOARD AUTHORIZES THE TRANSFER OF
ADDITIONAL FUNDS COLLECTED IN FUND (175), JUVENILE
ASSESSMENT CENTER, TO THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT
COURT TO BE USED FOR THE OPERATION OF THE
JUVENILE ASSESSMENT CENTER - FOR JUVENILE
ALTERNATIVE PROGRAMS AND TO SUPPORT TEEN COURT
PROGRAMS
Item #16Kl
MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT,
ALl R. GHAHRAMANI MD INVESTMENT LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, FOR PARCELS 815 AND 9151N THE AMOUNT
OF $7500.00 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V.
COLONNADE ON COLLIER BLVD. LLC, ET AL., CASE NO. 05-
1091-CA (SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT
WELLFIELD PROJECT #70892). (FISCAL IMPACT: $1750.00) -
LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CR 951,300 FEET SOUTH
OF LORD'S WAY
Item #16K2
MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO RESPONDENT,
CENTREX CORPORATION, LTD., FOR PARCELS 716,816,916,
814 AND 914 IN THE AMOUNT OF $65,400.00 IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. CENTREX
CORPORATION, LTD., ET AL., CASE NO. 05-1129-CA (SOUTH
Page 303
September 26, 2006
COUNTY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT WELLFIELD
PROJECT #70892) - LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CR 951,
NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK
ROAD
Item #16K3
THE MAKING OF AN OFFER OF JUDGMENT TO
RESPONDENTS, DUFFIELD W. MATSON, III AND SARAH
MATSON, FOR PARCELS 717R, 917, 718R AND 918R IN THE
AMOUNT OF $19,300.00 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER
COUNTY V. DUFFIELD W. MATSON, III, ET AL., CASE NO.
05-1054-CA (SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL WATER
TREATMENT WELLFIELD PROJECT #70892). (FISCAL
IMPACT: $4,150.00) - LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
LORD'S WAY~ NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF CR 951
Item #16K4
A MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT FOR PARCEL NO. 804 IN
THE LAWSUIT STYLED CC V. JAMES M. BROWN, ET AL.,
CASE NO. 06-0525-CA (SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD
PROJECT NO. 62081) (FISCAL IMPACT $28~500.00)
Item #16K5
PROPOSED AGREED MOTION FOR AN AGREED ORDER FOR
EXPERT FEES AND COSTS RELATING TO PARCEL 26P IN
THE LAWSUIT STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS V. COLLIER HMA, INC., ET AL., CASE NO.
06-0013-CA, CR-951 WATER TRANSMISSION MAIN PROJECT
Page 304
September 26, 2006
#70152. (FISCAL IMPACT: $38,636.25) - FOR A PERMANENT
UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF US 41 EAST AND CR 951
Item #16K6
AN AGREED ORDER AWARDING EXPERT FEES AND COSTS
FOR PARCEL 126 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER
COUNTY V. NORTH NAPLES FIRE CONTROL & RESCUE
DISTRICT, ET AL., CASE NO. 02-1702-CA (GOODLETTE-
FRANK ROAD PROJECT NO. 60134). (FISCAL IMPACT
$23~435.00)
Item #16K7
SPECIAL MAGISTRATE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZE
PAYMENT FOR SPECIAL MAGISTRATE SERVICES FOR
VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD HEARINGS FOR TAX YEAR
2006 - FOR CONDUCTING HEARINGS ON PETITIONS FOR
THE 2006 TAX YEAR
Item # 1 7 A
RESOLUTION 2006-254: A VPLAT-2006-AR-9422 LOUISE
PENTA TO DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE
COUNTY'S AND THE PUBLICS INTEREST IN A PORTION OF
A 10 DRAINAGE EASEMENT LYING WITHIN LOT 1, PLAT OF
LEL Y BAREFOOT BEACH UNIT 2 AS RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 15, PAGE 71 AND 72 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS
COLLIER COUNTY~ FLORIDA
Item #17B - Continued to the October 10,2006 BCC Meeting
Page 305
September 26, 2006
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 74-202 OF CHAPTER
74 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND
ORDINANCES (THE COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED
IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE) BY PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE
IN THE TIME PERIOD ALLOWED FOR REQUESTING AN
IMPACT FEE REIMBURSEMENT, CONSISTENT WITH
LIMITATIONS SET FORTH BY THE FLORIDA STATUTES
Item #17C
REQUEST THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO
SET A PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF DECEMBER 12, 2006 FOR
CONSIDERATION OF A DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL
IMPACT DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT FOR
PETITION DOA-2005-AR-8543, PINE AIR LAKES, LOCATED
ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD,
PARALLEL TO AND APPROXIMATELY 1,600 FEET NORTH
OF PINE RIDGE ROAD; AND ALONG BOTH SIDES OF
NAPLES BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49
SOUTH~ RANGE 25 EAST. COLLIER COUNTY~ FLORIDA
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:54 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
Page 306
September 26, 2006
FRANK0!~~
, as
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY
COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 307
.,..."'_."'''"''''_...........,''_."-~"..."..."--'''---~_._'"''''''. -" "._".._"~,""._...~.,